Podcasts about Biosafety

This bonus content is a reading from Platypus, the CASTAC Blog. The full post by Leonardo Vilaça Dupin, Ana Paula Perrota and Rosângela Pezza Cintrão can be read at https://blog.castac.org/2026/06/food-insecurity-under-the-microscope/. About the post: In November 2025, in Rio de Janeiro, the seminar Food (in)Security under the Microscope brought together researchers from different countries and professionals from various fields of knowledge to discuss inclusive sanitary norms for non-industrial food production. Biosafety requirements, which equate "food safety" with sterilization and the absence of microbiological contaminants, oversimplify the complex relationships between humans, non-humans, microbes, and their environments, and are generally at odds with the traditional knowledge and practices of family farmers, peasants, indigenous peoples, and traditional communities across Brazil. The seminar sought to bring interdisciplinary research and new evidence on the importance of microbiological diversity as constitutive of human and environmental health, contributing to a challenge of Pasteurian views that consider only its pathogenic (This episode is available in additional languages on Platypus, The CASTAC Blog.)

Founded in 2010, the Institut Pasteur spinout PathoQuest sold to top CRO Charles River for $70M this year, a product of years of collaboration and stepwise investments.Jean‑François tells us how the exit unfolded, as well as the importance of biosafety and CMC as pharma and biotech outsource heavily and cell and gene therapies mature. We also cover how animal testing is disappearing from CMC and how France must nurture its biotech ecosystem.---For transparency, this episode has been sponsored by PathoQuest.---⭐️ ABOUT THE SPEAKERJean-François has more than 20 years of pharma leadership under his belt. Before his ten years at PathoQuest, he was a Senior Vice-President in charge of Ipsen's GI-oncology and endocrinology franchise.He has an engineering degree and a master's degree in Foreign Trade.

Today, we check in a year after the first Unsupervised Learning x Latent Space Crossover special to discuss everything that has changed (there is a lot) in the world of AI. This episode was recorded just after AIE Europe, but before the Cursor-xAI deal.Unsupervised Learning is a podcast that interviews the sharpest minds in AI about what's real today, what will be real in the future and what it means for businesses and the world - helping builders, researchers and founders deconstruct and understand the biggest breakthroughs.Thanks to Jacob and the UL production team for hosting and editing this!Jacob Effron* LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/jacobeffron/* X: https://x.com/jacobeffronFull Episode on Their YouTubeWe discuss:* swyx's view from the center of the AI engineering zeitgeist: OpenClaw, harness engineering, context engineering, evals, observability, GPUs, multimodality, and why conference tracks now reveal what matters most in AI* Whether AI infrastructure has finally stabilized: why “skills” may be the minimal viable packaging format for agents, why infra companies have had to reinvent themselves every year, and why application companies have had an easier time surviving model volatility* The vertical vs. horizontal AI startup debate: why application companies can act as the outsourced AI team for enterprises, why some horizontal companies still matter, and why sandboxes may be the clearest reinvention of classic cloud infrastructure for the AI era* The “agent lab” playbook: starting with frontier models, specializing for your domain, then training your own models once you have enough data, workload, and user behavior to justify the cost and latency savings* Why domain-specific model training is real, not just marketing: how companies like Cursor and Cognition can get users to choose their in-house models, and why search, domain specialization, and distillation are becoming more important* Open models, custom chips, and alternative inference infrastructure: why swyx has turned more bullish on open source, why non-NVIDIA hardware is suddenly getting real attention, and why every 10x speedup can unlock new product experiences* What it means to sell to agents instead of humans: why agent experience may mostly just be good developer experience by another name, why APIs and docs matter more than ever, and how pretraining-data incumbents are compounding advantages in an agent-first world* Why memory and personalization may become the next big wedge: today's models mostly reward frequency of mentions, but in the future, swyx expects product choice to be shaped much more by personalized memory systems* The state of the AI coding wars: why coding has become one of the largest and fastest-growing categories in AI, how Anthropic, OpenAI, Cursor, and Cognition have all ridden the wave, and why the category may still have more room to run* Capability exploration vs. efficiency: why the industry is still in a token-maxing, experiment-heavy phase where people are rewarded for spending more rather than less* Claude Code vs. Codex and the strange stickiness of coding products: why first magical product experiences may matter more than expected, and why the bigger mystery may be why only a few names have emerged as real winners so far* What the end state of the coding market might look like: two major players, a longer tail of niche products, and possible disruption if Microsoft, Mistral, xAI, or the Chinese labs push harder into coding* Where application companies still have room against the labs: why frontier labs are trying to expand into verticals like finance and healthcare, but still leave space for focused companies that own the workflow and the last mile* Why coding may be a preview of every other AI market: the first category to truly go parabolic, the clearest example of foundation model companies colliding with application companies, and a template for how future vertical AI markets may develop* Why AI valuations now feel unbounded: from billion-dollar ARR products built in a year to trillion-dollar market caps, swyx and Jacob unpack how the AI market has broken traditional startup intuitions about scale and durability* Consumer AI vs. coding AI: why ChatGPT's consumer category may have plateaued on frequency and product design, while coding continues to feel like a daily-use category with real momentum* The next product frontier beyond coding: consumer agents, computer use, and “coding agents breaking containment,” with swyx's thesis that 2025 was the year of coding agents and 2026 may be the year they begin to do everything else* Whether foundation models are really killing startup categories: why swyx is less worried for early founders, more worried for mid-size startups and traditional SaaS, and why building something ambitious may now be the best job interview for a frontier lab* AI vs. SaaS and the internal culture war around adoption: the tension between AI-native employees who want to rip out expensive software and skeptics who think quick AI-built replacements create fragile systems* Why traditional SaaS may be under real pressure: swyx's own experience spending six figures on event and sponsor management software, the temptation to rebuild it cheaply with AI, and the broader question of whether teams will trust custom AI-native replacements* Biosafety, security, and frontier model access: why swyx raised biosafety at a dinner with Anthropic's Mike Krieger, why Krieger argued security is the bigger issue, and what restricted model releases reveal about Anthropic vs. OpenAI* The era of giant models: why 10T+ parameter systems may only be a temporary rationing phase before bigger clusters arrive, why labs may increasingly keep their most powerful models private for distillation, and why scale alone no longer feels like a complete answer* Memory as the slowest scaling factor in AI: why context windows have improved far more slowly than people hoped, why million-token context still has not changed most real workflows, and why memory may be the key bottleneck for the next generation of systems* What swyx changed his mind on in the past year: becoming more bullish on open models, more convinced that the top tier of agent startups behaves very differently from the median AI company, and more optimistic about fine-tuning and specialized model adaptation* “Dark factories” and zero-human-review coding: the next frontier after zero human-written code, where models not only write the code but ship it without human review, forcing companies to rethink testing and verification from first principles* Why RL and post-training may matter more than people assumed: even if the resulting models get thrown out every few months, the data, workflows, and domain-specific improvements persist* Synthetic rubrics, Doctor GRPO, and multi-turn RL: why reinforcement learning is becoming much more domain-specific and multi-step than many people realize, opening the door to much deeper customization* The next frontier after coding: memory, personalization, and world models, including why swyx thinks world models matter not just for robotics or gaming, but for giving AI something closer to lived understanding* Fei-Fei Li, spatial intelligence, and the Good Will Hunting analogy: the idea that today's LLMs may know everything by reading it all, but still lack the lived experience that turns knowledge into a deeper kind of intelligenceTimestamps* 00:00:00 Intro preview: AI coding wars, startup pressure, and market structure* 00:00:28 Welcome to the Latent Space × Unsupervised Learning crossover* 00:01:17 What AI builders are focused on now: OpenClaw, harnesses, and infra* 00:04:33 Why AI infra is harder than apps, and where startups can still win* 00:06:39 Should companies train their own models?* 00:09:28 Open models, custom chips, and the new inference race* 00:11:25 Designing products for agents, not just humans* 00:16:49 The state of the AI coding wars in 2026* 00:19:27 Capability exploration, token-maxing, and why coding is going parabolic* 00:21:41 What the end state of the coding market could look like* 00:23:50 Where app companies still have room against the labs* 00:27:02 Why AI valuations and market swings feel unprecedented* 00:28:56 Consumer AI vs. coding AI, and why sticky products still matter* 00:32:28 What the next breakthrough product experience might be* 00:32:53 2026 thesis: coding agents break containment and eat the world* 00:35:27 Are foundation models wiping out startup categories?* 00:37:33 AI vs. SaaS, vibe coding, and internal team tensions* 00:40:01 Biosafety, security, and the politics of restricted model releases* 00:42:19 Giant models, compute constraints, and the limits of scale* 00:44:30 Memory as the real bottleneck in AI* 00:44:57 Why swyx changed his mind on open models* 00:47:44 Dark factories and the future of zero-human-review coding* 00:49:36 Why post-training and RL may matter more than people think* 00:51:50 Memory, world models, and the next frontier of intelligence* 00:53:54 The Good Will Hunting analogy for LLMs* 00:54:21 OutroTranscript[00:00:00] swyx: Isn't that crazy? That number is just mind boggling.[00:00:03] Jacob Effron: What is the state of the AI coding wars today?[00:00:05] swyx: We're in a phase of sort of like capability exploration. The general thesis that I have been pursuing now is that the same way that 2025 was a year coding agents 2026 is coding agents breaking containments to do everything else.[00:00:16] Jacob Effron: Do you worry about the foundation models just getting into a bunch of these startup categories?[00:00:21] swyx: Mid-size startups. Yes.[00:00:23] Jacob Effron: What do you think the end state of this market is[00:00:25] swyx: for the market structure to, to significantly change? There would be[00:00:28] Jacob Effron: today on unsupervised learning. We had a, a fun episode and what's really become an annual tradition, a crossover episode with our friends at Latent space.Swix and I sat down and we talked about everything happening in the AI ecosystem today. What we thought of the various changes at the model layer, what's happening in the infra world, the coding wars, and a bunch of other things. It's a ton of fun to do this with someone I really respect and another great podcaster in the game.Without further ado, here's our episode. Well switch. This is, uh, super fun to be back with another unsupervised learning, uh, latent space crossover episode.[00:01:02] swyx: Yeah,[00:01:02] Jacob Effron: I feel like a lot of places we could start, but you know, one thing I always find fascinating, uh, about the way you spend your time is you obviously are like at the epicenter of this engineering movement and community, and you run these events and conferences and put on these.Awesome talks and, and I think just have a great pulse on the zeitgeist of what's going on.[00:01:16] swyx: Yeah.[00:01:17] Jacob Effron: Maybe to, to start just what are the biggest topics people are thinking about right now?[00:01:21] swyx: Yeah, so I just came back from London, uh, where we did a IE Europe and we're doing roughly one per quarter now, which Yeah, you've[00:01:27] Jacob Effron: really up[00:01:27] swyx: the, hopefully[00:01:28] Jacob Effron: up the, up the pace.[00:01:29] swyx: It's trying. We're trying to match AI speed, youknow?[00:01:30] Jacob Effron: Yeah, exactly. The tops would be completely different, I imagine. Uh,[00:01:33] swyx: yeah. You know, I definitely curate the tracks, like you can see what I think. When you see the track list and the, the speakers that I invite, obviously Open Claw is like the story of the last four or five months, and then be, be just below that.I would consider harness engineering, context engineering to be two related topics in agents and rag. And then there's a long tail of Evergreen stuff like evals, observability, GPUs, uh, and uh, LM infra and just general, just in general. We also have other updates on like multimodality and, uh, generative media, let's call it.Um, but I definitely, the, the first three that I mentioned are top of mind people. Yeah.[00:02:13] Jacob Effron: I think harness is particular like, so interesting. Um, you know, there was this tweet from Harrison Chase, the, the lane chain, CEO, that, that caught my eye recently where he said, you know, it finally feels like we have stability, uh, around the infrastructure for, uh, you know, around ai.And I think what. He basically was implying his like, look over the past two, three years as a company at the epicenter of AI infrastructure, it was a bit like playing whack-a-mole, right? You were constantly moving around with, however, the building patterns were evolving[00:02:36] swyx: for Harrison for sure. Right? Like he's basically had to reinvent the company every year since he started Lang Chain.Right? It was Lang chain, Ang graph and LP agents and like, uh, I think he's like one of the most nimble, adept sharp people about this. Yeah. Yeah.[00:02:49] Jacob Effron: Saying now, now is finally the time stability[00:02:51] swyx: this. Yeah.[00:02:52] Jacob Effron: Yeah. Um, do you buy that or what have you kind of make of that take?[00:02:56] swyx: I think that. It, it's very expensive to say this Time is different sometimes, but when you're just writing code, like it's actually okay to just like try to make a call and I think it may not even matter if this call is right or not.Like I just don't even care that much because you can be right on a thesis, but if you don't, you don't figure out how to monetize the thesis, then who cares if you said something first that said, um, it does feel like, for example. Uh, we went through a lot of different ways of passion packaging integrations up with, uh, with agents.And it feels like we've landed at skills, which is like the minimal viable format. Yeah. Which is just a markdown file, uh, with some scripts attached to it, and I don't see how it can be more simple than that. And so there is some justification for. The stability around harnesses. I feel like there may be more adaptation with regards to maybe like the real time elements or subagents or memory or any of those like agent disciplines, let's call it in, in agent engineering.Uh, but if, if the thesis is that, okay, you just want agents are LMS with tools in the loop with a file system, what they can do. Retrieval with, with skills and all these like standard tooling that now seems to be relatively consensus then probably. That makes sense. Um, I just think like there's no point trying to stake your reputation on this thesis that we're there because if it changes again, just change with it.It's fine.[00:04:33] Jacob Effron: Yeah. It's always, you know, I've always been struck by how that is. Much more challenging for infrastructure companies and application companies. Like obviously I think, yeah. You know, on the application side you've seen, you know, Brett Taylor from Sierra Max, from Lara. Like, they're like, look, we build, you know, what's ahead of the models and we're willing to throw everything out every three months, you know, as the models get better and better.Exactly. Yeah. But the thing you at least have there is you have. Uh, you have an end customer, right? That's like decently sticky. Um, you know, they will mostly stick, you know, they'll, they'll give you a shot at least of, of building these things. What I've always found more challenging, uh, at, at the kind of like, you know, reinvent yourself every three months of the infrastructure layer, it's like, you know, developers are definitely a, a pickier audience maybe than an accounting firm or, uh, you know, a bank.Yeah. And so it's definitely a, a, a more challenging position to be in to, to have to constantly reinvent yourself.[00:05:17] swyx: Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. And, and like when they turn, it's like. Very complete. Like, they'll leave to like the, the hot new thing, uh, because there's like no defensibility, I guess. Like e even, even if you are a database, like, uh, people can migrate workloads off databases.Like it's, it's a, it's a known thing. Uh, so I think like basically what we're talking about is the vertical versus horizontal, uh, debate in, in AI startups. And uh, the way I think about it also is just that like when you are. Um, Lara, when you are a bridge, like you are the outsource AI team, right? You, you are, your job is to apply whatever state ofthe art AI methods.[00:05:55] Jacob Effron: Yeah. Like this translation layer between model capabilities and your[00:05:57] swyx: own customers. Yeah. To, to the end customers and like, well, if they didn't have you, they would've to hire in house and they're not gonna hire in house so they have you. And like, I think that's like a reasonable, like very robust to any whatever trends and, and discoveries that people make in, in the engineering layer.I do think like there is, um. It like sort of useful horizontal companies being built, but they're all. Very much like, sort of like the reinventions of classic cloud in the AI era and the, the primary one being sandboxes. Yeah. Um, which like, it's another form of compute guys, like, let's not get too excited about it.But I mean, like the, the workloads are enormous.[00:06:38] Jacob Effron: Right.[00:06:38] swyx: Yeah.[00:06:39] Jacob Effron: It's interesting, and I feel like as, as part of this, you know, the questions that folks are asking around infrastructure, there's a lot around, you know, the extent to which companies should have their own AI teams and what they should be doing in-house.And, you know, uh, I think there's questions around should people be training their own models? Should people be doing, you know, rl, uh, in-house based on the data they have? I feel like, you know, one has to evolve their takes on this every, every three months with paces. But where, where are you at on this today?[00:07:00] swyx: I think, well, I mean actually all models have gone up. Um, and obviously I'm involved in cognition and also cursors doing, doing, uh, a lot of own model training. And I think that that is some part of the, what I've been calling the agent lab playbook, where you start off with the state of the art models from, uh, from the big labs and you, uh, specialize for your domain.But once you have enough workload and enough high quality data from your users, then you can obviously train your own models and like save a lot on cost and latency and all that, all that good stuff. Um, you also get like a marketing bonus of like calling it some fancy name and putting out some research[00:07:38] Jacob Effron: from my seat.I can't tell how much of it is like actual, you know, value that's provided to the end user. And how much of it is that marketing bonus? Right. It seems some combination of the[00:07:45] swyx: I think it's both.[00:07:46] Jacob Effron: Yeah.[00:07:46] swyx: Um, no, no. There, there actually is real value. Um, and you, you know that for a number of reasons. Like one, even when it's not subsidized, people do choose it as like one of the top four or five.This is both composer two and, uh, suite 1.6 I one of the top five models. Like in a, in a fair market? In a free market, yeah. In a, in a, in a model switch. Or people do choose it and like, it's not subsidized. Like, so that's as good as it gets. Uh, but beyond that, like domain specific models, for example. For search with, with both, which both companies have absolutely makes, makes a ton of sense.Everyone says like, yeah, we should always, always do this. And honestly like, I think the infrastructure for that is becoming easier with, um, like thinking machines tinker thing as well as primary like, uh, lab stuff. Yeah, I mean like, this is one of those like reversal of the, the bitter lesson where you first bootstrap on the large models and the general purpose models to get big.And as you get very well-defined workloads that are just high quantity but not high variance, um, then you just distill down to a smaller model and run that on your own. Right. Which like totally makes sense.[00:08:50] Jacob Effron: What I'm less clear on is the kind of DIY RL use case, which I think is really mostly around, you know, improved, uh, quality for, for different things.Obviously there's probably like more efficient ways to, you know, get a smaller model that's that's faster and cheaper. And it'll be interesting to see whether. You know, obviously you had, you know, uh, two, three years ago this whole case of companies that were, you know, pre-training and claiming better outcomes in, in their domains than getting kind of cooked as each model iteration improved.You know, I wonder whether that's a, a similar story plays out in the, uh, in, in the, our all space. Yeah, for the focus on, on on pure outcomes and quality, not the cost side, which clearly your own models for cost at scale makes a ton of sense.[00:09:28] swyx: I think there are this, there are two sides of the same coin.Like you basically always want to hold, uh, quality constant or trade off a little bit of quality for a drastic decreasing cost. And that's true for everyone. Uh, one element I wanted to bring out, which is very much in favor of open models, is custom chips. So this would be cereus, but also talu. And then there's a huge range of stuff in between.This has been a huge story this past year on just like everything non Nvidia is getting bid up, including like freaking MatX is working for, which is very, which is very rewarding for me, but I think one of those things where like, oh, like the suddenly, because the number of alternative. Hard, uh, hardware is increasing and the inference that you can get is insanely high.Like, um, we're talking thousands of tokens per second instead of less than a hundred. So the trade off for qua quality doesn't hold as much anymore because the speed is so high.[00:10:24] Jacob Effron: Have you seen a lot of companies go all in on the alternative chip?[00:10:26] swyx: So cognition has Yeah. On Cerebras, uh, and, and so has OpenAIUm, uh, and so no, I don't think so beyond that, uh, and that, do you think that's like a, that's mostly, that's foreshadowing of, that's, yeah. I used to be kind of a skeptic in terms of like, okay, so what if I get my inference at a hundred to a hundred tokens per second sped up to 200 tokens per second. It's only two X faster.It's not that big a deal. Um, but when you, uh, I think every 10 x does unlock a different usage pattern. Um, and you, we have proof in Talas and, and some of the others. That you can actually, um, drastically imp improve inference speed and what happens from there? I don't even really know, like it's, it's so hard to predict when entire applications just appear at once.Yeah. Uh, and it also isn't that expensive, right? So like, um, this is one of those things where like, I, I think the, the investment cycle is gonna be multi-year. Um, and I. Would caution people to not dismiss it too, too quickly.[00:11:25] Jacob Effron: Yeah. I mean, one other like infra question I was curious to get your thoughts on is obviously it seems increasingly a lot of the cutting edge infra companies are building for agents as the buyers of their product or users of their product, right?[00:11:35] swyx: Ooh,[00:11:36] Jacob Effron: and[00:11:37] swyx: another huge theme. Yeah. Yeah.[00:11:38] Jacob Effron: And I'm trying to figure out like what. What, what do you have to do differently about selling into agents? Um, are they just the ultimate rational developers? Uh, or is there, you know,[00:11:46] swyx: no, absolutely not. Um, I think they are easily prompt, injected and, uh, very tuned towards like, basically com compounding existing winners.[00:11:57] Jacob Effron: Yeah,[00:11:57] swyx: so like if, like, congrats if you won the lottery for getting into the training data right before 2023, because now you're like installed in there for the foreseeable future. But yeah. Uh, you know, one stat that Versal, uh, CTO Malta dropped at my conference was that there are now, uh, 60% of traffic to Elle's, um, like app arch, like admin app architecture for like configuring versal applications, uh, is bought.It's not, it's not human. Uh, so like your primary customer is agents now. Um, and it's mostly co like mostly coding agents, mostly people using CLI on CP or whatever. But yeah, I mean, I think. More. I, I think step one, if it doesn't exist as an API that agents can use, it doesn't exist. Right, right. Which I think is like, uh, it's a good hygiene thing anyway, to, to make everything API available, but not as like an extra, um.Push on like products, people to not only work on the ui, um, you should probably work on the on SCLI stuff. Beyond that, I think honestly there is like, so I, I come from the sensibility of, I think everything that you are trying to do for agents experience now, which is the term that Matt Bowman and Nullify is trying to coin, is the same thing that you should have been doing for developer experience.That you should have had good docs, you should have had a consistent API, uh, that is. Mostly stateless. Um, you should have, I guess, discoverable or progressive disclosure or like search or like whatever. And so now that people have energy in like finding these customers to do that, that's great. Um, do I believe in.Extending beyond that into something like a EO, um, for gaming The chatbots? Not necessarily, but obviously there's gonna be huge advantages when people who figure out the short term wins. Yeah. And short term wins can compound.[00:13:43] Jacob Effron: Do you think these compounding advantages to like the, the pre-training data cutoff companies, like, you know, obviously over some period of time, I imagine that doesn't persist.And so as you think about like. I dunno, three, four years from now what the, you know, selection criteria end up being. Do you think it still mirrors exactly what you were saying before? Like it's exactly what you should have been doing all along to sell a good product to developers?[00:14:01] swyx: It could be, except that I think in three, four years we'll probably have much better memory and personalization.So then general a EO or GEO doesn't really matter as much. So I think whatever memory or personalization system we end up with will probably d determine what you end up choosing much more. Than, than what is currently the case, which is just frequency of mentions, let's call it. Yeah,[00:14:26] Jacob Effron: yeah.[00:14:26] swyx: Uh, so you just spa quantity and I think that's, I mean, that's something I'm looking forward to.I do think, like, like, you know, I, I think that the fundamental exercise to work through for yourself is if you start a new, um, sort of. Uh, disruptor company. Now there's a, there's a big incumbent that everyone knows, like, like superb base. Super base is like, kind of like the Postgres, like database, uh, incumbent.If you wanna start like new superb base, how would you compete with them? And I don't necessarily have the answer, but I, I, I do think like people, like resend like relatively new. I think they would start like 20, 23 and still there was, there was a recent survey where like, people. Checked what Claude recommends by default.If you just don't prompt it with anything, just say, gimme an email provider and says, resent as in like 70, 70% of each cases. Like the fact that you can get in there with like such a relatively short existence, I think is, is encouraging.[00:15:14] Jacob Effron: Yeah.[00:15:14] swyx: I do think like. Um, you do want to do whatever it is to, to like to, to get in that Very short mentions this because, um, it's not gonna be 20 of them, it's gonna be like three.[00:15:26] Jacob Effron: No, definitely. It feels like, uh, you know, probably more, more consolidation than ever. Uh, or, or kind of like, you know, uh, a winner take most market than maybe the, the, the physics of go-to market in the past. Yeah. Might have, uh, enabled.[00:15:38] swyx: The other thing also is like, semantic association is gonna be very important, uh, in the sense that like, you want to do like the combo articles where you're like, use my thing with for sale, with blah, blah.And like that all gets picked up in a, in a corpus. And so that's. Probably one thing that you, you wanna do? Well, I don't know what else. Uh, it's, it's, it's, it's one of those things where like, I think I feel, I feel I'm behind, uh, I don't know how you feel about this, but like,[00:16:04] Jacob Effron: I think AI is just everyone constantly feeling like they're behind some, uh,[00:16:08] swyx: yeah.With,[00:16:09] Jacob Effron: I wanna meet the person that doesn't feel behind,[00:16:11] swyx: but like with, with ax, right? Like, so, so like, my, my stance was that exactly what I said before, like everything that you, that you should do for agents is something that you should have done for humans anyway. Yeah. And so. To the extent that you're just getting it more energy to, to do things for agents, great.But like, uh, it's hard to articulate what new thing apart from just like more spam, um, that you should be doing. Anyway, that would be my take right now. Um, I I, I do think like there, there will be more turns at this. I think the personalization turn that is coming, um, will be big. And I don't know what that looks like because like basically we're kind of, we feel kind of tapped out on the memory side of things.[00:16:49] Jacob Effron: Yeah. I, I guess since we last chatted, you know, you, you took this role over at cognition, um, and you've obviously have a, have a front row seat to the AI coding space today. You know, I feel like coding in many ways. You know, people view it as this, like, I mean, besides being like the, the mother of all markets and this massive opportunity, I think it's kinda a preview of like, what's to come for many other spaces.Both. Yeah. You know, I feel like agents are most advanced in coding. I also feel like the, you know, competition between foundation models and application companies, you know, and, uh, mirrors what we may see in other spaces. And so maybe for our listeners, can you just lay out like what is the state of the AI coding wars today?[00:17:25] swyx: Um, it is massive, right? Like, uh, and I don't think necessarily, last time we talked about this, we appreciated the size of what[00:17:32] Jacob Effron: No, I wish we did.[00:17:33] swyx: I state of AI coding wars today, um, both opening eye philanthropic have made it their p serials to competing coding. Um, and. Tropic is like 2.5 billion in a RR just from Cloud Code.The way they recognize a RR is. Opt for debate, uh, open ai. I don't think the, a public number is known, but let's call it 2 billion as well. And then cursor is like, rumored to be 2 billion, you know? And, and those, those are like the public numbers that are known? Yeah. Um, so like huge markets that have just been created in the past one year.Like, like anthropic, just like Claude Code just recently celebrated their one year anniversary, which is, yeah, pretty nice. Um, so, and then I think, like the other thing that I see is there's, there's some other people who are like, oh, here's like the, the sort of relative penetration of, uh, Claude use cases, right?Like, and it's like coding 50% and then legal, whatever. Health, uh, it's like the, the remaining ones. And there was a very popular tweet that was like, okay, I'll look at the, the empty space and all these other use cases. If you are a new founder today, you should be betting on the other stuff because on, on a sort of catch up Yeah.Theory and my. Consider my, my pushback is the same pushback that, uh, I had on app over Google, which is like, well, well why is this time different? Like, why, if it went from let's say 10 to 50% in the past year, why can't I keep going? Uh, and like getting that wrong is actually a very painful one because you could have just did, did the momentum bet.Instead of the mean reversion bed. So I, I, I think that that is the, the state of things now that people are very, very much into psychosis. Um, they're are getting rewarded for spending more rather than spending less. And I think we're not in that phase of efficiency. We're in a phase of sort of like capability exploration.So I think people who are more crazy, who are more. Uh, creative, um, get rewarded comparatively. Yeah.[00:19:27] Jacob Effron: Well, it's interesting. I mean, it feels like behind these like token maxing, leaderboards and whatnot is this, it's like the first phase of this transition from a workforce perspective is you just gotta show your employer like, Hey, I, I use these tools.[00:19:37] swyx: Here's my nu number of tokens I cost, and that's it. They don't care about the quality. Right. It is, uh, maybe distasteful to someone who cares about the craft and, and all that. Um, but directionally everyone just wants you to go up regardless. And so, um, there it is not very discerning. It's, and it's probably very sloppy, but I think it's net fine because we're still probably underusing ai just in generally.Yeah. Um, and so I think that's like very interesting. Like we had on the podcast, uh, Ryan La Poplar from OBI, who spends a billion tokens a day. Yeah. Um, and that's for those county home, it's like something like 10,000 worth, $10,000 worth a day of API tokens. If they, they did market rates, um, and like most of us can't afford that.Yeah. But like. And, and, and probably a lot of what he does is slop.[00:20:25] Jacob Effron: Right.[00:20:25] swyx: But like, he's going to dis, he's like, if there were a new capability, he would discover it first before you because he was, he was trying and you were not trying. Right. And like, you only do things that work like, well, good for you.But like the, the people who are going to discover the next hot thing are living at the edge.[00:20:42] Jacob Effron: Right and increase in living at the edge of just having the compute budget to like run these experiments. I mean, kind of similar to what living at the edge on the research side has always been. You know, it was constrained in many ways by the amount of compute you had to run these experiments.It feels similarly on the, almost on the builder or like actualizing these tools now.[00:20:56] swyx: Yeah. The other thing that's, I mean, very obvious is philanthropic is kind of like the high price premium player. Um, that where, you know. Restricting limits or restricting model releases even is like the name of the game.Whereas Codex is like, come on in guys, use our SDK, use our login and we don't care. We're gonna reset limits. Whatever you do want to try to exploit the subsidies where you can get it. And definitely Codex is super subsidized right now. Gemini also very subsidized. Um, and. Comparatively, like, I think you should make, Hey, I guess while, while that's going on, it's not that bad to be a capabilities explorer on just the $200 a month plan from Cloud Code or from OpenAI.Um, and, uh, I I, I, my sense is that people aren't even there yet.[00:21:41] Jacob Effron: How do you think this, like, market ultimately plays? I mean, it's obviously such a big market that, you know, any slice of that market is interesting for, for anyone going after it. But I think what, what makes people so interesting in the coding market particularly is it feels like it's kind of this.Foreshadowing of what will happen in other, you know, any other kind of application market that the foundation models eventually turn to and are all their models against and gather data around. And so how do you think, you know, like does there end up being room for lots of different kinds of players or like, what do you think the end state of this market is and is that, do you think that's applicable to other markets?[00:22:10] swyx: I feel like there will be, I mean. Status quo is probably the most likely outcome, which is there are two big players and there's a small range of longer tail people that, um, fit other use cases that the, the two big players don't. That feels right to me. I think that, um, for it to, for the market structure to, to significantly change there would be, there needs to be significant change in like the economics or like the, the brand building or like the, the, the, the value propositions of the, of the companies involved and I.Haven't seen any in the last six months that, that have really changed the stories materially. So I feel like they would just keep going until something, something else happens. Something else happens, meaning like Microsoft wakes up and like goes like. Guys, we have GitHub, we have, uh, you know, we, we, we'll, we'll do something much bigger here than other, other than just copilot.Um, and, uh, that would be a big change. Um, MSL has put out a model now, and I was in a breakfast with, uh, Alex Wang, where they were like, yeah, like, we, we really, really want to go after the coding use case. We haven't done anything yet, but like, don't underestimate them. Right. Um, and, and similarly for the Chinese labs.Um, I think they're trying to go after it. Like ZAI is doing stuff. GLM uh, ZI and GLM is same thing. Um, uh, and, and so it's, so like everyone's trying to get a piece of that pie. I, I feel like the, the status quo has been pretty stable for the past, like almost a year I'll say.[00:23:39] Jacob Effron: Yeah. And is the room for the, not like, you know, for, for the application companies more on like the enterprise side or like where do the, where do the, like what surface area do the model companies leave for application companies?[00:23:50] swyx: Yeah, that's a good one. Um. It's very much evolving. Um, it, I, I, I will say because opening I did not have this, the, this level of attention on coding. Yeah. Uh, a year ago. We just don't have that much history. Right. Um, and it seems like, for example, so the big push at Open I now is the Super app. Um, is that a consumer thing?Is that like a products like. Portfolio rationalization thing, how much is that gonna take away attention from coding at the time when they actually do want to put more coding? I think it's, it's very unclear. So I do think like there's, there's all these, like in both big labs, there's. Uh, sorry. Both of the, and, and drop and, and deep minus and XAI are are separate cases.Um, they are trying to see the other time expansion areas. So cloud code for finance. Yeah. Um, uh, cloud cowork, all those, all those things. Whereas I think cursor and cognition are like comparatively just focused on coding and so I, I do think they leave space and I do think for the other verticals that also means the same thing.Right. That, uh, that they're not gonna be that. Um, intensely focused on, on, on that domain. Except for, I, I think I would mark out finance and healthcare as like the next ones, um, that they're clearly going after. Uh, I, I would say comparatively, healthcare seems more thorny. There, there, there've been some announcements about it, but like, I would respect the, the finance work a lot more just because like the, the path to money is a lot clearer.[00:25:12] Jacob Effron: Yeah, no, I mean, obviously like, I, I think, you know, maybe similar to, to the space that's being left in these other domains, you know, there's obviously. Uh, a lot that's required to actually implement these tools in enterprises, uh, versus, you know, maybe just giving them, uh, giving model access to, to folks outta the box.[00:25:27] swyx: Yeah, yeah. Yeah. So the, the agent lab thing is like, we'll do the last mile for you. Whereas I think the model labs tend to just trust the model and, and be minimalist about it. Both of them work.[00:25:38] Jacob Effron: Yeah.[00:25:38] swyx: I, I don't, I don't necessarily think one, uh, beats the other, uh, for every, for every use case. Um, all I, all I do know is that it does seem like.Uh, the large enterprises do want a dedicated partner that isn't just the model labs, which is kind of interesting.[00:25:55] Jacob Effron: We, we've been in this phase of, of pure capability exploration. And so I think nothing has been, you know, better for the large labs, right? I mean, they're always gonna be, uh, uh, the frontier of, of capability exploration.And so I think have a very good relationship with a lot of these enterprises. But ultimately over time, like. The, uh, the incentive structure of these labs is always gonna be maximal, you know, token consumption for, uh, for the end customers they work with. And there's just, I think, so few companies that have actually gotten to massive scale.Maybe coding again is the most interesting. So it's the first space that really is just completely gone, you know? Yeah. You must love it every day. Like absolutely insane. And. I think it[00:26:32] swyx: gets even. Okay. I mean, like, I think we, we say good things about crystal cognition, but the sheer liftoff of like both end UPIC and open ai.‘cause they, they, they have independent valuations. I mean, let's throw an XEI in there because it's now I ping at 1.2 trillion. That number is just mind boggling. Like I, I feel like in normal investing or normal startups, there's kind of like a ceiling market cap or valuation. Totally. That, that like you, you reach and you go like, all right, let's, it's gonna be chiller from now on.And these guys are not slow down. No.[00:27:02] Jacob Effron: Well, I also think the dynamic is fascinating about some of these later stage companies is, is, you know, in the past, I feel like in, in venture world, if you got to a certain level of scale, the question around you was really more a valuation question. And this is like why there was different phase, like, you know, types of venture people did and like the late stage growth people were just incredible at like, you know, a little bit of what's the ultimate market opportunity of this company, but also what's the right way to, to value it.Like we know it's, it's in some bands of an outcome that is like. Sure there's some variance to it, but it's like relatively understood what that bands is and then maybe you get over time surprised to the upside. Whereas any kind of like later, even the labs themselves, any later stage company, the bands of which that company might be worth right now, even in a year or two years are so massive because of how fast the ecosystem changes that it's like.Even for later stage companies, every three months could be an existential level event to the upside to the downside. Yeah. Um, and I think that, like, you are obviously seeing it in the, in the positive with code, which, you know, if you think about a company like philanthropic, you know, that. For a while, it was like unclear if they were going to have access to enough capital, um, to really stay in the, in the race, right?And then coding hit at the exact right time. They had the perfect model for it. They executed brilliantly. Um, and you know, now are, are, you know, uh, you know, one of the most valuable companies in the world.[00:28:13] swyx: Uh, at the same time, I, I don't find, I, I have zero sympathy for opening eye because they're crushing it and they're all rich.You know, this is like a high class champagne problem to have to, uh, to be number two at coding or whatever. Like, who cares? Like, you're, you're doing great.[00:28:27] Jacob Effron: Yeah. It's funny though. I can't even, I mean, you would be closer to this, uh, you know, even that you're in the AI coding space, but it's like a lot of people I talk to think Codex is just as good, if not better than Claude Code.Right. I think one thing that I've been really surprised by, and maybe, maybe Cloud Code is a better product in some ways, I'm curious your thoughts is just in consumer AI with chat GBT. You saw this big first mover advantage, right? Where admittedly today, like, I don't know, Claude Gemini. Great products.Not sure, not abundantly clear chat GBTs any better, but like. People stick with chat, GBT, it's the first thing to introduce them.[00:28:56] swyx: They stay, but they're not growing anymore. I don't know if you've seen[00:28:59] Jacob Effron: Right. But that to me is more of like a, a, a product problem than it is. They're not like, it's not like they've like lost share to someone else.My understanding is the overall problem with consumer AI today is much more of a how do you take this tool and, you know, for, for folks like us, like knowledge workers, it's like this incredible magic tool, but it's not necessarily a daily active use tool for a lot of people around the world today. And what are the like products?It's, it's kind of a category wide problem. Like in coding, for example, like. The entire space has gone parabolic. There may be some relative growth in, uh, in other consumer AI players, but it's not like consumer AI as a category is like going parabolic and they're not capturing most of that thing. I think it's actually the larger problem is much more, hey, the category has kind of hit a bit of a plateau of people haven't figured out how to bring, you know, tons more users on board.Yeah, yeah. Or increase the frequency of those users. And so it seems more of a category wide problem than it is, you know, a massive market share of change. I was gonna draw the comparison to, to the coding space where Claude Co is the first product, obviously, to introduce people to this magical experience.You know, by all accounts, codex is, is pretty damn close to as good, if not better. Um, but like still that first product, you, you would've thought that would not be a super sticky, uh, you know, product surface area. And it actually has, it turns out, I, it feels like the first lab to introduce you and experience really does, uh, keep a lot of, uh, a lot of the focus.[00:30:12] swyx: I, I think. M maybe it's like still, still early days. You know, Chad, BT is like three plus years old and Yeah. Cloud code is only one. Just turned a year. Yeah. So give it time, you know? Yeah. Like, yeah. I mean, definitely sometimes a lot of people have switched from to Codex. Maybe that will keep going. I, it's like really hard to tell.Uh, yeah. I, I, I do, I do think that. Because we are in this like, high volatility, high temperature phase. Um, the loyalty and stickiness to first movers and category creators, I don't think is as high as it might be in some other, uh, areas in our careers that we've looked at.[00:30:47] Jacob Effron: Yeah. Though, I mean, I've been surprised by the cloud code thing.I, I would've thought that, like, in many ways I always worried about the[00:30:52] swyx: enterprise. You think you would've been gone by now?[00:30:53] Jacob Effron: Not gone. But I would've, I I always worried that the, that the consumer business of these companies would be quite sticky. And then the enterprise API business. Uh, was actually like, you know, in some ways like your least loyal buyers, like they would, they would move to,[00:31:05] swyx: right, right.But, but they worked out that it wasn't the enterprise API it was enterprise product.[00:31:09] Jacob Effron: Totally. And maybe that was the, that was the secret that like, but the amount of lock-in or just default behavior that has happened in that space, uh, is, is more than I might've imagined with two products that by all accounts are pretty damn similar.Yeah.[00:31:22] swyx: No fight there. Uh, I will say I do think that Codex is still in like a catch up. Like in terms of personal experience. Um, the only thing I like out of, out of Codex is the, is like Spark and like yeah. Uh, the, I, I feel like the skills integration is a little bit better. I feel like, uh, the, the speed is a bit better.Maybe ‘cause it's in, is written in rust or whatever. Um, very minor things that you like. Almost like telling yourself rather than like objectively assessing between two, two of them. I, I, I do think, like vibes wise, I think that's going on. Um, the, the, you know, I, I feel like the, the missing questions, uh, in, in this whole debate is like, why is this so concentrated in only two names, right?Yeah. Like, um, how, where, like, where is the Gemini? You know, presence, where's the Xai presence? Um, and like they are trying, it's just they haven't made that much progress yet.[00:32:12] Jacob Effron: But what the, what the Claude Co moment does show, and it actually in some ways makes you a little more bullish on the potential for someone else to catch up because it does feel like if you're the first person to introduce some magical net new product experience, that that actually might be stickier than one might have imagined.[00:32:27] swyx: Right, right, right. Okay. Yeah.[00:32:28] Jacob Effron: And so it's, everyone can believe they have shot[00:32:29] swyx: that. What do you think that new product experience might be like? I, I, it's, it's like, and this is a failure of imagination on my part. Like, I always wonder, like, people always say this like, well, the, the thing that will save us is like being first to the next new thing.Like what is it?[00:32:41] Jacob Effron: Yeah.[00:32:42] swyx: It's like,[00:32:45] Jacob Effron: I dunno, something around like, uh, consumer agent, computer use, like hybrid. I think, obviously, I think we're like scratching the surface on the consumer side.[00:32:53] swyx: So my, my current theory is like the. Open claw is like a vision of things to come.[00:32:58] Jacob Effron: Totally.[00:32:58] swyx: Um, and uh, it's good that O open I has like the association with open claw, but by no means do they have the rights to win it.The general thesis that I have been pursuing now is that the year the same way that 2025 was the year of coding agents, 2026 is coding agents breaking containment to do everything else. Um, and so coding agents continue to still win, but because they generate software and software eats the world, so like, it's kind of like the trans.Associated property of like software, eat the world, coding agents, eat software, therefore coding agents eat the world. Um, which is like an interesting,[00:33:30] Jacob Effron: yeah, and breaking containment always an easier phase phrase in the consumer context than the enterprise one. You've seen people run these really cool, uh, experiments in their own personal lives.I think like,[00:33:37] swyx: yes.[00:33:38] Jacob Effron: Figuring out, you know, how you, obviously everyone's focused, you know, on the enterprise side now around how you create these experiences. I feel like the vibes, you know, people love to have these narratives of like, everything is completely shifted. It's like I actually, you know, open AI.Organizationally, uh, you know, volatility aside is, you know, great products, great team, great models like everyone else in the world is incentivized for there to be. Two, three more. Everyone would love more like great model companies. And so I feel like the, the natural forces of the world revolt when any one company, you know, is too much the star of the show, right?There's so many people in the ecosystem that are incentivized for that not to happen. And so I think I'd be shocked if we don't have. Uh, uh, reversion of vibes, not maybe completely the other way, but at least a little bit more equal at some point over the next six, 12 months.[00:34:24] swyx: I, I think there's just a kind of different stages when, when you talk about the world, one wanting more model companies, I talked think about like the neo labs.[00:34:30] Jacob Effron: Yeah.[00:34:31] swyx: And I mean, I don't know, is it fair to say none of them have really broken through in the past year?[00:34:35] Jacob Effron: I think that's totally fair,[00:34:37] swyx: which is rough. Um, and well, how are we gonna, how are we gonna grow that diversity in, in, in choice, like. Um, that's, this is it.[00:34:46] Jacob Effron: Yeah. It'll be really interesting to see what, what, what ends up happening with that.And you've seen, you know, folks like Nvidia, you know, very incentivized to make sure there's, there's a broader platform of, of other model providers.[00:34:57] swyx: I think, uh, I don't know people say this, but I, I, I don't think they try it hard. Nvidia tries harder to build neo clouds[00:35:05] Jacob Effron: Yeah.[00:35:06] swyx: Than neo labs.[00:35:07] Jacob Effron: Well, they try pretty damn hard to build neo Cloud, so[00:35:09] swyx: that's,[00:35:09] Jacob Effron: yeah.[00:35:10] swyx: But like, you know, let's call it like the, the core weaves of the world, much happier place in the, you know, than any neo lab built on top of them.[00:35:18] Jacob Effron: Yeah. That one might argue it's, it's easier to, to enable a neo cloud to be successful than it is. Uh, you can't will a neo lab into existence the same way you, soNvidia[00:35:25] swyx: has more direct control over it.Uh, for sure.[00:35:27] Jacob Effron: What else is kind of catching your eye today on the startup side? I mean, you worry, there's obviously this whole narrative of like, you know, the foundation models, you know, they announced a product and every stock goes down 15%. Like[00:35:36] swyx: Yeah.[00:35:37] Jacob Effron: Do you, do you worry about the foundation models just kind of eating into to a bunch of these startup categories?[00:35:43] swyx: Not really. I, I think actually like. As, uh, there's, there's, okay, there's, there's, there's the, there's the point of view of like being an investor in startups, and there's a point of view of like, do you wanna start something? And I think honestly, like the, the downside for all these is so. Minimal in, in a sense of like, the worst you do is you just get hired into one of these labs anyway.So I, I think the, the market for people who just do things and try things and try to execute in like a competent way, even if like it doesn't work out commercially, even if it just wasn't that great anyway. Like, but like that's your job interview to go into, into one of these things anyway, so, um, I don't feel that.From a, from a very, very small startup perspective, mid-size startups. Yes. Uh, I will say there's been a lot of dead, um, LM Infra, a lot of LM infra consolidation like the, the, uh, lang fuses of the world getting absorbed into, into click house. And I, I think. Like people have maybe worked out the domain specific playbook, uh, and like, I think that's okay.Um, and, and yeah, I'm not that, not that worried about, uh, okay. So, um, I, I would say I'd be more worried about traditional SaaS, like low NPSS. This is the whole AI versus SaaS debate that has, that's been going on. Uh, and, and like literally I'm going through that exact thing in my company where, so I like kind of.Thinking through this on a very visceral, visceral level, right? On one hand you have the people who say you vibe coders don't appreciate the amount of work that goes into A-A-C-R-M and like, yeah, you think you can rip out Salesforce? So did the 30 entrepreneurs before you, right? Like, like, you know, you classically underestimate the things that you don't.Deeply, no. And, and, and target audience is not you. Uh, at the same time, like we have never been able to build software so easily and customize software so easily and like Yeah, you're not gonna use 90% of the things in Salesforce. So like, yeah. What's the typical, so what have you, what[00:37:33] Jacob Effron: have you done internally?[00:37:34] swyx: So we have there the main SaaS that we do for event management and sponsor management. That's, and we paid 200 KA year for that. Not, not huge, but like chunky for, for, for my, my scale. Um, and like, yeah, I could probably spend 2000 and, and build like a custom version of that. Um, the, the, the trick has been dealing with my, the rest of my team and getting them on board.Yeah. ‘cause I'm the most ethical person on my team, but like, I can't make that decision myself. And I think in the same way I've been telling with other CEOs team leaders as well, it's like, well you can be super cloud pilled. You can be super LM psychosis and that you think that's okay, but you like you have to bring your team with you.And I think like there, the sort of widening disparity in LM psychosis in companies is causing real s real riffs because. And on one hand, on one hand, the people who are less AI native are not getting with the picture. They're not, they're actually like behind, they're actually not waking up to the fact that like you, everything you think is necessary is not actually that necessary.And in fact, exactly would be better of you if you just like held your nose and went in and when came out the other side. Yeah, only talking to agents in natural language and like your life would actually be better and you just, you're just like close-minded. There's that perspective. The other perspective is, oh, you vibe coder.You, you did this in a weekend and you got the 80% solution and now the rest of your employees. Have to pick up the rest of your s**t, right, that you, that you thought you were, you were such hot, amazing, uh, uh, at, but like, actually you didn't figure it out. And like, actually LMS are still useless at this and blah, blah, blah.So like, I think there's this huge debate going on in every company right now. Um, and like, um, you know, I have a small microcosm of it, but like, yeah, it, it's making me hesitate to, to pull the trigger. But like I will at some point, it's like maybe I've put it off for one year, but not like five. Yeah, but like, so, so like SaaS is definitely getting squeezed.Um, it does make me wonder, like, I, I do think that there's an opportunity for a more AI native, um, system of record thing that is not just Postgres. Um, or not just MongoDB, although both are very good. Maybe it's like a convex or like people Yeah. Bring up convex a lot. I don't know, like, like, I, I just feel like the sort of quote unquote firebase of, of AI apps isn't really a thing yet.Um, beyond what we have. Uh, which, which is fine. It's, it's, it's just. We could probably start in a more sort of rapid iteration cycle first before scaling up to like a Postgres or MongoDB, which are more sort of old tech. I was at a dinner with, uh, Mike Krieger, the CPO of en philanthropic, and, and he, we were just kind of going around the room going like, what are people most worried about?Yeah. And, uh, for me, uh, I, instead of security, I brought up biosafety. Yeah,[00:40:21] Jacob Effron: classic.[00:40:22] swyx: Um, actually, like I said, it was. Cliche and classic, and the rest of the table were, were like, what do you mean? Someone sitting at home can manufacture a virus that wipes out half of humanity,[00:40:32] Jacob Effron: almost like the OG Jeffrey Hinton.Like, this is why you should be scared.[00:40:35] swyx: I'm like, yeah, like the read the, you know, risk reports. Like this is like the thing. Um, I think, and Mike was just sitting there knowing he was sitting on Mythos and going like, actually it's security. Um, and I think like, um, I think the, there's, there's, part of it is.A very good marketing. Like too good. Yeah, like I would actually advise and topic to tune down the marketing because also it's, it is just a very good model and you don't have to make so many marketing claims around it. At the same time, it is not really a private model. If you give it to 40 companies.Each of whom have like 10,000 employees or whatever. Right. It's not, it's not private, it's, it's like there's bad actors in there.[00:41:18] Jacob Effron: Yeah. Hopefully, hopefully not as, uh, as bad as releasing it widely, but, uh, no, I mean, it's an interesting. You know, it's an interesting case study for how all, I mean, many model releases might, I mean, you know, this might be the first model release that looks like the rest of ‘em from from now on, right?[00:41:31] swyx: It, it, so it's, it's the, there's an overall product strategy, uh, for anthropic of like bundle, uh, you know, restrict access bundle, uh, product with model maybe.Whereas, uh, OpenAI has definitely been a lot more sort of. Philosophically aligned on like, we will just enable access everywhere and we don't know what you, what will come out of it. Right.[00:41:51] Jacob Effron: Right. Though, I mean, this current moment, uh, obviously the cynical take is also just ties to the amount of compute that both companies[00:41:56] swyx: Yeah.Right, right, right. Yeah, I think, I think that's true. I I do think like the, the, this is the, the, the scale, the dawn of like larger than 10 trillion parameter models is very interesting. I don't think it, I think it's a temporary phenomenon because we have much larger compute clusters coming online for everyone over the next like three, five years.It's, and this is like already written in, in the cards.[00:42:18] Jacob Effron: Yeah.[00:42:19] swyx: So to the extent that like, you know, will we have rationing of models, uh, above 10 trillion, uh, in like two years? I don't think so. I think everyone will have no, we'll just[00:42:29] Jacob Effron: have rationing of the next phase.[00:42:30] swyx: Right. Right. But like, that's as it should be almost like, um.My, my classic example, which I, this is just me theorizing, not anything confirmed by Google. When Google announced Gemini, they actually announced three sizes, which was Flash Pro Ultra. They never released Ultra. They only have Pro and Flash. Um, so my theory is they have ultra sitting in a basement and they just could distilling from it for, for flashing pro.Um, which like, yeah, I mean, I, I actually think that's. As it should be for any lab that they, that they do that.[00:43:02] Jacob Effron: Yeah. Just because those are the models that people actually wanna end up using. And it's just like cost prohibit.[00:43:06] swyx: It is more, yeah, it's cost. Yeah. It's, it's not the want, it's just, just, just the cost.Um, I do think, like, uh, it is interesting that, uh, for a while I was, I was considering the theory that models capped out at two, 2 trillion, and I think that's proving to be wrong. And well then if I'm wrong, how wrong? How wrong am I? Do we do 200 trillion? Do we do two quarter trillion, whatever? Um, and I don't think we have the straight answer to that, but like, uh, it's interesting that we are continuing to scale number of pers when everyone kind of assu like can see that we're not going to get like the next thousand or 1 million x from this paradigm.So like the others, like the alias of the world are working on other. Um, model architecture improvements. We need a different scaling law, I guess, because like, we're, I, I feel like people already already feel like we're tapped out on this. Like the, the end, the end state of this is we turn most of the world into data centers and like, I don't know.I don't know if we want that.[00:44:08] Jacob Effron: Yeah, I mean, uh, if the, if, if, if the return of intelligence are there, maybe, uh, maybe not so bad.[00:44:13] swyx: I, I, I think there, there's just a sheer amount of like, like un scalability that like is wrangling people's sensibilities right now. Um, especially in terms of like context lengths.Um, my classic quote is that context length is like the slowest scaling factor in, in lms.[00:44:30] Jacob Effron: Yeah.[00:44:30] swyx: Um, we, like, we took maybe. Three years to go from like 4,000 context length to a million and that's about it. Yeah. Like Gemini has had a million token context length for two years now. Um, and no one's using it.Like, so like yeah, it's memory. Memory is probably gonna be the, the biggest limiting constraint on all these things.[00:44:50] Jacob Effron: Yeah. Certainly seems that way. I guess I'm curious over the last year since you recorded last, like what's one thing you've changed your mind on?[00:44:57] swyx: I feel like I was kind of bearish on open models like last year.Um, in a sense of, like, I, I had just done the podcast with an Al[00:45:07] Jacob Effron: Yeah.[00:45:08] swyx: Of Braintrust where he, and he, I mean, you know, he has a good cross section of all the top AI companies and he says market share of open source is 5% and going down. Um, I think that's changed. I think it's going up. Um, and even if,[00:45:22] Jacob Effron: even though the capability gap does seem to be increasing.Spending on the[00:45:26] swyx: time. It's hard to tell. Yeah, it's, it's really hard to tell. ‘cause like, okay, for, for listeners, capability gap increasing is like on public benchmarks. And let's say you're comparing mythos versus like, I don't know, G-T-O-S-S or like GLM 5.1. And, um, it's, it is really hard to tell. ‘cause even if they were closing, you will also not believe that they were closing that much because it's very easy to gain the benchmarks.Yeah. So you just don't really, really know. Um, all you know is like. Uh, there's somewhat objective open router stats on like what people choose in a free market. And people do choose some of these open models in significant volume, except that a lot of them are heavily discounted. So you need to kind of like price adjust, uh, these things.So even if, even if that were true, which I, I'm not sure, like I, I, I feel like the numbers just up now instead of down. Uh, I think the. Separation between what the top tier agent labs

Lab containment levels 1-4Safety cabinets 1-3ACDP approved list of biological agents 2-4Counterterrorism act  schedule 5 pathogensCat A and Cat B transport SAPO?!Confused? We're not surprised, but things will all become clear.... Once you listen to this masterclass from Dr Claire Gordon on all things biosafety and biosecurity from a UK lab perspective.  Support the showWe are currently seeking more detailed feedback, please help us improve the podcast by giving your feedback here: https://forms.gle/yXTxeYQt1UKnUFGp7Questions, comments, suggestions to idiotspodcasting@gmail.com or on Bluesky @idiots-pod.bsky.socialPrep notes for completed episodes can be found here (Not all episodes have prep notes).If you are enjoying the podcast please leave a review on your preferred podcast app! Feel like giving back? Donations of caffeine gratefully received!https://www.buymeacoffee.com/idiotspod

In this podcast, we spoke with Troy Ostreng, Senior Product Manager and David Burdge, Director of Cell and Gene Therapy at CPC about the development of the MicroCNX® aseptic micro-connectors and how they're helping biopharma teams streamline closed-system operations for cell and gene therapies. What unfolded was a detailed and forward-looking conversation that touched on CPC's 47-year legacy, the technical demands of advanced therapies, and the company's plans to drive the future of automation and sterility in manufacturing. A Legacy That Positioned CPC for Today's Advanced Therapy Boom When asked how CPC's long history in biologics and hospital environments prepared the company for today's cell and gene therapy landscape, David took us back to CPC's roots. “CPC was founded in 1978, so that's 47 years of innovation within connection technologies,” he said. “The first biologic was released in 1982, synthetic insulin, and we were there supporting the industry with open-format connectors on single-use bags.” From the early development of biologics through the shift to single-use and the rise of stainless-steel/single-use hybrid systems, CPC continuously evolved its connection technologies. They launched steam-through connectors as bioprocessing grew more complex, released their first aseptic connector in 2009, and introduced their first connector specifically targeted for the cell and gene therapy market in 2017. David explained how that history matters today: “Biologics has about a 35-year head start on advanced therapies. So the question becomes, what lessons can we transfer from biologics to cell and gene therapy as that industry grows at three to four times the rate biologics did in its first decade?” That perspective, combining biological manufacturing experience with the needs of new therapy modalities, forms the foundation for CPC's MicroCNX platform. MicroCNX: The First Aseptic Connector Built for Small-Format Tubing As cell and gene therapy developers began scaling up manufacturing, they quickly discovered a problem: the connectors used for biologics were not designed for small-volume, patient-specific therapies. Troy described it plainly: “Several years ago, we started hearing rumblings that current connectors weren't meeting what cell and gene therapy required.” CPC responded with a deep Voice of Customer (VOC) initiative, interviewing process engineers, operators, manufacturing leaders, and platform developers. Over and over, the same needs emerged. Operators wanted something simple. “Ease of use was the number one requirement,” Troy said. “Operators needed a product that was easy to use so they could make sterile connections in a short amount of time.” Processes demanded robustness. “Customers needed a connection they could trust—no contamination, no failures, no weak spots in the connection process,” he added. Small-volume precise applications required connectors actually designed for them. With autologous therapies, he noted, “We aren't talking about 1,000 liters; we're talking about 250 milliliters. And if there's a mishap, that could mean the difference between life and death for a patient.” All of this laid the groundwork for MicroCNX, which became the first aseptic connector engineered for small-format tubing. The “Pinch-Click-Pull” Process: Sterility Meets Speed One of the standout features of MicroCNX is its elegantly simple pinch-click-pull operation. Troy explained how simplicity came directly from user feedback. “As operators walked us through their pain points, what they needed was clear: a connector they could learn immediately. So MicroCNX has a three-step process—pinch, click, pull. You can literally do it as fast as I say it.” He continued,“Once someone does it one time, they're basically an expert. That ease of use dramatically reduces operator error.” For an industry where operator variability remains one of the biggest sources of risk and batch loss, eliminating complexity is critical. Cryogenic Challenges Call for Cryo-Rated Solutions As the conversation shifted to cryopreservation, a critical component of cell therapy manufacturing,Troy introduced the MicroCNX® ULT and MicroCNX® Nano variants. “These were really developed because therapies were being frozen to –150°C, even –190°C. You need a connector that can be frozen to those temperatures, thawed, and still be as robust as it was before.” The ULT and Nano were engineered with: Low-profile geometries to fit inside freezing cassettes Specialized materials to withstand thermal stress Chemical compatibility with DMSO and other cryoprotectants Enhanced durability to survive impacts while frozen Troy emphasized how critical it was to get the materials right: “We searched extensively for a material that could handle those harsh chemicals and temperatures. What we landed on was PPSU—polyphenylsulfone. It's chemically sound, and it's incredibly impact-resistant at very low temperatures.” CPC built these connectors because customers repeatedly told them: existing solutions were cracking, leaking, or becoming brittle. MicroCNX was engineered to overcome all of that. True Closed Systems vs. Functionally Closed Systems: Why the Difference Matters A substantial part of the conversation focused on the differences between closed, functionally closed, and open systems—distinctions that are often overlooked but critically important. Troy broke down the differences clearly: “An open system is exposed at some point. A functionally closed system is inherently open but gets closed temporarily to let fluid transfer. In comparison, a closed system is never open at any point.” Examples of functionally closed systems include: Biosafety cabinets (BSCs) Luer-based connections Closed system transfer devices These approaches require: Sanitization Careful environmental controls Operator expertise And, as Troy noted, “a mishap in one of these can mean losing a very valuable therapy.” CPC's sterile connectors—including MicroCNX minimize these risks: “Our connectors allow the system to remain closed 100% of the time. That greatly reduces contamination risk.” This distinction isn't merely academic—it has direct regulatory implications as well. David added,“In Annex 1, they refer to intrinsically sterile connection devices—like sterile connectors and tube welders—that allow operations normally requiring Grade A or B to occur in a Grade C or D environment.” That ability to operate safely in lower-grade spaces is increasingly critical as the industry tries to overcome facility and labor bottlenecks. Why Teams Are Moving Away from Tube Welding Tube welding has been part of bioprocessing for decades, but David explained why its era may be ending for CGT. “Tube welding was born out of the blood banking industry when no other solution existed. But sterile connectors don't require capital investment. They're faster. They eliminate issues like tubing alignment or pinhole leaks. They're simply more reliable.” As biologics manufacturers have already done, CGT teams are now transitioning toward connectors like MicroCNX® that provide sterile, consistent, low-burden operations. The MicroCNX® Luer Variant: Supporting Transitional Workflows Not all workflows are ready to move away from luer-based devices. That's where the MicroCNX Luer variant fits in. Troy described how it works.“You connect a syringe or bag with a luer inside the BSC, but then because the MicroCNX® connector itself is sterile, you can take it outside the hood and make a sterile connection elsewhere.” This capability bridges legacy workflows and fully closed systems—critical during process development, technology transfer, or when working with specific devices. Co-Development: The Heart of CPC's Innovation Process As the conversation returned to CPC's broader philosophy, David highlighted how important customer collaboration is. “It's all about the customer for CPC,” he said. “We start with Voice of Customer. Our business and applications managers are out in the field understanding real applications and guiding them to the right products.” This feedback fuels CPC's two major development tracks: Catalog product development (platforms like MicroCNX) Custom-engineered solutions for unique applications David added: “We maintain a full new product introduction roadmap. Some products will be released broadly. Others will be developed specifically for one customer. But both are driven by real application requirements.” This process ensures CPC's products evolve in lockstep with the needs of advanced therapy teams. Looking Ahead: Designing Connectors for Robotics and Automation Toward the end of the conversation, David turned to one of CPC's biggest focus areas: the future of automation. “The ultimate customer in this industry is the patient,” he said. “And right now we face barriers—capacity, speed, accessibility, cost. Process automation can significantly reduce those barriers.” Automation requires connectors designed not just for human hands but for robotics: Predictable geometries Features optimized for machine vision Forces and actuation steps compatible with robotic grippers Designs intended for automated loading and unloading David summarized CPC's future direction: “We're taking a fresh look at our connectors, reimagining them as something designed for robotic manipulation. It's a high priority for us.” Troy echoed the sentiment: “Our connectors are awesomely designed for humans. But automation is coming, and we're focused on the features robots need.” A Future Built on Innovation and Patient Impact The interview closed with both guests reflecting on CPC's mission. “We're incredibly passionate about innovation and meeting the needs of our customers through thoughtful product development,” Troy said.

Drawing on his background in science and international affairs, UP alum Scott Knackstedt shares how innovation can be used to advance health equity in low-resource settings around the world, transforming barriers to access into opportunities for impact. As a Senior Commercialization Officer at PATH, a global health nonprofit based in Seattle, Scott helps develop affordable, life-saving technologies that range from low-cost devices to next-generation vaccine platforms. His work focuses on overcoming access challenges through formulation and delivery innovations that make health solutions more effective, scalable, and equitable.

From CAR-T therapies to viral vectors, cell and gene treatments are redefining the boundaries of pharmacy practice—but with innovation comes complexity. Host Carolyn Liptak welcomes Dr. Mark Wiencek, Principal Microbiologist with the Technical Services Group at Contec, and Dr. Amanda Frick, Senior Clinical Manager of Market Intelligence at Vizient, to break down the challenges of compounding these advanced therapies.   Listen in as they discuss real-world risk assessments, biosafety considerations, and how hospital pharmacies can safely manage these groundbreaking yet high-risk treatments.   Guest speakers:  Mark Wiencek, PhD Principal Microbiologist, Technical Services Group Contec Amanda Frick, PharmD, BCPS Senior Clinical Manager, Market Intelligence Vizient   Host:  Carolyn Liptak, MBA, RPh  Pharmacy Executive Director  Vizient   Show Notes:  [01:02-01:51] Mark shares his background and experience in microbiology [01:52-04:04] Overview of the types of cell and gene therapies (CGT) currently used in clinical practice [04:05-05:14] Which CGT therapies are most applicable to pharmacy compounding and why [05:15-10:29] Things not on the NIOSH list and the risks [10:30-12:03] Evaluating whether viral vectors can penetrate intact skin and the true occupational exposure risks [12:04-13:18] If hazards are not defined by the NIOSH list, how should these CGT hazards be classified [13:19-15:03] Determining the safest environment for compounding CGT therapies [15:04-20:14] Best practices for decontamination, disinfection, and viral vector handling [20:15-20:59] Do you need a dedicated biosafety cabinet for CGT therapies [21:00-22:55] Recommended resources for further learning   Links | Resources:   Blind and colleagues (Nationwide): Click here Wang and colleagues (Stanford): Click here CONTEC HEALTHCARE WEBINAR Using Bugs as Drugs: Compounding Viral Vectors in Cell & Gene Therapy for Hospital Pharmacies, Mark Wiencek, May 13, 2025: Click here Blind, J.E., Ghosh, S., Niese, T.D., Gardner, J.C., Stack-Simone, S., Dean, A. and Washam, M., 2024. A comprehensive literature scoping review of infection prevention and control methods for viral-mediated gene therapies. Antimicrobial Stewardship & Healthcare Epidemiology, 4(1), p.e15. Click here Deramoudt, L., Pinturaud, M., Bouquet, P., Goffard, A., Simon, N. and Odou, P., 2024. Method for the detection and quantification of viral contamination during the preparation of gene therapy drugs in a hospital pharmacy. Occupational and Environmental Medicine, 81(12), pp.615-621. Click here Korte, J., Mienert, J., Hennigs, J.K. and Körbelin, J., 2021. Inactivation of adeno-associated viral vectors by oxidant-based disinfectants. Human Gene Therapy, 32(13-14), pp.771-781. Click here (abstract only; full article available for purchase) Martino, J.G., McConnell, K., Greathouse, L., Rosario, B.D. and Jaskowiak, J.M., 2024. Cellular therapy site-preparedness: Inpatient pharmacy implementation at a large academic medical center. Journal of Oncology Pharmacy Practice, 30(8), pp.1442-1449. Click here Penzien, C., 2023. Safe handling of BioSafety drugs and live virus vaccines. Pharm Purch Prod, 20(4), p.12. Click here Petrich, J., Marchese, D., Jenkins, C., Storey, M. and Blind, J., 2020. Gene replacement therapy: a primer for the health-system pharmacist. Journal of Pharmacy Practice, 33(6), pp.846-855. Click here Wang, A., Ngo, Z., Yu, S.J. and MacDonald, E.A., 2025. Implementing standard practices in the safe handling of gene therapy and biohazardous drugs in a health-system setting. American Journal of Health-System Pharmacy, p.zxaf026. Click here   VerifiedRx Listener Feedback Survey: We would love to hear from you - Please click here   Subscribe Today! Apple Podcasts Spotify YouTube RSS Feed

About this episode: News about HKU5, a new bat coronavirus with the ability to spread to humans, was met with concerns in the scientific community—mostly because of how the research was done. In this episode: Johns Hopkins virologist Andy Pekosz talks about the different levels of biosecurity in laboratories where scientists study some of the world's most dangerous viruses, how these standards vary worldwide, and what that could mean for studying future viruses with pandemic potential. Guest: Dr. Andy Pekosz is a virologist at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health with appointments in Molecular Microbiology and Immunology and Environmental Health and Engineering. Host: Stephanie Desmon, MA, is a former journalist, author, and the director of public relations and communications for the Johns Hopkins Center for Communication Programs, the largest center at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health. Show links and related content: Recent Virus Research Should Raise the Alarm—The New York Times (Opinion) Chinese researchers find bat virus enters human cells via same pathway as COVID—Reuters The virus hunters who search bat caves to predict the next pandemic—CNN Health (2020) Transcript information: Looking for episode transcripts? Open our podcast on the Apple Podcasts app (desktop or mobile) or the Spotify mobile app to access an auto-generated transcript of any episode. Closed captioning is also available for every episode on our YouTube channel. Contact us: Have a question about something you heard? Looking for a transcript? Want to suggest a topic or guest? Contact us via email or visit our website. Follow us: @‌PublicHealthPod on Bluesky @‌JohnsHopkinsSPH on Instagram @‌JohnsHopkinsSPH on Facebook @‌PublicHealthOnCall on YouTube Here's our RSS feed Note: These podcasts are a conversation between the participants, and do not represent the position of Johns Hopkins University.

Saeed Khan, Ph.D., Head of the Department of Molecular Pathology at Dow diagnostic research and reference laboratory and President of the Pakistan Biological Safety Association discusses the importance and challenges of biosafety/biosecurity practices on both a local and global scale. He highlights key steps for biorisk assessment and management and stresses the importance of training, timing and technology. Ashley's Biggest Takeaways Adequate biosafety and biosecurity protocols depend on a thorough understanding of modern challenges, and scientists must be willing and able to respond to new technological threats appropriately. In the microbiology lab, the threat goes beyond the physical pathogen. Implications of genomics and cyber security must be built into biorisk management techniques, including data storage and waste management practices. Risk assessments involve evaluation of both inherent and residual risk. Inherent risk is linked to the pathogen. Residual risk varies according to the lab, equipment, employee, environment, etc. As a result, biosafety and biosecurity risks are constantly changing, and assessments must be repeated strategically and often. Khan recommended repeating a risk assessment whenever a key variable in the equation changes, i.e., new equipment, new employee, new pathogen. He also recommended (at minimum) conducting routine risk assessments every 6 months, or twice a year. Featured Quotes:  “We need to have basic biosafety and biosecurity to stay away from these bugs and the modern challenges, like cyber biosecurity and genomics. These are the new areas, which are potential threats for the future, and where we need to train our researchers and students.” “Starting from simple hand washing or hand hygiene, the basic things we use are gloves, goggles and PPE to protect the workers, the staff and the patient from getting infected from the environment, laboratory or hospitals. These are the basic things, and it's very crucial, because if one is not using gloves in the lab or not wearing the lab coat, he or she may get infected from the sample, and the patient can get infected from the physician and doctors or nurse if they are not following the basic biosafety rules. These [things] are routinely important. Every day we should practice this.” “But there are [also] new challenges. Particularly in the microbiology lab, we [used to] think that once we killed the bacteria, then it's fine. But nowadays, it's not the way we should think about it. Though you kill the bacteria practically, it still has a sequence, [which] we call the genome, and if you have that information with you, you theoretically have the potential to recreate that pathogen… that can be used or maybe misused as well.” “[Working with] scripts of pathogens, like smallpox or the polioviruses, we call this synthetic biology. Different scientists are doing it for the right purposes, like for production of vaccines, to find new therapeutics, to understand the pathology of the diseases. But on [the other hand]—we call it dual use research of concern (DURC)—the same can be misused as well. That's why it's very important to be aware of the bugs that we are working with, and the potential of that pathogen or microbe, to the extent that can be useful or otherwise.” “So, we should be aware of the new concern of the technology, synthetic biology and DURC. These are new concepts—cyber, biosecurity and information security [are all] very much important these days. You cannot be relaxed being in the microbiology lab. Once we have identified a pathogen, declared a result to the patient and the physician, and it's been treated, we [still] need to be worried about waste management—that we discard that waste properly and we have proper inventory control of our culture. It should be safe in the locker or on in the freezers and properly locked, so we should not be losing any single tube of the culture, otherwise it may be misused.” Risk Assessment “The best word that you have used is risk assessment. So, it should gage the severity of the issue. We should not over exaggerate the risk, and we should not undermine the risk. Once the risk assessment been made, we can proceed.” “Right from the beginning of touching a patient or a sample of the patient until the end of discarding the sample, that is called biorisk management. It's a complete science that we need to be aware of—not in bits and pieces. Rather a comprehensive approach should be adopted, and each and every person in the organization should be involved. Otherwise, we may think [we are] doing something good, but someone else may spoil the whole thing, and it will be counterproductive at the end.” “We should involve each and every person working with us and the lab, and we should empower them. They should feel ownership that they are working with us, and they are [as] responsible as we are. So, this the whole process needs to be properly engaged. People must be engaged, and they should be empowered, and they should be responsible.” “Each and every lab has different weaknesses and strengths of their own, which play an important role in the risk assessment.” “There is inherent risk, which is linked with the pathogen, and there is another thing we call residual risk. So, residual risk everywhere and varies. Though the inherent risk may be the same, the residual risk is based on the training of the person, the lab facility that is available, the resources that labs have and the potential threats from the environment.” “It's not usually possible that you do a risk assessment every day. So, when you have different factors involving a new pathogen in your lab, you have new equipment in your in your lab, or some new employee in your lab—[a new] variable factor that is involved—you should [perform] the risk assessment. Otherwise, [a routine risk assessment] should [be done] twice a year, after 6 months.” “Training is important, and response time is very much crucial. And different technology plays a vital role, but the lack of technology should not be an excuse for not responding. There is always an alternative on the ground that you may do the risk assessment. And within the given resources and facility, we should mimic the technology and respond to any outbreaks or disease within our given resources.” Links for the Episode ASM Guidelines for Biosafety in Teaching Laboratories Pakistan Biological Safety Association Training to be a Biosafety Professional (video) Take the MTM listener survey!

The emergence of the SARS-CoV-2 pathogen in late 2019, and the ensuing investigation into its origins, revealed a dangerous lack of concern among bureaucrats and elected officials for biosafety and biosecurity. Not only did our government fund research to make viruses more deadly to humans, but it continues to do so, refusing to back down or admit any wrongdoing, paving the way for a future pandemic that makes COVID-19 look like the common cold. In his research for "The Coverup" series, which examines the national security apparatus' involvement in the development of the COVID virus, Matt Kibbe speaks with Bryce Nickels, professor of genetics for Rutgers University and co-founder of Biosafety Now, to find out what we as a society should be doing to prevent the development and spread of future pathogens. Their conversation also serves as a preview of the upcoming episode of "The Coverup" featuring Dr. Richard Ebright.

In this episode we look at the history of bio-threat assessment. With a review provided by Michael Parker, who has collated a list of threat assessments produced over the past century. You can find further details on the project here! Do check it out!   https://cobrabiosecurity.org/   Further reading: Sequence-Based Classification of Select Agents A BRIGHTER LINE Committee on Scientific Milestones for the Development of a Gene Sequence-Based Classification System for the Oversight of Select Agents National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2010. Sequence-Based Classification of Select Agents: A Brighter Line. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/12970.  The Select Agent Regulations: Structure and Stricture Shreya Kalra ▸Michael Parker (2022)  The Select Agent Regulations: Structure and Stricture | Georgetown Scientific Research Journal (gsrjournal.org)  Opinion: Coronavirus and Regulating Access to High-Risk Pathogens Overbearing restrictions on research into toxins and pathogens such as SARS-CoV-2 could undermine public health and security in the long run. Michael Parker Shreya Kalra and Bryce Kassalow (2022) Opinion: Coronavirus and Regulating Access to High-Risk Pathogens | The Scientist Magazine® (the-scientist.com)    Comment from Parker, Michael Posted by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention on Jan 19, (2022)  Regulations.gov Improving U.S. Biosafety and Biosecurity: Revisiting Recommendations from the Federal Experts Security Advisory Panel and the Fast Track Action Committee on Select Agent Regulations Authors: Clint A. Haines  and Gigi Kwik Gronvall  (2022) Improving U.S. Biosafety and Biosecurity: Revisiting Recommendations from the Federal Experts Security Advisory Panel and the Fast Track Action Committee on Select Agent Regulations | Applied Biosafety (liebertpub.com)      

Most people shudder at the idea of an infectious disease outbreak — patients stricken with a mysterious illness, hospitals overflowing, and cities going into lockdown. But for Syra Madad, DHSc, MSc , MCP, rushing into such a scenario, donned in a hazmat suit, to control the chaos has been a dream since childhood. Today, she is an epidemiologist, biosecurity advisor, and a pathogen preparedness expert who serves as Senior Director of the System-Wide Special Pathogens Program at New York City Health and Hospitals, which operates the municipal health care system of New York City. Over the course of our conversation, Dr. Madad shares what excites her about the work of infectious disease control, why she believes we have emerged from the Covid-19 pandemic worse prepared for the next pandemic, how scientists and doctors can better communicate with the public in the absence of clear data, the importance of utilizing trusted messengers in the community to fully deploy the power of public health, and more. In this episode, you'll hear about: 2:09 - How a movie led Dr. Madad to become an infectious disease preparedness expert6:54 - An overview of Biosafety levels (BSL)  9:30 - Moments in Dr. Madad's career when disease containment went well and moments when it did not. 12:27 - How Dr. Madad mentally and emotionally manages the heavy weight of often-lethal infectious diseases18:05 - Dr. Madad's opinion on how COVID-19 policies were handled 24:02 - Dr. Madad's personal thoughts on the potential origins of COVID-19 26:55 - What concerns Dr. Madad most about future pandemics and how we can make positive steps toward recovering trust in science35:40 - Dr. Madad's advice for those considering a career in public health or infectious diseases Dr. Syra Madad appears in the Netflix special Pandemic: How to Prevent an Outbreak.Dr. Syra Madad can be found on Twitter/X at @syramadad.Visit our website www.TheDoctorsArt.com where you can find transcripts of all episodes.If you enjoyed this episode, please subscribe, rate, and review our show, available for free on Spotify, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts. If you know of a doctor, patient, or anyone working in health care who would love to explore meaning in medicine with us on the show, feel free to leave a suggestion in the comments or send an email to info@thedoctorsart.com.Copyright The Doctor's Art Podcast 2024

How is Bioengineering Different than GMOs? “Bioengineered food refers to food products that have been altered at a genetic or molecular level using biotechnology, which includes genetic engineering and nanotechnology. This involves modifying the genetic material of a food source or manipulating matter on a nanoscale to achieve improved traits such as enhanced nutritional content, pest resistance, longer shelf life, or targeted delivery of bioactive compounds. The modifications are made using lab techniques that cannot be created through conventional breeding or found in nature. As nanotechnology continues to evolve, its applications in bioengineering food are expected to grow, potentially offering new ways to enhance the safety, quality, and nutritional value of our food supply.” This is Scientists Playing God. Bioengineering: Applies engineering principles to biological systems and biomedical technologies. Involves design and analysis of biological systems. Nanotechnology: Manipulates matter on an atomic, molecular, and supramolecular scale. Applied in bioengineering for creating new functional materials and devices for medical applications. Synthetic Manipulation: Part of bioengineering where biological entities are artificially manipulated to achieve desired outcomes. Genetic engineering is a prime example. mRNA (Messenger RNA): Conveys genetic information from DNA to the ribosome, specifying the amino acid sequence of the protein products of gene expression. Used in bioengineering for various applications, including the development of mRNA vaccines. CRISPR-Cas9: A gene-editing system that allows scientists to modify an organism's DNA with precision and efficiency. Has transformed genetic engineering and has broad implications in biotechnology, agriculture, and medicine. President Biden's Executive Order on Advancing Biotechnology and Biomanufacturing Innovation but this tech is an abomination. Here is the propaganda: Innovative Solutions: Advance biotechnology and biomanufacturing for solutions in health, climate change, energy, food security, agriculture, supply chain resilience, and national and economic security. Equity, Ethics, Safety, and Security: Emphasize these principles to ensure access to technologies, processes, and products that benefit all Americans and the global community. Economic Growth: Recognize the economic potential of biotechnology and biomanufacturing, referred to as “the bioeconomy”. Investment in Scientific Capabilities: Invest in foundational scientific capabilities, including the development of genetic engineering technologies and techniques, unlocking the power of biological data, and advancing the science of scale-up production. Biosafety and Biosecurity: Invest in and promote biosafety and biosecurity to ensure that biotechnology is developed and deployed in ways that align with United States principles and values and international best practices. Domestic Production: Ensure that what is invented in the US can be made in the United States, creating jobs at home, building stronger supply chains, and lowering prices for American families. Addressing Global Challenges: Drive advances in biomanufacturing that can improve food and energy security, mitigate the impacts of climate change, and help people live longer and healthier lives through advances in medicine.

205. R-Zero | Grant Morgan was developing a powerful UV-C disinfection device capable of destroying over 99.99% of pathogens to make commercial space as safe as possible for employees and customers. Grant, along with his co-founders, runs R-Zero Systems, which is a biosafety company dedicated to making safer everyday spaces and common places. Among their top priority is to thoughtfully design the most effective technologies and protocols that would reduce our world of deadly pathogens such as the Coronavirus, Influenza, norovirus, E. coli, common cold, and other common infectious diseases.   *** For Show Notes, Key Points, Contact Info, Resources Mentioned, & the Fabulous 4 Questions on this episode visit our website: Grant Morgan Interview. ***   If you have land in Georgia, then check out: https://bubba-land.com/georgia/  

Earl is joined by Bryce Nickels, Robert H. Ebright, and Simon Wain-Hobson from Biosafety Now to discuss the dangers 'gain of function' research poses to public health and general safety. Gain of function refers to a type of research in which the transmissibility and/or lethality of a virus is artificially enhanced in a laboratory. With the proposal of Bill AB413 and AB401, Wisconsin looks to become the first state to regulate and limit this type of research. Bryce, Robert, and Simon are world-renowned scientists, with Ph.D.'s in chemical biology, genetics, and microbiology, that are now speaking out against the lack of transparency in the field. Biosafety Now is a global NGO dedicated to educating the public on the threat of research-generated pandemics and passing legislation to protect the public from the creation of non-natural pathogens. https://biosafetynow.org/ The Earl Ingram Show is a part of the Civic Media radio network and airs Monday through Friday from 8-10 am across the state. Subscribed to the podcast to be sure not to miss out on a single episode! To learn more about the show and all of the programming across the Civic Media network, head over to https://civicmedia.us/shows to see the entire broadcast line up. Follow the show on Facebook and X to keep up with Earl and the show! Guests: Bryce Nickels, Robert H. Ebright, Simon Wain-Hobson

Earl continues the discussion with Bryce Nickels, Robert H. Ebright, and Simon Wain-Hobson on gain of function research and the dangers of non-natural pathogens. Gain of function refers to a type of research in which the transmissibility and/or lethality of a virus is artificially enhanced in a laboratory. With the proposal of Bill AB413 and AB401, Wisconsin looks to become the first state to regulate and limit this type of research. Bryce, Robert, and Simon are world-renowned scientists, with Ph.D.'s in chemical biology, genetics, and microbiology, that are now speaking out against the lack of transparency in the field. Biosafety Now is a global NGO dedicated to educating the public on the threat of research-generated pandemics and passing legislation to protect the public from the creation of non-natural pathogens. https://biosafetynow.org/ The Earl Ingram Show is a part of the Civic Media radio network and airs Monday through Friday from 8-10 am across the state. Subscribed to the podcast to be sure not to miss out on a single episode! To learn more about the show and all of the programming across the Civic Media network, head over to https://civicmedia.us/shows to see the entire broadcast line up. Follow the show on Facebook and X to keep up with Earl and the show! Guests: Bryce Nickels, Robert H. Ebright, Simon Wain-Hobson

Major General (ret) Dr. Aamer Ikram is currently the Director of the Pakistan Field Epidemiology and Laboratory Training Program (FELTP), as well as Chairperson of the Training Programs in Epidemiology and Public Health Interventions Network ( TEPHINET - https://www.tephinet.org/aamer-ikram ) Advisory Board; a global network of Field Epidemiology Training Programs spanning more than 80 programs actively training field epidemiologists in more than 200 countries and territories. Dr. Ikram recently spent 7 years in leadership as Executive Director of the National Institute of Health Pakistan ( https://www.nih.org.pk/ ). Dr. Ikram is also a member Board Gavi, The Vaccine Alliance; Executive Board International Association of National Public Health Institutes (IANPHI); Executive Committee Institute of Safety in Technology & Research, UK; Technical Advisory Group – Biosafety, WHO; adjunct faculty Emory University; Ex-Executive Council of International Society for Infectious Diseases; and Co-Chair Biological Sciences Committee, Higher Education Commission; and member multiple National Working Groups. Dr. Ikram has extensive experience working with International Health Regulations, Global Health Security Agenda, Integrated Disease Surveillance & Response, One-Heath, Biosafety & Biosecurity. Dr. Ikram graduated from Army Medical College with a Diploma in Pathology, qualified MCPS (Clinical Pathology) and Fellowship (Clinical Microbiology), and then did his Ph.D. in molecular biology. He is a Registered Biosafety Professional from the American Biological Safety Association, a Biosafety Professional from the Institute of Safety in Technology and Research (UK), and an International Federation of Biosafety Associations (IFBA) Certified Professional. Furthermore, he was awarded Fellowship of the Royal College of Physicians (FRCP) by the Royal College of Edinburgh; FRCPath by the Royal College of Pathologists in London; and a Fellowship in Public Health from Royal Colleges UK. He was also recently elected as a Fellow in the Pakistan Academy of Sciences. Dr. Ikram has served as the President of the Pakistan Biological Safety Association (PBSA); Ex-President of the Medical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases Society (MMIDSP); Higher Education Commission Focal Point of Expertise for Medical Research, and Convener of Microbiology Pakistan Health Research Council. Support the show

This is a selection of highlights from episode #171 of The 80,000 Hours Podcast.These aren't necessarily the most important, or even most entertaining parts of the interview — and if you enjoy this, we strongly recommend checking out the full episode:Alison Young on how top labs have jeopardised public health with repeated biosafety failuresAnd if you're finding these highlights episodes valuable, please let us know by emailing podcast@80000hours.org.Highlights put together by Simon Monsour, Milo McGuire, and Dominic Armstrong

"Rare events can still cause catastrophic accidents. The concern that has been raised by experts going back over time, is that really, the more of these experiments, the more labs, the more opportunities there are for a rare event to occur — that the right pathogen is involved and infects somebody in one of these labs, or is released in some way from these labs. And what I chronicle in Pandora's Gamble is that there have been these previous outbreaks that have been associated with various kinds of lab accidents. So this is not a theoretical thing that can happen: it has happened in the past." — Alison YoungIn today's episode, host Luisa Rodriguez interviews award-winning investigative journalist Alison Young on the surprising frequency of lab leaks and what needs to be done to prevent them in the future.Links to learn more, summary, and full transcript.They cover:The most egregious biosafety mistakes made by the CDC, and how Alison uncovered them through her investigative reportingThe Dugway life science test facility case, where live anthrax was accidentally sent to labs across the US and several other countries over a period of many yearsThe time the Soviets had a major anthrax leak, and then hid it for over a decadeThe 1977 influenza pandemic caused by vaccine trial gone wrong in ChinaThe last death from smallpox, caused not by the virus spreading in the wild, but by a lab leak in the UK Ways we could get more reliable oversight and accountability for these labsAnd the investigative work Alison's most proud ofProducer and editor: Keiran HarrisAudio Engineering Lead: Ben CordellTechnical editing: Simon Monsour and Milo McGuireAdditional content editing: Katy Moore and Luisa RodriguezTranscriptions: Katy Moore

Dr. Andy Spry, Consultant to the Planetary Protection Officer, NASA April 21, 2023 In this episode, we discuss NASA's Office of Planetary Protection, which focuses on mitigating contamination risk for space missions. Their efforts cover both forward contamination—ie, contaminating extraterrestrial bodies with organisms from Earth—and backward contamination—ie, contaminating Earth with extraterrestrial life. Planetary protection functions much like laboratory biosafety, but on a much larger scale! The Planetary Protection office is responsible for developing and implementing the processes and standards necessary to ensure cleanliness and containment, and these considerations are part of the long-term planning that goes into all of NASA's space missions, including historical, current, and future efforts to return sample materials collected from the Moon, asteroids, and Mars.

Welcome to The Nonlinear Library, where we use Text-to-Speech software to convert the best writing from the Rationalist and EA communities into audio. This is: EA Germany Community Health Documents & Processes, published by Milena Canzler on August 30, 2023 on The Effective Altruism Forum. Our goal with these documents is to build a safe community for all our members by making sure any interpersonal harm is appropriately dealt with and encouraging harmed individuals to reach out to us. This is a collection of all the documents we created for EA Germany during the Community Health Project (March - July 2023). We were asked to share these with the wider community. We welcome others to use and adapt them and invite feedback. We created two types of documents: Public: to inform our community about our Code of Conduct, event standards, ways to report misbehaviours and ask for help, processes for evaluating and responding to reports, confidentiality, professional contact points, and Awareness Workshop results. Internal: description of the role and responsibility of the Community Health Contact, their interaction with the Equal Opportunities Officer of our association, and handover processes. Why we need this Last week, Ninas, a new group organizer, was alerted by group member Sayat about allegations against a long-term member. Unaware of any past issues, Ninas informs Sayat, causing Sayat to feel belittled and cease work on a promising Biosafety camp. After confronting the accused and mistakenly revealing Sayat as the source, retaliation against Sayat ensues. Ninas, now shocked and believing Sayat, uncovers additional troubling stories about the long-term member after further inquiry. Ninas regrets not knowing earlier, as this knowledge could have prevented Sayat's distress and withdrawal from their project due to harassment. Imagine if Ninas, the hypothetical group organiser, had a starter pack of information about Community Health and previous incidents in their group. Imagine if they didn't botch their first conversation with Sayat and were better informed about confidentiality procedures. As part of the Community Health Project, which started in March 2023, we created a series of documents to inform our members about our offers and to document internal processes for the team. These documents exist to support us in staying in line with our vision and values. They further help identify areas for improvement and serve as the foundation for action. Setting in Germany To appreciate how these documents work, here is an overview of the system in and for which they're created. Other communities will have to adapt the processes for their own structure, culture and laws. Our structure: The German EA community has 27 active local groups. EA Germany is organised as a membership association Effektiver Altruismus Deutschland (EAD) e.V. with over 100 members. We currently have a team of five employees, some full-time and some part-time. The association also elects an Equal Opportunities Officer who checks our processes and important documents for discrimination. They also provided us with feedback on these documents. The resources Part of our strategy for 2023 is to provide a trained Community Health Contact, implement standards and offer documents for Community Health. With the support of colleagues, the Equal opportunities officer, CEA's Community Health team and experts, I assessed our options to create a safer community. This assessment is ongoing. Here is the summary of what needed to be done and the results so far: Public documents Community Health Contact Mental Health First Aid training to qualify me for this role in our team Informed our community about this offer; also in German Anonymous contact forms established; also in German Code of Conduct We added avenues of reporting violations and responses to reports, an alcohol and drug policy and anonymous contact forms. During our annual meeting at the start of June, we asked the memb...

Welcome to The Nonlinear Library, where we use Text-to-Speech software to convert the best writing from the Rationalist and EA communities into audio. This is: Biosafety in BSL-3, BSL-3+ and BSL-4 Laboratories: Mapping and Recommendations for Latin America, published by JorgeTorresC on August 23, 2023 on The Effective Altruism Forum. Executive summary This article addresses biosafety and biosecurity in high-containment level laboratories (BSL-3 and BSL-4) in Latin America, with a focus on classification, current status, and regulatory frameworks. In the region, the lack of uniformity in data collection makes it difficult to accurately understand the infrastructure of high-containment laboratories. Regulatory frameworks vary across the region and present challenges in terms of standardization. Although countries like Colombia have made progress in this area, there is a need to establish updated and centralized regulatory frameworks in each country. To improve biosafety and biosecurity, we make a series of recommendations such as the implementation of biological risk management systems in laboratories, the promotion of non-punitive incident reports, the standardization of supervision processes, collaboration between institutions, and the exchange of best practices. Introduction Biosafety and biosecurity in high-containment level laboratories (BSL-3 and BSL-4) are of vital importance for the protection of public health. These laboratories work with dangerous biological agents, so it is essential to ensure that practices, equipment, and security measures are adequate and rigorous. In this context, this article focuses on analyzing the current situation of BSL-3, BSL-3+, and BSL-4 laboratories in Latin America. We explore the increase in the construction of these laboratories at a global level, the regulatory frameworks by which they are governed, and the challenges that some Latin American countries face in their implementation. In addition, we propose several recommendations to improve biosafety and biosecurity in these laboratories. To consult the complete map follow the link: Classification of laboratories by biosafety levels In 1974, the United States Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) published a document titled "Classification of etiologic agents on the basis of hazard", proposing the classification of pathogens into four risk groups. Subsequently, both the National Institutes of Health (NIH) of the United States and the World Health Organization (WHO) updated this system, thus establishing the bases for the classification of laboratories according to the risk group of the pathogens they handle (Villegas et al. al., 2007). Out of the classification of risk groups, four levels of biosafety in laboratories have been established. These levels are determined taking into account several factors, such as the infectious capacity of the pathogen, the existence of treatments or vaccines for it, the severity of the disease it causes, its transmissibility, whether it is of exotic origin or not, and the nature of the work carried out in the laboratory (Lara-Villegas et al., 2008). Level 1 (BSL-1) laboratories use elemental equipment and practices for teaching purposes. They work with well-defined and characterized strains of microorganisms that do not cause disease in healthy people. The use of special protective equipment is not required. Level 2 (BSL-2) laboratories adopt appropriate practices, equipment, and measures to realize clinical analysis, diagnoses, and pathology. These laboratories handle microorganisms of moderate risk that are present in the community and are associated with human diseases of variable severity. Level 3 (BSL-3) laboratories implement appropriate practices, equipment, and measures to realize clinical analysis, diagnoses, and research. These laboratories handle known or unknown agents that have the potential to be transmitted by aerosol or splash and that can cause life-threatening infections...

Welcome to The Nonlinear Library, where we use Text-to-Speech software to convert the best writing from the Rationalist and EA communities into audio. This is: An overview of standards in biosafety and biorisk, published by rosehadshar on July 26, 2023 on The Effective Altruism Forum. Linkpost for This report represents ~40 hours of work by Rose Hadshar in summer 2023 for Arb Research, in turn for Holden Karnofsky in response to this call for proposals on standards. It's based on a mixture of background reading, research into individual standards, and interviews with experts. Note that I didn't ask for permission to cite the expert interviews publicly, so I've anonymised them. I suggest reading the scope and summary and skimming the overview, then only looking at sections which seem particularly relevant to you. Scope This report covers: Both biosecurity and biosafety: Biosecurity: "the protection, control and accountability for valuable biological materials (including information) in laboratories in order to prevent their unauthorized access, loss, theft, misuse, diversion or intentional release." Biosafety: "the containment principles, technologies and practices that are implemented to prevent unintentional exposure to pathogens and toxins or their accidental release" Biosecurity and biosafety standards internationally, but with much more emphasis on the US Regulations and guidance as well as standards proper. I am using these terms as follows: Regulations: rules on how to comply with a particular law or laws. Legally binding Guidance: rules on how to comply with particular regulations. Not legally binding, but risky to ignore Standards: rules which do not relate to compliance with a particular law or laws. Not legally binding. Note that I also sometimes use 'standards' as an umbrella term for regulations, guidance and standards. Summary of most interesting findings For each point: I've included my confidence in the claim (operationalised as the probability that I would still believe the claim after 40 hours' more work). I link to a subsection with more details (though in some cases I don't have much more to say). The origins of bio standards (80%) There were many different motivations behind bio standards (e.g. plant health, animal health, worker protection, bioterrorism, fair sharing of genetic resources.) (70%) Standards were significantly reactive to rather than proactive about incidents (e.g. lab accidents, terrorist attacks, and epidemics), though: There are exceptions (e.g. the NIH guidelines on recombinant DNA) Guidance is often more proactive than standards (e.g. gene drives) (80%) International standards weren't always later or less influential than national ones (70%) Voluntary standards seem to have prevented regulation in at least one case (e.g. the NIH guidelines) (65%) In the US, it may be more likely that mandatory standards are passed on matters of national security (e.g. FSAP) Compliance (60%) Voluntary compliance may sometimes be higher than mandated compliance (e.g. NIH guidelines) (70%) Motives for voluntarily following standards include responsibility, market access, and the spread of norms via international training (80%) Voluntary standards may be easier to internationalise than regulation (90%) Deliberate efforts were made to increase compliance internationally (e.g. via funding biosafety associations, offering training and other assistance) Problems with these standards (90%) Bio standards are often list-based. This means that they are not comprehensive, do not reflect new threats, prevent innovation in risk management, and fail to recognise the importance of context for risk There's been a partial move away from prescriptive, list-based standards towards holistic, risk-based standards (e.g. ISO 35001) (85%) Bio standards tend to lack reporting standards, so it's very hard to tell how effective they are (60%) Standards may have impeded safety work in some areas (e.g. select agent designation as a...

Raina MacIntyre (MBBS Hons 1, M App Epid, PhD, FRACP, FAFPHM) is Head of the Biosecurity Program, Kirby Institute, UNSW & author of DARK WINTER. She has over 450 peer-reviewed publications, has received many awards including the Sir Henry Wellcome Medal from the Association of Military Surgeons of the US and is a member of the WHO COVID-19 Vaccine Composition Technical Advisory Group and WHO Smallpox and monkeypox working group.

Do you know how the biosafety risks of oncolytic immunotherapies and their combination with immune checkpoint inhibitors can be mitigated? Credit available for this activity expires: 6/22/24 Earn Credit / Learning Objectives & Disclosures: https://www.medscape.org/viewarticle/993479?ecd=bdc_podcast_libsyn_mscpedu

Welcome to The Nonlinear Library, where we use Text-to-Speech software to convert the best writing from the Rationalist and EA communities into audio. This is: How biosafety could inform AI standards, published by Olivia Jimenez on June 9, 2023 on The AI Alignment Forum. Context: Simeon Campos and I wanted to understand how other industries handle catastrophic risks, then write pieces about how any standards from them could be applied to AI for policy readers. This is a draft slightly modified for LessWrong. Epistemic status: Very shallow dive, though I checked my understanding with people with more biosecurity and policy expertise, like David Manheim (thanks!). Related posts I recommend: Six Dimensions of Operational Adequacy in AGI Projects, High Reliability Orgs, and AI Companies, “Carefully-Bootstrapped Alignment” is organizationally hard How biosafety could inform AI standards Leading AI executives and researchers recently signed a statement saying “Mitigating the risk of extinction from AI should be a global priority alongside other societal-scale risks such as pandemics and nuclear war.” If we take this seriously, it's worth looking at how much we do to mitigate pandemic and nuclear risk. (Spoiler: a lot.) This post addresses the first half of that, outlining my understanding of biosafety standards and how they could inform standards for high-risk AI research. Biosafety & its relevance The field of biology has comprehensive standards for maintaining safety while working with potentially dangerous biological agents, such as viruses that could escape the lab and infect many people. Biosafety standards are applied in a tiered approach, where the riskiest research can only occur in laboratories taking the most stringent precautions. The levels of laboratory precautions range from biosafety level 1 (BSL-1, the lowest) to biosafety level 4 (BSL-4, the highest). BSL standards also govern the storage and transportation of biological agents, access to these labs, and similar. BSL-1 has minimal standards; it allows places like high school labs to easily experiment. BSL-4 has very restrictive standards; there are only around 50 BSL-4 labs in the world. BSL-4 labs are the only places where easily-transmissible and lethal diseases like Ebola can be studied. By enforcing tiered standards according to research risk at all labs, biology has been relatively successful at mitigating the two types of risks it faces: accident risks, such as a virus escaping the lab because it was accidentally mishandled, and misuse risk, such as a virus being intentionally taken out of the lab by someone who intends to cause harm with it. There are notable parallels to AI here. Different AI research poses different risks, and most are easily manageable. However, research on the most powerful systems poses significant accident and misuse risks that are difficult to manage (in some cases, we don't even know how we could manage them): powerful systems could get out of developers control or they could be used to cause harm. Accordingly, labs conducting that research should probably be held to particularly high standards of reliability and security. Below I outline some standards for US biosafety level 3 and 4 labs, which handle pathogens that pose catastrophic risks. Other countries' standards at these levels are very similar, so I haven't taken the time to spell out differences. Selected biosafety standards & potential applications in AI 1. High-risk research must be conducted in designated labs subject to stringent standards. The USDA maintains a list of biological agents that pose severe public health and safety threats (henceforth select agents). Any lab wishing to work with a select agent must be licensed by the Federal Select Agent Program (FSAP). These facilities are continuously monitored for compliance. Additionally, each BSL-4 research project must get specific approval before it can be conducted. Researchers must submit detailed research plans an...

Welcome to The Nonlinear Library, where we use Text-to-Speech software to convert the best writing from the Rationalist and EA communities into audio. This is: How biosafety could inform AI standards, published by Olivia Jimenez on June 9, 2023 on LessWrong. Context: Simeon Campos and I wanted to understand how other industries handle catastrophic risks, then write pieces about how any standards from them could be applied to AI for policy readers. This is a draft slightly modified for LessWrong. Epistemic status: Very shallow dive, though I checked my understanding with people with more biosecurity and policy expertise, like David Manheim (thanks!). Related posts I recommend: Six Dimensions of Operational Adequacy in AGI Projects, High Reliability Orgs, and AI Companies, “Carefully-Bootstrapped Alignment” is organizationally hard How biosafety could inform AI standards Leading AI executives and researchers recently signed a statement saying “Mitigating the risk of extinction from AI should be a global priority alongside other societal-scale risks such as pandemics and nuclear war.” If we take this seriously, it's worth looking at how much we do to mitigate pandemic and nuclear risks. (Spoiler: a lot.) This post addresses the first half of that, outlining my understanding of biosafety standards and how they could inform standards for high-risk AI research. Biosafety & its relevance The field of biology has comprehensive standards for maintaining safety while working with potentially dangerous biological agents, such as viruses that could escape the lab and infect many people. Biosafety standards are applied in a tiered approach, where the riskiest research can only occur in laboratories taking the most stringent precautions. The levels of laboratory precautions range from biosafety level 1 (BSL-1, the lowest) to biosafety level 4 (BSL-4, the highest). BSL standards also govern the storage and transportation of biological agents, access to these labs, and similar. BSL-1 has minimal standards; it allows places like high school labs to easily experiment. BSL-4 has very restrictive standards; there are only around 50 BSL-4 labs in the world. BSL-4 labs are the only places where easily-transmissible and lethal diseases like Ebola can be studied. By enforcing tiered standards according to research risk at all labs, biology has been relatively successful at mitigating the two types of risks it faces: accident risks, such as a virus escaping the lab because it was accidentally mishandled, and misuse risk, such as a virus being intentionally taken out of the lab by someone who intends to cause harm with it. There are notable parallels to AI here. Different AI research poses different risks, and most are easily manageable. However, research on the most powerful systems poses significant accident and misuse risks that are difficult to manage (in some cases, we don't even know how we could manage them): powerful systems could get out of developers control or they could be used to cause harm. Accordingly, labs conducting that research should probably be held to particularly high standards of reliability and security. Below I outline some standards for US biosafety level 3 and 4 labs, which handle pathogens that pose catastrophic risks. Other countries' standards at these levels are very similar, so I haven't taken the time to spell out differences. Then, I outline how they could be applied in AI. I'm not going to defend these particular applications here; they're just examples. That said, I've chosen examples I'm pretty sympathetic to. Selected biosafety standards & potential applications in AI 1. High-risk research must be conducted in designated labs subject to stringent standards. The USDA maintains a list of biological agents that pose severe public health and safety threats (henceforth select agents). Any lab wishing to work with a select agent must be licensed by the Federal Select Agent Program (FSAP). These facilities are continu...

Sen. Marco Rubio, R-Fla., has published a report that suggests that the COVID-19 outbreak was tied to "a serious biosafety incident."Advertising Inquiries: https://redcircle.com/brandsPrivacy & Opt-Out: https://redcircle.com/privacy

Welcome to The Nonlinear Library, where we use Text-to-Speech software to convert the best writing from the Rationalist and EA communities into audio. This is: Write more Wikipedia articles on policy-relevant EA concepts, published by freedomandutility on April 3, 2023 on The Effective Altruism Forum. One way I think EA fails to maximise impact is by its focus on legible, clear and attributable impact over actions where the impact is extremely difficult to estimate. Writing Wikipedia articles on and around important EA concepts (except perhaps on infohazardous bioterrorism incidents) has low downside risk and extremely high upside risk, making these ideas much more easy to understand for policymakers and other people in positions of power who may come across them and google them. However, the feedback loops are virtually non-existent and the impact is highly illegible. For example, there is currently no dedicated Wikipedia page for “Existential Risk” and “Global Catastrophic Biological Risk”. Writing Wikipedia pages could be a particularly good use of time for people new to EA and people in university student groups who want to gain a better understanding of EA concepts or of EA-relevant policy areas. Some other ideas for creating new Wikipedia articles or adding more detail to existing ones: International Biosecurity and Biosafety Initiative for Science Alternative Proteins Governance of Alternative Proteins Global Partnership Biological Security Working Group Regulation of gain-of-function biological research by country Public investment in alternative proteins by country Space governance Regulation of alternative proteins UN Biorisk Working Group Political Representation of Future Generations Political Representation of Future Generations by Country Political Representation of Animals Joint Assessment Mechanism Public investment in AI Safety research by country International Experts Group of Biosafety and Biosecurity Regulators Tobacco taxation by country Global Partnership Signature Initiative to Mitigate Biological Threats in Africa Regulations on lead in paint by country Alcohol taxation by country Regulation of dual-use biological research by country Joint External Evaluations Biological Weapons Convention funding by country Thanks for listening. To help us out with The Nonlinear Library or to learn more, please visit nonlinear.org.

How do research communities contend with controversial science? J. Benjamin Hurlbut, Ph.D., Arizona State University, Alysson Muotri, Ph.D., UC San Diego, Matthew Porteus, M.D., Ph.D., Stanford University, and Jacob (Yaqub) Hanna, M.D., Ph.D., Weizmann Institute of Science, explore controversial case studies and the limitations of scientific deliberation/dissent/ambivalence. Series: "Stem Cell Channel" [Health and Medicine] [Humanities] [Science] [Show ID: 38729]

How do research communities contend with controversial science? J. Benjamin Hurlbut, Ph.D., Arizona State University, Alysson Muotri, Ph.D., UC San Diego, Matthew Porteus, M.D., Ph.D., Stanford University, and Jacob (Yaqub) Hanna, M.D., Ph.D., Weizmann Institute of Science, explore controversial case studies and the limitations of scientific deliberation/dissent/ambivalence. Series: "Stem Cell Channel" [Health and Medicine] [Humanities] [Science] [Show ID: 38729]

How do research communities contend with controversial science? J. Benjamin Hurlbut, Ph.D., Arizona State University, Alysson Muotri, Ph.D., UC San Diego, Matthew Porteus, M.D., Ph.D., Stanford University, and Jacob (Yaqub) Hanna, M.D., Ph.D., Weizmann Institute of Science, explore controversial case studies and the limitations of scientific deliberation/dissent/ambivalence. Series: "Stem Cell Channel" [Health and Medicine] [Humanities] [Science] [Show ID: 38729]

How do research communities contend with controversial science? J. Benjamin Hurlbut, Ph.D., Arizona State University, Alysson Muotri, Ph.D., UC San Diego, Matthew Porteus, M.D., Ph.D., Stanford University, and Jacob (Yaqub) Hanna, M.D., Ph.D., Weizmann Institute of Science, explore controversial case studies and the limitations of scientific deliberation/dissent/ambivalence. Series: "Stem Cell Channel" [Health and Medicine] [Humanities] [Science] [Show ID: 38729]

How do research communities contend with controversial science? J. Benjamin Hurlbut, Ph.D., Arizona State University, Alysson Muotri, Ph.D., UC San Diego, Matthew Porteus, M.D., Ph.D., Stanford University, and Jacob (Yaqub) Hanna, M.D., Ph.D., Weizmann Institute of Science, explore controversial case studies and the limitations of scientific deliberation/dissent/ambivalence. Series: "Stem Cell Channel" [Health and Medicine] [Humanities] [Science] [Show ID: 38729]

How do research communities contend with controversial science? J. Benjamin Hurlbut, Ph.D., Arizona State University, Alysson Muotri, Ph.D., UC San Diego, Matthew Porteus, M.D., Ph.D., Stanford University, and Jacob (Yaqub) Hanna, M.D., Ph.D., Weizmann Institute of Science, explore controversial case studies and the limitations of scientific deliberation/dissent/ambivalence. Series: "Stem Cell Channel" [Health and Medicine] [Humanities] [Science] [Show ID: 38729]

How do research communities contend with controversial science? J. Benjamin Hurlbut, Ph.D., Arizona State University, Alysson Muotri, Ph.D., UC San Diego, Matthew Porteus, M.D., Ph.D., Stanford University, and Jacob (Yaqub) Hanna, M.D., Ph.D., Weizmann Institute of Science, explore controversial case studies and the limitations of scientific deliberation/dissent/ambivalence. Series: "Stem Cell Channel" [Health and Medicine] [Humanities] [Science] [Show ID: 38729]

In this episode of the Debugged Podcast, Medha Gupta chats with Dr. Marian L. McKee, the Vice President Biosafety at Eurofins Biopharma Product Testing labs. McKee goes in depth about her role, which is working to ensure the safety of pharmaceutical products by testing for viral contaminants. McKee shares her journey from her interest in zoology to a career in microbiology. The duo discuss the importance of understanding science, the integration of technology in science, and following your passion. Tune into McKee's amazing journey as a leader in biosafety and inspiration to many!

Welcome to The Nonlinear Library, where we use Text-to-Speech software to convert the best writing from the Rationalist and EA communities into audio. This is: Advice on communicating in and around the biosecurity policy community, published by Elika on March 2, 2023 on The Effective Altruism Forum. TL;DR The field of biosecurity is more complicated, sensitive and nuanced, especially in the policy space, than what impressions you might get based on publicly available information. As a result, say / write / do things with caution (especially if you are a non-technical person or more junior, or talking to a new (non-EA) expert). This might help make more headway on safer biosecurity policy. Generally, take caution in what you say and how you present yourself, because it does impact how much you are trusted, whether or not you are invited back to the conversation, and thus the potential to make an impact in this (highly sensitive) space. Why Am I Saying This? An important note: I don't represent the views of the NIH, HHS, or the U.S. government and these are my personal opinions. This is me engaging outside of my professional capacity to provide advice for people interested in working on biosecurity policy. I work for a U.S. government agency on projects related to oversight and ethics over dual-use research of concern (DURC) and enhanced pandemic potential pathogens (ePPP). In my job, I talk and interface with science policy advisors, policy makers, regulators, (health) security professionals, scientists who do DURC / ePPP research, biosafety professionals, ethicists, and more. Everyone has a slightly different opinion and risk categorisation of biosecurity / biosafety as a whole, and DURC and ePPP research risk in specific. As a result of my work, I regularly (and happily) speak to newer and more junior EAs to give them advice on entering the biosecurity space. I've noticed a few common mistakes with how many EA community members – both newer bio people and non-bio people who know the basics about the cause area – approach communication, stakeholder engagement, and conversation around biosecurity, especially when engaging with non-EA-aligned stakeholders whose perspectives might be (and very often) are different than the typical EA-perspective on biosecurity and biorisk. I've also made many of these mistakes! I'm hoping this is educational and helpful and not shaming or off-putting. I'm happy to help anyone unsure communicate and engage more strategically in this space. Some Key Points that you might need to Update On. Junior EAs and people new to biosecurity / biosafety may not know how to or that they should be diplomatic. EA communities have a trend of encouraging provoking behaviour and absolutist, black-and-white scenarios in ways that don't communicate an understanding of how grey this field is and the importance of cooperation and diplomacy. If possible, even in EA contexts, train your default to be (at least a bit more) agreeable (especially at first). Be careful with the terms you use and what you say Terms matter. They signal where you are on the spectrum of ‘how dangerous X research type is', what educational background you have and whose articles / what sources you read, and how much you know on this topic. Example: If you use the term gain-of-function with a virologist, most will respond saying most biomedical research is either a gain or loss of function and isn't inherently risky. In an age where many virologists feel like health security professionals want to take away their jobs, saying gain-of-function is an easy and unknowing way to discredit yourself. Biosafety, biorisk, and biosecurity all indicate different approaches to a problem and often, different perspectives on risk and reasonable solutions. What terms you use signal not only what ‘side' you represent, but in a field that's heavily political and sensitive can discredit you amongst the other sides. Recognise how little (or how much) you know Biosec...

Welcome to The Nonlinear Library, where we use Text-to-Speech software to convert the best writing from the Rationalist and EA communities into audio. This is: Biosecurity newsletters you should subscribe to, published by Sofya Lebedeva on January 29, 2023 on The Effective Altruism Forum. TL;DR I searched for other lists of biosecurity newsletters specifically and didn't find one that suited my needs, so I made one! Please leave a comment with any other newsletters that I missed so that I can add them. I hope you find something useful in this list. Newsletters Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security (CHS) subscribe here Health Security Headlines (also from CHS) subscribe here Center for Infectious Disease Research and Policy (CIDRAP) subscribe here Global Biodefence subscribe here Pandora Report subscribe here Nuclear Threat Initiative (NTI) subscribe here Bipartisan Commission on Biodefence subscribe here The Association for Biosafety and Biosecurity (ABSA) subscribe here (scroll to the bottom) Council on Strategic Risks (CSR) subscribe here Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority (BARDA) subscribe here Administration for Strategic Preparedness and Response (ASPR) do not recommend subscribing as it is very narrowly biosafety oriented and is sometimes poorly referenced. Comments I sourced a lot of these from recommendations by Caitlin Walker, as well as from looking through various posts by Chris Bakerlee and Tessa Alexanian. Please don't hesitate to point out any links that are broken, comment about the relative quality of the above newsletters, or comment with any newsletters that I have missed. Thank you! Thanks for listening. To help us out with The Nonlinear Library or to learn more, please visit nonlinear.org.

https://westminster-institute.org/events/will-the-war-in-ukraine-be-a-turning-point-for-the-east-mediterranean/ Dr. Basem Shabb served in the Lebanese Parliament from 2005 to 2018. During his tenure, he served on several committees addressing important challenges such as defense, economic policy, and human rights. He was also a member of the Parliamentary Network of the World Bank and International Monetary Fund as well as the Congressional US-Lebanon Friendship Caucus. He was a parliamentary representative at the EU-Lebanese security committee on illicit firearms, small arms and light weapons, and served as Lebanon's representative at the International Institute for Justice and the Rule of Law. Additionally, Dr. Shabb was part of the Lebanese parliamentary delegation that visited Norway to gather more information about oil and gas exploration and legislation. He is a surgeon and a clinical associate professor of surgery at the Lebanese American University. He is a founding member of the Euro-Asian Bridge Society of Cardiac Surgeons and as well as that of the Lebanese Association for Biosafety, Biosecurity, and Bioethics.

Today's show is a conversation between four past winners of APHL's Leadership in Biosafety and Biosecurity Award. Jill Power, Christina Egan, Carrie Anglewicz and Andrew Cannons share their thoughts on the past, present and future of biosafety in public health laboratories. Andrew C. Cannons, PhD Laboratory Director Bureau of Public Health Laboratories –Tampa Florida Department of Health Jill J. Power, MS Deputy Director New Hampshire Public Health Laboratories New Hampshire Department of Health and Human Services Carrie Anglewicz, MS Biosafety Officer, Laboratory Outreach Bureau of Laboratories Michigan Department of Health and Human Services Christina Egan, PhD Deputy Director, Division of Infectious Diseases Chief, Biodefense and Mycology Laboratories Wadsworth Center New York State Department of Health Links: Leadership in Biosafety and Biosecurity Award Strengthening Lab Biosafety & Biosecurity APHL Blog posts about biosafety

This week, the Biden regime issued an executive order establishing a new Biosafety and Biosecurity Initiative. The order seeks to “reduce biological risks associated with advances in biotechnology, biomanufacturing, and the bioeconomy.” It also wants to ensure that biotechnology is not used “in ways that lead to accidental or deliberate harm to people.” The Biden regime is laying the groundwork for a Republican takeover of Congress when it inevitably becomes widely known and accepted that COVID-19 came out of a lab. The fact that we will—one way or another—find out the truth is also evident from newly released Fauci emails. Once again, the bulk of Dr. Anthony Fauci's emails has been unjustifiably redacted by National Institutes of Health censors. But from what we can see, it again becomes clear that Fauci and his boss, Francis Collins, know a lot more about COVID's origin than they let on. ⭕️Watch in-depth videos based on Truth & Tradition at Epoch TV

Genetic Engineering and Society Center GES Colloquium - Tuesdays 12-1PM (via Zoom) NC State University | http://go.ncsu.edu/ges-colloquium GES Mediasite - See videos, full abstracts, speaker bios, and slides https://go.ncsu.edu/ges-mediasite Twitter - https://twitter.com/GESCenterNCSU Pioneering Work in Genetic Engineering of Crops and It's Adoption in Africa Florence M. Wambugu, PhD, DSc., Founding Director and CEO, Africa Harvest Biotech Foundation International Website | Twitter @AfricaHarvestKe & @DrFWambugu Factors influencing the adoption of GE crops in Africa, and Dr. Wambugu's pioneering work on GE sweetpotato and with the Africa Biofortified Sorghum (ABS) project. Abstract Despite huge adoption of Genetically Engineered (GE) Crops globally in the last two decades, the debate continues especially among interest groups in the public, policy makers, regulators & researchers. During the early days of GE Crops debate, anti-GE Lobby groups argued that Africa lacked capacity to regulate the GE technology and Africa policy makers feared they would lose trade with EU. These positions have changed and according to the latest report of the ISAAA Brief 55, on the Global Status of Commercialized GE Crops in 2019, Africa leads the progress among the regions of the world in adopting GE crops by doubling the number of adopting countries in 2019. Africa has been regarded as the region with the biggest potential to benefit from GE crop adoption because of the immense challenges relating to poverty, hunger, and malnutrition. However, from an initial list of limited GE crops adopters in 2018, Africa have significantly increased adopters from 2019 to harness the benefits of GE technology. Globally, different continents and regions have taken different positions, with the USA, Canada, Australia, China, and Latin America leading in adoption of GE crops, while the EU remains generally cautious on case-by-case basis by different states. However, Africa is rising from the negative influence of EU anti-GE lobby groups, based on fear of losing trade opportunities, telling by the increased GE confined field trails (CFTs) targeting food security crops. In this colloquium, Dr. Florence Wambugu will discuss the factors that earlier contributed, and continue to influence adoption of GE crops in Africa, highlighting GE Crops Research & Development by Africa Scientists using existing Biosafety laws. She will also discuss her pioneering work of GE Sweet-potato and promising GE work with Africa Biofortified Sorghum (ABS) Project in Africa. Related links: Dr. Wambugu profile on SourceWatch Speaker Bio Dr. Florence M. Wambugu is the Founding Director and Chief Executive Officer of Africa Harvest Biotech Foundation International (AHBFI) — also known as Africa Harvest — in Kenya since 2002. She is a plant pathologist with specialization in virology holding a Ph.D. from the University of Bath, England (1991), Post-Doctoral Research Associate – Biotechnology with a life science company in USA, and holds an Honorary Doctor of Science from University of Bath, England (2008). For over 30 years she has dedicated her life to agricultural research where she's made significant contributions to the improvement of sorghum, maize, pyrethrum, banana and sweet potato with significant impact on the livelihoods of smallholder farmers. Dr. Wambugu has authored/co-authored over 300 papers, publications, and books in local and international journals, written two books including “Modifying Africa”- How Biotechnology Can Benefit the Poor and Hungry (2001, 2004), and Biotechnology for Africa; Emergence, Initiatives and Future (2014) by Springer. Dr. Wambugu holds several awards and honors from local and international institutions in recognition of her work in Africa including first place medal winner in Global Development Network Awards under science and technology category in Year 2000 for the TC banana project impact. Named as one of the world top 100 most influential people in biotech today by the Scientific American Worldview special report 2015, Awarded Yara Prize 2008, from the Norway-based Yara Foundation for her significant contribution to fight hunger and poverty in Africa. Dr. Wambugu was awarded the Eve Woman of the year Award by the EVE Magazine, in February 2004 in East Africa in recognition of her contribution to science and its application to combat hunger and poverty in Africa. Another award was given to Dr. Wambugu by the South African government during the commemoration of 10 years of democratic rule for her consistent support to agricultural development. In 2002 she was awarded “Woman of the Year” recognition by the American Biographical Institute for empowering the power through increased food production. She is also a recipient of International Institute of Tropical Agriculture's (IITA) award in 1981 for successful establishment of a tissue culture laboratory in support of root and tuber crops germplasm improvement; KARI's 1989 Crop Science award for excellent performance in scientific conferences; International Potato Centre's (CIP) 1989 Regional Research award, for outstanding advancements in sweet potato research; Pyrethrum Marketing Board of Kenya 1990 farmers support award for successful establishment of a rapid micro-propagation laboratory for pyrethrum (Chrysanthemum) in 1986/7. Recognized by Virology Division of Horticultural Research International in England and KARI in 1991, as exemplary Ph.D. candidate for outstanding dissertation contributions on sweet potato virus disease research work done in Kenya, Monsanto Company Outstanding Performance Award for 1992 and 1993. Participated in key boards including Member of DuPont Biotech Advisory Panel-USA, International Plant Genetic Research Institute, UN Millennium Development goals Hunger Task Force, The Science Board of Bill and Melinda Gates Global Health Challenge and as a Council Member of the Science Technology and Society of Japan. GES Colloquium is jointly taught by Drs. Jen Baltzegar and Sumit Dhole, who you may contact with any class-specific questions. Please subscribe to the GES newsletter and Twitter for updates. GES Center - Integrating scientific knowledge & diverse public values in shaping the futures of biotechnology. Find out more at https://ges-center-lectures-ncsu.pinecast.co

This 1993 song gives focus to so much, including emotional men struggling with their feels (or their apathy) and their words. How can the Smooth music listener contend with the voice of Satan and still get to yoga on time? Childhood mini-traumas. The Ying and Yang of Hair and skin pigments. Canadian contributions to culture and the cinematic climax of Dumb and Dumber. Pretentious use of the word "vignette". Othering. C+C Music Factory and Arsenio Hall. The inertia of hair colour. Biosafety. PentaCostco and godly or Nazi salutes. The mystery of skin and hair conditions, and the bigger mystery of "reaction videos". Albino witchcraft and preventative murder in Africa. Corrective Frankenstein shoes. Empathy-gasms. Extra teeth and extra toes. Total Recall mutations. Weird Al Yankovic. Venom versus the Melanocyte. Marie Antoinette. Stem cells. Cancel culture and cosmetic clinics. Anal probes. Who hasn't seen "Sling Blade"? Audio soundscapes of pizza. Door handle life-hacks. Would you like to appear (well, vocally) on the show? Do you have a pop song or ear-worm from the SMOOTH FM genre that's infested your mind and needs to be investigated? Visit this page anchor.fm/peter-davis6 and press the message button to record me your own voicemail hot-take on your specific smooth song of suckiness. You can be on a future episode! (you can always email sound files or text your thoughts to poidadavis@gmail.com if that's easier). Cheers! Sound clips are included for educational reference, criticism, satire and parody in fair use. Clips remain the property of the respective rights holder and no endorsement is implied. All information and opinion is performed and expressed in-character and does not reflect reality or genuine commentary on any persons (living or dead), bands or other organisations, or their works, and is not recommended listening for anyone, anywhere.

Andy Dybala shares his research into monkeys being cloned in China and how it relates to the synthetic nanoparticle CoronaVirus. He also shares the disgusting the future technology of primate to human organ transplant. And a surprise at the end of how the worlds Biosafety labs were built by old Nazi pharmaceutical & chemical companies IG Farben and Hauscht AG. Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/andydybala Twitter: https://twitter.com/LivewithAndy NeighborhoodNewsStudio.com/

10月11日，生物多样性大会将在云南昆明召开。Next Monday in the city of Kunming in southwestern China, the UN Biodiversity Conference is being held.这场国际性会议对未来十年的生态环境有着至关重要的作用，甚至直接关乎你我的日常生活，但你知道这场大会的全称是什么吗↓联合国《生物多样性公约》缔约方第十五次大会，《卡塔赫纳生物安全议定书》缔约方第十次会议，以及《关于获取遗传资源和公正和公平分享其利用所产生惠益的名古屋议定书》缔约方第四次会议。The 15th meeting of the Conference of the Parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity, the Tenth meeting of Parties to the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety, and the Fourth meeting of Parties to the Nagoya Protocol on Access to Genetic Resources and the Fair and Equitable Sharing of Benefits Arising from their Utilization. 长到记者唱了一段Rap……不调侃啦，关于这场国际性会议，你还是要了解这些知识点，一起戳视频学习吧。

Something is amiss. --- This episode is sponsored by · Anchor: The easiest way to make a podcast. https://anchor.fm/app --- Send in a voice message: https://anchor.fm/bling-viera/message

Disease testing has never been more a part of our day-to-day lives, just as constant awareness of a worldwide infectious disease threat has never been more a part of our lives. Even with this presence, like me, you might never have thought to look under the hood of the testing process.  In this episode of the PandemicTech Podcast, we bring you an exploration of biosafety and biosecurity, diagnostic practices that have become intensely personal for all of us over the last twelve months, whether we realized it or not.  Today, we'll get to know Luis Ochoa-Carrera and Maureen Ellis, two biosafety and biosecurity specialists who manage the safe handling and process of live infectious disease pathogens like COVID that threaten the safety and health of citizens across the globe. Featured in this episode: https://www.linkedin.com/in/luis-alberto-ochoa-carrera-055137145/ (Luis Ochoa Carrera) http://www.imss.gob.mx/ (Instituto Mexicano del Seguro Social) https://internationalbiosafety.org/who-we-are/governance-structure/maureen-ellis/ (Maureen Ellis) https://internationalbiosafety.org/#:~:text=The%20International%20Federation%20of%20Biosafety%20Associations%20%28IFBA%29%20is,Biosafety%20Associations%20from%20all%20areas%20of%20the%20world. (International Federation of Biosafety Associations) https://www.msn.com/en-ae/news/other/coronavirus-meet-harley-mexico-citys-fluorescent-green-raincoat-wearing-pug-spreading-joy-amongst-frontliners/ar-BB14demw (“Coronavirus: Meet Harley, Mexico City's fluorescent green raincoat wearing pug, spreading joy amongst frontliners”) MSN, 17 May 2020 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1985_Mexico_City_earthquake (1985 Mexico City Earthquake) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2017_Puebla_earthquake (2017 Puebla Earthquake) Read the https://drive.google.com/file/d/1XDQ2t6Wh4yZmKckUIkL3AxVIw2isIgew/view?usp=sharing (transcript of this episode). Follow the PandemicTech Podcast wherever you listen to podcasts. Connect with us on https://www.linkedin.com/company/pandemictech/ (LinkedIn) and https://twitter.com/pandemic_tech (Twitter) From PandemicTech, the world's first innovation ecosystem dedicated to fighting pandemics.

Episode 45 – The Middle Sees and Joan Rivers Exposé Update!  What is the big question after Episode 44 regarding the Level 4 Biosafety labs?  And how does the COVID-19 Corona virus relate to an over-arching theme from the Trump Presidency? Let's have some fun!  Have you heard the story about the comedic pioneer, a sarcastic joke, and the confusing death that followed? Joan Rivers makes a sarcastic joke? Joan Rivers dies. Official cause of death. What is an esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD)? What is a nasolaryngoscopy? Strange circumstances surrounding Joan Rivers death. Investigation. Report by Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services. Follow up a year later. Email Feedback to theconservativehippiepodcast@gmail.com Sponsors: The Perfect Vaporizer! SmokinJs.com … Use Code HIPPIE for 15% off Your Order ME! StonerHoroscope.com Moody Beats The post The Middle Sees and Joan Rivers Exposé appeared first on Conservative Hippie Podcast.

Accidents happen in science labs all over the world, but when you're working with deadly pathogens the consequences can be disastrous. The reputation of America's ‘gold standard' The Centres for Disease Control and Prevention in Georgia has recently become tarnished as news emerged that 80 workers were inadvertently exposed to live anthrax, and a deadly strain of flu was accidentally sent to another lab. Further reports of tick-box safety culture, lethal samples sent in ziplock plastic bags and vials of smallpox from the 1950s being found in the back of a fridge have increased calls for a review of the work being done on some of the world's most dangerous pathogens.Andrew Luck-Baker looks at the impact of these recent biosafety lapses for BBC WS Discovery. Some scientists are now arguing for the reduction of laboratories working with deadly viruses and the closing down of research which is potentially risky. But does the benefit of the work outweigh its potential risks to the public? And how can human error be eliminated?(Photo: Bio hazard warning symbol. Credit: Getty Images)