Podcasts about conclusions

In this edition of Weekend Conclusions, Mac talks through Charlotte FC's blowout loss, Bone reveals a feature on Mabel is coming to The Charlotte Observer, they address the wild rumors around Jim Carey's appearance on a red carpet in Paris, Tim Brando caused a stir on the WFNZ airwaves on Friday, & mor See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

The NFL combine is over.

Draft predictions from Doug and Gator.

In this Foojay Podcast, we're celebrating a major milestone in Java development history: 25 years of IntelliJ IDEA.Think about it: IntelliJ IDEA launched in 2000, and since then, it has become the go-to IDE for millions of Java developers worldwide. From its revolutionary code completion and refactoring tools to AI-powered features and the recent unified Community and Ultimate release, IntelliJ has shaped how we write Java, and keeps reinventing itself to stay ahead.For this episode, I'm joined by three people from the JetBrains team who know this story inside and out. Marit van Dijk, developer advocate and contributor to the Foojay community. Anton Arhipov, also a developer advocate at JetBrains. And Dmitry Jemerov, who has been part of the IntelliJ IDEA story for a very long time.GuestsMarit van Dijkhttps://foojay.io/today/author/marit-van-dijk/https://www.linkedin.com/in/maritvandijk/https://mastodon.social/@maritvandijkAnton Arhipovhttps://www.linkedin.com/in/antonarhipov/Dmitry Jemerovhttps://www.linkedin.com/in/dmitry-jemerov-3a59b43a5/LinksWebsiteDocumentationBlogYouTubeLinkedInBlueskyTwitterFoojay Podcast #81: Maven 4 – The Future of Java Build AutomationVideo: IntelliJ IDEA: The Documentary | [OFFICIAL TRAILER] | Coming March 5thIntroducing Mellum: JetBrains' New LLM Built for Developers Mellum: Explore code-intelligent large language models for IDEs, AI assistants, research, and educationBirthday game websiteGame plugin in IntelliJ IDEAYou're Invited to IntelliJ IDEA Conf 2025!The Unified IntelliJ IDEA: More Free Features, a Better Experience, Smoother FlowVideo: Troubleshooting Spring Boot Applications with the Spring DebuggerSpring Debugger pluginPlugin for IntelliJ IDEA (and other IDEs) created by Frank: Recent Projects OrganizedContent00:00 Introduction of topic and guests01:36 Now JetBrains started02:31 Licensed software in an open-source world06:37 Other JetBrains IDEs07:46 Why Kotlin was created08:50 The challenge of maintaining all the tools10:36 How the guests joined JetBrains14:03 IntelliJ versus IntelliJ IDEA, history of the name15:10 Most important ongoing changes in IDEs17:55 Unified distribution of IntelliJ IDEA and the history of the open-source version21:28 The number of people at JetBrains23:31 the "business model" behind Kotlin24:39 The impact of AI, LLM, Chat interfaces,...35:49 Upcoming evolutions in IntelliJ IDEA38:07 About shortcuts and the many features and plugins in IntelliJ IDEA46:36 Announcements: IntelliJ IDEA Conf 2026 and Documentary Trailer48:35 The IntelliJ IDEA Birthday Game49:24 Conclusions

In this episode, Ryan and Mike discuss how screen time impacts the executive functioning skills already delayed in kids with ADHD — things like impulse control, attention shifting, and cognitive flexibility. They challenge the popular online messaging that frames screens as "social" or "regulating" for neurodivergent kids, arguing that these messages make parents feel better but don't actually build skills in children. They also cover practical advice for managing school-issued devices, why parents don't need their child's buy-in to set screen limits, and why short-term calm from screens comes at the cost of long-term development.Find Mike @ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠www.grownowadhd.com⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ & on ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠IG⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Find Ryan @ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠www.adhddude.com⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ & on ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Youtube⁠⁠⁠{{chapters}}[00:00:00] Start[00:00:34] Screen Time Realities for Working Parents[00:03:44] The 2025 Longitudinal Brain Study[00:04:28] How Screens Alter Executive Function Development[00:05:45] Why In-Person Interaction Builds Skills[00:08:05] The Myth That Screens Are Social[00:10:19] Why "Screens Are Regulating" Appeals to Parents[00:11:30] Your Child Is Not Your Co-Parent[00:14:13] Addressing Screen Use on School Devices[00:16:20] Best Predictors of Future Success[00:17:51] Key Takeaways and Closing ThoughtsCITATIONS:Shou, Q., Yamashita, M., & Mizuno, Y. (2025). Association of screen time with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder symptoms and their development: The mediating role of brain structure. Translational Psychiatry, 15, Article 447.Diamond, A. (2013). Executive functions. Annual Review of Psychology, 64, 135–168.Diamond, A., & Ling, D. S. (2016). Conclusions about interventions, programs, and approaches for improving executive functions that appear justified and those that do not. Developmental Cognitive Neuroscience, 18, 34–48.Doebel, S. (2020). Rethinking executive function and its development. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 15(4), 942–956.Nigg, J. T. (2017). Annual research review: On the relations among self-regulation, self-control, executive functioning, effortful control, cognitive control, impulsivity, risk-taking, and inhibition for developmental psychopathology. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 58(4), 361–383.

- SUBSCRIBE TO OUR PODCAST: http://cornerofthegalaxy.com/subscribe/  - COG LA GALAXY DISCORD: https://discord.gg/drr9HFZY2P - COG ANTHEM MUSIC BY RAY PLAZA: https://linktr.ee/munditoplaza - COG ANTHEM MUSIC DOWNLOAD: https://open.spotify.com/artist/3asiasldwKyoCRm1Vzx2h7?si=_LmXI9otT9y9j0ChMGMt2w COG STUDIOS, Calif. -- The LA Galaxy started the 2026 season with back-to-back draws. And neither of the games is anything approaching great soccer! But are there trends that we can identify early on? On today's show, hosts Josh Guesman and Damian Calhoun (Southern California News Group) discuss the 1-1 draws to both Sporting San Miguelito and New York City FC. They are two different games with two different versions of the Galaxy. But the results were the same. So is this version of the Galaxy a defensive team? Is this version of the Galaxy working on offense? Is this version of the Galaxy missing pieces in the midfield? Let's talk about what actual competitive soccer means and what to expect on the return leg of the Concacaf Champions Cup. -- Corner of the Galaxy is kicking off Season 18, just a few shows past number 1,270! And we can't wait to show you everything we've got in store for 2026! This is a reminder that we go live twice a week — on Mondays and Thursdays at 8 PM on YouTube — and that you can find us conveniently on your preferred podcast platform (Apple, Spotify, SoundCloud, YouTube, Google Play, etc.). We're making it easy for you to stay connected! So tell a friend that you've been listening to the longest-running team-specific podcast in Major League Soccer and that 2025 is a great time to start listening!

In the final hour of the show, Mac & Fitty are joined by Ron Slay, who gives all of his biggest takeaways from the biggest college hoops weekend of the season so far, they deliver their conclusions from the weekend before previewing the night in sports, reading funny texts, & more See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

In this edition of Weekend Conclusions, Mac gives you his initial takeaways from the Charlotte FC season opener, and shares a funny story about having to watch the game in Spanish, Fitty delivers an in-depth review of the chicken sandwich at the new Guthrie's in Monroe, & more See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Last episode we broke down the Offense position by position.  This episode we look at the defensive side of the ball.Jeff Chadiha (NFL Network/NFL.com/@JeffriChadiha), Sam McDowell (Kansas City Star/KCStar.com/@SamMcDowell11) and Soren Petro (Sports Radio 810 - WHB/810whb.com/@SorenPetro) break down each position group using a scale of 1 (best case) to 10 (worst case), to determine where the Chiefs Defense needs attention this offseason. - Really thin at Defensive Tackle!- After Karlaftis, there's not much at DE.- The linebackers should still be solid.- Corner looks good with McDuffie, without?- Safety is a problem!⁃ Conclusions.

We wrap up our two-part conversation with Trey Ackerman—songwriter, multi-instrumentalist, audio engineer, producer, IT expert, and creative thinker.In Part 2, we continue and conclude our deep discussion on AI in music, sharing final thoughts, real-world takeaways, and where Trey believes the balance between technology and creativity ultimately lands. It's a thoughtful, honest look at how artists can use new tools without losing the human heart of songwriting.Then, we shift gears and let you experience Trey the songwriter as he performs live, acoustic songs around the dining room table—the way great songs are meant to be shared. Stripped-down, intimate, and full of stories, this episode brings the conversation full circle from technology back to the song.

DOCKET ALERTS:Trump celebrated President's Day by filing a trademark for Donald J. Trump International Airport — just in time for Florida's move to rename Palm Beach International Airport in his honor. KA-CHING!In Colorado, a state judge ruled that throwing prisoners in solitary confinement as a penalty for refusing to work violates the state constitution's ban on involuntary servitude. It's a start!And in Philadelphia, Judge Cynthia Rufe ordered the Trump administration to restore an exhibit on the enslaved people who lived at President's House under George Washington: “Each person who visits the President's House and does not learn of the realities of founding-era slavery receives a false account of this country's history.”MAIN SHOW:In Minnesota, Judge Nancy Brasel ordered DHS to grant detainees in “holding rooms” at the Whipple Building in Minneapolis meaningful access to counsel. The ruling bars ICE from removing immigrants from the state for 72 hours after they are originally picked up. We'll discuss the cracks appearing between DHS, which ignores court orders, and DOJ, which has to show up in court and take the blame for it.In New York, Judge Lewis Kaplan issued a similar order in September with respect to temporary “holding rooms” on the 9th floor at 26 Federal Plaza in Manhattan, with additional requirements that DHS provide for detainees' hygiene, nutrition, and medical needs. The plaintiffs say ICE has not complied and moved for contempt. The City reports that DHS opened up new temporary detention facilities on the 10th floor, but claims the injunction doesn't apply there for, uh, REASONS.And we break down all the ways Republicans are trying to suppress the vote with the SAVE America Act, which solves the nonexistent problem of noncitizens voting illegally by imposing a series of restrictions on citizens registering and voting.In the subscriber bonus, we discuss a district court's decision in Massachusetts enjoining the Trump administration from deploying ICE in and around churches. Trump's Private Company Files Trademark for ‘President Donald J. Trump International Airport'https://www.gerbenlaw.com/blog/trumps-private-company-files-trademark-for-president-donald-j-trump-international-airport/Buried in the budget: Mike Huckabee, Donald Trump and Newsmaxhttps://jasongarcia.substack.com/p/buried-in-the-budget-mike-huckabeeMortis v. Polis [Colorado Prison Labor]https://towardsjustice.org/wp-content/uploads/2026/02/Findings-of-Fact-and-Conclusions-of-Law.pdfPhiladelphia v. Burgum https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/72178941/city-of-philadelphia-v-burgum/Advocates for Human Rights v. DHS [Whipple Building]https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/72196538/the-advocates-for-human-rights-v-us-department-of-homeland-securitBarco Mercado v. Noem [26 Federal Plaza]https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/71065570/barco-mercado-v-noemICE Moved Detainees to Previously Undisclosed Floor of 26 Federal Plazahttps://www.thecity.nyc/2026/02/09/26-federal-plaza-jail-conditions-ice-judge-kaplan-ruling/Text of S.1383, the “SAVE America” Acthttps://docs.house.gov/billsthisweek/20260209/RCP_S1383_xml.pdfNew England Synod, Evangelical Lutheran Church in America v. DHShttps://www.courtlistener.com/docket/70939776/new-england-synod-evangelical-lutheran-church-in-america-v-department-of/Show Links:https://www.lawandchaospod.com/BlueSky: @LawAndChaosPodThreads: @LawAndChaosPodTwitter: @LawAndChaosPodSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

STgenetics has a group of 22 new Holstein bulls just released to the market! Out of this impressive group, 15 are Legend™ sires, three are Polled, seven are over +200 CFP, seven are over +4.0 for Productive Life, and five are over +1.00 for Udder Composite. Diverse and elite traits, profitable, productive, and exciting sire stacks and maternal lines, a discussion you don't want to miss!00:00 Introduction & February 2026 Mid-Round Release00:45 Top GTPI Spotlight: JAMESTOWN 02:06 High-End Standouts: RETROSPECT & MOTLEY 04:01 Specialist Profiles: JURIST, MANHUNT & JURISPRUDENT06:46 Net Merit Leaders: JOULE, UNION & KICKBOX08:12 ENDURANCE Influence: JAYWALK & PURDY 09:38 Beyond Legend™: LAUGHTER, POLAR, YADICAL & KILOWATT11:52 Polled Legend™ Lineup: OPULENT P, ADANTE & INGRAM PP14:42 Final Trio Breakdown: JAMPACKED, MOJITO & JESTER16:24 Conclusions & Resources

With Spring Training underway it's time to start breaking down the American League Central.  How do the Royals measure up to the Tigers, Guardians, Twins and White Sox?David Lesky (Publisher - Inside the Crown/@DBLesky) and Soren Petro (Sports Radio 810-WHB, 810whb.com/@SorenPetro) rank the American League Central 1 to 5 in five key categories… - Offense.- Starting Pitching.- Bullpen.- Defense.- Base Running.⁃ Conclusions!

An episode from THE BIBLE Baptist Church, a Bible believing, Bible preaching church in DeLand, Florida.If you are looking for a church in the DeLand, Florida area that preaches the Truth from God's Word, reach out to us at any time. We would love to hear from you at (386) 736-9274 or on our website: ⁠⁠⁠https://biblebaptistdeland.com/⁠⁠⁠ You may also write to them at:THE BIBLE Baptist Church872 Glenwood Rd.DeLand, FL 32720 This message is part of the KJV Bible Preaching Churches Podcast, a ministry dedicated to making faithful, King James Bible preaching available to all; especially those who may have limited access to sound biblical teaching.Our purpose is simple: to exalt the Lord Jesus Christ, uphold the authority of the Holy Scriptures, and point souls to the truth of God's Word. Every message shared through this podcast comes from likeminded, Bible-believing churches and ministries that hold firmly to the King James Bible as the final authority in faith and practice.This podcast is used as a Gospel resource and teaching tool, including outreach efforts to individuals who are incarcerated. We believe God's Word is living, powerful, and able to work in hearts wherever it is heard.If you are a pastor, preacher, or church that faithfully preaches from the King James Bible and would like to learn more about being part of this podcast, or if you have questions about this ministry, you are welcome to reach out.The KJV Bible Preaching Churches Podcast is directly supported by Doss Metrics LLC | Ministry Services based out of Cleveland Texas. If you have any questions regarding this podcast, or the churches hosted on the podcast, please reach out to us directly at ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠dossmetrics@gmail.com⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ or write to us at: Doss Metrics | KJV Bible Preaching Churches Podcast1501 McBride Rd.Cleveland, TX 77328 God Bless#KJV #BaptistChurches #BiblePreaching #KJVPreaching #KingJamesBible #ChurchSermons #ChristianPodcasts #BibilicalTeaching #JamesKnox

I've been watching the conversation about the Super Bowl halftime show unfold online and what struck me isn't the show(s) themselves but how quickly narratives and opinions formed. Some people are saying Bad Bunny's show included vulgar lyrics. There was an alternative halftime show. There are rumors about where it was filmed - if it was lip synced. And I found myself thinking: wait ... what do we actually KNOW? And how do we DECIDE? Today's episode isn't necessarily about the halftime show options. It's about what and how we decide. Is it possible to watch something or listen to someone else without judging? The commenters on today's live recording added so much to the dialogue. One person added actual lyrics to a Bad Bunny song (which were too vulgar for me to repeat). But are those the lyrics he sang at the halftime show? The jury's still out on that. How do we discern? Who do we listen to?  Welcome to today's episode.

In this edition of Weekend Conclusions, they react to a menu item at the Super Bowl, Mac gives Lindsey Vonn credit for competing in the Olympics after tearing her ACL, they talk about the latest controversy that Jordon Hudson caused this weekend, & more See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

The conversation explores how humor serves psychological purposes beyond entertainment, often functioning to establish power hierarchies and devalue professional contributions. Through survey data and qualitative interviews, the research demonstrates that passive coping strategies prevent organizations from understanding the true extent of harm. David and Drew argue that the "just joking" defense creates ambiguity that makes harassment difficult to report, particularly when supervisors are the perpetrators, emphasizing that effective psychosocial safety policies must explicitly address humor-based discrimination. Discussion Points:(00:00) Defining psychosocial safety versus psychological safety(03:07) Introduction to workplace humor research in construction(06:44) Research aims and the construction industry gender gap(11:31) Research methodology using surveys and interviews(15:07) Theoretical framework on humor as communication(20:10) Survey findings on sexual harassment experiences(26:24) How humor is weaponized as cover for harassment(35:36) Conclusions on devaluing professional contributions(40:08) Key takeaways and practical implications for organizationsLike and follow, send us your comments and suggestions for future show topics! Quotes:"The harms are real. When we talk about expanding safety into the psychosocial space, however you might feel about that framing and whether safety people are the right people to be managing it, when we're talking about people getting hurt at work, gender based humour is a hazard." - Drew Rae"I think this is the ultimate, you know, safety is not the absence of incident reports. This is clearly something that's happening to 50, 60, 70% of participants in this study and obviously representative of the broader population. If you're getting no insight into this through any of your systems, then you need to go looking." - David Provan"The fact that something's a joke is being used almost like weaponised to mask or shield what's actually going on, we need to just like get totally away from the idea that humour is an excuse. The question isn't, is this a joke or not a joke? Question is, what was the underlying purpose of that joke?" - Drew Rae"If no one's complaining, get worried. We know it's happening. We know that people don't complain. If you're not getting any complaints in your work site, that's not an indication that there's no problem or no harm. That's an indication that people are not feeling safe to complain." - Drew Rae"Jokes are fine, but not these jokes. And I think this paper really helps us understand where we might be able to draw a less fuzzy boundary around what people can and can't joke about in the workplace." - David ProvanResources:Resource Link: https://ascelibrary.org/doi/abs/10.1061/JMENEA.MEENG-7109The Safety of Work PodcastThe Safety of Work on LinkedInFeedback@safetyofwork

Les conclusions de l'enquête concernant l'attaque au couteau de Bondi Junction survenue en avril 2024 mettent en lumière des défaillances systémiques majeures en matière de santé mentale et de sécurité.

Matthew 28:16-20 BIG IDEA: "Because Jesus is Lord of all and worthy of all worship, and
since He is with us in every trial and triumph, you must advance greater
and greater Great Commission Initiatives." 1. The CHARACTER of the Great Commission: Four Alls 2. The CADENCE of the Great Commission: Four
Directives 3. The CORE of the Great Commission: Four Mores 4. The CONCLUSIONS concerning the Great Commission: Four
Great Commission Priorities

In this edition of Weekend Conclusions, Mac talks about watching the performances at last night's Grammy awards, they pay tribute to a legendary actress who passed away over the weekend, Bone talks about some crazy happenings in the boxing world, & Fitty has a fast food review See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

This is a link post. There is an extremely important question about the near-future of AI that almost no-one is asking. We've all seen the graphs from METR showing that the length of tasks AI agents can perform has been growing exponentially over the last 7 years. While GPT-2 could only do software engineering tasks that would take someone a few seconds, the latest models can (50% of the time) do tasks that would take a human a few hours. As this trend shows no signs of stopping, people have naturally taken to extrapolating it out, to forecast when we might expect AI to be able to do tasks that take an engineer a full work-day; or week; or year. But we are missing a key piece of information — the cost of performing this work. Over those 7 years AI systems have grown exponentially. The size of the models (parameter count) has grown by 4,000x and the number of times they are run in each task (tokens generated) has grown by about 100,000x. AI researchers have also found massive efficiencies, but it is eminently plausible that the cost for the peak performance measured by METR has been [...] ---Outline:(13:02) Conclusions(14:05) Appendix(14:08) METR has a similar graph on their page for GPT-5.1 codex. It includes more models and compares them by token counts rather than dollar costs: --- First published: February 2nd, 2026 Source: https://forum.effectivealtruism.org/posts/AbHPpGTtAMyenWGX8/are-the-costs-of-ai-agents-also-rising-exponentially Linkpost URL:https://www.tobyord.com/writing/hourly-costs-for-ai-agents --- Narrated by TYPE III AUDIO. ---Images from the article:Apple Podcasts and Spotify do not show images in the episode description. Try Pocket Casts, or another podcast app.

This is a link post. The shift from scaling up the pre-training compute of AI systems to scaling up their inference compute may have profound effects on AI governance. The nature of these effects depends crucially on whether this new inference compute will primarily be used during external deployment or as part of a more complex training programme within the lab. Rapid scaling of inference-at-deployment would: lower the importance of open-weight models (and of securing the weights of closed models), reduce the impact of the first human-level models, change the business model for frontier AI, reduce the need for power-intense data centres, and derail the current paradigm of AI governance via training compute thresholds. Rapid scaling of inference-during-training would have more ambiguous effects that range from a revitalisation of pre-training scaling to a form of recursive self-improvement via iterated distillation and amplification. The end of an era — for both training and governance The intense year-on-year scaling up of AI training runs has been one of the most dramatic and stable markers of the Large Language Model era. Indeed it had been widely taken to be a permanent fixture of the AI landscape and the basis of many approaches to [...] ---Outline:(01:06) The end of an era -- for both training and governance(05:24) Scaling inference-at-deployment(06:42) Reducing the number of simultaneously served copies of each new model(08:45) Reducing the value of securing model weights(09:30) Reducing the benefits and risks of open-weight models(10:05) Unequal performance for different tasks and for different users(12:08) Changing the business model and industry structure(12:50) Reducing the need for monolithic data centres(17:16) Scaling inference-during-training(28:07) Conclusions(30:17) Appendix. Comparing the costs of scaling pre-training vs inference-at-deployment --- First published: February 2nd, 2026 Source: https://forum.effectivealtruism.org/posts/RnsgMzsnXcceFfKip/inference-scaling-reshapes-ai-governance Linkpost URL:https://www.tobyord.com/writing/inference-scaling-reshapes-ai-governance --- Narrated by TYPE III AUDIO. ---Images from the article:Apple Podcasts and Spotify do not show images in the episode description. Try Pocket Casts, or another podcast app.

In this episode of the Green Lanterns Podcast, host Will Smith delves into the latest insights from Tom King's interview regarding the upcoming HBO show. He discusses the significance of a promo image that has sparked speculation among fans, analyzing its implications for the storyline and character dynamics. The conversation also touches on the filming details and the potential disconnect between promotional material and actual scenes in the show, leading to a broader discussion on audience expectations and the nature of speculation in fandom.Green Lanterns, Tom King, HBO, promo image, Hal Jordan, John Stewart, speculation, podcast, superhero, storytellingLink to the podcast where I pulled this information from:https://open.spotify.com/episode/3GEa8pkXdmURPoz9b56Jx0Shoutout to Riverside.fm! Riverside.fm is where I record and edit this podcast and then also turn it into Shorts and TikToks. It handles like 95% of all the behind the scenes and the only thing I do outside of it is make thumbnails in Canva. Riverside has made it where I normally would get very anxious about recording and editing and it has made the podcasting process a stressless experience. If you or somebody you know would like to try Riverside.fm out feel free to use my referral code here and get a discount if you commit: https://riverside.sjv.io/APM21aNext shoutout goes to hectorlizard who designed my website, www.GreenLanternsPodcast.com and goes way beyond expectations when it comes to quality as well as communication. He took care of me and has helped me get on the right path with all this content and I now consider him a friend. If you want to check out more of his work head to https://hectorlizard.me/Looking for a place to chat about DC Comics and Green Lantern in particular? Join us over on discord at: https://discord.com/invite/dcofficialChapters00:00 Introduction to Green Lanterns Podcast00:33 Insights from Tom King's Interview03:33 Promo Image Analysis and Speculation08:42 Conclusions on Promo Image's Relevance

In this episode of 'Getting Your Edge: How to Downsize Your Home and Life,' hosts Dennis Day and Judy Gratton discuss the concept of right-sizing your life. They provide 12 actionable tips to make your home and lifestyle more manageable and less stressful, from living on one level and decluttering without relocating, to simplifying your landscaping and evaluating your lighting. Whether you are contemplating a smaller home, an RV lifestyle, or aging in place, this episode offers practical advice to help you align your living environment with your current needs. Tune in for insights on making thoughtful, informed decisions that enhance your comfort and well-being.00:00 S4,Ep.71-Re-Size00:42 Introduction to Downsizing01:28 Meet Your Hosts01:56 Understanding Rightsizing02:59 What is Rightsizing?04:09 12 Tips for Rightsizing04:31 Tip 1: Live on One Level04:50 Tip 2: Repurpose Unused Rooms05:23 Tip 3: Declutter Without Relocating06:42 Tip 4: Reduce Maintenance, Not Space07:08 Tip 5: Simplify Your Landscaping07:44 Tip 6: Remodel for Ease and Comfort08:21 Tip 7: Shrink Your Expenses09:25 Tip 8: Create a Lock and Leave Home10:03 Tip #9: Rent Before You Move11:12 #10 Create a Rental or Guest Space12:50 Tip #11: Outsource What Drains Your Energy13:55 Number 12: Change Your Schedule or Routines14:54 Conclusions and Final Thoughts21:15 Free PDF of 12 TipsHere's Our Free 12 Steps To Re-Size Your Life PDF https://drive.google.com/file/d/1kzTVog0QHj9unOFIMFv7QPMjDA0webj0/view?usp=sharingWe Would Love to Hear Your Feedback!

London Writers' Salon co-founder Matt Trinetti and Head of Writer Experience Lindsey Trout Hughes share prompts from our Dreaming Big in 2026: Creative Goal Setting for Writers workshop – designed to help writers get clear on what they actually want from their writing life in 2026, and translate that desire into a plan that can survive reality in the first 1-3 months of the year.Through 8 steps – from identifying desire to committing to a 48-hour move – Matt and Lindsey step through over a dozen prompts, discuss why each is important for writers to think about, and share what's coming up for them personally for the year ahead.Download the free workbook: community.londonwriterssalon.com/dreamingbigTimestamps:(00:00) Introduction(02:07) Step 0: Two Words (bringing in & leaving behind)(08:05) Step 1: Identifying what we truly desire(17:42) Step 2: Vision (translating desire into clear vision)(25:18) Step 3: Moving from wanting to deciding(34:35) Step 4: Building a project bank(42:02) Step 5: Finding a first season focus(47:32) Step 6: Designing your creative practice(59:00) Step 7: Your 30-day plan & 48-hour move(01:04:50) Step 8: Opening up to support(01:09:40) Conclusions and next steps You'll learn:A simple “two words” ritual to decide what you're bringing into 2026 (and what you're leaving behind).Prompts to identify what you truly desire, including what you might feel embarrassed to say out loud.How to reframe desire as a helpful signal instead of something “selfish” you should downplay.How to build a project bank so you can choose one focus without feeling like you're abandoning your other ideas.Ways to use simple lists to spark clearer project options.How to choose a first-season focus (a three-month container) so you're not trying to hold the entire year at once.The importance of defining what “done” looks like for the season and setting milestones that make progress visible.How to design a writing practice while planning for obstacles before they derail you.How to set a measurable 30-day goal, choose your first moves, and turn intention into proof.   About London Writers' Salon:London Writers' Salon is a community and membership that helps writers make meaningful progress on their work, stay committed to a writing practice, and find creative friends around the world. Members can build consistency through Writers' Hour, develop craft through interviews and workshops, and connect with a global community of writers.  Resources & Links: Download the free workbook at: community.londonwriterssalon.com/dreamingbigJoin Writers' Hour - daily silent writing sessions: writershour.comAttend live events and workshops – Become a Member: community.londonwriterssalon.com/membership For show notes, transcripts and to attend our live podcasts visit: podcast.londonwriterssalon.com.For free writing sessions, join free Writers' Hours: writershour.com.*FOLLOW LONDON WRITERS' SALONTwitter: twitter.com/​​WritersSalonInstagram: instagram.com/londonwriterssalonFacebook: facebook.com/LondonWritersSalonIf you're enjoying this show, please rate and review this show!

The Ashanti RCC Coordinator and Kwadaso Area Head of The Church of Pentecost, Apostle Yaw Adjei Kwarteng, throws more light on this in this insightful message titled: "The Prayer, The Reflections and Conclusions of King David When Old Age Was Approaching." Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Trump at Davos sparked big claims from Glenn Beck, and this episode breaks down the Conclusion. Alan Smith and Jeff Rowland react to Trump's Davos speech, the talk around Greenland, and what “peace through strength” looks like when the economy becomes the big stick. They also weigh Beck's view that Trump put global groups on notice, from the United Nations to the Davos crowd, and discuss how tough language, tariffs, and trade pressure can shift outcomes without firing a shot. The conversation turns back home to Minnesota and the hard truth that foreign policy wins don't fix broken local leadership. Subscribe for new episodes of The Smith and Rowland Show and daily talk on faith, culture, and politics. #Trump #Davos #GlennBeck #Geopolitics #TheSmithAndRowlandShow

In this edition of Weekend Conclusions, Cam Newton causes a stir on First Take, the guys have more takeaways from Tony Romo's performance calling the AFC Championship game, Narc Palaczcuk struck again on Saturday night, & more See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Send us a textAfter a nice long break your favorite truth seekers are back at it! For our season premiere we are breaking down all the reasons we should be paying attention to Palantir. As usual this DOOZY will connect the dots and bring you the facts- so you can decide if it's TRUTH OR PROPAGANDA!!!Support the show@truthorpropaganda Truthorpropaganda@gmail.com

Welcome to episode 327 of Growers Daily! We cover: where the microbes go in winter, what happened when we started telling time(hint: it kind of started telling us) and it's feedback friday! We are a Non-Profit! 

In this episode of Iron Culture, Eric Helms and Eric Trexler discuss the recent changes to the Dietary Guidelines for Americans (DGAs) and the implications of these updates. They begin by addressing the shift in their podcast schedule, emphasizing the importance of mental health and balance in their work. The conversation then transitions into a detailed analysis of the new dietary guidelines, highlighting the complexities of the process behind their formulation. Helms critiques the influence of corporate interests and the political landscape on the DGAs, while also acknowledging the positive aspects of the new recommendations, particularly the increased emphasis on protein intake. The hosts explore the historical context of dietary guidelines, the evolution of public health messaging, and the challenges of effectively communicating nutritional advice to the public. In this episode, Eric Helms and MASS Research delve into the complexities of the latest Dietary Guidelines for Americans (DGAs), discussing the implications of the visual representation of food groups and the recommendations for protein, fats, and processed foods. They critique the new guidelines for their lack of clarity and potential confusion, particularly regarding the emphasis on whole foods versus processed foods. The conversation highlights the disconnect between the written guidelines and their visual representation, which may mislead the public about healthy eating patterns. They also explore the political influences on these guidelines and how they may affect vulnerable populations, particularly in school lunch programs and social assistance programs. If you're in the market for some lifting gear or apparel, be sure to check out EliteFTS.com (and use our code "MRR10" for a 10% discount) Chapters 00:00 Introduction and Schedule Changes 07:15 The Dietary Guidelines Controversy 20:56 Understanding the Formation of Dietary Guidelines 32:30 The Influence of Food Industries on Guidelines 33:38 The Role of the Second Committee 43:49 Changes in Protein Recommendations 44:19 The Inverted Pyramid and Dietary Miscommunication 59:55 Understanding Fats in the New Guidelines 01:09:17 The Role of Full-Fat Dairy in Heart Health 01:15:06 Alcohol Consumption: New Guidelines Explained 01:21:52 Processed Foods and Public Health Implications 01:25:03 The Impact of Dietary Guidelines on Vulnerable Populations 01:30:34 Conclusions and Future Directions in Nutrition Guidelines

Episode 372 | Live From America Podcast This week on Live From America Podcast, hosts Hatem Gabr and Noam Dworman are joined by Jonathan Wackrow, former Secret Service agent and CNN Law Enforcement Analyst, and Andrew Heaton - author/host of "The political orphanage Podcast" - for a deep dive into one of the most controversial police shootings in America We break down the use-of-force legal standard, the concept of objective reasonableness, and why video footage often misleads public opinion. Jonathan explains how investigators assess threats, why some shootings are legally justified but publicly condemned, and what transparency in policing should look like. The conversation moves into immigration enforcement, political threats, and the legal implications of Trump's proposed use of the Insurrection Act in Minneapolis. We also cover President Trump's attempt to buy Greenland, examining its strategic value, diplomatic consequences, and why it became one of the most bizarre geopolitical stories of his presidency. The episode ends with a broader look at Trump's impact on American society, political polarization, far-right movements, and the shifting relationship between law enforcement and public trust. Topics Covered: Federal “objective reasonableness” standard in police shootings ICE shooting analysis and law-enforcement decision-making Transparency and accountability in use-of-force investigations Trump's consideration of the Insurrection Act Immigration enforcement and political threats Trump's plan to acquire Greenland The far right, polarization, and civil liberties How Trump reshaped American politics and public safety About the Guests Jonathan Wackrow is a former U.S. Secret Service agent and CNN Law Enforcement Analyst specializing in public safety, national security, presidential protection, and threat assessment. Andrew Heaton is a comedian, Author and hos of "The Political Orphanage Podcast" About the Show Live From America Podcast covers politics, culture, national security, and comedy with top experts, journalists, comedians, and public figures. Follow Live From America Podcast YouTube: @LiveFromAmericaPodcast Website: www.LiveFromAmericaPodcast.com Twitter/X: @AmericasPodcast Email: LiveFromAmericaPodcast@gmail.com Hosts Hatem Gabr — @HatemNYC Noam Dworman — @noam_dworman Hashtags #LiveFromAmericaPodcast #PoliceShooting #UseOfForce #InsurrectionAct #JonathanWackrow #ImmigrationPolicy #Greenland #TrumpNews #LawEnforcement #PublicSafety #NationalSecurity

In this episode, Pastor Bruce Varner takes us on a journey through the Bible to explore the often-overlooked sin of jumping to conclusions. Discover how assumptions can lead to misunderstandings and learn the importance of humility and discernment.Explore biblical accounts that highlight the dangers of hasty judgments. Pastor Varner delves into the story of Eve, who assumed she knew better than God, leading to the fall of humanity. He also discusses Pharaoh's assumptions about the Israelites, which ultimately led to his downfall. These stories serve as powerful reminders of the dangers of hasty judgments.Join us as we delve into these timeless lessons and uncover the spiritual and practical implications of making hasty judgments and jumping to the wrong conclusions.Listen now and transform your perspective!Send us a textEmail us at thatsinthebible@gmail.comWebsite: thatsinthebible.comOur podcast theme song "Jesus Is Coming Soon", courtesy of His Reflection a Gospel Quartet from Buckley Road Baptist Church, Liverpool, NY.

Nike dropped the Mind 001 and the internet had opinions. One of us already bought it and tried it, so we're debating this with actual experience instead of just hot takes. Is this innovation or gimmick? Is Nike breaking new ground or desperately trying to make us care about something... anything? What does this release signal about their bigger strategy? Rohit, Robbie, and Nick argue it out.For Deep Dives on Sneaker Lore, Business Analysis, and Industry Insider Insight: https://www.thesneakernewsletter.comGet Your Nike Mind: https://fave.co/4jD3HcsChapters00:00 The Buzz Around Nike's New Releases03:08 Consumer Reactions and Market Trends06:04 The Evolution of Nike's Technology09:06 Gamification and User Engagement11:55 The Future of Footwear Technology15:01 Personal Experiences with New Products17:59 The Role of Marketing in Consumer Perception20:58 Reflections on Mental Health and Footwear24:00 The Aesthetics of New Nike Models26:58 Conclusions and Final Thoughts34:24 The Evolution of Sneaker Technology37:14 Pricing and Consumer Perception40:22 Generational Trends in Footwear43:02 Market Timing and Economic Factors51:00 The Future of Sneaker CultureSUPPORT THE SHOW:Donate Through Venmo: https://venmo.com/u/sneakerhistoryBuy Me A Coffee: https://buymeacoffee.com/nickengvallEarly Access, Exclusive Videos, and Content On Patreon: https://patreon.com/sneakerhistoryIf you are interested in advertising to our audience, contact us: podcast@sneakerhistory.comCHECK OUT OUR OTHER SHOWS:For the Formula 1 Fans - Exhaust Notes: https://exhaustnotes.fmFor the Fitted Hat Fans - Crown and Stitch: https://crownandstitch.comFor the Cars & Sneakers Fans - Cars & Kicks: https://carsxkicks.comFor the Creators & Creatives - Outside The Box: https://podcasts.apple.com/id/podcast/outside-the-box-convos-with-creators/id1050172106[Links contain affiliate links; we may receive a small commission if you purchase after clicking a link. A great way to support the pod!]—––––—––––—––––—––––—––––—––––—––––—––––Our podcast is proudly...Recorded on Riverside: http://www.riverside.fm/?via=sneakerhistoryHosted & Distributed By Captivate: https://bit.ly/3j2muPbGET IN TOUCH:Robbie - robbie@sneakerhistory.comMike - mike@sneakerhistory.comRohit - rohit@sneakerhistory.comNick - nick@sneakerhistory.comDisclaimer: The views and opinions expressed in this program are those of the speakers and do not necessarily reflect the views or positions of any entities they represent.This podcast uses the following third-party services for analysis: Spotify Ad Analytics - https://www.spotify.com/us/legal/ad-analytics-privacy-policy/

Conclusions are drawn.   “In the beginning God created.” - Genesis 1:1 (KJV)    

In the season finale of Infinite Danger, Will gets what he wants and instantly regrets it. Episode 17, The Mask, or The Apotheosis of Dennis. Anthropology. Learning to spell “Kwakwaka'wakw” without typos. Uncle Mungo. Red tape. Nightwatchmen. Potlatches, legal and illegal. “Scout's Honour.” Crackers the Croc. The BC Museum of Anthropology. Doing burglary to prove an important point. Getting left out in the cold. Raven and the First Men. The Crab. “This snake just can't get enough of how good I taste,” says the snake's tail. “He's like putty in my hands. What an idiot!” 00:00 “The Moon” 13:45 Preamble: Critical updates on the Peruvian Arsenic Crisis 21:16 Cast and Crew 33:43 “The Mask” 1:48:49 Conclusions on Danger Bay S1 1:55:19 Modern Danger Bay/ “What is going on downstairs?” About Infinite Danger: Infinite Danger is a podcast chronicling the wildly successful Canadian action TV classic, Danger Bay. All 40-plus seasons of it. Join your host Will, as he breaks down each episode of the adventures of aquarium policeman Grant Roberts and his children Nicole and Jonah in the trillion-dollar franchise which continues to define the city of Vancouver culturally, economically, religiously, and geopolitically. Support Infinite Danger and other fine projects at http://patreon.kittysneezes.com. Patrons receive access to the official Kittysneezes Discord and more. Kittysneezes is supported by readers like you. If you enjoy what you've read here, please consider supporting us on Patreon at http://patreon.kittysneezes.com/. The post S1 FINALE: The Mask—The Moon by Matt Keeley appeared first on Kittysneezes.

Protests erupt in Minneapolis after a 37-year-old American citizen was shot and killed by an ICE officer. Plus, the Trump administration reveals briefs Congress on its plans to control Venezuela's economy and oil reserves. Alex Tabet, Rob D'Amico, Tom Manger, John Sandweg, Rep. Kelly Morrison, Paul Rieckhoff, and Hagar Chemali join The 11th Hour this Wednesday night. To listen to this show and other MS podcasts without ads, sign up for MS NOW Premium on Apple Podcasts. Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

Questions about whether two logical people can come to conflicting conclusions on a topic without committing a fallacy, how Greg, as a public figure, deals with criticism, and whether or not criticism gets to him.   Can two people come to conflicting conclusions on a topic while holding true to logic and reason without committing a fallacy? As a public figure, how do you deal with criticism, and does it get to you?

Send us a textAngelo, Rhea, and Jay are back to discuss whether or not there is a SECRET 9th episode of Stranger Things and what makes for a good final episode of a show.  Were things better in the old days when shows would just... end?THEN, there's a new Chevy Chase documentary on CNN and whoooo boy, does he come off as bad in it.  The gang discusses the documentary, jerks in Hollywood, and where, exactly, the line is when it comes to no longer supporting a star.All that PLUS: a reviews Night Sleeper, Boo-Ya, Stranger Things, and much MUCH more!MAKE SURE TO VISIT OUR SPONSOR: Steven Singer Jewelers!The TV Show is a weekly podcast hosted by Jay Black, with regular guests Angelo Cataldi and Rhea Hughes. Each week, we dive into the new Golden Age of Television, with a discussion of the latest shows and news. 

U.S. Congressman Darin LaHood (R-IL 16) joins John Williams to talk about the ICE shooting in Minneapolis, how he feels the immigration effort by DHS is going, the latest on the situation in Venezuela, and if he believes the capture of Maduro was legal.

U.S. Congressman Darin LaHood (R-IL 16) joins John Williams to talk about the ICE shooting in Minneapolis, how he feels the immigration effort by DHS is going, the latest on the situation in Venezuela, and if he believes the capture of Maduro was legal.

U.S. Congressman Darin LaHood (R-IL 16) joins John Williams to talk about the ICE shooting in Minneapolis, how he feels the immigration effort by DHS is going, the latest on the situation in Venezuela, and if he believes the capture of Maduro was legal.

What can we conclude?

Nat, Ben and Prop-O get ready to ring in the New Year with a pretty weird Week 18 slate. They kick off by sharing their big end-of-season takes: Which team does Nat say is the best in the league? What Super Bowl does Prop-O want to see? Why does Ben say the year's surprise teams are built for sustained success? Previewing the weekend's games, the crew reveal the most important players in all of those matchups - you may be shocked! As Nat cruises to the Drew Locks crown, Prop-O tries to keep him in sight while Ben gets some karmic retribution after two years of boasting. All this and lots more! ___ To sign up for our partners FanTeam, hit the link: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://af.fanteam.com/click?o=1&a=99082&c=1⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ - use code RUSH to unlock special offers for followers of The NC Show! Get involved in the Edge Rush Boosted Acca, the TNF Freeroll contest - free to enter - and more! FanTeam is the ultimate home for NFL fans in the UK, with season-long, weekly, and daily fantasy contests featuring regular five-figure guaranteed prize pools. Users have to be 18+, please play responsibly, BeGambleAware.org ___ Check out the official Nat Coombs Show music playlist: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠http://open.spotify.com/playlist/0i1nSLaUJWxZMGCe8eJLQY⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ___ BONUS CONTENT! Subscribe to our YouTube Channel: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://www.youtube.com/@TheNCShow⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ___ Follow Nat on X or Instagram: X (Twitter): ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://twitter.com/natcoombs⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ Instagram: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://www.instagram.com/natcoombs⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ___ NC Show socials: X (Twitter): ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://twitter.com/thencshow⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ Facebook: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://www.facebook.com/thencshow⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ Instagram: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://www.instagram.com/thencshow/⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ Tik Tok: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://www.tiktok.com/@thencshow?lang=en⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ Threads: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://www.threads.net/@thencshow⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

In this week's edition of Weekend Conclusions, the guys react to Dabo's comments after losing the bowl game, they talk about Kon Knueppel suffering his first major injury as a Charlotte Hornet, & more See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Something To Think About Series #286 Thought of the day from Venerable Robina Courtin

PESTO Trial Results: What Stroke Survivors Need to Know About Perispinal Etanercept If you've spent any time in stroke recovery communities, you've probably seen the same pattern: a treatment gets talked about with real intensity, people share personal stories that pull you in, and suddenly you're left trying to sort hope from hype from “maybe.” When the decision also involves significant cost, that uncertainty can feel even heavier. That's exactly why I recorded this episode: to help stroke survivors and their families understand the PESTO trial results in plain language without drama, without attacks, and without jumping to conclusions. In this interview, Professor Vincent Thijs explains what the PESTO trial set out to test, why it was designed the way it was, and what the results can (and can't) tell us about perispinal etanercept in stroke recovery. The real problem: not “hope vs skepticism”… it's confusion If you're a stroke survivor, you're already doing something heroic: you're living inside a recovery journey that demands patience, grit, and constant adjustment. The challenge isn't that you “don't want to believe” in something. The challenge is that it's genuinely hard to make an informed decision when: People report different outcomes Online conversations become polarised fast Scientific studies use unfamiliar language The same treatment can be described in completely different ways depending on who you're listening to My goal here isn't to tell you what to do. It's to help you think clearly, ask better questions, and understand what the best available evidence from this trial actually tested. What the PESTO trial was trying to investigate (in simple terms) Professor Thijs explains that the PESTO trial was designed in response to strong community interest. Stroke survivors wanted to know whether the way perispinal etanercept is currently administered in some settings could be demonstrated to work under the standards used for medicines to become widely accepted as part of routine care. So the researchers designed a randomized, placebo-controlled clinical trial. In this type of study: A computer assigns participants to either the treatment or a placebo Participants and clinicians are kept “blinded” (they don't know who got what) Outcomes are measured in a consistent way at set time points In the PESTO trial, the focus was on stroke survivors with moderate to severe disability and reduced quality of life. The primary question was straightforward: Does quality of life improve after one or two injections compared with placebo, over the measured timeframe? Why this study looked at quality of life (not one symptom) One key detail Professor Thijs highlights is the design choice: the trial didn't only target one issue, like pain or walking. It aimed to be more “pragmatic,” reflecting how treatment is used in real-world settings where people seek help for different post-stroke challenges (mobility, fatigue, speech, cognition, pain, and more). That means the main outcome wasn't “Did walking speed improve?” or “Did pain reduce?” It was broader: Quality of life at 28 days And again after the second injection timeframe (56 days total) This matters because your results can look different depending on what you measure. A trial targeting one symptom might see a signal that a broad quality-of-life measure doesn't detect (and vice versa). What the PESTO trial results found In Professor Thijs' words, the trial did not show a difference in quality of life between the treatment and placebo groups at the measured time points: No clear quality-of-life improvement at 28 days No clear improvement after two injections at 56 days That's the central outcome. But there's another finding that grabbed my attention—and it's one many listeners will find surprising. Quote block (mid-article): “We saw that 58% of the people also had that improvement [with placebo] and 53% had it with etanercept… our initial guess was very wrong.” — Professor Vincent Thijs The “placebo signal” and why it matters A strong placebo response doesn't mean “it was all in their heads.” It means that in a blinded clinical trial, people can improve for multiple reasons that aren't specific to the drug itself, such as: Expectation and hope Natural fluctuations in symptoms The impact of being monitored and supported Regression to the mean (symptoms often move toward average over time) The structure and attention that come with trial participation Professor Thijs describes how, during the blinded phase, participants reported improvements in a variety of areas (like sensation, vision, speech). The crucial point is: the team didn't know who had a placebo or an active treatment at the time, which is exactly why blinding exists. For you, the listener, this is a reminder of something empowering: Personal stories can be real and meaningful—and still not answer the question of efficacy on their own. “Am I a candidate?” The trial's honest answer: we don't know how to predict it (yet) One of the most important parts of this conversation is the desire to identify who might benefit most. Professor Thijs explains that the team looked at subgroups (for example: age, sex, severity, diabetes, time since stroke). In this trial, they didn't find a clear subgroup where the treatment stood out as reliably beneficial compared with placebo. He also adds an important caveat: subgroup analysis is difficult, especially in trials that aren't extremely large. So the absence of a clear “responder profile” here doesn't automatically prove none exists—it means this trial didn't reveal one. What this episode is (and isn't) saying Let's keep this grounded and fair. This interview is not about attacking any person, provider, or clinic. It's not about shaming stroke survivors who tried something. It's not even about telling you that you should or shouldn't pursue a treatment. It is about this: Understanding what the PESTO trial tested Understanding what the results showed within their timeframe Knowing the limits of what the trial can conclude Using evidence to reduce confusion before making big decisions A simple “clarity plan” before you decide anything big If you're considering any high-stakes treatment decision, here's a neutral, practical way to move forward: 1) Ask: “What outcome matters most for me?” Is it pain? walking? fatigue? speech? cognition? daily function? quality of life? A treatment might be studied for one outcome and discussed online for another. 2) Ask: “What does the best evidence say—specifically?” Not “Does it work?” in general, but: In what population? Using what method? At what dose? Over what timeframe? Compared with what? 3) Ask: “What are my options and trade-offs?” Talk with a qualified healthcare professional who understands your medical history, risk factors, and rehab plan. Ask about: Potential risks and side effects Opportunity cost (what else could you do with the same time, money, and energy?) Evidence-based rehab and supports that match your goals Listen to the full interview If you want the clearest explanation of the PESTO trial results—from the lead researcher himself—listen to the full episode with Professor Vincent Thijs. And if you'd like to support the podcast (and help keep these conversations going for stroke survivors who need hope and clarity): Bill's book: recoveryafterstroke.com/book Patreon: patreon.com/recoveryafterstroke Medical disclaimer This blog is for informational purposes only and does not constitute medical advice. Please consult your doctor before making any changes to your health or recovery plan. PESTO Trial Results (Etanercept After Stroke) | Interview with Professor Vincent Thijs Confused about perispinal etanercept after stroke? Prof Vincent Thijs explains the PESTO trial results clearly, calmly, and evidence-first. More About Perispinal Etanercept: Etanercept Stroke Recovery: Wesley Ray's Relentless Comeback Dwayne Semple's Remarkable Stroke Journey and Perispinal Etanercept Etanercept for Stroke Recovery – Andrew Stopps Support The Recovery After Stroke Podcast on Patreon Highlights: 00:00 Introduction and Overview of the PESTO Trial 04:19 Design and Objectives of the PESTO Trial 11:23 Recruitment and Methodology of the Trial 18:31  PESTO Trial Results and Findings 24:28 Implications and Future Directions for Research 32:15 Conclusions and Final Thoughts Transcript: Introduction: PESTO Trial Results Bill Gasiamis (00:00) Hello and welcome back to Recovery After Stroke. Before we get started, a quick thank you to my Patreon supporters. Your support helps cover the hosting costs after more than 10 years of me doing this show solo. And it helps me keep creating episodes for stroke survivors who need hope and practical guidance. And thank you as well to everyone who comments on YouTube, leaves reviews on Spotify and Apple podcasts. buys the book and even to those of you who don’t skip the ads. Every bit of that supports keep this podcast going. Now today’s episode is about the PESTO trial results and I’m interviewing Professor Vincent Theis. If you’ve ever felt confused by the conversation online about perisponal antenna sept, some people sharing positive experiences while others are feeling disappointed and plenty of strong opinions in between, this episode is designed to bring clarity. We talk about what the PESTO trial set out to test, how the study was designed, what it found within the measured timeframes and what the results can and can’t tell us. Just a quick note, this conversation is educational and not medical advice. Always speak with a qualified health professional about your situation. All right, let’s get into it. Professor Vincent Dase, welcome to the podcast. Vincent Thijs (01:24) Thank you for having me, Bill. Bill Gasiamis (01:26) I’m really looking forward to this conversation. Atenosept is one of the most hotly discussed topics in stroke recovery. And there’s a lot of misconceptions about whether or not it is or is not efficacious. And while there’s a lot of anecdotal evidence where some people have had positive outcomes from injections, there’s also a lot of people’s feedback, which is very negative about their experience with the Etanercept injections and the lack of results. So today, the reason I reached out is because I wanted to get to the bottom of the findings of the PESTO trial. And I’m hoping that you can shed some light on that. The first question basically is, can you start by explaining in simple terms what it was that the PESTO trial set out to investigate? Vincent Thijs (02:22) All right. The PESTO trial was in response to community members, stroke survivors, wanting to find out whether the current practice of administering Etanercept has done in the U.S. in private practice. In Denmark, I hear there are some sites that provide this treatment. Whether the treatment and genders can be actually proven according to the standards that we use in the pharmaceutical industry to get it to become accepted as a standard of care treatment. For that, you need to do what we call a randomized controlled clinical trial, preferably two that show evidence that treatment does what it’s set out to do. And that’s why with this background and the community pressuring the minister several years ago, Mr. Hunt at the time, to fund a trial that would help answer that question. Design and Objectives of the PESTO Trial There was a call was set out to do this trial and several groups in Australia applied and then an independent committee decided to award the trial to the PESTO study group. And then we tried to design this trial to give an answer. So it’s mostly about people that have moderate to severe disability after their stroke that have reduced quality of life. And We wanted to know, does their quality of life improve when Etanercept is administered? And we wanted to test whether one or two injections were needed. Because that’s what we heard from stroke survivors that from Australia and internationally that went over to the US. Well, this is how it’s done. You get one or two injections and there was a paper that had shown big effects with one injection. So that was the primary endpoint, but then we also looked at whether two injections could help. And when you design a trial, you have to make a decision, will we focus on people with. pain after stroke, or will we look at people who have mobility issues or speech issues or cognitive issues? And we saw that current clinical practice actually was people with various impairments after stroke were accepted and received the treatment. And what would have been the advantage of doing say only mobility or only pain? Well, you can then look at the outcome of pain or mobility, does it improve? Or is your cognition improved? But because we wanted to be pragmatic and we know that recruitment in clinical trials needs to reflect how is current practice. So we thought let’s put in all the people with moderate to severe disability, whatever their impairment after stroke and reduce quality of life. And then we looked at quality of life as an outcome rather than an individual impairment. And so what we did then was to use the randomized technique and where it’s left up to the computer to decide what treatment a person will receive, the active Etanercept or a similar looking placebo, and then look at 28 days and we had to make a decision what makes sense 28 days, what is practical. to see whether that injection then had improved quality of life. And then we did another injection again with a placebo or the active drug. And then after 28 days again, we looked again whether that had made a difference. So we have people that had received two times the placebo, one time the placebo, and one active injection. And then we have people that had received two active injections. And then we were able to compare those and see whether they had made bigger improvements if you receive two injections versus one or zero. Unfortunately, we couldn’t show a difference in quality of life at 28 days. And we also couldn’t show an improvement at 56 days after people had two injections. But that was in a nutshell how we designed and the background of the study. Bill Gasiamis (07:25) So the main difference then between the Griffith University study and your particular study was that they did go after a specific improvement in one area, I believe. it in? Okay. So although those guys went after pain, you guys went after just a general improvement in quality of life after the injection and your stroke survivors. Vincent Thijs (07:39) Mostly, think. Bill Gasiamis (07:54) would have been as far as 15 years post stroke. Is that right? Vincent Thijs (07:59) Yes, correct. We wanted to have people early after stroke between one and five years, and then also between people five to 15 years after stroke. That was also for practical reasons. Once you start trial, you see how good recruitment is, how many people want to participate in the study. And we saw that if we went to up to five years. Recruitment was relatively slow. So we added this additional group of people later on after their stroke. that because many people, I’m five years, I’m six years after stroke. Why can’t I get the treatment? And you know, so we also wanted to expand the pool. And that’s also what happens in clinical practice. Current clinical practice, I don’t think the sites and the US and they would refuse the patient six years or so. We just wanted to reflect the people that we see on the website going for this treatment. Bill Gasiamis (09:01) Yeah, yeah. And then the difference between the Griffith trial and your trial as well was the actual dosage of Etanercept the amount that was in the injection. I do believe that your trial was a 25 milligram injection. And I believe that the Griffith University trial was 25 milligram. injection to 50 milligram injection. Vincent Thijs (09:34) Yeah, we just based on what people told us they received when they went to the clinic, also the other sites and then also 35 milligram was chosen because that’s in the patent for the street. Bill Gasiamis (09:49) Okay, I see. So you’re trying to as much as possible mimic what was happening out there in in the private practice Vincent Thijs (10:00) We wanted to answer the question, is current clinical practice, is that beneficial? And that’s what sort of what the call was to do a clinical trial in current clinical practice. You can, you have to make decisions, right? And I think this was the most relevant for a stroke survivor. Bill Gasiamis (10:17) Now that’s really interesting that stroke survivors were able to twist the arm of a minister to get the funding to begin that process of the trial. How long ago did this actually start? Vincent Thijs (10:28) I think it was 2016, 2017 or so. So it takes a while to get the minister and then I think that the trial started in 2019. took a while to complete as well. Bill Gasiamis (10:43) Right understood. Okay So then you recruit people they come along and they go through the trial through the particular trial How does that work on the day do they turn up are they admitted? We’ll be back with more of professor face explanation in just a moment But I want to pause here because if you’ve ever felt stuck between hope and uncertainty, you’re not alone When you’re recovering from stroke, you’re constantly making decisions and some decisions feel high stakes, especially when confronting information that’s conflicting. Recruitment and Methodology of the Trial In the second half of this conversation, we get into the parts that really help you think clearly. What the trial results do and don’t mean, and why placebo responses matter in blinded research, and how to frame smarter questions before you commit time, money, or energy to any path. If you want to support the podcast and keep these episodes coming, You can grab my book at recoveryafterstroke.com/book or join the Patreon at patreon.com/recoveryafterstroke All right, back to the episode. Vincent Thijs (11:51) All right, so we recruited from a variety of sources. So we had kept a log of people that were interested in this. We had a Facebook post in New Zealand, for instance, where we recruited as well. We had people from the Stroke Clinical Registry that were approached. We had a website and people could register their interest if they were doing a search online to participate in clinical trial. So the variety of sources and then we have to determine eligibility that was mostly done either via an in-person visit or remotely via telehealth. We tried to get their medical information, what type of stroke they had. And then we also questioned whether they had this modified rank in scale, the disability they had, the impairments they had from their stroke. so then people came. they were considered eligible, then we scheduled a visit and they would typically come in no overnight stay needed. It was a day procedure that was done. People were then receiving another questionnaire on the day itself to measure their quality of life and other measures like their fatigue levels and how much help they required, etc. And then we proceeded with the injection, which was done. We had bought a special bed that was able to do the, the, the tilting that was required. So we set the people up, injected and then tilted the table. so, we received the drug. It was prepared independently by the pharmacist. So the pharmacist, they took the drug off the shelf or the made the placebo. and they made sure it looked exactly alike. So then somebody from the trial team picked it up from the pharmacist. The pharmacist didn’t tell, of course, what it was. And then the administration happened. So the doctor who administered and the participant did not know what they received. So after the procedure, they were left like this for four minutes. And then after four minutes, people could sit up again. And we waited about half an hour. then we asked them how they were doing, whether there were any adverse reactions, ⁓ and ⁓ then after that half an hour of observation people could go back to their habitual situation. ⁓ it’s a very simple ⁓ procedure to do. Bill Gasiamis (14:35) I believe there was a was there 126 participants Vincent Thijs (14:40) Yes, 126 people participated. had anticipated a little bit more people to participate. So we had hoped 168, but recruitment fell flat after a while and we were not able to find more people to recruit. So we made a decision and then, you know, these clinical trials, they have some funding ⁓ and they require the treatment team to be paid, et cetera, and that ran out. So we had to stop at a certain time. Bill Gasiamis (15:13) Was the study stopped early because of a decrease in the amount of funding or was there an issue with the funding at some point? Vincent Thijs (15:23) Funding ran out. You hire people for a certain amount of years and then you have fewer patients than you anticipate. So you have to stop. Bill Gasiamis (15:32) huh, okay. So would that affect the outcome of the trial? Would you say the lack of funding or the lack of the ability to take the trial further? Vincent Thijs (15:42) Yeah, well, what we had when you do the trial, when you plan the trial, you say, well, this is what we’re going to expect in terms of efficacy. You have to make a guess and say, well, that many people will have an improvement in quality of life if we give them the placebo and that many people will have an improvement in quality of life with the trial drug. And we had thought that about 11 % would improve with the placebo based on an earlier study. And then we had to make a guess because nobody had done this type of study on what Etanosap would provide. But reading the report that was published several years ago now, where 90 % of the people reported improvement in their impairments, we thought, well, Let’s not go for 90%, but a 30 % improvement. And so that was based on that we needed 168 people to participate in the trial. So that was what we call the pre-planned sample size estimation, which is a guess. When we stopped at 126 participants, actually we saw that the results were very different. There was not that 11 % actually in the placebo arm. saw that 58 % of the people also had that improvement and 53 % had it with ethanosab. So our initial guess was very wrong based on some statistical advanced statistical techniques we have. We have quite a lot of power to estimate whether there was a difference. So I think the trial can provide us an answer. It’s large enough to give us an answer about this particular question. Is current clinical practice in these people with this range after their stroke, does it improve? quality of life after a month or after two months. I’m not speaking about early improvement, I’m not speaking about six months down the line. We only can decide what we see in this study. Bill Gasiamis (18:05) So you have some limitations because you can’t have the funding to test one month, two months, six months, 12 months. You have the funding to basically meet the design of your study and then you can report on that. Now what’s really interesting is that the placebo had such a large result. PESTO Trial Results and Findings Vincent Thijs (18:34) What kind of things were people reporting that improved for the people who had the placebo injection?Look, this is, course, when we were in the blinded phase, when neither myself or my colleagues who did these scales, we were totally blinded. And that’s, remember vividly people saying, it didn’t do anything for me. But then there were also people said that they could see again. And so people that had improvement in sensation. Some people had improvement in their speech. there were, we, we observed these things, but we didn’t know whether they were active or placebo. And then surprisingly we had some people in whom we thought, they must have had active drug that turned out to have the placebo, but that’s years after, right? Because it takes a little bit of time to accumulate a sufficient number of patients. And we were only reporting and breaking the blind when the trial was finished. because otherwise you may be biased in all your analysis, et cetera. You don’t want to do that. So you wait until the end of the study to break the blind. And that’s very frustrating for the participants because there were many people that said, I must have had the placebo because it didn’t do anything for me. And there were other people that were, and some people like that, they said, I still want to go to the US. Bill Gasiamis (19:37) I see. Vincent Thijs (19:59) And please, can you tell me if I received a placebo? And I understand it was terribly frustrating for these participants. But we were very strict. No, we don’t want to break the blind. This is against the rules that you have to adhere to in a clinical trial. And so we didn’t do that. Of course, once the trial was finished, we were able to report the results back to the the participants. And then there were some people that were very surprised that they had received the active drug. I remember one person vividly who said, you have to tell me now because I’m going. And then I said, hold off, hold off. And then we told them you had twice the active drug. And so they decided not to go anymore. So you see how From a clinical trial perspective, it’s very important to remain very objective and not being able to see what people have received. From a humane level, of course, I understand it was very important to these people. Bill Gasiamis (21:02) Yeah, that’d be difficult. ⁓ And then I imagine that had the placebo not worked and then the tenisept did work, then there would have been people who would have said, well, I’ve received the placebo. It didn’t work for me. Other people received the tenisept. It did work for them. Why can’t I get the tenisept injection now? Vincent Thijs (21:26) Yeah, and we also had two people, people that had twice the placebo who noticed an improvement and have told me the improvement is still there. Bill Gasiamis (21:35) Wow. Vincent Thijs (21:36) So it. Bill Gasiamis (21:38) That’s amazing. Now was the. Vincent Thijs (21:40) And often that, and I must tell you, often those were relatively little things that seemed to improve both with the placebo and in the active group. And you see that there are changes in quality of life that people have reported, but it happens as well with the placebo. Bill Gasiamis (21:58) Wow. Was the intention of the study that was funded at the very beginning in 2016 by Minister Hunt, was it to determine whether or not this was going to be an effective treatment for people in stroke and therefore to roll it out somehow in the Australian medical system for stroke survivors? What was the thinking for Minister Hunt? Do you know? Vincent Thijs (22:24) Of course, I was not involved in that lobbying to the minister or anything, but it was to bring it on a pathway towards regulatory approval. We know that Etanercept is a relatively cheap drug that you can get ⁓ and is approved already for some indications, especially in people with rheumatoid arthritis, the condition of the joints, but it’s not approved for stroke. And to be officially approved and then potentially re- reimbursed on the PBS. You need to have some trials that have been done such as PESTO. We do different trial phases. One would be a phase two trial and a phase three trial. So phase one is typically in people just to assess the safety and some dosages usually in healthy people. And then a phase two is safety amongst stroke survivors. and preliminary efficacy. And that’s where PESTO was what we call a phase two B trial. And then a phase three trial would then be a trial in many more participants based usually on the results of a phase two B trial. And then usually when you have a phase three trial and it’s convincing and the authorities may approve such a trial. Bill Gasiamis (23:46) So in this case, the phase two B trial, this PESTO trial didn’t find that it’s efficacious. And as a result, there’s not going to be a further trial. Would that be accurate? Vincent Thijs (23:56) Well, based on the findings we have in this particular type of ⁓ way of administering in this particular group of people, I don’t think there’s enough evidence to argue for a phase three trial. It may be that you could say, well, we want to focus on pain because that was more promising. Well, you’ll need to do another trial in that condition. Implications and Future Directions for Research After stroke or maybe within a year after stroke. I mean, there are other possibilities, but at the moment, current clinical practice type trials, I don’t think there’s enough evidence to move forward with that. Bill Gasiamis (24:43) What would the numbers have had to look like for the trial to conclude that there was evidence of efficacy? Vincent Thijs (24:51) Well, I think based on what we have now, you would need to design a much, much bigger trial because there was only a 5 % difference between the placebo and the active group. And actually it was in favor of the placebo. So the placebo did a little bit better, not statistically significant. So it could just be by chance, but you would need probably thousands of people. Bill Gasiamis (25:15) I see. And I imagine there’s not a lot of excitement about funding something like that by the people who fund these trials. Vincent Thijs (25:25) Yes, typically the funders will look at how good is the evidence to pursue this. And if you were a pharmaceutical company on a pathway to development for a drug, you probably would say, well, it looks safe, but it didn’t do what it intended to do. So let’s stop the development of this drug for this indication. Bill Gasiamis (25:45) I say so. I think one of the challenges with the path of administering a TANACEP to stroke survivors is that there seems to be a missing step. And the step to me is determining whether or not somebody is a candidate for a TANACEP. perhaps if we knew more about the stroke survivor, what was actually happening in their particular brain, and we were able to determine some similarities between the people who have had a positive result and we developed a method, then that would make it a lot easier. to say, well, I’m a stroke survivor. I’d like to have a TANACYPT and then go through a process of determining whether or not I was a candidate rather than just guessing whether I’m a candidate or not and then having to pay money to find out whether in fact I was a candidate. Vincent Thijs (26:33) The trial provides a little bit of answers to that. ⁓ You want to identify a marker or a subgroup of people in whom the drug will work particularly well. And so you could look at, and we looked at different things like females versus males, if you’re younger versus older, if you have very severe disability or less severe disability, if you have diabetes, are you early after your stroke or later? That one to five versus six to 15 category. And we could not identify a group in whom the the drug worked particularly well. Now there’s a caveat when you do a clinical trial, it’s really hard to look at subgroups, especially if your trial is relatively small and the PESTO trial is relatively small. So you have to take this with a grain of salt, but it was nothing really promising. that we could identify. So probably you need other markers. If you believe in Etanercept as a drug, you would possibly need to look at what are the levels of TNF alpha, the drug, the molecule that actually is targeted. Unfortunately, there’s nothing like readily available to do that. Could it be that people with a… a stroke in a particular location that would work particularly more than in others, but we don’t have any real way at the moment to do that. Bill Gasiamis (28:08) Okay, so we’re assuming that the people who experience an improvement after they’ve had an attempt to shut that the markers of TNF alpha were lower or higher or Vincent Thijs (28:21) Well, the theory is that they have a lot higher TNF-alpha. Now, as you know, the premise is Etanercept works by reducing this molecule and we have good evidence that it reduces this molecule in the blood, but we don’t have good evidence that it reduces the levels in the brain. That’s where you want it to be. And one of the difficulties and many scientists that work on the Etanercept and ⁓ have said, look, it doesn’t cross the blood-brain barrier. It doesn’t. go against the natural defense that we have to protect the brain against substances that could potentially be harmful for the brain or that have a large size. And the Tandacep we know has a large size would not cross the blood-brain barrier. So it doesn’t reach the brain. And many people look at it with relative skepticism that it actually enters the brain. Bill Gasiamis (29:18) ⁓ And then with regards to rheumatoid arthritis, doesn’t need to cross the blood-brain barrier. It just somehow gets to this, position or the place where inflammation is occurring. TNF-alpha is active and it can easily mitigate the impact that TNF-alpha is causing. In the brain, the brain is protected by the blood-brain barrier and it cannot cross the blood-brain barrier under normal conditions and therefore it can’t get to where the TNF-alpha is. if there’s any TNF alpha, if inflammation is the issue and it cannot resolve it one way or another. So for some people perhaps it can’t resolve it. Now, I don’t understand about Etanercept a lot. I don’t understand exactly how the molecule works, et cetera. But if it was injected into a blood vessel, is that not something that can occur? And if it was, if it can occur, would that then cross the blood brain barrier? Vincent Thijs (30:15) That wouldn’t cause a blood brain barrier, no. You would have to do what we call a lumbar puncture or put a little ⁓ injection into the ventricles and then hope that it would enter the area that is stark where the TNF alpha is elevated. Those experiments have not been done. Bill Gasiamis (30:17) Either. Okay, so a lumbar puncture is probably riskier than… Vincent Thijs (30:44) Well, it’s uncomfortable. It’s uncomfortable and we do it to administer drugs if needed. Some people with brain cancer receive it. There are other trials ongoing in certain areas of stroke where it’s done. Bill Gasiamis (30:58) Then the difficulty is, and my job here is to report back to the community how they should proceed with Etanercept going forward. Now, I don’t expect you to answer that. However, your study probably gives enough information for people to be able to make an even more informed decision than they did before. Previously, what I think was happening is people, and it still happens every day. And I’ve interviewed a lot of stroke survivors who’ve had positive results with Etanercept. The challenge is getting interviews with stroke survivors who have had negative results with Etanercept. That is something I haven’t been able to do. So if somebody happens to be watching and listening to this and they have had the Etanercept shots and they didn’t get positive results, please reach out so that we can share a balanced story of what’s happening out there in the community. Would there be a reason for the community to perhaps begin again to lobby a government or a minister of a government to look at perisponinal tenosept and study it in a different way, like administration via a lumbar puncture. Conclusions and Final Thoughts Vincent Thijs (32:08) I think we need more, probably go back to the drawing table to see whether, because we’re just taking a step back. The idea is that there is inflammation after stroke and we know that there is inflammation after stroke. We don’t, we just don’t know how long it is. We don’t have a good marker. Is it present only for weeks or months after stroke or can it persist for years? The theory is that it persists for years, but if you look at the actual experiments that have been done, it’s really hard to study in humans because we don’t have good tests. But if you look in animals, it’s also hard to do long-term studies in animals, but nobody has really proven that conclusively that there is still after the stroke causes a scar, that process is still really active. Is TNF-alpha years after a stroke still present? Yes, it’s present because we use TNF as a transmitter in the brain or a chemical in the brain, but is it still worth reducing its activity? That’s probably, I think, a bigger question that science needs to answer is to understand that all inflammation piece and the time after stroke that it persists in my Bill Gasiamis (33:35) Yeah, because it could still be the fact that the person has had brain damage. The particular part of their brain that’s damaged has, for example, taken offline one of their limbs and there is no way to recover that once it’s gone. there is no, there may also be no inflammation ⁓ there. So somebody in that situation receiving Etanercept wouldn’t get a result even if it was able to cross the blood-brain barrier because the damage is done and that’s the challenge with the brain is once it’s damaged restoring the damaged part is not possible. Vincent Thijs (34:15) Yeah, look, after this experience with the PESTA trial, I think we need to work on other avenues and I’m not as hopeful with this based on the data that I have seen. Bill Gasiamis (34:28) Yeah Well, my final question then is, are you planning on exploring inflammation and recovery after stroke with any work that you’re doing in the future? Is there any more of this type of work being done? Vincent Thijs (34:46) we’ve just launched a new study, which is not a randomized trial, but it’s trying to get at this common symptom that people have after stroke, which is fatigue and cognitive changes. And one of my post-docs, Dr. Emily Ramech, she’s a physio by background. We just launched what we call the deep phenotyping study after stroke. And we are looking at young people that have had a stroke up to age 55 and we’re taking them into the scanner. We will do a PET scan that’s looking at inflammation. We’re taking their bloods and looking at markers of inflammation and see how that relates to fatigue after stroke. This is between the first month and the sixth month after stroke. That will give us a little bit of timeline of inflammation after stroke. It will give us some information about fatigue, which is very common, but I have no plans at the moment to look at ethanocephaly. Bill Gasiamis (35:53) Fair enough. I appreciate your time. Thank you so much. All right, well, that brings us back to the end of the episode with Professor Vincent Dease on the PESLO trial results. My hope is that this conversation gives you more clarity, especially if you’re felt caught between personal stories, strong opinions, and a lot of uncertainty. The goal here isn’t to tell you what to do. It’s to help you ask better questions and make decisions with your eyes open alongside a qualified healthcare professional who knows your situation. If this episode helped you, please do a couple of things. Subscribe on YouTube or follow the podcast on Spotify or Apple. Leave a review if you can. It really helps more stroke survivors find the show. And if you’ve had an experience you’re willing to share respectfully, positive, negative or mixed, add a comment. Those real-world perspectives help community feel less alone. And if you’d like to support the podcast and keep it going, my book is at recoveryafterstroke.com/book. And you can join the Patreon at patreon.com/recoveryafterstroke. Thanks for being here with me. And remember you’re not alone in this recovery journey. Importantly, we present many podcasts designed to give you an insight and understanding into the experiences of other individuals. Opinions and treatment protocols discussed during any podcast are the individual’s own experience, and we do not necessarily share the same opinion, nor do we recommend any treatment protocol discussed. All content on this website and any linked blog, podcast or video material controlled this website or content is created and produced for informational purposes only and is largely based on the personal experience of Bill Gassiamus. Content is intended to complement your medical treatment and support healing. It is not intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice and should not be relied on as health advice. The information is general and may not be suitable for your personal injuries, circumstances or health objectives. Do not use our content as a standalone resource to diagnose, treat, cure or prevent any disease for therapeutic purposes or as a substitute for the advice of a health professional. Never delay seeking advice or disregard the advice of a medical professional, your doctor or your rehabilitator. program based on our content. you have any questions or concerns about your health or medical condition, please seek guidance from a doctor or other medical professional. If you are experiencing a health emergency or think you might be, call 000 if in Australia or your local emergency number immediately for emergency assistance or go to the nearest hospital emergency department. Medical information changes constantly. While we aim to provide current quality information in our content, we do not provide any guarantees and assume no legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, currency or completeness of the content. If you choose to rely on any information within our content, you do so solely at your own risk. We are careful with links we provide. However, third-party links from our website are followed at your own risk and we are not responsible for any information you find there. The post PESTO Trial Results (Etanercept After Stroke) | Interview with Professor Vincent Thijs appeared first on Recovery After Stroke.

Is an elder always an Elder, or are they simply an elder—and how does that change what Peter says about them in chapter five? Tune in to today's episode to make sense of that sentence and to dive into the closing remarks of 1 Peter, with a view of leadership that resists the worldly temptation to wield authority over others. Instead, see how submitting to one another out of obedience to the Lord elevates our life together and amplifies our witness to the watching world. In this episode, the guys tie all the verses together to show how these concepts are lived out today, and challenge some translation choices along the way. Join us for the conclusion of our series on the book of 1 Peter, and feel free to drop any unanswered questions about the series on Facebook! 

PREVIEW — Husain Haqqani — Conclusions of Russia-Washington negotiations over Ukraine conflict. Haqqani examines the outcomes of U.S.-Moscow negotiations on the Ukraine conflict, predicting favorable conclusions for Russia and unfavorable ones for the United States. Should Russia succeed, its global player status returns, yet inherent suspicion of Russian intentions endures because they extract more than they contribute. The key negative outcome remains the perception that the U.S. is no longer a reliable ally that secures nations' freedom.