Family of DNA sequences found in prokaryotic organisms
POPULARITY
Categories
404 episodes with CRISPR
80 episodes with CRISPR
47 episodes with CRISPR
24 episodes with CRISPR
35 episodes with CRISPR
40 episodes with CRISPR
24 episodes with CRISPR
19 episodes with CRISPR
19 episodes with CRISPR
24 episodes with CRISPR
12 episodes with CRISPR
18 episodes with CRISPR
23 episodes with CRISPR
8 episodes with CRISPR
18 episodes with CRISPR
10 episodes with CRISPR
21 episodes with CRISPR
11 episodes with CRISPR
13 episodes with CRISPR
7 episodes with CRISPR
34 episodes with CRISPR
10 episodes with CRISPR
9 episodes with CRISPR
16 episodes with CRISPR
14 episodes with CRISPR
5 episodes with CRISPR
18 episodes with CRISPR
5 episodes with CRISPR
11 episodes with CRISPR
10 episodes with CRISPR
24 episodes with CRISPR
27 episodes with CRISPR
8 episodes with CRISPR
6 episodes with CRISPR
9 episodes with CRISPR
10 episodes with CRISPR
4 episodes with CRISPR
10 episodes with CRISPR
13 episodes with CRISPR
4 episodes with CRISPR
12 episodes with CRISPR
9 episodes with CRISPR
9 episodes with CRISPR
9 episodes with CRISPR
6 episodes with CRISPR
13 episodes with CRISPR
7 episodes with CRISPR
9 episodes with CRISPR
3 episodes with CRISPR
10 episodes with CRISPR
11 episodes with CRISPR
6 episodes with CRISPR
5 episodes with CRISPR
5 episodes with CRISPR
3 episodes with CRISPR
9 episodes with CRISPR
5 episodes with CRISPR
10 episodes with CRISPR
4 episodes with CRISPR
5 episodes with CRISPR
9 episodes with CRISPR
14 episodes with CRISPR
6 episodes with CRISPR
5 episodes with CRISPR
8 episodes with CRISPR
4 episodes with CRISPR
8 episodes with CRISPR
8 episodes with CRISPR
3 episodes with CRISPR
7 episodes with CRISPR
4 episodes with CRISPR
7 episodes with CRISPR
8 episodes with CRISPR
8 episodes with CRISPR
6 episodes with CRISPR
8 episodes with CRISPR
4 episodes with CRISPR
3 episodes with CRISPR
5 episodes with CRISPR
6 episodes with CRISPR
5 episodes with CRISPR
3 episodes with CRISPR
4 episodes with CRISPR
4 episodes with CRISPR
4 episodes with CRISPR
3 episodes with CRISPR
5 episodes with CRISPR
5 episodes with CRISPR
5 episodes with CRISPR
10 episodes with CRISPR
6 episodes with CRISPR
9 episodes with CRISPR
3 episodes with CRISPR
5 episodes with CRISPR
4 episodes with CRISPR
5 episodes with CRISPR
3 episodes with CRISPR
10 episodes with CRISPR
3 episodes with CRISPR
4 episodes with CRISPR
3 episodes with CRISPR
4 episodes with CRISPR
14 episodes with CRISPR
5 episodes with CRISPR
6 episodes with CRISPR
5 episodes with CRISPR
3 episodes with CRISPR
3 episodes with CRISPR
3 episodes with CRISPR
5 episodes with CRISPR
7 episodes with CRISPR
3 episodes with CRISPR
5 episodes with CRISPR
5 episodes with CRISPR
4 episodes with CRISPR
4 episodes with CRISPR
5 episodes with CRISPR
3 episodes with CRISPR
2 episodes with CRISPR
9 episodes with CRISPR
3 episodes with CRISPR
8 episodes with CRISPR
6 episodes with CRISPR
3 episodes with CRISPR
2 episodes with CRISPR
2 episodes with CRISPR
5 episodes with CRISPR
5 episodes with CRISPR
2 episodes with CRISPR
3 episodes with CRISPR
2 episodes with CRISPR
3 episodes with CRISPR
3 episodes with CRISPR
7 episodes with CRISPR
2 episodes with CRISPR
4 episodes with CRISPR
4 episodes with CRISPR
7 episodes with CRISPR
3 episodes with CRISPR
3 episodes with CRISPR
3 episodes with CRISPR
5 episodes with CRISPR
3 episodes with CRISPR
2 episodes with CRISPR
2 episodes with CRISPR
7 episodes with CRISPR
7 episodes with CRISPR
2 episodes with CRISPR
3 episodes with CRISPR
3 episodes with CRISPR
2 episodes with CRISPR
8 episodes with CRISPR
4 episodes with CRISPR
[01:00:44] EU Push for WarOpening monologue frames EU leaders' Oval Office visit as another step toward World War III, warning of elites driving conflict. [01:02:13] Chemo Costs & CorruptionKansas woman forced to sell baked goods for $10,000/month chemo illustrates Big Pharma greed and insurance industry corruption, with added discussion of chemo's brain damage. [01:20:33] Soros & Ukraine RevolutionsClips of George Soros admitting to funding Ukraine's revolution reinforce claims of Western-engineered regime change and manufactured conflict. [01:23:02] COVID Propaganda MachineActors and government PSAs compared to “I play a doctor on TV,” exposing taxpayer-funded psy-ops that pushed vaccines and lockdowns. [01:27:00] NATO & Endless WarsCriticism of NATO as an entangling alliance meant to drag the U.S. into European wars, with sanctions framed as acts of war. [01:42:00] Culture Wars: Tradwives & FuentesAnalysis of “tradwife” influencers like Lauren Southern and Nick Fuentes, accusing them of cosplaying tradition and discouraging real families, seen as controlled opposition undermining Western civilization. [02:25:03] Milo & the Right-Wing CircusDiscussion of Milo Yiannopoulos as an unstable provocateur, linked to Alex Jones, with comparisons to Laura Loomer; highlights the grifter culture. [02:25:44] AI as Modern IdolatryHealth Impact article sparks a segment framing AI as today's “talking idols,” reflecting human emptiness rather than true intelligence. [02:45:30] CRISPR & AI GeneticsConcerns raised that CRISPR gene editing is more like a chainsaw than a scalpel, with elites now turning to AI to “clean up” dangerous genetic manipulation. [02:49:19] De-Banking & StablecoinsDiscussion of Bank of America walking back “debanking” rules against religious groups, but warning that stablecoins are a Trojan horse for CBDCs and government financial control. [03:11:01] Trump Tariffs & Food CostsNew tariffs on Brazil, Switzerland, and Mexico predicted to raise prices on coffee, chocolate, olive oil, and groceries. Large corporations can absorb costs temporarily, but small businesses and consumers will feel the squeeze. [03:29:48] Israeli Official & Sex CrimesCoverage of an Israeli official caught in a Nevada sex crime sting but quietly returned to Israel, sparking discussion of influence, Epstein networks, and government protection of predators. [03:44:05] Pornography, AI & Spiritual WarAnalysis of how pornography addiction undermines churches, worsened by AI chatbots and virtual companions that manipulate users — framed as a spiritual battle for minds and families. Follow the show on Kick and watch live every weekday 9:00am EST – 12:00pm EST https://kick.com/davidknightshow Money should have intrinsic value AND transactional privacy: Go to https://davidknight.gold/ for great deals on physical gold/silverFor 10% off Gerald Celente's prescient Trends Journal, go to https://trendsjournal.com/ and enter the code KNIGHTFind out more about the show and where you can watch it at TheDavidKnightShow.com If you would like to support the show and our family please consider subscribing monthly here: SubscribeStar https://www.subscribestar.com/the-david-knight-showOr you can send a donation throughMail: David Knight POB 994 Kodak, TN 37764Zelle: @DavidKnightShow@protonmail.comCash App at: $davidknightshowBTC to: bc1qkuec29hkuye4xse9unh7nptvu3y9qmv24vanh7Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-david-knight-show--2653468/support.
[01:00:44] EU Push for WarOpening monologue frames EU leaders' Oval Office visit as another step toward World War III, warning of elites driving conflict. [01:02:13] Chemo Costs & CorruptionKansas woman forced to sell baked goods for $10,000/month chemo illustrates Big Pharma greed and insurance industry corruption, with added discussion of chemo's brain damage. [01:20:33] Soros & Ukraine RevolutionsClips of George Soros admitting to funding Ukraine's revolution reinforce claims of Western-engineered regime change and manufactured conflict. [01:23:02] COVID Propaganda MachineActors and government PSAs compared to “I play a doctor on TV,” exposing taxpayer-funded psy-ops that pushed vaccines and lockdowns. [01:27:00] NATO & Endless WarsCriticism of NATO as an entangling alliance meant to drag the U.S. into European wars, with sanctions framed as acts of war. [01:42:00] Culture Wars: Tradwives & FuentesAnalysis of “tradwife” influencers like Lauren Southern and Nick Fuentes, accusing them of cosplaying tradition and discouraging real families, seen as controlled opposition undermining Western civilization. [02:25:03] Milo & the Right-Wing CircusDiscussion of Milo Yiannopoulos as an unstable provocateur, linked to Alex Jones, with comparisons to Laura Loomer; highlights the grifter culture. [02:25:44] AI as Modern IdolatryHealth Impact article sparks a segment framing AI as today's “talking idols,” reflecting human emptiness rather than true intelligence. [02:45:30] CRISPR & AI GeneticsConcerns raised that CRISPR gene editing is more like a chainsaw than a scalpel, with elites now turning to AI to “clean up” dangerous genetic manipulation. [02:49:19] De-Banking & StablecoinsDiscussion of Bank of America walking back “debanking” rules against religious groups, but warning that stablecoins are a Trojan horse for CBDCs and government financial control. [03:11:01] Trump Tariffs & Food CostsNew tariffs on Brazil, Switzerland, and Mexico predicted to raise prices on coffee, chocolate, olive oil, and groceries. Large corporations can absorb costs temporarily, but small businesses and consumers will feel the squeeze. [03:29:48] Israeli Official & Sex CrimesCoverage of an Israeli official caught in a Nevada sex crime sting but quietly returned to Israel, sparking discussion of influence, Epstein networks, and government protection of predators. [03:44:05] Pornography, AI & Spiritual WarAnalysis of how pornography addiction undermines churches, worsened by AI chatbots and virtual companions that manipulate users — framed as a spiritual battle for minds and families. Follow the show on Kick and watch live every weekday 9:00am EST – 12:00pm EST https://kick.com/davidknightshow Money should have intrinsic value AND transactional privacy: Go to https://davidknight.gold/ for great deals on physical gold/silverFor 10% off Gerald Celente's prescient Trends Journal, go to https://trendsjournal.com/ and enter the code KNIGHTFind out more about the show and where you can watch it at TheDavidKnightShow.com If you would like to support the show and our family please consider subscribing monthly here: SubscribeStar https://www.subscribestar.com/the-david-knight-showOr you can send a donation throughMail: David Knight POB 994 Kodak, TN 37764Zelle: @DavidKnightShow@protonmail.comCash App at: $davidknightshowBTC to: bc1qkuec29hkuye4xse9unh7nptvu3y9qmv24vanh7Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-real-david-knight-show--5282736/support.
About this episode: Sickle cell disease affects an estimated 100,000 people in the United States. Recent advancements in gene therapies and medicines like hydroxyurea are diminishing extreme pain, reducing strokes, and extending survival times for those afflicted by the disease. In this episode: leading sickle cell disease expert Dr. Mark Gladwin explains how revolutionary new treatments work and discusses the challenges to access to life-saving care. Guest: Dr. Mark Gladwin is a physician-scientist and the Dean of the University of Maryland School of Medicine and Vice President for Medical Affairs at the University of Maryland, Baltimore. His research focuses include sickle cell disease and hypertension. Host: Dr. Josh Sharfstein is vice dean for public health practice and community engagement at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, a faculty member in health policy, a pediatrician, and former secretary of Maryland's Health Department. Show links and related content: New sickle cell gene therapies are a breakthrough, but solving how to pay their high prices is a struggle—CNBC Gene Therapy: What You Need to Know—Sickle Cell Disease Association of American No More Pain: Breakthrough Sickle Cell Treatment from Johns Hopkins Offers Curative Potential—Johns Hopkins School of Medicine Transcript information: Looking for episode transcripts? Open our podcast on the Apple Podcasts app (desktop or mobile) or the Spotify mobile app to access an auto-generated transcript of any episode. Closed captioning is also available for every episode on our YouTube channel. Contact us: Have a question about something you heard? Looking for a transcript? Want to suggest a topic or guest? Contact us via email or visit our website. Follow us: @PublicHealthPod on Bluesky @JohnsHopkinsSPH on Instagram @JohnsHopkinsSPH on Facebook @PublicHealthOnCall on YouTube Here's our RSS feed Note: These podcasts are a conversation between the participants, and do not represent the position of Johns Hopkins University.
ORIGINAL AIR DATE: AUG 2, 2015An amazing conversation from a decade ago with the amazing Dr. Thomas Horn, on the subject of Transhumanism.Here is the documentary Tom refers to: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8QG1EgkpJX4Sheila's content is viewer supported.SHEILA WEBSITE: https://sheilazilinsky.comHOW TO GIVE: https://sheilazilinsky.com/givingVenmo https://venmo.com/u/SheilaZilinskyCash app https://cash.app/$SheilaZilinskyZelle sheila@sheilazilinsky.comPayPal https://www.paypal.com/paypalme/sheilazilinskyPatreon https://www.patreon.com/sheilazilinskyHOW TO LISTEN:BRAND NEW YOUTUBE CHANNEL https://www.youtube.com/@realsheilazRumble: https://rumble.com/user/RealSheilaZPodcast: https://www.podomatic.com/podcasts/sheilazilinskyApple Podcast: https://podcasts.apple.com/ca/podcast/the-sheila-zilinsky-show/id960689559FOLLOW SHEILA:Telegram: https://t.me/realsheilazTwitter: https://twitter.com/RealSheilaZFacebook: https://www.facebook.com/realSheilaZInstagram: https://www.instagram.com/sheilazilinskySubstack: https://sheilazilinsky.substack.com
A Chinese scientist, He Jiankui, made a shocking announcement to the world in 2018: He had secretly engineered the birth of the first gene-edited babies. The birth of the twins was seen as reckless and unethical by the scientific community. That's because, among other things, the CRISPR gene-editing technique Jiankui used was so new. NPR science correspondent Rob Stein has been following the controversial world of gene-editing and human reproduction, including some companies' recent quests to push gene-editing technology forward.Read more of Rob Stein's reporting on the topic here.Interested in more science news? Let us know at shortwave@npr.org. Listen to every episode of Short Wave sponsor-free and support our work at NPR by signing up for Short Wave+ at plus.npr.org/shortwave.Learn more about sponsor message choices: podcastchoices.com/adchoicesNPR Privacy Policy
基因编辑是人类的生命奇迹还是潘多拉魔盒？2018年，贺建奎以“免疫艾滋病”为名，编辑了一对双胞胎的CCR5基因，引发了全球科学界的强烈谴责与伦理声讨。而在今年年初，美国婴儿KJ接受了全球首例个性化CRISPR基因编辑疗法，这一尝试被视作“医学奇迹”。同是基因编辑技术，为何两者引发的价值评判截然相反？基因治疗的伦理边界究竟何在？展望未来，基因科技是否会成为富人专属？又将颠覆哪些领域？本期播客邀请到两位相关领域专家，从KJ的案例到全球基因编辑和治疗的前沿进展，他们将带领我们一同探索这场正在重塑医学未来的生命技术突破。-嘉宾-周叶斌Y博，美国阿拉巴马大学伯明翰分校遗传学博士王志荣，美国乔治城大学生物学博士莉莉安，《IQ老友说》主播-精华highlight-01:43 基因编辑如何帮助新生儿KJ“逆天改命”？05:04 从玉米到人类，基因编辑是“蜜糖”还是“砒霜”？07:26 基因治疗已经在CAR-T疗法、血友病、镰状细胞病等多个领域得到应用10:45 体细胞vs.生殖细胞，贺建奎编辑生殖细胞可能会打开“潘多拉的魔盒”16:29 通过现有技术而非基因编辑，HIV感染者也能拥有一个健康的后代20:22 嵌合体是怎样形成的？基因编辑过程中“脱靶”会导致什么后果？23:44 华人科学家张锋对CRISPR-Cas9的应用是基因编辑领域的一项重大突破27:28 CRISPR技术的出现为基因编辑提供了“万能剪刀”的模板29:41 如何区分基因治疗与基因编辑？32:30 从转基因食品到CRISPR-Cas，基因编辑技术是如何演变的？36:15 CRISPR是“瞄准镜”，Cas9则是“枪”，两者缺一不可41:05 目前的基因编辑技术仅适用于小部分能够产生蛋白质的编码基因44:20 高治疗费用+低容错率=医药行业在基因治疗方面有所退潮51:34 哪些情形下，是更为适合做基因治疗的？52:58 基因编辑“完美婴儿”目前的技术尚无法实现57:54如何看待这种担心：基因编辑技术恐将成为富人的特权，加剧阶级分化*本节目仅做信息交流之目的，嘉宾观点不代表任何公司立场- 制作团队 -沈旸、王心影、束菲滢- IQ老友说 -这是一档IQVIA艾昆纬的谈话类播客节目，聚焦医疗行业，网罗多元视角，激发观点碰撞，探寻新鲜洞见，让我们一起在轻松话聊的氛围中，老友说医疗，有趣又有料！- 关于IQVIA -IQVIA艾昆纬（纽交所代码：IQV）是全球领先的专注生命科学领域的高级分析、技术解决方案和临床研究服务供应商。IQVIA利用深入分析、前沿技术、大数据资源和广泛领域的专业知识，智能连接医疗生态的各个环节。IQVIA Connected Intelligence快速敏锐地为客户提供强大的数据洞察，帮助客户加速创新医疗的临床开发和商业化进程，以更好的医疗成果惠及患者。IQVIA拥有约88,000名员工，足迹遍布100多个国家/地区。IQVIA帮助生物科技、医疗器械、制药公司、医学研究者、政府机关、支付方以及其他医疗利益相关方，获得对疾病、人类行为和科技进步更深入的理解，共同朝着治愈各类疾病的方向迈进。- 互动方式 -关注IQVIA艾昆纬微信公众号，获取更多独家洞察！- 本节目由IQVIA出品，JustPod制作发行 -
Food Travel USA with Elizabeth DoughertyAlbum: The TRUTH About Food and Travel 080225 Episode #: 1955 Original Broadcast Date: 08/02/2025 Gene editing isn't coming — it's already here. And you won't be asked for consent. In this explosive segment, Elizabeth unpacks the growing push to normalize editing human DNA using synthetic tools like CRISPR and RNA-based interventions. What was once science fiction is now being pitched as “healthcare innovation,” but the implications are far more sinister. Governments and private companies are quietly rolling out gene-altering technologies without long-term studies, and without telling you what the risks are. Elizabeth argues this isn't just a biotech debate — it's a battle for human autonomy. If we don't resist now, we'll wake up in a future where your biology is editable... by someone else. FOOD TRAVEL USA FAST FACTS About the Show Using the chassis of a food and travel show, Elizabeth Dougherty has carved out her own lane in Talk Radio, covering the contamination of the food supply and the travel restrictions placed upon us by an overreaching government. The show also covers data protection, self-sufficiency, and homesteading-related topics to help protect us from this evil, corrupt system. With Elizabeth as the host, the show has a very different sound from the typical male-oriented talk radio. In combination with terrestrial stations that carry the show, we reach people who don't normally listen to politically-driven talk radio. In addition to the LIVE FEED of the show on Saturday afternoons from 5pm–7pm (Eastern) / 2pm–4pm (Pacific), we produce and distribute a dozen podcast segments each week. Website & Social Media Website: FoodTravelUSA.com Social Media: Facebook | X (formerly Twitter) | Truth Social | YouTube Broadcast Details Live Broadcast: Saturday, 5 PM Listen Anytime Production Team Executive Producer: Michael Serio Email: FoodTravelUSA@proton.me
Dr. Hoffman continues his conversation with Zen Honeycutt, founder and executive director of Moms Across America and author of “Unstoppable: Transforming Sickness and Struggle into Triumph, Empowerment and a Celebration of Community.”
Zen Honeycutt, founder and executive director of Moms Across America and author of “Unstoppable: Transforming Sickness and Struggle into Triumph, Empowerment and a Celebration of Community,” details the origins and mission of the nonprofit organization aimed at transforming the food supply and improving health by reducing chemicals in food, water, and air. Highlighting the impact of grassroots activism, Honeycutt illustrates how the organization's initiatives have driven significant awareness and policy changes, including advances in organic food consumption and labeling. She also touches on the challenges posed by government and corporate influences, advocating for policies that put children's health and safety first. Honeycutt emphasizes the importance of individual actions and community involvement in creating a healthier future.
Künstliche Intelligenz und humanoide Roboter revolutionieren nahezu jeden Lebensbereich – auch das Gesundheitswesen. Doch was bedeutet das für die Zukunft der Medizin? Können Maschinen bessere Ärzte sein als Menschen?In dieser Folge des ERCM Medizin Podcasts sprechen wir mit Prof. Dr. Stefan Gröner, Zukunftsforscher, KI-Experte und Professor für digitales Management an der Hochschule Fresenius. Er gibt faszinierende Einblick in aktuelle Entwicklungen der medizinischen Robotik und deren Einsatz in Krankenhäusern und Pflegeeinrichtungen weltweit.Prof. Dr. Gröner erklärt, welche völlig neuen Möglichkeiten die Mensch-Maschine-Interaktion eröffnet und wie Künstliche Intelligenz das Arzt-Patienten-Verhältnis verändert. Besonders spannend: Können Roboter so etwas wie echte Gefühle entwickeln – oder nur perfekt simulieren?Wir diskutieren Nano-Roboter in der Krebstherapie, die Grenzen autonomer medizinischer Entscheidungen, ethische Fragen sowie Europas Wettbewerbsfähigkeit im Spannungsfeld zwischen Innovationskraft und Regulierung. Stefan Gröner zeigt, wie Kooperationen zwischen Mensch und Maschine gelingen können, welche menschlichen Fähigkeiten künftig besonders wertvoll sind – und warum unser Bildungssystem überdacht werden muss. Seine These: „Es gibt kein Berufsbild, wo KI nicht eine dramatische Veränderung herbeiführen wird.“Ein aufschlussreiches Gespräch über die Zukunft der Medizin, gesellschaftliche Herausforderungen und die entscheidende Frage: Sind wir bereit für eine Welt, in der Roboter unsere Partner werden?Zentrale Themen:- Aktuelle Fortschritte in der humanoiden Robotik und deren Einsatz in der Medizin- Mensch-Roboter-Interaktion: Können Maschinen bereits Empathie simulieren?- Pflege der Zukunft: Roboter als Entlastung für Pflegekräfte- Nano-Robotik: Mikroskopische Helfer in der Krebstherapie- Berufswandel: Welche Jobs wird die KI ersetzen?- Gesellschaftliche Herausforderungen: Von Massenarbeitslosigkeit bis zum BildungswandelDer ERCM Medizin Podcast – Social & Webseite:Instagram: @ercm.podcastTikTok: @ercm.podcastWebseite: www.erc-munich.comKontakt: podcast@erc-munich.comProf. Dr. Stefan Gröner:Webseite: https://stefan-groener.de/LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/dr-stefan-gr%C3%B6ner-7420b1b4/?original_referer=https%3A%2F%2Fwww%2Egoogle%2Ecom%2F&originalSubdomain=deZeitangaben:00:00 - Einführung: Roboter in der Medizin - Partner oder Konkurrenten?01:13 - Prof. Gröners Weg: Von Medien zur KI-Forschung04:04 - Lebenslanges Lernen im KI-Zeitalter07:26 - Deepfakes und Informationsqualität in der Medizin10:38 - Fortschritte in der KI-gesteuerten Robotik der letzten Jahre15:00 - Medizinische Robotik: Japan und China als Vorreiter21:26 - Mensch-Roboter-Interaktion: Können Roboter Empathie simulieren?25:28 - Therapie-Roboter in der Altenpflege und Demenzbetreuung29:55 - Nano-Robotik: Zielgerichtete Medikamentenabgabe33:08 - Neurolink: Gedanken lesen in naher Zukunft?37:03 - CRISPR und KI-gestützte Medikamentenentwicklung42:53 - Ethik: Sollen Maschinen medizinische Entscheidungen treffen?47:28 - EU-Regulierung vs. Innovation: Wettbewerbsnachteil?54:40 - Geoffrey Hinton warnt vor Massenarbeitslosigkeit1:03:38 - Bildungssystem: Medizinstudium muss sich radikal ändern1:06:25 - Abschluss: Erfolgreiche Mensch-Maschine-Kollaboration#KIMedizin #HumanoideRoboter #MedizinZukunft #RoboterÄrzte #Gesundheitswesen #DigitaleTherapie #MedizinischeEthik #KIRevolution
* Of Pangolins and Protection: Fred and Ryan review the latest Creation Magazine, starting with the pangolin! Its an armored, anteater-like creature with keratin scales and unique defensive design. Evolutionists once linked it to armadillos, but genetic studies disproved the connection, forcing an appeal to convergent evolution—a recurring "rescue device" for failing Darwinian models. * Shark Skin and Airplanes: From ocean to air, shark skin's ridged structure reduces drag. Engineers have reverse-engineered this feature for airplane coatings and banned swimsuits. Like past guest Dr. Michael Egnor noted, reverse engineering proves intentional design. * A Forest from a Warmer Past: Global warming headlines falter as ancient warm-climate forests are discovered under melting snow in Wyoming. * Dawkins vs. Dawkins: Irony strikes as atheist icon Richard Dawkins clashes with the Freedom From Religion Foundation over gender ideology. Dawkins is now censored for insisting humans can't change biological sex. As Romans 1 says, suppressing truth leads to folly. * Life on Bennu? Not So Fast: NASA's return samples from asteroid Bennu contain racemic amino acids—both left and right-handed—suggesting death, not life. Fred and Ryan highlight the missed opportunity by CMI to support the Hydroplate Theory, which better explains why Earth-like materials (like serpentinite) are found in space. * Dire Wolves and DNA: A biotech firm claims to have "de-extincted" the Ice Age dire wolf using CRISPR and gray wolf DNA. But critics argue it's just a genetically engineered look-alike. The ethics—and science fiction parallels—raise valid concerns about modern tinkering with life. * Ant Eyes and Imaging Breakthroughs: Desert ants' compound eyes detect polarized light to navigate featureless landscapes. Chinese scientists copied this tech to enhance imaging—enabling detection of cancer cells without staining. Once again, man learns from the Master Engineer.
* Of Pangolins and Protection: Fred and Ryan review the latest Creation Magazine, starting with the pangolin! Its an armored, anteater-like creature with keratin scales and unique defensive design. Evolutionists once linked it to armadillos, but genetic studies disproved the connection, forcing an appeal to convergent evolution—a recurring "rescue device" for failing Darwinian models. * Shark Skin and Airplanes: From ocean to air, shark skin's ridged structure reduces drag. Engineers have reverse-engineered this feature for airplane coatings and banned swimsuits. Like past guest Dr. Michael Egnor noted, reverse engineering proves intentional design. * A Forest from a Warmer Past: Global warming headlines falter as ancient warm-climate forests are discovered under melting snow in Wyoming. * Dawkins vs. Dawkins: Irony strikes as atheist icon Richard Dawkins clashes with the Freedom From Religion Foundation over gender ideology. Dawkins is now censored for insisting humans can't change biological sex. As Romans 1 says, suppressing truth leads to folly. * Life on Bennu? Not So Fast: NASA's return samples from asteroid Bennu contain racemic amino acids—both left and right-handed—suggesting death, not life. Fred and Ryan highlight the missed opportunity by CMI to support the Hydroplate Theory, which better explains why Earth-like materials (like serpentinite) are found in space. * Dire Wolves and DNA: A biotech firm claims to have "de-extincted" the Ice Age dire wolf using CRISPR and gray wolf DNA. But critics argue it's just a genetically engineered look-alike. The ethics—and science fiction parallels—raise valid concerns about modern tinkering with life. * Ant Eyes and Imaging Breakthroughs: Desert ants' compound eyes detect polarized light to navigate featureless landscapes. Chinese scientists copied this tech to enhance imaging—enabling detection of cancer cells without staining. Once again, man learns from the Master Engineer.
Trade Deadline Day is here Guest: Allison Gifford, President of Clear Strategies Weekly Cecchini Check-In Guest: Reggie Cecchini, Washington Correspondent for Global News Is our healthcare data property of the United States? Guest: Michael Geist, Canada Research Chair in Internet and E-commerce Law What is CRISPR? Guest: Akshay Sharma, Associate Member Pediatric Bone Marrow Transplantation and Cellular Therapy, St. Jude Children's Research Hospital, Memphis. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices
What is CRISPR? Guest: Akshay Sharma, Associate Member Pediatric Bone Marrow Transplantation and Cellular Therapy, St. Jude Children's Research Hospital, Memphis. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices
When we think about gene editing, the conversation often feels trapped between scientific journals and ethical debates too complex for public forums. In this episode, I spoke with Neal Baer, a rare voice who bridges both worlds. Known to many as an award-winning television showrunner for series like ER, Law & Order SVU, and Designated Survivor, Neal is also a Harvard-trained physician and co-director of the Media, Medicine, and Health program at Harvard Medical School. His latest project brings all of that experience together in a new collection of essays that explores the promise and peril of CRISPR gene-editing technology. Neal takes us on a journey that begins with his time as a medical resident treating a young sickle cell patient, and leads to a much broader conversation about science, ethics, and storytelling. We discuss how CRISPR is already being used to cure diseases like sickle cell, and how companies are now exploring gene edits that promise permanent reductions in cholesterol. But the real power of this discussion is not just in what CRISPR can do, but in what we still don't fully understand about its long-term impact. The conversation moves into difficult territory—unintended mutations, germline editing, the risk of pathologizing human diversity, and the slippery slope of “enhancement” where only those with access can benefit. Neal raises critical questions about the social cost of deciding which conditions should be “fixed” and who gets to make that call. We also dive into the lack of political and regulatory oversight, and why a global framework, not just scientific advancement, is urgently needed. This episode offers a powerful reminder that the future of CRISPR shouldn't be left solely to researchers or startups. It demands wide engagement, from classrooms to policymaking, and inclusive voices that challenge how we define progress. How should we decide what counts as improvement when the very definition of being human is at stake?
Broadcasting live from the heart of Baltic, South Dakota, this episode of What's On Your Mind hits the airwaves from the annual PhD Field Day, hosted by the Hefty Seed Company. Join Scott Hennen and Dean Wysocki as they meet farmers, industry leaders, and meteorologists to talk cutting-edge agtech, long-range weather forecasting, biologicals, education, and the now-infamous “great jeans” ad controversy that has social media buzzing. This is ag radio at its finest—informative, unfiltered, and occasionally hilariously off-track (mini donuts, anyone?). Whether you farm or just love good radio, this episode has something for you. ⏱️ Standout Moments & Timestamps: [00:50] – “Live from Baltic!” — Broadcasting setup and Field Day preview. [02:07] – F-35 crash and viral fighter jet video from Spain
In this episode, Lyell K. Jones Jr, MD, FAAN, speaks with Michael S. Okun, MD, FAAN, who served as the guest editor of the August 2025 Movement Disorders issue. They provide a preview of the issue, which publishes on August 1, 2025. Dr. Jones is the editor-in-chief of Continuum: Lifelong Learning in Neurology® and is a professor of neurology at Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minnesota. Dr. Okun is the director at Norman Fixel Institute for Neurological Diseases and distinguished professor of neurology at University of Florida in Gainesville, Florida. Additional Resources Read the issue: continuum.aan.com Subscribe to Continuum®: shop.lww.com/Continuum Continuum® Aloud (verbatim audio-book style recordings of articles available only to Continuum® subscribers): continpub.com/Aloud More about the American Academy of Neurology: aan.com Social Media facebook.com/continuumcme @ContinuumAAN Host: @LyellJ Guest: @MichaelOkun Full episode transcript available here: Dr Jones: Our ability to move through the world is one of the essential functions of our nervous system. Gross movements like walking ranging down to fine movements with our eyes and our hands, our ability to create and coordinate movement is something many of us take for granted. So what do we do when those movements stop working as we intend? Today I have the opportunity to speak with one of the world's leading experts on movement disorders, Dr Michael Okun, about the latest issue of Continuum on Movement Disorders. Dr Jones: This is Dr Lyell Jones, Editor-in-Chief of Continuum. Thank you for listening to Continuum Audio. Be sure to visit the links in the episode notes for information about subscribing to the journal, listening to verbatim recordings of the articles, and exclusive access to interviews not featured on the podcast. Dr Jones: This is Dr Lyle Jones, Editor-in-Chief of Continuum: Lifelong Learning in Neurology. Today, I'm interviewing Dr Michael Okun, who is Continuum's guest editor for our latest issue on movement disorders. Dr Okun is the Adelaide Lackner Distinguished Professor of Neurology at the University of Florida in Gainesville, where he's also the director of the Norman Fixel Institute for Neurological Diseases. Dr Okun, welcome, and thank you for joining us today. Why don't you introduce yourselves to our listeners? Dr Okun: It's great to be here today. And I'm a neurologist. Everybody who knows me knows I'm pretty simple. I believe the patient's the sun and we should always orbit around the person with disease, and so that's how I look at my practice. And I know we always participate in a lot of research, and I've got a research lab and all those things. But to me, it's always the patients and the families first. So, it'll be great to have that discussion today. Dr Jones: Yeah, thank you for that, Dr Oaken. Obviously, movement disorders is a huge part of our field of neurology. There are many highly prevalent conditions that fit into this category that most of our listeners will be familiar with: idiopathic Parkinson's disease, essential tremor, tic disorders and so on. And having worked with trainees for a long time, it's one of the areas that I see a lot of trainees gravitate to movement disorders. And I think it's in part because of the prevalence; I think it's in part because of the diversity of the specialty with treatment options and DBS and Botox. But it's also the centrality of the neurologic exam, right? That's- the clinical examination of the patient is so fundamental. And we'll cover a lot of topics today with some questions that I have for you about biomarkers and new developments in the field. But is that your sense too, that people are drawn to just the old-fashioned, essential focus on the neurologic encounter and the neurologic exam? Dr Okun: I believe that is one of the draws to the field of movement. I think that you have neurologists from all over the world that are really interested and fascinated with what things look like. And when you see something that's a little bit, you know, off the normal road or off the normal beaten path… and we are always curious. And so, I got into movement disorders, I think, accidentally; I think even as a child, I was looking at people who had abnormal movements and tremors and I was very fascinated as to why those things happened and what's going on in the brain. And, you know, what are the symptoms and the signs. And then later on, even as my own career developed, that black bag was so great as a neurologist. I mean, it makes us so much more powerful than any of the other clinicians---at least in my biased opinion---out on the wards and out in the clinic. And, you know, knowing the signs and the symptoms, knowing how to do a neurological examination and really walking through the phenomenology, what people look like, you know, which is different than the geno- you know, the genotypes, what the genes are. What people look like is so much more important as clinicians. And so, I think that movement disorders is just the specialty for that, at least in my opinion. Dr Jones: And it helps bring it back to the patient. And that's something that I saw coming through the articles in this issue. And let's get right to it. You've had a chance to review all these articles on all these different topics across the entire field of movement disorders. As you look at that survey of the field, Dr Okun, what do you think is the most exciting recent development for patients with movement disorders? Dr Okun: I think that when you look across all of the different specialties, what you're seeing is a shift. And the shift is that, you know, a lot of people used to talk in our generation about neurology being one of these “diagnose and adios” specialties. You make the diagnosis and there's nothing that you can do, you know, about these diseases. And boy, that has changed. I mean, we have really blown it out of the water. And when you look at the topics and what people are writing about now and the Continuum issue, and we compare that the last several Continuum issues on movement disorders, we just keep accumulating a knowledge base about what these things look like and how we can treat them. And when we start thinking about, you know, all of the emergence of the autoimmune disorders and identifying the right one and getting something that's quite treatable. Back in my day, and in your day, Lyle, we saw these things and we didn't know what they were. And now we have antibodies, now we can identify them, we can pin them down, and we can treat many of them and really change people's lives. And so, I'm really impressed at what I see in changes in identification of autoimmune disorders, of channelopathies and some of the more rare things, but I'm also impressed with just the fundamental principles of how we're teaching people to be better clinicians in diseases like Parkinson's, Huntington's, ataxia, and Tourette. And so, my enthusiasm for this issue of Continuum is both on, you know, the cutting edge of what we're seeing based on the identification on our exams, what we can do for these people, but also the emergence of how we're shifting and providing much better care across a continuum for folks with basal ganglia diseases. Dr Jones: Yeah, I appreciate that perspective, Dr Okun. One of the common themes that I saw in the issue was with these new developments, right, when you have new tools like new diagnostic biomarker tools, is the question of if and when and how to integrate those into daily clinical practice, right? So, we've had imaging biomarkers for a while, DAT scans, etc. For patients with idiopathic Parkinson disease, one of the things that I hear a lot of discussion and controversy about are the seed amplification assays as diagnostic biomarkers. What can you tell us about those? Are those ready for routine clinical use yet? Dr Okun: I think the main bottom-line point for folks that are out there trying to practice neurology, either in general clinics or even in specialty clinics, is to know that there is this movement toward, can we biologically classify a disease? One of the things that has, you know, really accelerated that effort has been the development of these seed amplification assays, which---in short for people who are listening---are basically, we “shake and bake” these things. You know? We shake them for like 20 hours and we use these prionlike proteins, and we learn from diseases like prion disease how to kind of tag these things and then see, do they have degenerative properties? And in the case of Parkinson's disease, we're able to do this with synuclein. That is the idea of a seed amplification assay. We're able to use this to see, hey, is there synuclein present or not in this sample? And people are looking at things like cerebrospinal fluid, they're looking at things like blood and saliva, and they're finding it. The challenge here is that, remember- and one of the things that's great about this issue of Continuum is, remember, there are a whole bunch of different synucleinopathies. So, Dr Jones, it isn't just Parkinson's disease. So, you've got Parkinson's disease, you've got Lewy body, you know, and dementia with Lewy bodies. You've got, you know, multiple system atrophy is within that synucleinopathy, you know, group primary autonomic failure… so not just Parkinson's disease. And so, I think we have to tap the brakes as clinicians and just say, we are where we are. We are moving in that direction. And remember that a seed amplification assay gives you some information, but it doesn't give you all the information. It doesn't forgive you looking at a person over time, examining them in your clinic, seeing how they progress, seeing their response to dopamine- and by the way, several of these genes that are associated with Parkinson; and there's, you know, less than 20% of Parkinson is genetic, but several of these genes, in a solid third---and in some cases, in some series, even more---miss the synuclein assay, misses, you know, the presence of a disease like Parkinson's disease. And so, we have to be careful in how we interpret it. And I think we're more likely to see over time a gemish: we're going to smush together all this information. We're going to get better with MRIs. And so, we're actually doing much better with MRIs and AI-based intelligence. We've got DAT scans, we've got synuclein assays. But more than anything, everybody listening out there, you can still examine the person and examine them over time and see how they do over time and see how they do with dopamine. And that is still a really, really solid way to do this. The synuclein assays are probably going to be ready for prime time more in choosing and enriching clinical trials populations first. And you know, we're probably 5, 10 years behind where Alzheimer's is right now. So, we'll get there at some point, but it's not going to be a silver bullet. I think we're looking at these are going to be things that are going to be interpreted in the context for a clinician of our examination and in the context of where the field is and what you're trying to use the information for. Dr Jones: Thank you for that. And I think that's the general gestalt I got from the articles and what I hear from my colleagues. And I think we've seen this in other domains of neurology, right? We have the specificity and sensitivity issues with the biomarkers, but we also have the high prevalence of copathology, right? People can have multiple different neurodegenerative problems, and I think it gets back to that clinical context, like you said, following the patient longitudinally. That was a theme that came out in the idiopathic Parkinson disease article. And while we're on Parkinson disease, you know, the first description of that was what, more than two hundred years ago. And I think we're still thinking about the pathophysiology of that disorder. We understand risk factors, and I think many of our listeners would be familiar with those. But as far as the actual cause, you know, there's been discussion in recent years about, is there a role of the gut microbiome? Is this a prionopathic disorder? What's your take on all of that? Dr Okun: Yeah, so it's a great question. It's a super-hot area right now of Parkinson. And I kind of take this, you know, apart in a couple of different ways. First of all, when we think about Parkinson disease, we have to think upstream. Like, what are the cause and causes? Okay? So, Parkinson is not one disease, okay? And even within the genes, there's a bunch of different genes that cause it. But then we have to look and say, well, if that's less than 20% depending on who's counting, then 80% don't have a single piece of DNA that's closely associated with this syndrome. And so, what are we missing with environment and other factors? We need to understand not what happens at the end of the process, not necessarily when synuclein is clumping- and by the way, there's a lot of synuclein in the brains normally, and there's a lot of Tau in people's brains who have Parkinson as well. We don't know what we don't know, Dr Jones. And so when we begin to think about this disease, we've got to look upstream. We've got to start to think, where do things really start? Okay? We've got to stop looking at it as probably a single disease or disorder, and it's a circuit disorder. And then as we begin to develop and follow people along that pathway and continuum, we're going to realize that it's not a one-size-fits-all equation when we're trying to look at Parkinson. By the way, for people listening, we only spend two to three cents out of every dollar on prevention. Wouldn't prevention be the best cure, right? Like, if we were thinking about this disease. And so that's something that we should be, you know, thinking about. And then the other is the Global Burden of Disease study. You know, when we wrote about this in a book called Ending Parkinson's Disease, it looked like Parkinson's was going to double by 2035. The new numbers tell us it's almost double to the level that we expected in 2035 in this last series of numbers. So, it's actually growing much faster. We have to ask why? Why is it growing faster? And then we have lots of folks, and even within these issues here within Continuum, people are beginning to talk about maybe these environmental things that might be blind spots. Is it starting in our nose? Is it starting in our gut? And then we get to the gut question. And the gut question is, if we look at the microbiomes of people with Parkinson, there does seem to be, in a group of folks with Parkinson, a Parkinson microbiome. Not in everyone, but if you look at it in composite, there seems to be some clues there. We see changes in Lactobacillus, we see some bacteria going up that are good, some bacteria going down, you know, that are bad. And we see flipping around, and that can change as we put people on probiotics and we try to do fecal microbiota transplantations- which, by the way, the data so far has not been positive in Parkinson's. Doesn't mean we might not get there at some point, but I think the main point here is that as we move into the AI generation, there are just millions and millions and millions of organisms within your gut. And it's going to take more than just our eyes and just our regular arithmetic. You and I probably know how to do arithmetic really well, but this is, like, going to be a much bigger problem for computers that are way smarter than our brains to start to look and say, well, we see the bacteria is up here. That's a good bacteria, that's a good thing or it's down with this bacteria or this phage or there's a relationship or proportion that's changing. And so, we're not quite there. And so, I always tell people---and you know, we talk about the sum in the issue---microbiomes aren't quite ready for prime time yet. And so be careful, because you could tweak the system and you might actually end up worse than before you started. So, we don't know what we don't know on this issue. Dr Jones: And that's a great point. And one of the themes they're reading between the lines is, we will continue to work on understanding the bio-pathophysiology, but we can't wait until that day to start managing the risk factors and treating patients, which I think is a good point. And if we pivot to treatment here a little bit, you know, one of the exciting areas of movement disorders---and really neurology broadly, I think movement disorders has led the field in many ways---is bioelectronic therapy, or what one of my colleagues taught me is “electroceutical therapy”, which I think is a wonderful term. Dr Okun, when our listeners are hearing about the latest in deep brain stimulation in patients who have movement disorders, what should they know? What are the latest developments in that area with devices? Dr Okun: Yeah. So, they should know that things are moving rapidly in the field of putting electricity into the brain. And we're way past the era where we thought putting a little bit of electricity was snake oil. We know we can actually drive these circuits, and we know that many of these disorders---and actually, probably all of the disorders within this issue of Continuum---are all circuit disorders. And so, you can drive the circuit by modulating the circuit. And it's turned out to be quite robust with therapies like deep brain stimulation. Now, we're seeing uses of deep brain stimulation across multiple of these disorders now. So, for example, you may think of it in Parkinson's disease, but now we're also seeing people use it to help in cases where you need to palliate very severe and bothersome chorea and Huntington's disease, we're seeing it move along in Tourette syndrome. We of course have seen this for various hyperkinetic disorders and dystonias. And so, the main thing for clinicians to realize when dealing with neuromodulation is, take a deep breath because it can be overwhelming. We have a lot of different devices in the marketplace and no matter how many different devices we have in the marketplace, the most important thing is that we get the leads. You know, where we're stimulating into the right location. It's like real estate: location, location, location, whether you've got a lead that can steer left, right, up, down and do all of these things. Second, if you're feeling overwhelmed because there are so many devices and so many settings, especially as we put these leads in and they have all sorts of different, you know, nodes on them and you can steer this way and that way, you are not alone. Everybody is feeling that way now. And we're beginning to see AI solutions to that that are going to merge together with imaging, and then we're moving toward an era of, you know, should I say things like robotic programming, where it's going to be actually so complicated as we move forward that we're going to have to automate these systems. There's no way to get this and scale this for all of the locales within the United States, but within the entire world of people that need these types of devices and these therapies. And so, it's moving rapidly. It's overwhelming. The most important thing is choosing the right person. Okay? For this, with multidisciplinary teams, getting the lead in the right place. And then all these other little bells and whistles, they're like sculpting. So, if you think of a sculpture, you kind of get that sculpture almost there. You know, those little adds are helping to maybe make the eyes come out a little more or the facial expression a little bit better. There's little bits of sculpting. But if you're feeling overwhelmed by it, everybody is. And then also remember that we're starting to move towards some trials here that are in their early stages. And a lot of times when we start, we need more failures to get to our successes. So, we're seeing trials of people looking at, like, oligo therapies and protein therapies. We're seeing CRISPR gene therapies in the laboratory. And we should have a zero tolerance for errors with CRISPR, okay? we still have issues with CRISPR in the laboratory and which ones we apply it to and with animals. But it's still pretty exciting when we're starting to see some of these therapies move forward. We're going to see gene therapies, and then the other thing we're going to see are nano-therapies. And remember, smaller can be better. It can slip across the blood brain barrier, you have very good surface area-to-volume ratios, and we can uncage drugs by shining things like focused ultrasound beams or magnets or heat onto these particles to turn them on or off. And so, we're seeing a great change in the field there. And then also, I should mention: pumps are coming and they're here. We're getting pumps like we have for diabetes and neurology. It's very exciting. It's going to be overwhelming as everybody tries to learn how to do this. So again, if you're feeling overwhelmed, so am I. Okay? But you know, pumps underneath the skin for dopamine, pumps underneath the skin for apomorphine. And that may apply to other disorders and not just Parkinson as we move along, what we put into those therapies. So, we're seeing that age come forward. And then making lesions from outside the brain with focused ultrasound, we're starting to get better at that. Precision is less coming from outside the brain; complications are also less. And as we learn how to do that better, that also can provide more options for folks. So, a lot of things to read about in this issue of Continuum and a lot of really interesting and beyond, I would say, you know, the horizon as to where we're headed. Dr Jones: Thank you for that. And it is a lot. It can be overwhelming, which I guess is maybe a good reason to read the issue, right? I think that's a great place to end and encourage our listeners to pick up the issue. And Dr Okun, I want to thank you for joining us today. Thank you for such a great discussion on movement disorders. I learned a lot. I'm sure our listeners will as well, given the importance of the topic, your leadership in the field over many years. I'm grateful that you have put this issue together. So, thank you. And you're a busy person. I don't know how we talked you into doing this, but I'm really glad that we did. Dr Okun: Well, it's been my honor. And I just want to point out that the whole authorship panel that agreed to write these articles, they did all the work. I'm just a talking head here, you know, telling you what they did, but they're writing, and the people that are in the field are really, you know, leading and helping us to understand, and have really put it together in a way that's kind of helped us to be better clinicians and to impact more lives. So, I want to thank the group of authors, and thank you, Dr Jones. Dr Jones: Again, we've been speaking with Dr Michael Okun, guest editor of Continuum's most recent issue on movement disorders. Please check it out. And thank you to our listeners for joining today. Dr Monteith: This is Dr Teshamae Monteith, Associate Editor of Continuum Audio. If you've enjoyed this episode, you'll love the journal, which is full of in-depth and clinically relevant information important for neurology practitioners. Use the link in the episode notes to learn more and subscribe. Thank you for listening to Continuum Audio.
Frank Lavin talks with Olaf Groth, the author of “The Great Remobilization” and discusses the six major trends that will drive decisions in our personal lives, government policies, and business decision-making: 1. Covid and CRISPR; 2. Cognitive Technologies; 3. Crypto and distributed power; 4. Cyber security; 5. Climate Change; 6. China. Olaf moves on to discuss how corporations and governments should respond to meet – and perhaps even benefit from – these challenges. Olaf also suggests reading Ezra Klein's “Abundance” and the work of our previous guest, “Apple in China” by Patrick McGee.
In this essential episode of Parallax, Dr Ankur Kalra is joined by Dr Carolyn Ho, Professor of Medicine at Harvard Medical School and Medical Director of the Cardiovascular Genetics Program at Brigham and Women's Hospital, for a comprehensive discussion on how genetic testing is reshaping hypertrophic cardiomyopathy management. The conversation explores the VANISH HCM trial results, which showed that valsartan can slow disease progression in young, asymptomatic individuals with early sarcomeric HCM. Dr Ho discusses how this evidence influenced the 2024 HCM guidelines and created new opportunities for disease-modifying therapy before clinical symptoms appear. The episode also examines emerging gene-based therapeutics, from current adeno-associated virus approaches to future CRISPR technologies that could address the underlying genetic causes of HCM. Dr Ho addresses practical considerations for clinicians, including when to initiate genetic testing, how to manage family screening, and the promise of AI-assisted screening tools. The discussion highlights both current therapeutic options and the evolving landscape of precision medicine in inherited cardiovascular disease. Questions and comments can be sent to "podcast@radcliffe-group.com" and may be answered by Ankur in the next episode. Host: @AnkurKalraMD and produced by: @RadcliffeCardio Parallax is Ranked in the Top 100 Health Science Podcasts (#48) by Million Podcasts.
The line between groundbreaking innovation and controversial ownership blurs when scientists begin creating life in laboratories. What happens when your invention isn't just a device or chemical formula, but a living, breathing, self-replicating organism that refuses to stay contained within traditional legal boundaries?Synthetic biology—the field where engineering meets genetics—has created a perfect storm for intellectual property law. Scientists can now design cells like software, program bacteria to clean oil spills, and edit genes with CRISPR technology. But who owns these inventions when they start reproducing themselves?From the landmark 1980 Chakrabarty decision that first allowed patents on genetically modified bacteria to the controversial Myriad Genetics case that determined human genes cannot be patented, we explore the fascinating legal battles that shaped biotech innovation. We journey through courtrooms worldwide where judges grappled with unprecedented questions: Can you patent a cloned sheep? Should farmers be allowed to replant patented seeds? Does traditional knowledge about medicinal plants deserve protection from corporate "biopiracy"?The legal landscape continues evolving, with a brand new WIPO treaty requiring disclosure of genetic resources' origins in patent applications. This represents a major shift toward transparency and fairness, especially for communities whose biodiversity and traditional knowledge have contributed to modern innovations.Whether you're a scientist, lawyer, entrepreneur, or simply curious about the legal frameworks governing emerging technologies, this episode offers crucial insights into how intellectual property systems are adapting to the brave new world where the line between invention and life itself becomes increasingly blurred. Subscribe to Intangiblia for more explorations of the fascinating intersection of law, technology, and innovation.Send us a text
In today's OncClub episode, we had the pleasure of speaking with Branden Moriarity, PhD; and Beau Webber, PhD, about a study evaluating neoantigen-reactive CISH knockout tumor-infiltrating lymphocyte (TIL) therapy in patients with metastatic gastrointestinal cancers. Dr Moriarity is an associate professor in the Division of Pediatric Hematology/Oncology, co-director of the Center for Genome Engineering and the Genome Engineering Shared Resource (GESR), and a member of the Center for Genome Engineering at the University of Minnesota in Minneapolis, where he is also a faculty member in the Department of Pediatrics; the Microbiology, Immunology and Cancer Biology (MICaB) PhD Graduate Program; the PhD Program in Molecular, Cellular, Developmental Biology and Genetics; the Cellular and Molecular Biology (CMB) Graduate Program, and the Masters Program in Stem Cell Biology. He is also a member of the Stem Cell Institute at the Masonic Cancer Center. Dr Webber is an associate professor in the Division of Pediatric Hematology/Oncology, co-director of the GESR, and a member of the Stem Cell Institute at the University of Minnesota Medical School, where he is also a faculty member in the Department of Pediatrics, the Molecular Pharmacology & Therapeutics Graduate Program, and the Masters Program in Stem Cell Biology. He is also a member of the Masonic Cancer Center. In our exclusive interview, Drs Moriarity and Webber discussed how targeting the CISH gene using CRISPR enhances T-cell function, key safety and efficacy findings from this study in 12 patients, and future research efforts that may focus on reducing manufacturing time and cost, as well as enhancing T-cell resilience. Check out the full OncClub subseries to see additional findings and insights from this research!
La revolución de la biología sintética ha llegado para quedarse, trayendo consigo desafíos legales sin precedentes. En este apasionante viaje a través de los tribunales más importantes del mundo, desentrañamos cómo la humanidad está intentando regular lo que antes parecía imposible: la creación y posesión de formas de vida diseñadas.Desde el histórico caso Diamond v. Chakravarti que por primera vez permitió patentar organismos vivos, hasta las batallas contemporáneas por la tecnología CRISPR, cada sentencia ha redefinido nuestra relación con la naturaleza y la innovación. Exploramos cómo diferentes países responden a preguntas fundamentales: ¿Puede patentarse un ratón diseñado para desarrollar cáncer? ¿Son los genes humanos propiedad privada? ¿Qué sucede cuando una invención patentada se reproduce por sí misma?No solo analizamos la legalidad, sino también la ética detrás de estas decisiones. El caso Brüstle en Europa estableció límites claros sobre la investigación con embriones, mientras que la disputa del árbol de Neem puso en el centro del debate la biopiratería y el conocimiento tradicional. El reciente tratado de la OMPI (2024) marca un punto de inflexión al exigir transparencia sobre el origen de los recursos genéticos utilizados en invenciones patentables.Te invitamos a sumergirte en estos fascinantes dilemas donde ciencia, ética y derecho convergen. Descubrirás por qué las decisiones actuales sobre biología sintética moldearán no solo nuestro marco legal, sino también el futuro de la medicina, la agricultura y nuestra propia definición de lo que significa "inventar" en pleno siglo XXI. ¿Estamos preparados para un mundo donde las invenciones tienen vida propia?
Mientras algunos científicos reciben aplausos por haber editado genéticamente a un bebé, otros científicos terminan en la cárcel ¿Por qué?!.He Jiankui, el científico chino que escandalizó al mundo en 2018 por editar genéticamente embriones humanos y dar lugar al nacimiento de las primeras bebés modificadas con CRISPR, vuelve a ser noticia. Esta vez, no por un nuevo experimento, sino por una declaración pública en la que acusa a la comunidad científica de hipocresía. Según Jiankui, otros investigadores están siendo aplaudidos por hacer lo mismo que él hizo, mientras que él fue encarcelado y duramente criticado. Pero ¿realmente hicieron lo mismo?En este video analizamos a fondo esta nueva controversia científica. Explicamos con claridad qué hizo exactamente He Jiankui, por qué su experimento fue considerado antiético, y qué diferencias existen con los trabajos más recientes que han sido bien recibidos por la comunidad científica. Profundizamos en conceptos clave como la edición genética en células germinales frente a células somáticas, el papel de los comités de ética, y los estándares internacionales que se deben cumplir para que un experimento en edición genética sea considerado responsable.La pregunta de fondo es incómoda pero necesaria: ¿existe una doble moral en la ciencia? ¿Estamos castigando a los pioneros mientras premiamos a quienes siguen caminos más aceptables, aunque similares? ¿O hay diferencias esenciales que justifican el trato desigual? Este caso nos obliga a reflexionar sobre los límites de la ética en la investigación genética, el avance de la tecnología CRISPR y la posibilidad real de intervenir en la línea germinal humana.He Jiankui no solo pone sobre la mesa su propia historia, sino que reabre un debate que involucra ciencia, ética, política y sociedad. ¿Fue un visionario incomprendido o alguien que cruzó una línea que no debía tocarse? Te invito a ver el video completo y a dejar tu opinión en los comentarios. ¿Estamos más cerca de aceptar la ingeniería genética en humanos? ¿Y quién decide qué es aceptable y qué no?
Become a beta tester for our new Unapologetically Outspoken GPT! Use the link here or head over to our website: https://www.thelawofattractiontribe.com/a/2148108179/MpCJCAPZWant to join the conversation? Connect with Tara and Stephanie on TikTok, X, Rumble, YouTube, Truth Social, Facebook, and IG.https://msha.ke/unapologeticallyoutspoken/What if the next pandemic isn't natural — but manufactured?In this explosive episode, we connect the dots between the U.S. formally rejecting the WHO's 2024 International Health Regulations amendments and the terrifying biotech weapons quietly being developed behind the scenes. From CRISPR-engineered viruses to AI-generated pathogens and mirror life forms that could evade all natural immune defenses, we dive into the real threats no one in mainstream media is talking about.We break down:
Israel becoming a nation again, being re-gathered to the Holy Land from all over the world, are the fulfillment of many prophecies. Not vague, predictions, or hopes, but very exact prophecies. Pastor Gene Pensiero Find audio, video, and text of hundreds of other prophecy updates at: https://calvaryhanford.com/prophecy Read along with us at https://calvaryhanford.substack.com Follow us […]
In this episode of the Healthy, Wealthy and Smart podcast, host Karen Litzy welcomes Elizabeth Chabe, MBA, MS, CEO of High Touch Group and author of "The Giant's Ladder, The Science Professional's Blueprint for Marketing Success." Elizabeth shares her expertise in marketing within the science and technology sectors, particularly focusing on biotech and MedTech. She discusses the challenges faced by innovators in getting their ideas noticed and provides insights on how to market groundbreaking work effectively. Listeners will gain valuable strategies for building brand awareness and achieving market traction, making this episode a must-listen for health and wellness professionals looking to amplify their impact. Join Tara and Elizabeth as they explore the intersection of science, storytelling, and strategy in marketing. Time Stamps: [00:01:43] Marketing strategies for science professionals. [00:04:33] CRISPR and corporate strategy. [00:10:58] Fractional wet lab space. [00:12:08] Storytelling in scientific marketing. [00:15:50] Founders and product-market fit. [00:19:24] Selling scientific products effectively. [00:25:20] Business strategy vs. marketing gloss. [00:29:43] Science marketing for founders. [00:34:40] Marketing strategies for researchers. [00:38:04] Philanthropic support for dog rescue. [00:39:19] Importance of mission in business. More About Elizabeth: ELIZABETH CHABE (MBA, MS) is an author, entrepreneur, and recognized strategic marketing consultant for science, engineering, and technology organizations. Her work has been featured in The New York Times, Popular Science, Entrepreneur, CNBC, Composites World, and 360Dx, among others. As the founder and CEO of High Touch Group, Elizabeth oversees a team that develops marketing and PR strategies for advanced science, engineering, and technology organizations. Through High Touch Group's holistic, comprehensive marketing services, clients generate more leads, drive revenue, and elevate their brands into the global B2B space. Her work as a strategic consultant has been instrumental to biotechnology, energy, advanced materials, advanced manufacturing, robotics, and automation companies. Since her first business venture at the age of nine, Elizabeth has built and overseen countless successful research programs and marketing teams. As the former senior manager of digital and strategic marketing at the Jackson Laboratory (JAX), she developed the marketing strategies for its mouse model portfolio, model generation (CRISPR), and in vivo contract research services. Prior to joining JAX, she oversaw global communications for the Advanced Structures and Composites Center in Maine. There, she managed projects including the center's offshore wind research program, the largest research and R&D program in Maine's history. Since 2018, Elizabeth has been a governor-appointed director of the Maine Venture Fund. An inveterate traveler, she splits her time between the US and developing world communities. She currently resides in Mexico with her husband and rescue dogs. Resources from this Episode: July 17th Jane Q&A Webinar High Touch Group Elizabeth's Website Elizabeth on LinkedIn Giant's Ladder Book Jane Sponsorship Information: Book a one-on-one demo here Mention the code LITZY1MO for a free month Follow Dr. Karen Litzy on Social Media: Karen's Twitter Karen's Instagram Karen's LinkedIn Subscribe to Healthy, Wealthy & Smart: YouTube Website Apple Podcast Spotify SoundCloud Stitcher iHeart Radio
Let Me Be Frank | Bishop Frank Caggiano's Podcast | Diocese of Bridgeport, CT
Join Bishop Frank Caggiano and Steve Lee as they delve into pressing societal issues, from the Educational Choice for Children's Act to the ethical implications of genetic engineering, IVF, and artificial intelligence. Explore the intersection of faith and modern challenges, and discover how the Church can guide us through these complex times. Also discussed are The Educational Choice for Children's Act's impact on Catholic education; the ethical considerations for genetic engineering and CRISPR technology; the role of artificial intelligence in the workforce, especially healthcare, and its moral implications; the rise of euthanasia and the Church's stance on life issues; and the moral and ethical challenges of in vitro fertilization and frozen embryos. We also received a thought-provoking question from a listener in Poland about the existence of genetic disorders in a world created by an all powerful, fully good God. If you'd like to have your question featured on Let Me Be Frank, comment down below or email us at questions@veritascatholic.com SUPPORT VERITAS: www.veritascatholic.com Other shows The Tangent: https://thetangent.podbean.com/ Daily Reflections: https://dailycatholicreflection.podbean.com/ The Frontline With Joe & Joe: https://thefrontlinewithjoeandjoe.podbean.com/ Restless Catholic Young Adults: https://restlesscatholicmedia.podbean.com/
Rapid bursts of ageing are causing a total rethink of how we grow old https://www.newscientist.com/article/2485338-rapid-bursts-of-ageing-are-causing-a-total-rethink-of-how-we-grow-old/ How human eggs stay fresh for decades https://www.newscientist.com/article/2488497-how-human-eggs-stay-fresh-for-decades/ Why many Americans still think Darwin was wrong, yet the British don't https://theconversation.com/why-many-americans-still-think-darwin-was-wrong-yet-the-british-dont-260709 We are playing God | Slavoj Žižek and Yuval Noah Harari on CRISPR, AI, and the future of humanity ... Read more The post envelhemos aos trancos? óvulos não envelhecem? lições do século XX appeared first on radinho de pilha.
What if evolution had a fast-forward button? William Pelton, CEO of Phytoform Labs, is harnessing AI-powered gene editing to radically accelerate crop development and boost climate resilience. He shares how Phytoform's platform decodes plant genomes, eliminates guesswork in breeding, and delivers scalable, sustainable traits at speed. Explore how partnerships, precision, and platform thinking are rewriting the rules of agriculture—and why Phytoform's compact, climate-resilient tomatoes could redefine how and where we grow our foodTune in as we decode innovation that feeds the future--- Hey Climate Tech enthusiasts! Searching for new podcasts on sustainability? Check out the Leaders on a Mission podcast, where I interview climate tech leaders who are shaking up the industry and bringing us the next big thing in sustainable solutions. Join me for a deep dive into the future of green innovation exploring the highs, lows, and everything in between of pioneering new technologies.Get an exclusive insight into how these leaders started up their journey, and how their cutting edge products will make a real impact. Tune in on…YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@leadersonamissionNet0Spotify: https://open.spotify.com/show/7o41ubdkzChAzD9C53xH82Apple Podcasts: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/leaders-on-a-mission/id1532211726…to listen to the latest episodes!0:04 Climate threat to crop yields1:36 William's path to plant science5:03 Solving the crop innovation gap9:46 AI-guided gene switching10:05 CRISPR for precision breeding17:01 Choosing crops and markets22:19 Reducing tomato crop waste26:10 Partnering with Corteva30:26 Launching compact tomato plantsUseful links: Pytoforms website: https://www.phytoformlabs.com/Phytoforms LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/phytoform-labs/Will Pelton Linked: https://www.linkedin.com/in/william-pelton-12813b56/Leaders on a Mission website: https://cs-partners.net/podcasts/Simon Leich's LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/executive-talent-headhunter-agtech-foodtech-agrifoodtech-agritech/
Even though it's undeniably...aesthetic-challenged, the naked mole-rat is the envy of the longevity world. Its risk of death barely changes with time; it shrugs off cancer, stays fertile for decades and seems to skip every hallmark of aging that hobbles the rest of us.But why? What evolutionary forces gave a mouse-sized, subterranean rodent near-immunity to aging - and what can its biology teach us about extending healthy human life?Comparative biologist Prof. Rochelle Buffenstein (University of Illinois Chicago) - who has maintained the world's largest captive colonies and authored 200+ papers - joins LEVITY to dissect the evidence.In this episode✅ Rochelle's journey: from Zimbabwe farm kid to the pre-eminent naked mole-rat researcher.✅ Eusocial society: queens, worker castes and lethal succession battles.✅ No Gompertz slope: hard numbers that show mortality risk stays essentially flat for 40 years.✅ Cancer resistance → high-molecular-weight hyaluronan, unusual immune cell profiles.✅ Telomere maintenance and DNA-methylation reversal.✅ Proteostasis on easy-mode: slow translation, durable proteins, super-charged autophagy.✅ What actually kills a mole-rat?✅ Translational angles: small-molecule screens, CRISPR edits, and why funding is still an uphill battle.✅ Other long-lived species worth studying - and how young scientists can break into comparative gerontology.
Simon & Schuster provided me with an advanced copy of the superb book After the Spike: Population, Progress, and the Case for People, scheduled for release on July 8, 2025. The University of Texas authors, Dean Spears and Michael Geruso, have written a mind-blowing book! It's my second favorite book of 2025! My favorite 2025 book is They're Not Gaslighting You. Video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x-JfpjJRkok Podcast The Population Whimper When I was born, Paul R. Ehrlich's book, The Population Bomb, was a mega-bestseller. Although I never read the book, my generation believed the book's message that humanity is dangerously overpopulated. The book gave me one major reason not to have children. The book made intuitive sense, built on Thomas Malthus's observations, that if our population continues to expand, we will eventually hit a brick wall. However, Ehrlich, a Stanford biologist, made these stunningly wrong predictions in The Population Bomb: Mass Starvation in the 1970s and 1980s: The book opened with the statement, "The battle to feed all of humanity is over. In the 1970s, hundreds of millions of people will starve to death in spite of any crash programs embarked upon now." England's Demise by 2000: He suggested that England would not exist by the year 2000 due to environmental collapse related to overpopulation. Devastation of Fish Populations by 1990: He predicted that all significant animal life in the sea would be extinct by 1990, and large areas of coastline would need to be evacuated due to the stench of dead fish. India's Famine: He predicted catastrophic food shortages in India in the 1990s that did not materialize. United States Food Rationing by 1984: He envisioned the U.S. rationing food by 1984. Instead of all this doom and gloom, here's what happened: we went from 3.5 billion (when Ehrich wrote his doomsday book) to 8 billion people today, most of whom are fat. Today, our biggest problem isn't famine but obesity. Dean Spears and Michael Geruso's new book should have been called The Population Whimper because it says the opposite of what The Population Bomb said. Forget a catastrophic demographic explosion. We're going to suffer a catastrophic demographic implosion. The graph on the cover of After the Spike sums up the problem: during a 200-year time period, the human population will have spiked to 10 billion and then experienced an equally dramatic fall. Three criticisms of After the Spike For a book packed with counterintuitive arguments, it's remarkable that I can only spot three flaws. Admittedly, these are minor critiques, as they will disappear if we stabilize below 10 billion. 1. Wildlife lost The authors correctly argue that the environment has been improving even as the human population has been growing rapidly. For example: Air and water are now cleaner than they were 50 years ago, when the population was half its current size. Our per capita CO2 consumption is falling. Clean energy production is at an all-time high. There's one metric that authors overlooked: wildlife. As the human population doubled, we've needed more space for growing food. This has led to a decrease in habitat, which is why biologists refer to the Anthropocene Extinction. While fish farms are efficient, overfishing continues. The Amazon gets denuded to make space for soy and cattle plantations. The loss of African wildlife habitats is acute, as the African population is projected to quadruple in this century. I imagine that the authors of After the Spike would counter: National parks didn't exist 200 years ago. Green revolutions and GMO foods have made the most productive farmers ever. De-extinction may restore extinct species. And they're correct. There are bright spots. However, as we approach 10 billion, wildlife will continue to suffer and be marginalized. The book should have mentioned that. Dean Spears and Michael Geruso would likely agree that if humans continue to grow nonstop, wildlife will continue to suffer. However, they aren't arguing for nonstop human expansion. They want stabilization. When you combine stabilization with technology (e.g., vertical farming and lab-grown animal products), we would reverse the downward trend in wildlife habitat. 2. Increased energy consumption Dean Spears and Michael Geruso celebrate humanity's progress in energy efficiency and productivity. However, they overlook these facts: 1. The Rebound Effect (Jevons Paradox): As energy efficiency improves, the cost of using energy services effectively decreases. This can lead to: Increased usage of existing services: For example, more efficient air conditioners might lead people to cool their homes to lower temperatures or for longer periods. More fuel-efficient cars might encourage more driving. Adoption of new energy-intensive activities: The increased affordability of energy services can enable entirely new consumption patterns that were previously too expensive to adopt. Think about the proliferation of data centers for AI and digital services, or the growth of electric vehicles. While individual electric vehicles (EVs) are more efficient than gasoline cars, the rapid increase in their adoption contributes to overall electricity demand. 2. Economic Growth and Rising Living Standards: Increased demand for energy services: As economies grow and incomes rise, people generally desire greater comfort, convenience, and a wider range of goods and services. This translates to greater demand for heating and cooling, larger homes, more personal transportation, more manufactured goods, and more leisure activities, all of which require energy. Industrialization and urbanization: Developing economies, in particular, are undergoing rapid industrialization and urbanization. This involves massive construction, increased manufacturing, and the expansion of infrastructure, all of which are highly energy-intensive. Even with efficiency gains, the sheer scale of this growth drives up overall energy consumption. Emerging technologies: The growth of data centers, AI, and other digital technologies is leading to a significant increase in electricity demand. 3. Population Growth: While efficiency might improve per unit of output, the overall global population continues to grow. More people, even if individually more efficient, will inherently consume more energy in total. 4. Shifting Economic Structures: Some economies are shifting from less energy-intensive sectors (like agriculture) to more energy-intensive ones (like manufacturing or specific services). Even within industries, while individual processes might become more efficient, the overall scale of production can increase dramatically. 5. Energy Price and Policy Factors: Low energy prices: If energy remains relatively inexpensive (due to subsidies or abundant supply), the incentive for significant behavioral changes to reduce consumption might be diminished, even with efficient technologies available. Policy limitations: Although many countries have energy efficiency policies, their impact may be offset by other factors that drive demand. Conclusion: While technological advancements and efficiency measures reduce the energy intensity of specific activities, these gains are often outpaced by the aggregate increase in demand for energy services driven by economic growth, rising living standards, population increases, and the adoption of new, energy-intensive technologies and behaviors. The challenge lies in achieving a proper decoupling of economic growth from energy consumption, and ultimately, from carbon emissions. Humanity's per capita energy consumption has been steadily increasing with each passing century, a trend that is unlikely to change soon. Therefore, humans of the 26th century will consume far more energy than those of the 21st century. The authors of After the Spike would probably argue that in 2525, we'll be using a clean energy source (e.g., nuclear fusion), so it'll be irrelevant that our per capita energy consumption increases ten times. Again, short term, we're going in the wrong direction. However, in a stabilized world, we won't have a problem. 3. Designer babies The authors of After the Spike never addressed the potential impact that designer babies may have. I coined the term "Homo-enhanced" to address our desire to overcome our biological limitations. Couples are already using IVF to select the gender and eye color of their babies. Soon, we'll be able to edit and select for more complex traits such as height or even intelligence. It's easy to imagine a world like Gattaca, where parents collaborate with CRISPR-powered gene tools to create custom-made babies. One reason some people don't want to reproduce is that it's a crap shoot. Any parent who has more than one child will tell you that each of their children is quite different from the others. Given that they grow up in the same environment, it suggests that genetics is a decisive factor. Until now, we couldn't mold our children's DNA. Soon, we will. If we were to remove the lottery aspect of having a child and allow parents to design their children, perhaps there would be a baby boom. Dean Spears and Michael Geruso would probably argue that this is unlikely or centuries away from happening. We'll be descending the steep population slope long before we are homo-enhanced. One trillion humans in this millennium? In the Bulgaria chapter of The Hidden Europe, I observed that Bulgaria is depopulating faster than any other European country. Having peaked at 9 million in the late 1980s, a century later, it will be half that size. Despite that, in that chapter, I predicted that in 500 years, we'll have one trillion humans in the solar system, with at least 100 billion on Earth. This video explains how and why that may happen: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8lJJ_QqIVnc Conclusion In 2075, will After the Spike: Population, Progress, and the Case for People look as stupid as The Population Bomb looks 50 years after publication? Does After the Spike make the same errors as The Population Bomb? Paul Ehrlich's underestimated technology and the continued collapse in fertility rates. As Dean Spears and Michael Geruso point out, fertility rates have been declining since they were first measured. Had Ehrlich extrapolated the trendline, he would have realized that our demographic collapse was imminent, not an explosion. Furthermore, technology solved many of the problems Ehrlich imagined. Is After the Spike making the same error? Fertility rates won't fall forever. They must stop. Otherwise, we'll become extinct. However, will fertility rates soar due to technology or some other reason? What could make our fertility rates return to three or more? Here are a few ideas: We master fusion energy, providing us with ultra-cheap energy and dramatically decreasing the cost of having children. Robots perform most jobs, leaving humans with ample time to raise large families. As the negative effects of depopulation start rippling across the world, a global cultural panic erupts, prompting people to prioritize reproduction. Homo-enhanced humans, merged with artificial general intelligence, decide to proliferate to dominate the planet. Vertical farms and lab-grown cultured meat improve the environment so dramatically that humans feel less guilty about having three or more children, and generous subsidies offset the costs. Admittedly, these scenarios are unlikely to occur during the next 50 years, so After the Spike won't become the joke that The Population Bomb became in 50 years. Still, I predict that Ehrlich's great-great-granddaughter will write The Population Bomb II: Thomas Malthus Will Be Right Someday. Verdict 10 out of 10 stars! Excerpts The excerpts below are from an advanced copy, which may have undergone edits. Hence, some of these excerpts may have been reworded or deleted in the final print. The reason I am quoting them is that even if the excerpts are removed in the final edition, they illustrate the book's overall message. It would be easy to think that fewer people would be better—better for the planet, better for the people who remain. This book asks you to think again. Depopulation is not the solution we urgently need for environmental challenges, nor will it raise living standards by dividing what the world can offer across fewer of us. Despite what you may have been told, depopulation is not the solution we urgently need for environmental challenges like climate change. Nor will it raise living standards by dividing what the world can offer across fewer of us. To the contrary, so much of the progress that we now take for granted sprang up in a large and interconnected society. Part I's big claim: No future is more likely than that people worldwide choose to have too few children to replace their own generation. Over the long run, this would cause exponential population decline. Whether depopulation would be good or bad depends on the facts and depends on our values. We ask about those facts and values, building up to an overall assessment: Part II and Part III's big claim: A stabilized world population would be better, overall, than a depopulating future. Part IV's big claim: Nobody yet knows how to stabilize a depopulating world. But humanity has made revolutionary improvements to society before— we can do it again if we choose. We won't ask you to abandon your concerns about climate change; about reproductive freedom and abortion access; or about ensuring safe, healthy, flourishing lives for everyone everywhere. We won't ask you to consider even an inch of backsliding on humanity's progress toward gender equity. We insist throughout that everyone should have the tools to choose to parent or not to parent. This book is not about whether or how you should parent. It's about whether we all should make parenting easier. In 2012, 146 million children were born. That was more than in any year of history to that point. It was also more than in any year since. Millions fewer will be born this year. The year 2012 may well turn out to be the year in which the most humans were ever born— ever as in ever for as long as humanity exists. Within three hundred years, a peak population of 10 billion could fall below 2 billion. The tip of the Spike may be six decades from today. For every 205 babies born, human biology, it turns out, would produce about 100 females. Average fertility in Europe today is about 1.5. That means the next generation will be 25 percent smaller than the last. Birth rates were falling all along. For as long as any reliable records exist, and for at least several hundred years while the Spike was ascending, the average number of births per woman has been falling, generation by generation. In the United States in the early 1800s, married white women (a population for whom some data were recorded) gave birth an average of seven times. If life expectancy doubles to 150 years, or quadruples to 300 years, couldn't that prevent the depopulating edge of the Spike? The surprising answer is no. The story of the Spike would stay the same, even if life expectancy quadrupled to three hundred years. In contrast, if adults' reproductive spans also changed, so people had, say, one or two babies on average over their twenties, thirties, and forties and then another one on average over their fifties, sixties, and seventies, then that would stop depopulation— but it would be because births changed, not because later-adulthood deaths changed. Where exactly should humanity stabilize? Six billion? Eight? Ten? Some other number? This book makes the case to stabilize somewhere. Exactly where will have to be a question for public and scientific debate. So the extra greenhouse gas emissions contributed by the larger population would be small, even under the assumption here that the future is bleak and we go on emitting for another century. The environmental costs of a new child are not zero. Not by a long shot. Not yet. But they are falling. Each new person who joins the ranks of humanity will add less CO2 than, well, you over your lifetime. Humanity could choose a future that's good, free, and fair for women and that also has an average birth rate of two. There is no inescapable dilemma. In that kind of future, people who want to parent would get the support that they need (from nonparents, from taxpayers, from everyone) to choose parenting. The most plausible way humanity might stabilize— and the only way this book endorses— is if societies everywhere work to make parenting better. Globally, we now produce about 50 percent more food per person than in 1961. “endogenous economic growth.” Endogenous means “created from the inside.” Ideas do not come from outside the economy. They come from us. Because scale matters, a depopulating planet will be able to fill fewer niches. A threat with a fixed cost: A threat has arisen that will kill all humans (however many) unless a large cost is paid to escape it (such as by deflecting an asteroid) within a certain time period. Could a kajillion lives ever be the best plan? That question goes beyond the practical question that this book is here to answer. Between our two families, we have had three live births, four miscarriages, and three failed IVF rounds. Parenting will need to become better than it is today. That's what we, your authors, hope and believe. The opportunity cost hypothesis: Spending time on parenting means giving up something. Because the world has improved around us, that “something” is better than it used to be. In no case is there evidence that more support for parents predicts more births. Nobody— no expert, no theory— fully understands why birth rates, everywhere, in different cultures and contexts, are lower than ever before. I hope these excerpts compel you to buy the book. If you're still undecided, consider that the book features numerous graphs and illustrations that will rewire your brain. Buy After the Spike: Population, Progress, and the Case for People. Connect Send me an anonymous voicemail at SpeakPipe.com/FTapon You can post comments, ask questions, and sign up for my newsletter at https://wanderlearn.com. If you like this podcast, subscribe and share! On social media, my username is always FTapon. Connect with me on: Facebook Twitter YouTube Instagram TikTok LinkedIn Pinterest Tumblr Sponsors 1. My Patrons sponsored this show! Claim your monthly reward by becoming a patron for as little as $2/month at https://Patreon.com/FTapon 2. For the best travel credit card, get one of the Chase Sapphire cards and get 75-100k bonus miles! 3. Get $5 when you sign up for Roamless, my favorite global eSIM! Use code LR32K 4. Get 25% off when you sign up for Trusted Housesitters, a site that helps you find sitters or homes to sit in. 5. Start your podcast with my company, Podbean, and get one month free! 6. In the United States, I recommend trading cryptocurrency with Kraken. 7. Outside the USA, trade crypto with Binance and get 5% off your trading fees! 8. For backpacking gear, buy from Gossamer Gear.
My fellow pro-growth/progress/abundance Up Wingers,The 1990s and the dawn of the internet were a pivotal time for America and the wider world. The history of human progress is a series of such pivotal moments. As Peter Leyden points out, it seems we're facing another defining era as society wrestles with three new key technologies: artificial intelligence, clean energy, and bioengineering.Today on Faster, Please! — The Podcast, I chat with Leyden about American leadership in emerging technology and the mindset shifts we must undergo to bring about the future we dream of.Leyden is a futurist and technology expert. He is a speaker, author, and founder of Reinvent Futures. Thirty years ago, he worked with the founders of WIRED magazine, and now authors his latest book project via Substack: The Great Progression: 2025 to 2050.In This Episode* Eras of transformation (1:38)* American risk tolerance (11:15)* Facing AI pessimism (15:38)* The bioengineering breakthrough (24:24)* Demographic pressure (28:52)Below is a lightly edited transcript of our conversation. Eras of transformation (1:38)I think we Americans tend to reset the clock in which we get in these dead ends, we get in these old patterns, these old systems, and the things are all falling apart, it's not working. And then there is a kind of a can-do reinvention phase . . .Pethokoukis: Since World War II, as I see it, we have twice been on the verge of a transformational leap forward, economically and technologically. I would say that was right around 1970 and then right around 2000, and the periods of time after that, I think, certainly relative to the expectations then, was disappointing.It is my hope, and I know it's your hope as well, that we are at another such moment of transformation. One, do you accept my general premise, and two, why are we going to get it right this time?If I'm hearing you right, you're kind of making two junctures there. I do believe we're in the beginning of what would be much more thought of as a transformation. I would say the most direct parallel is closer to what happened coming off of World War II. I also think, if you really go back in American history, it's what came off of Civil War and even came off of the Founding Era. I think there's a lot of parallels there I can go into, I've written about in my Substack and it's part of the next book I'm writing, so there's a bigger way that I think about it. I think both those times that you're referring to, it seems to me we were coming off a boom, or what seemed to be an updraft or your “Up Wing” kind of periods that you think of — and then we didn't.I guess I think of it this way: the '50s, '60s, and '90s were exciting times that made it feel like the best was yet to come — but then that momentum stalled. I'm hopeful we're entering another such moment now, with so much happening, so much in motion, and I just hope it all comes together.The way I think about it in a bigger lens, I would just push back a little bit, which is, it's true coming off the '90s — I was at WIRED magazine in the '90s. I was watching the early '90s internet and the Digital Revolution and I sketched out at that time, in my first book but also cover stories in WIRED, trying to rough out what would happen by the year 2020. And it is true that coming off the '90s there was a Dot Com crash, but temporarily, honestly, that with the Web 2.0 and others, a lot of those trends we were talking about in the '90s actually just kept picking up.So depending how big the lens is, I would argue that, coming off the '90s, the full digital revolution and the full globalization that we were starting to see in the early to mid-'90s in some respects did come to fruition. It didn't play out the way we all wanted it to happen — spreading wealth all through the society and blah, blah, blah, and many of the things that people complain about and react to now — but I would argue that a lot of what we were saying in those '90s, and had begun in the '90s with the '90s boom, continued after a temporary pause, for sure.The Dot Com boom was just frothy investment. It crashed, but the companies that come out of that crash are literally trillion-dollar companies dominating the global economy now here on the west coast. That was some of the things we could see happening from the mid-'90s. The world did get connected through the internet, and globalization did, from a lens that's beyond America, we took 800 million peasants living on two bucks a day in China and brought them into the global economy. There's all kinds of positive things of what happened in the last 25 years, depending on how big your lens is.I would say that we've been through a largely successful — clearly some issues, “Oh my gosh, we didn't anticipate social media and that stuff,” but in general, the world that we were actually starting to envision in the '90s came about, at some level — with some flaws, and some issues, and we could have done better, but I'm saying now I think AI is bigger than the internet. I think the idea that humans are now working side-by-side with intelligent machines and being augmented by intelligent machines is a world historical event that is going to go beyond just connecting everybody on the planet through the internet, which is kind of what the '90s was, and the early Digital Revolution.This is a bigger deal, and I do think this transformation has the potential to be way bigger too. If we manage it right — including how we did it positively or negatively in the last 25, 30 years off the '90s — if we do this right, we could really pull off what I think is a reinvention of America and a much better world going beyond this. That's not a prediction that we're going to do that, but I think we certainly have the potential there.While I was preparing for our chat, I recalled a podcast I did with Marc Andreessen where we discussed AI — not just its potential to solve big problems and drive progress, but also about the obstacles, especially regulatory ones. He pointed out that those barriers are why we don't have things like widespread nuclear power, let alone fusion reactors.When I asked why he thought we could overcome those barriers this time around, he said we probably won't — that failure should be the baseline because these obstacles are deeply rooted in a risk-averse American society. Now, why isn't that your baseline?My baseline is that America — again, I'm taking a bigger lens here, which is we periodically come to these junctures in history in which you could say, from left and right, there's kind of an ossification of the old system. What happens is the old ways of doing things, the old systems, essentially get kind of stuck, and ossified, and just defunct, and long in the tooth, and all different ways you can describe it. But what happens at these junctures — and it happened coming off World War II, it happened after the Civil War, I happened after in the Founding Era too, coming off the colonial world — there is an incredible period of explosion of progress, essentially, and they usually are about 25 years, which is why I'm thinking about the next 25 years.I think we Americans tend to reset the clock in which we get in these dead ends, we get in these old patterns, these old systems, and the things are all falling apart, it's not working. And then there is a kind of a can-do reinvention phase that, frankly, is beyond Europe now. The great hope of the West is still going to be America here. But I think we're actually entering it and I think this is what's happening, and . . . I've read your book, The Conservative Futurist, I would call myself more of a “Progressive Futurist,” but I would say both left and right in this country have gone too extreme. The right is critiquing “government can't do anything right,” and the left is critiquing “the market, corporations can't do anything right.”The actual American framework is the Hamiltonian government, coming off Lincoln's government, the FDR government. There is a role for government, a vigorous kind of government presence that can drive change, but there's also a great role for the market too.There's this center left and center right that has now got to recalibrate for this next era of America. I think because the old system — and from the right, the old system might be big bureaucratic government that was born out of World War II, the great welfare state bureaucracies, also the Pax Americana. Trump is kind of banging against, dismantling that old thing that's been going for 80 years and, frankly, is kind of run out of steam. It's not really working. But the left is also coming out, carbon energy, and drilling for oil, and industrial pollution, and all that other stuff that was coming off of that scaling of the 20th century economy is also not working for the 21st century. We've also got to dismantle those systems. But together, looking forward, you could imagine a complete reinvention around these new technologies. AI is a huge one. Without question, the first among equals it's going to be the game changer around every field, every industry.Also clean energy technologies, I would argue, are just hitting the point of tipping points of scale that we could imagine a shift in the energy foundation. We could see abundant clean energy, including nuclear. I think there's a new re-appreciation of nuclear coming even from left-of-center, but also potential fusion on the horizon.I also think bioengineering is something that we haven't really got our heads into, but in terms of the long-term health of the planet, and all kinds of synthetic biology, and all kinds of things that are happening, we are now past the tipping point, and we know how to do this.I think there's three world historic technologies that America could get reinvented around in the next 25 years. I think the old system, left and right, is now done with this old thing that isn't working, but that opens up the potential for the future. So yes, what Andreessen's talking about is the late stage of the last gummed-up system that wasn't working. For that matter, the same thing from the left is complaining about the inequality, and the old system isn't working now the way it was, circulating wealth through society. But I think there's a way to reinvent that and I actually think we're on the verge of doing it, and that's what I'm trying to do for my project, my book, my Substack stuff.American risk tolerance (11:15)I think there is an elite on the right-of-center tech and the left-of-center tech that sees the same commonalities about the potential of the technology, but also the potential for transformation going forward, that would be healthy. Do you feel that there's enough ferment happening that, institutionally, there will be enough space for these technologies to flourish as you hope? That the first time that there's a problem with an AI model where people die because some system failed, we're not going to be like, “We need to pause AI.” That the next time with one of these restarted nuclear reactors, if there's some minor problem, we're not going to suddenly panic and say, “That's it, nuclear is gone again.” Do you think we have that kind of societal resilience to deal? I think we've had too little of that, but do you think there's enough now, for the reasons you're talking about, that we will continue to push forward?I think there's absolutely the chance that can happen. Now, like Andreessen said, it's not a prediction like, “Oh, this will be fine, it's all going to work out.” We could also go the way of Europe, which is we could get over-regulated, over-ossified, go back to the old days, be this nice tourist spot that, whatever, we look at our old buildings and stuff and we figure out a way to earn a living, but it's just getting more and more and more in the past. That's also a possibility, and I suppose if you had to bet, maybe that's the greater possibility, in default.But I don't think that's going to happen because I do believe more in America. I'm also living in Northern California here. I'm surrounded for the last 30 years, people are just jam packed with new ideas. There's all kinds of s**t happening here. It's just an explosive moment right now. We are attracting the best and the brightest from all over the country, all over the world. There is no other place in the world, bar none, around AI than San Francisco right now, and you cannot be here and not just get thrilled at the possibility of what's happening. Now, does that mean that we're going to be able to pull this off through the whole country, through the whole world? I don't know, there is a lot of ambiguity there and this is why you can't predict the future with certainty.But I do believe we have the potential here to rebuild fundamentally. I think there is an elite on the right-of-center tech and the left-of-center tech that sees the same commonalities about the potential of the technology, but also the potential for transformation going forward, that would be healthy. For example, I know Andreessen, you talk about Andreessen . . . I was also rooted in the whole Obama thing, there was a ton of tech people in the Obama thing, and now there's a ton of tech people who are kind of tech-right, but it's all kind of washes together. It's because we all see the potential of these technologies just emerging in front of us. The question is . . . how do you get the systems to adapt?Now, to be fair, California, yes, it's been gummed up with regulations and overthink, but on the other hand, it's opened itself up. It just went through historic shifts in rolling back environmental reviews and trying to drive more housing by refusing to let the NIMBY shut it down. There's a bunch of things that even the left-of-center side is trying to deal with this gummed-up system, and the right-of-center side is doing their version of it in DC right now.Anyhow, the point is, we see the limits on both left-of-center and right-of-center of what's currently happening and what has happened. The question is, can we get aligned on a relatively common way forward, which is what America did coming off the war for 25 years, which is what happened after the Civil War. There were issues around the Reconstruction, but there was a kind of explosive expansion around American progress in the 25 years there. And we did it off the Revolution too. There are these moments where left-of-center and right-of-center align and we kind of build off of a more American set of values: pluralism, meritocracy, economic growth, freedom, personal freedom, things that we all can agree on, it's just they get gummed up in these old systems and these old ideologies periodically and we've just got to blow through them and try something different. I think the period we're in right now.Facing AI pessimism (15:38)The world of AI is so foreign to them, it's so bizarre to them, it's so obscure to them, that they're reacting off it just like any sensible human being. You're scared of a thing you don't get.I feel like you are very optimistic.Yes, that is true.I like to think that I am very optimistic. I think we're both optimistic about what these technologies can do to make this country and this world a richer world, a more sustainable world, a healthier world, create more opportunity. I think we're on the same page. So it's sad to me that I feel like I've been this pessimistic so far throughout our conversation and this next question, unfortunately, will be in that vein.Okay, fair enough.I have a very clear memory of the '90s tech boom, and the excitement, and this is the most excited I've been since then, but I know some people aren't excited, and they're not excited about AI. They think AI means job loss, it means a dehumanization of society where we only interact with screens, and they think all the gains from any added economic growth will only go to the super rich, and they're not excited about it.My concern is that the obvious upsides will take long enough to manifest that the people who are negative, and the downsides — because there will be downsides with any technology or amazing new tool, no matter how amazing it is — that our society will begin to focus on the downsides, on, “Oh, this company let go of these 50 people in their marketing department,” and that's what will be the focus, and we will end up overregulating it. There will be pressure on companies, just like there's pressure on film companies not to use AI in their special effects or in their advertising, that there will be this anti-AI, anti-technology backlash — like we've seen with trade — because what I think are the obvious upsides will take too long to manifest. That is one of my concerns.I agree with that. That is a concern. In fact, right now if you look at the polling globally, about a third of Americans are very negative and down on AI, about a third are into AI, and about a third, don't what the hell what to make of it. But if you go to China, and Japan, and a lot of Asian countries, it's like 60 percent, 70 percent positive about AI. You go to Europe and it's similar to the US, if not worse, meaning there is a pessimism.To be fair, from a human planet point of view, the West has had a way privileged position in the last 250 years in terms of the wealth creation, in terms of the spoils of globalization, and the whole thing. So you could say — which is not a popular thing to say in America right now — that with globalization in the last 25 years, we actually started to rectify, from a global point of view, a lot of these inequities in ways that, from the long view, is not a bad thing to happen, that everybody in the planet gets lifted up and we can move forward as eight billion people on the planet.I would say so there is a negativity in the West because they're coming off a kind of an era that they were always relatively privileged. There is this kind of baked-in “things are getting worse” feeling for a lot of people. That's kind of adding to this pessimism, I think. That's a bad thing.My next book, which is coming out with Harper Collins and we just cracked the contract on that, I got a big advance —Hey, congratulations.But the whole idea of this book is kind of trying to create a new grand narrative of what's possible now, in the next 25 years, based on these new technologies and how we could reorganize the economy and society in ways that would work better for everybody. The reason I'm kind of trying to wrap this up, and the early pieces of this are in my Substack series of these essays I'm writing, is because I think what's missing right now is people can't see the new way forward. That's the win-win way forward. They actually are only operating on this opaque thing. The world of AI is so foreign to them, it's so bizarre to them, it's so obscure to them, that they're reacting off it just like any sensible human being. You're scared of a thing you don't get.What's interesting about this, and again what's useful, is I went through this exact same thing in the '90s. It's a little bit different, and I'll tell you the differentiation in a minute, but basically back in the '90s when I was working at the early stage with the founders of WIRED magazine, it was the early days of WIRED, basically meaning the world didn't know what email was, what the web was, people were saying there's no way people would put their credit cards on the internet, no one's going to buy anything on there, you had to start with square one. What was interesting about it is they didn't understand what's possible. A lot of the work I was doing back then at WIRED, but also with my first book then, went into multiple languages, all kinds of stuff, was trying to explain from the mid-'90s, what the internet and the Digital Revolution tied with globalization might look like in a positive way to the year 2020, which is a 25-year lookout.That was one of the popularities of the book, and the articles I was doing on that, and the talks I was doing — a decade speaking on this thing — because people just needed to see it: “Oh! This is what it means when you connect up everybody! Oh! I could see myself in my field living in a world where that works. Oh, actually, the trade of with China might work for my company, blah, blah, blah.” People could kind of start to see it in a way that they couldn't in the early to mid-'90s. They were just like, “I don't even know, what's an Amazon? Who cares if they're selling books on it? I don't get it.” But you could rough it out from a technological point of view and do that.I think it's the same thing now. I think we need do this now. We have to say, “Hey dudes, you working with AI is going to make you twice as productive. You're going to make twice as much money.” The growth rate of the economy — and you're good with this with your Up Wing stuff. I'm kind of with you on that. It could be like we're all actually making more money, more wealth pulsing through society. Frankly, we're hurting right now in terms of, we don't have enough bodies doing stuff and maybe we need some robots. There's a bunch of ways that you could reframe this in a bigger way that people could say, “Oh, maybe I could do that better,” and in a way that I think I saw the parallels back there.Now the one difference now, and I'll tell you the one difference between the '90s, and I mentioned this earlier, in the '90s, everybody thought these goofy tech companies and stuff were just knucklehead things. They didn't understand what they were. In fact, if anything, the problem was the opposite. You get their attention to say, “Hey, this Amazon thing is a big deal,” or “This thing called Google is going to be a big thing.” You couldn't even get them focused on that. It took until about the 20-teens, 2012, -13, -14 till these companies got big enough.So now everybody's freaked out about the tech because they're these giant gargantuan things, these trillion-dollar companies with global reach in ways that, in the '90s, they weren't. So there is a kind of fear-factor baked into tech. The last thing I'll say about that, though, is I know I've learned one thing about tech is over the years, and I still believe it's true today, that the actual cutting-edge of technology is not done in the legacy companies, even these big legacy tech companies, although they'll still be big players, is that the actual innovation is going to happen on the edges through startups and all that other thing, unless I'm completely wrong, which I doubt. That's been the true thing of all these tech phases. I think there's plenty of room for innovation, plenty of room for a lot of people to be tapped into this next wave of innovation, and also wealth creation, and I think there is a way forward that I think is going to be less scary than people right now think. It's like they think that current tech setup is going to be forever and they're just going to get richer, and richer, and richer. Well, if they were in the '90s, those companies, Facebook didn't exist, Google didn't exist, Amazon didn't exist. Just like we all thought, “Oh, IBM is going to run everything,” it's like, no. These things happen at these junctures, and I think we're in another one of the junctures, so we've got to get people over this hump. We've got to get them to see, “Hey, there's a win-win way forward that America can be revitalized, and prosperous, and wealth spread.”The bioengineering breakthrough (24:24)Just like we had industrial production in the Industrial Revolution that scaled great wealth and created all these products off of that we could have a bio-economy, a biological revolution . . .I think that's extraordinarily important, giving people an idea of what can be, and it's not all negative. You've talked a little bit about AI, people know that's out there and they know that some people think it's going to be big. Same thing with clean energy.To me, of your three transformer technologies, the one we I think sometimes hear less about right now is bioengineering. I wonder if you could just give me a little flavor of what excites you about that.It is on a delay. Clean energy has been going for a while here and is starting to scale on levels that you can see the impact of solar, the impact of electric cars and all kinds stuff, particularly from a global perspective. Same thing with AI, there's a lot of focus on that, but what's interesting about bioengineering is there were some world historic breakthroughs basically in the last 25 years.One is just cracking the human genome and driving the cost down to, it's like a hundred bucks now to get anybody's genome processed. That's just crazy drop in price from $3 million on the first one 20 years ago to like a hundred bucks now. That kind of dramatic change. Then the CRISPR breakthrough, which is essentially we can know how to cheaply and easily edit these genomes. That's a huge thing. But it's not just about the genomics. It's essentially we are understanding biology to the point where we can now engineer living things.Just think about that: Human beings, we've been in the Industrial Revolution, everything. We've learned how to engineer inert things, dig up metals, and blah, blah, blah, blah, and engineer a thing. We didn't even know how living things worked, or we didn't even know what DNA was until the 1950s, right? The living things has been this opaque world that we have no idea. We've crossed that threshold. We now understand how to engineer living things, and it's not just the genetic engineering. We can actually create proteins. Oh, we can grow cultured meat instead of waiting for the cow to chew the grass to make the meat, we can actually make it into that and boom, we know how it works.This breakthrough of engineering living things is only now starting to kind of dawn on everyone . . . when you talk about synthetic biology, it's essentially man-made biology, and that breakthrough is huge. It's going to have a lot of economic implications because, across this century, it depends how long it takes to get past the regulation, and get the fear factor of people, which is higher than even AI, probably, around genetic engineering and cloning and all this stuff. Stem cells, there's all kinds of stuff happening in this world now that we could essentially create a bio-economy. Just like we had industrial production in the Industrial Revolution that scaled great wealth and created all these products off of that we could have a bio-economy, a biological revolution that would allow, instead of creating plastic bottles, you could design biological synthetic bottles that dissolve after two weeks in the ocean from saltwater or exposure to sunlight and things like that. Nature knows how to both create things that work and also biodegrade them back to nothing.There's a bunch of insights that we now can learn from Mother Nature about the biology of the world around us that we can actually design products and services, things that actually could do it and be much more sustainable in terms of the long-term health of the planet, but also could be better for us and has all kinds of health implications, of course. That's where people normally go is think, “Oh my god, we can live longer” and all kinds of stuff. That's true, but also our built world could actually be redesigned using super-hard woods or all kinds of stuff that you could genetically design differently.That's a bigger leap. There's people who are religious who can't think of touching God's work, or a lot of eco-environmentalists like, “Oh, we can't mess with Mother Nature.” There's going to be some issues around that, but through the course of the century, it's going to absolutely happen and I think it could happen in the next 25 years, and that one could actually be a huge thing about recreating essentially a different kind of economy around those kinds of insights.So we've got three world-historic technologies: AI, clean energy, and now bioengineering, and if America can't invent the next system, who the hell is going to do that? You don't want China doing it.Demographic pressure (28:52)We are going to welcome the robots. We are going to welcome the AI, these advanced societies, to create the kind of wealth, and support the older people, and have these long lives.No, I do not. I do not. Two things I find myself writing a lot about are falling birth rates globally, and I also find myself writing about the future of the space economy. Which of those topics, demographic change or space, do you find intellectually more interesting?I think the demographic thing is more interesting. I mean, I grew up in a period where everyone was freaked out about overpopulation. We didn't think the planet would hold enough people. It's only been in the last 10 years that, conventionally, people have kind of started to shift, “Oh my God, we might not have enough people.” Although I must say, in the futurist business, I've been watching this for 30 years and we've been talking about this for a long time, about when it's going to peak humans and then it's going to go down. Here's why I think that's fantastic: We are going to welcome the robots. We are going to welcome the AI, these advanced societies, to create the kind of wealth, and support the older people, and have these long lives. I mean long lives way beyond 80, it could be 120 years at some level. Our kids might live to that.The point is, we're going to need artificial intelligence, and robotics, and all these other things, and also we're going to need, frankly, to move the shrinking number of human beings around the planet, i.e. immigration and cross-migration. We're going to need these things to solve these problems. So I think about this: Americans are practical people. At its core, we're practical people. We're not super ideological. Currently, we kind of think we're ideological, but we're basically common-sense, practical people. So these pressures, the demographic pressures, are going to be one of the reasons I think we are going to migrate to this stuff faster than people think, because we're going to realize, “Holy s**t, we've got to do this.” When social security starts going broke and the boomers are like 80 and 90 and it is like, okay, let alone the young people thinking, “How the hell am I going to get supported?” we're going to start having to create a different kind of economy where we leverage the productivity of the humans through these advanced technologies, AI and robotics, to actually create the kind of world we want to live in. It could be a better world than the world we've got now, than the old 20th-century thing that did a good shot. They lifted the bar from the 19th century to the 20th. Now we've got to lift it in the 21st. It's our role, it's what we do. America, [let's] get our s**t together and start doing it. That's the way I would say it.On sale everywhere The Conservative Futurist: How To Create the Sci-Fi World We Were PromisedFaster, Please! is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber. This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit fasterplease.substack.com/subscribe
Got Health Questions or Comments?
Our program centered on the Viking life detection experiments on Mars and their broader implications for the search for extraterrestrial life. Our guest, Dr. Steven Benner, delved into topics including synthetic biology, paleogenetics, and the potential for current and future Mars missions to detect life. The conversation also addressed the capabilities and limitations of genetic engineering technologies such as CRISPR, along with the conditions required for life to exist on Mars and other planets. Following co-host Bill's introduction of Dr. Benner, our conversation transitioned into a discussion of paleogenetics. Dr. Benner explained how ancient proteins can be inferred and resurrected using techniques analogous to those used in historical linguistics. These approaches allow scientists to better understand the evolution of life and the environmental conditions of early Earth. Drawing on his extensive background in paleogenetics, bioinformatics, astrobiology, and synthetic biology—with significant contributions to medical applications, Dr. Benner offered valuable insights into the Viking life detection experiments. Read the full summary at www.thespaceshow.com for this program and date plus at Substack, doctorspace.substack.com
We love to hear from our listeners. Send us a message. This week's episode is one from the road, recorded in front of a live audience in Boston's Seaport neighborhood during the BIO conference (special thanks to MasterControl for making it happen). Amber Salzman, Ph.D., CEO of Epicrispr Biotechnologies (aka 'Epic Bio') explains how epigenetic editing is revolutionizing genetic medicine by controlling gene expression, without cutting DNA like traditional CRISPR technologies. Amber talks about FSHD, a progressive muscular dystrophy, how the company raised $68 million in Series B funding despite challenging market conditions, her partnership with Springbok Analytics for AI analysis of MRI images, working with a CDMO to manufacture a new treatment modality, and navigating the FDA during a time of disruption. Access this and hundreds of episodes of the Business of Biotech videocast under the Business of Biotech tab at lifescienceleader.com. Subscribe to our monthly Business of Biotech newsletter. Get in touch with guest and topic suggestions: ben.comer@lifescienceleader.comFind Ben Comer on LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/bencomer/
In this insightful episode of Parallax, Dr Ankur Kalra explores the emerging field of cardiac epigenetics with Dr Manuel Rosa-Garrido, assistant professor of medicine at the University of Alabama in Birmingham. Their conversation examines how the three-dimensional organization of DNA within the cell nucleus influences heart disease development beyond traditional genetic sequencing. Dr Rosa-Garrido shares his pioneering work using Hi-C technology to map genome structure, revealing that DNA arrangement plays a crucial role in cardiac pathology. The discussion covers key concepts including chromatin loops, topologically associating domains, and compartmentalization—explaining how these structures regulate gene expression and how their disruption contributes to cardiovascular disease. The episode explores practical implications for clinical practice, from early biomarker identification to potential CRISPR-based therapies that could target chromatin structure. Dr Rosa-Garrido outlines how this research could transform cardiovascular care within the next decade, offering new approaches to both inherited cardiomyopathies and environmentally-influenced conditions like atherosclerosis. Valuable insights for cardiologists interested in precision medicine and the evolving understanding of how genetic architecture influences cardiovascular risk and treatment strategies. Questions and comments can be sent to "podcast@radcliffe-group.com" and may be answered by Ankur in the next episode. Host: @AnkurKalraMD and produced by: @RadcliffeCardio Parallax is Ranked in the Top 100 Health Science Podcasts (#48) by Million Podcasts.
Ying Tam, Chief Scientific Officer at Acuitas Therapeutics, discusses the company's role in delivering the first personalized CRISPR gene editing treatment to an infant with CPS-1, achieving treatment in just six months from diagnosis. Tam shares insights on evolving lipid nanoparticle technology beyond COVID vaccines, including LNPs that allow for next-generation immune-targeting delivery that is 10x more potent, and progress in delivering genetic medicines to stem cells and solid tumors. He also addresses the challenges of repeat dosing, a new biodegradable LNP formulation, and expanding genetic medicine beyond the liver to treat blood disorders and cancer.
In this captivating episode of Reading with Your Kids, host Jed Doherty explores the fascinating world of children's literature with two remarkable authors who are transforming how we introduce science and wonder to young readers. Martha Brockenbrough takes listeners on an incredible journey through her book "A Gift of Dust," revealing how Saharan dust travels across oceans, feeding microscopic organisms and ultimately nourishing the Amazon rainforest. Her passionate discussion highlights the interconnectedness of our planet, challenging traditional narratives about humans and nature. Susan Fletcher introduces her young adult novel "Sea Change," a science fiction reimagining of The Little Mermaid that explores cutting-edge genetic technologies. By incorporating real scientific concepts like CRISPR gene editing, Fletcher creates a compelling narrative that asks profound questions about human potential and ethical boundaries. Both authors share a common mission: sparking curiosity in young minds. They argue that education should be about process, not just results, and that storytelling is a powerful tool for helping children understand complex scientific concepts. Martha emphasizes how emotions and rational thinking are deeply interconnected, while Susan explores how emerging technologies might reshape human experiences. The conversation touches on broader themes of environmental awareness, technological innovation, and the importance of nurturing children's natural sense of wonder. From discussing ocean ecosystems to potential human genetic modifications, these authors demonstrate how non-fiction and speculative fiction can inspire the next generation of thinkers and explorers. Listeners will come away with a renewed appreciation for science, storytelling, and the incredible potential of young minds. Whether you're a parent, educator, or simply curious about the world, this episode offers fascinating insights into how we can engage children with the magic of scientific discovery. Click here to visit our website – www.ReadingWithYourKids.com Follow Us On Social Media Facebook - https://www.facebook.com/readingwithyourkids Instagram - https://www.instagram.com/readingwithyourkids/ X - https://x.com/jedliemagic LinkedIn - https://www.linkedin.com/company/reading-with-your-kids-podcast/ Please consider leaving a review of this episode and the podcast on whatever app you are listening on, it really helps!
What would you do if you got a blackmail call from an AI chatbot? One engineer faced that very issue. AI is capable of much more than many people think. Could it be used in fulfillment of the Bible’s prophecy of the Image of the Beast during the Great Tribulation? Pastor Gene Pensiero Find audio, […]
TIME STAMPS 0:00 คุยชีวิตทั่วไป + อัพเดทไขมันในเลือด 40:36 พฤติกรรมประหลาด 3 อย่างของวาฬออร์กา 1:15:32 เล่าเรื่องทริปไปตรัง ตามหาพะยูน 1:58:15 นวัตกรรมการแพทย์ 2:06:12 Crispr ช่วยชีวิตน้อง KJ 2:28:53 รำพึงวันเกิด WiTcast ครบ 13 ปี พฤติกรรม orca พยายามให้อาหารมนุษย์ https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2025/07/250701020706.htm https://psycnet.apa.org/fulltext/2026-29805-001.html https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5cQu7eA_EnU พฤติกรรม orca จูบกัน https://www.sciencealert.com/orcas-caught-kissing-for-two-minutes-with-tongue https://www.mdpi.com/2673-1924/6/2/37# https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8riI75Vffq8 พฤติกรรม orca ถูสาหร่าย https://www.science.org/content/article/killer-whales-groom-each-other-pieces-kelp https://www.cell.com/current-biology/fulltext/S0960-9822(25)00450-6 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iaBIYTXRvV4 เล่าทริปไปตรัง หาพะยูน คลิปเสียงพะยูน https://www.facebook.com/watch?v=2357532397643813 ชวนติดตามเฟซคุณป๊อบ มีลงคลิปพะยูนและสัตว์ทะเลอื่นๆ ตลอด https://www.facebook.com/popumon คลิปปูโบกก้าม https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UU3OnqVzkJI https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2E49AONxOes ช่วงสิ่งประดิษฐ์สักประเดี๋ยว นวัตกรรม ผ้าอนามัยตรวจเลือด MenstruAI https://www.advancedsciencenews.com/turning-periods-into-power-menstrual-blood-for-medical-diagnostics/ นวัตกรรมเข็มจิ๋วตรวจเซลล์ Nano Needles Biopsy https://www.sciencenews.org/article/painless-nanoneedle-patch-biopsies ข่าวน้อง KJ Crispr Baby คนแรก https://www.nytimes.com/2025/05/15/health/gene-editing-personalized-rare-disorders.html Crispr แก้โครโมโซมเกิน ความหวังรักษา Down Syndrome https://www.earth.com/news/crispr-used-to-remove-extra-chromosomes-in-down-syndrome-and-restore-cell-function/
Broadcast from KSQD, Santa Cruz on 7-03-2025: Dr. Dawn responds to an email about vitamin D and statin interactions, explaining how statins may prevent vitamin D's longevity benefits by interfering with CoQ10 production. She references a study showing vitamin D preserved telomeres and prevented aging over 3-4 years, but benefits disappeared in statin users. For borderline high LDL, she recommends testing for large versus small particles and oxidized LDL rather than treating with statins or red yeast rice. Red yeast rice may also block CoQ10 production, potentially negating vitamin D benefits. She discusses the critical problem of overmedication in elderly patients through a story of a 75-year-old taking 21 prescription drugs who improved dramatically when reduced to eight medications. Multiple specialists practicing standard care in isolation create dangerous polypharmacy without coordination. HIPAA privacy laws prevent medication sharing between providers, while electronic medical records remain siloed and incompatible. England's pilot program will provide whole genome screening for every newborn within 10 years, assessing hundreds of disease risks and enabling personalized medicine. While beneficial for identifying genetic disorders and drug metabolism variations like 2D6 mutations affecting tamoxifen effectiveness, Dr. Dawn expresses concern about government surveillance implications. Unlike voluntary phone tracking, this represents involuntary comprehensive genetic monitoring of citizens unable to provide informed consent. She describes alarming research showing cancer cells steal mitochondria from nerve cells by extending tubes and sucking out energy-producing organelles. This behavior helps cancer cells survive the hostile journey through bloodstream during metastasis. Turbocharged cancer cells with stolen mitochondria generate more energy and survive better when subjected to physical stress mimicking bloodstream travel. Dr. Dawn explores the parasitic amoeba Entamoeba histolytica, which causes intestinal disease but can become invasive, liquefying organs through tissue destruction. The parasite kills cells without eating them immediately, then consumes fragments and displays stolen cellular proteins on its surface to fool the immune system, potentially leading to CRISPR-based treatments or targeted drugs. She discusses converting plastic waste into acetaminophen using modified E. coli bacteria. Researchers chemically degrade PET plastic into precursor molecules, then use bacterial enzymes to complete synthesis into paracetamol with 92% efficiency. This transforms environmental waste into globally important medication, though she notes acetaminophen risks for regular drinkers due to toxic liver metabolites. MIT research reveals that AI writing assistance reduces brain engagement, memory, and sense of authorship. Students using ChatGPT showed lower neural connectivity in memory, attention, and executive function networks over four months. AI users retained less information and struggled to quote from their own essays. Dr. Dawn compares this to physical atrophy, emphasizing that cognitive challenge strengthens neural pathways like exercise strengthens muscles. She warns about fluoroquinolone antibiotics causing aortic aneurysm ruptures, in addition to known risks of tendon ruptures and retinal detachment. People with dilated aortas, hypertension history, or smoking should avoid these drugs entirely. This represents new information that wasn't widely known among primary care physicians, highlighting the importance of continuing medical education. Research shows celecoxib (Celebrex) cuts colon cancer recurrence rates in half for patients with circulating tumor DNA, but provides no benefit without detectable residual disease. This anti-inflammatory drug appears to impair cancer's ability to thrive in metastatic conditions. The finding supports using circulating tumor DNA testing to identify who needs targeted therapy rather than treating everyone. Dr. Dawn concludes with surprising research showing chronic inflammation during aging occurs only in industrialized societies. Studies comparing indigenous communities from Bolivian Amazon and Malaysia with populations from Italy and Singapore found inflammatory cytokines increase with age only in industrialized groups.
✨Apoya este canal y descarga Opera completamente gratis en el siguiente link https://opr.as/04-Opera-browser-jefillyshEn un futuro donde los humanos pueden ser reimpresos después de morir, ¿qué valor tiene la vida individual? En este video analizamos en profundidad la película Mickey 17, una historia de ciencia ficción que plantea un universo en el que los cuerpos humanos son prescindibles gracias a la tecnología de duplicación biológica. Exploramos los dilemas éticos, políticos y filosóficos que surgen cuando la muerte deja de ser un límite y los individuos se convierten en herramientas descartables al servicio del sistema. ¿Puede una sociedad seguir siendo humana cuando la identidad personal ya no es única ni irreemplazable?También discutimos la base científica detrás de esta idea: desde los avances actuales en biotecnología, clonación, ingeniería genética, neurociencia y transferencia de memoria, hasta las tecnologías emergentes como la impresión 3D de órganos, la edición de ADN con CRISPR, y los debates en torno a la digitalización de la conciencia. ¿Qué tan lejos estamos realmente de poder replicar un ser humano completo? ¿Y qué implicaciones tendría eso para los derechos humanos, la economía, el control estatal y la ética médica?Este video está pensado para quienes se interesan en el cruce entre ciencia real y ciencia ficción, y en cómo las tecnologías que hoy parecen imposibles podrían transformar —o destruir— nuestra sociedad. Si te apasionan los debates sobre identidad, mortalidad, inteligencia artificial, clonación humana y el futuro de la humanidad, no podés perderte este análisis de Mickey 17. La ciencia está más cerca de la ficción de lo que imaginamos.#Mickey17 #ClonaciónHumana #TecnologíaFutura #CienciaFicción #Bioética #IdentidadYTecnología #ImpresiónHumana #NeurocienciaYConciencia #CRISPR #TransferenciaDeMemoria #DilemasÉticos #PelículasDeCienciaFicción #FuturoDeLaHumanidad #CineYCiencia #ClonesYPolítica❤️Puedes apoyar este proyecto de divulgación en
Last month, scientists reported a historic first: they gave the first personalized gene-editing treatment to a baby who was born with a rare life-threatening genetic disorder. Before the treatment, his prognosis was grim. But after three doses, the baby's health improved. So how does it work? What are the risks? And what could this breakthrough mean for the 30 million people in the US who have a rare genetic disease with no available treatments?To help get some answers, Host Flora Lichtman is joined by the physician-scientists who led this research: geneticist Dr. Kiran Musunuru and pediatrician Dr. Rebecca Ahrens-Nicklas.Guests: Dr. Rebecca Ahrens-Nicklas is an assistant professor of pediatrics and genetics at the Children's Hospital of Philadelphia and the University of Pennsylvania.Dr. Kiran Musunuru is a professor of translational research at the University of Pennsylvania.Transcripts for each episode are available within 1-3 days at sciencefriday.com. Subscribe to this podcast. Plus, to stay updated on all things science, sign up for Science Friday's newsletters.
Brian Frank, the founder and general partner at FTW Ventures, shares why he left his founder career to invest in startups solving real-world problems starting with the global food system. He explores the climate risks, supply chain fragility, and health challenges driving the need for innovation in food and agriculture. From AI and biotech to automation, Brian highlights where the biggest opportunities lie. He also offers candid advice for founders navigating slow-moving, regulation-heavy industries and calls for a more collaborative, mission-aligned approach to venture capital.In this episode, you'll learn:[03:35] How startup success as a student got Brian hooked on innovation early[05:54] Why Brian left startup life after seven companies to support founders solving global problems[09:18] The urgent reasons our food system needs reinvention—from climate to national security[12:33] FTW Ventures investment philosophy and focus areas[22:50] Hard truths for founders in food and agriculture[31:13] The story of a founder who proved his market, didn't wait for funding, and built trust[37:05] What needs to change in VC: stop party rounds, leave space for small funds, invest with purposeThe nonprofit organization Brian is passionate about: World Central KitchenAbout Brian FrankBrian Frank is the founder and general partner at FTW Ventures, a venture capital firm focused on technology solutions in food, agriculture, and health. A serial entrepreneur with a background in computer science and product development, Brian has launched and scaled seven startups. He brings that hands-on experience to founders tackling real-world challenges, backing science-backed and mission-driven companies that aim to improve life on the planet.About FTW VenturesFTW Ventures is a Silicon Valley-based venture capital firm investing in the future of food, agriculture, and human health. With a thesis grounded in problem-first investing, FTW backs early-stage startups applying biotechnology, artificial intelligence, automation, and sustainable systems to global challenges. Their portfolio includes companies advancing biomanufacturing, food-as-medicine, CRISPR-based crop innovation, and more—pursuing returns across people, planet, and profit. Companies in FTW's portfolio include Boston Bioprocess, ALTR, Sylvan Health, FreshFry, Izote Biosciences, Arise, Quorum Bio, Earthodic, Heritable, Brilliant Harvest, VoltAir, Geltor, Spoiler Alert, Plantible Foods, Galley, Phytoform, Nfinite Nanotech, Yali Bio, and Debut Biotechnology.Subscribe to our podcast and stay tuned for our next episode.
This week on The Nerdpocalypse Podcast, the guys return to discuss Duster, CRISPR new innovation on chromosome editing that creates some moral issues potentially, Tyler Perry accused of exactly what you'd assume he'd be accused of, first look at He-Man is interesting, Clayface solo film gets its lead, is Mindhunters going to return?, more Pirates movies, Rachel Brosnahan has a message for actors in superhero movies, and much more.CHECKED OUTDusterSCIENCE & TECH NEWSCRISPR used to remove extra chromosomesTOPICS - Section 1Tyler Perry accused of sexual assault in actor's $260m lawsuitFirst look at He-Man is well…ok sure. Umm okMike Flanagan's Clayface solo movie finds its leadTNP STUDIOS PREMIUM (www.TheNerdpocalypse.com/premium)$5 a month Access to premium slate of podcasts incl. The Airing of Grievances, No Time to Bleed, The Men with the Golden Tongues, Upstage Conversation, and full episodes of the Look Forward political podcastTOPICS - Section 2Mindhunters may make a return!More Pirates of the Caribbean movies in the works but with or with Jack Sparrow?Rachel Brosnahan on acting not standing by their comic book moviesWTF? by JayTeeDee from the “Edit That Out” PodcastMicah: https://tinyurl.com/hell2danawJay: https://tinyurl.com/gwarlivesTRAILERS40 Acres
A Note from James:Michael Dell. Founder of Dell. I remember in college, hearing about this kid who was building computers in his dorm and making millions. I thought it was a myth. It wasn't. He's the real thing—and he just kept going.I wanted to understand what drove him, what it felt like to deal with Carl Icahn trying to wrestle his company from him, and what success feels like after decades of being in the game. Also: I had to ask why Dell didn't invent Google. That, plus how he's now thinking about AI, cancer, and what “focus” really means.Episode Description:James Altucher sits down with Michael Dell, founder and CEO of Dell Technologies, to trace the entire arc of Dell's career—from building computers in a college dorm room to defending his company against Carl Icahn and taking it private. In this candid conversation, Dell shares how early obsession with tech and business turned into a multibillion-dollar global enterprise, the lessons he's learned about leadership, and how he's positioning for the future with AI, cybersecurity, and gene tech on the horizon.This is more than a business story. It's about risk, conviction, reinvention—and knowing when to walk away from Steve Jobs.What You'll Learn:How Dell's dorm-room business scaled to $80,000/month before he even left collegeWhat Michael Dell really thought during his showdown with Carl IcahnWhy most big companies fail to innovate—and how to keep a startup mindsetHow Dell Technologies is preparing for the explosion in AI and edge computingWhat makes a good leader at the head of a $100 billion companyTimestamped Chapters:[00:00] James introduces Michael Dell and the origin story of Dell Computers[01:00] The economics of building PCs in the early 1980s[03:00] Winning state bids with a bike and a dorm room[05:00] Pressure to become a doctor—and the 10-day “intervention”[10:00] Meeting Steve Jobs and licensing DOS from Bill Gates[13:00] Dell's early B2B focus and international expansion[15:00] Going public and the Icahn showdown[18:00] How activist investors play poker with billion-dollar stakes[21:00] What focus really means in business[24:00] Defining leadership at global scale[26:00] Encouraging innovation inside massive companies[28:00] The failed Mac OS licensing deal[30:00] Philanthropy, education, and urban poverty[33:00] COVID lockdowns and a $100M response[35:00] The future of work and city migration[39:00] AI, edge computing, and exponential data[42:00] Gene editing, mRNA vaccines, and solving cancer[45:00] Blockchain in enterprise (no bitcoin on Dell's balance sheet—yet)[47:00] Why cybersecurity is an arms raceAdditional Resources:Play Nice But Win – Michael Dell's memoir (Amazon)Dell Technologies – Official websiteJudge rejects Icahn's move on Dell buyout – CT InsiderRichard Florida on the future of cities – Vital City NYC interviewWhat is CRISPR? – Broad InstituteHistory of MS‑DOS – WikipediaSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.
South American cane toads were brought to Australia in 1935 to help eradicate native beetles that were destroying sugar cane crops. The toads didn't care much for the beetles, but they did spread across the coast of Queensland and beyond, with no natural predators to stop them. Their own deadly toxin devastated local reptiles along the way, and they now number over 200 million.Invasive biologists have long tried to curb Australia's cane toad population. The newest approach uses CRISPR gene-editing technology to create cannibalistic “Peter Pan” cane toad tadpoles: tadpoles that don't fully mature and instead feast on the tens of thousands of eggs that the toads produce.How was this approach developed, and how do these researchers think about making a potentially massive change to the ecosystem? Biologist Rick Shine, who has led the effort, joins Host Flora Lichtman to discuss it. Later, science journalist Elizabeth Kolbert talks about her experience reporting on similar monumental efforts to control nature—and what they say about us.Guests: Elizabeth Kolbert is a staff writer at The New Yorker and author of Under a White Sky: The Nature of the Future (Crown, 2021). She's based in Williamstown, Massachusetts.Dr. Rick Shine is a professor of biology at Macquarie University in Sydney, Australia.Transcript is available on sciencefriday.com. Subscribe to this podcast. Plus, to stay updated on all things science, sign up for Science Friday's newsletters.
My guest is Dr. Melissa Ilardo, Ph.D., professor of biomedical informatics at the University of Utah. We discuss the interplay between genes and behaviors, including how certain behaviors can improve resilience by changing gene and organ function, as well as natural selection events happening in humans today. We also discuss the immune system–related reasons people find the smells of potential mates attractive—or not. We explore how physical and psychological traits are passed from one generation to the next, and the specific behaviors that can influence gene expression to improve health and performance. Melissa explains her lab's pioneering research on breath-hold training and how activation of the dive reflex through breath holding can significantly improve oxygen availability by changing spleen size and function. We also delve into the medical uses and ethics of gene editing to cure disease in both babies and adults. For those interested in genes and inheritance, human performance, immune system function, and natural selection, this episode illustrates the remarkable interplay between human nature and nurture. Read the episode show notes at hubermanlab.com. Thank you to our sponsors AG1: https://drinkag1.com/huberman Joovv: https://joovv.com/huberman Eight Sleep: https://eightsleep.com/huberman LMNT: https://drinklmnt.com/huberman Function: https://functionhealth.com/huberman Timestamps 00:00:00 Melissa Ilardo 00:02:35 Nature vs Nurture, Gene Expression, Eye Color 00:07:06 Sponsors: Joovv & Eight Sleep 00:10:24 Epigenetics, Trauma, Mutations; Hybrid Vigor, Mate Attraction 00:15:47 Globalization; Homo Sapiens, Mating & Evolution; Mutations 00:25:28 Sea Nomads, Bajau & Moken Groups; Free Diving, Dangers & Gasp Reflex 00:32:52 Cultural Traditions, Free Diving & Families; Fishing 00:35:36 Mammalian Dive Reflex, Oxygen, Spleen, Cold Water & Face; Exercise 00:42:43 Sponsors: AG1 & LMNT 00:46:00 Free Diving, Spleen, Thyroid Hormone, Performance Enhancement 00:52:00 Dive Reflex, Immune System; Swimming & Health; Coastal Regions & Genetics 00:55:17 Female Free Divers, Haenyeo, Cold Water, Age, Protein 01:03:20 Human Evolution & Diet, Lactase, Fat 01:05:07 Korean Female Free Divers & Adaptations, Cardiovascular, Pregnancy 01:10:13 Miscarriages & Genetic Selection; Bajau, External Appearance, Mate Selection 01:17:15 Sponsor: Function 01:19:03 Free Diving, Underwater Vision; Super-Performers & Genetics 01:25:01 Cognitive Performance, Autism, Creativity; Genetic Determinism & Mindset 01:36:30 Genetics & Ethics, CRISPR, Embryo Genetic Screening 01:44:36 Admixture, Genetics; Are Humans a Single Species? 01:49:39 Zero-Cost Support, YouTube, Spotify & Apple Follow & Reviews, Sponsors, YouTube Feedback, Protocols Book, Social Media, Neural Network Newsletter Disclaimer & Disclosures Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices
© 2020-2025 Ivy Podcast Discovery LLC
