Podcasts about frcp

Richard David Graham Leslie, MD, FRCP, FAoP - When Could Dysglycaemia in Adults Be Type 1 Diabetes? Expert Perspectives on Recognising and Addressing Diagnostic Complexities and Challenges

Richard David Graham Leslie, MD, FRCP, FAoP - When Could Dysglycaemia in Adults Be Type 1 Diabetes? Expert Perspectives on Recognising and Addressing Diagnostic Complexities and Challenges

Richard David Graham Leslie, MD, FRCP, FAoP - When Could Dysglycaemia in Adults Be Type 1 Diabetes? Expert Perspectives on Recognising and Addressing Diagnostic Complexities and Challenges

Richard David Graham Leslie, MD, FRCP, FAoP - When Could Dysglycaemia in Adults Be Type 1 Diabetes? Expert Perspectives on Recognising and Addressing Diagnostic Complexities and Challenges

Richard David Graham Leslie, MD, FRCP, FAoP - When Could Dysglycaemia in Adults Be Type 1 Diabetes? Expert Perspectives on Recognising and Addressing Diagnostic Complexities and Challenges

Richard David Graham Leslie, MD, FRCP, FAoP - When Could Dysglycaemia in Adults Be Type 1 Diabetes? Expert Perspectives on Recognising and Addressing Diagnostic Complexities and Challenges

In a time of growing uncertainty for the HIV response within the U.S., you may be wondering: What do I do if the public guidelines and resources I rely on to provide HIV-related clinical services cease receiving updates or are permanently removed? Laura and Myles discuss the complexities of our current moment -- and the extent to which our colleagues across the pond in the British HIV Association (BHIVA) can help fill the gap. Laura will also review recent highlights from BHIVA's annual Spring Conference, a cross-disciplinary meeting featuring clinical research and state-of-the-art updates. ° Read the full transcript, which includes a bevy of relevant links: https://www.thebodypro.com/podcast/hiv/future-hiv-care-bhiva-may-2025 ° The pod production team: Our co-hosts are Laura Waters, M.D., FRCP, and Myles Helfand; our senior production manager is Alina Mogollon-Volk; our senior producer is Lizzie Warren; our associate production manager is Maui Voskova; our audio editor is Kim Buikema; and our executive producer is Myles Helfand.

Chronicling her dual professional life as a highly respected, Lancet-published academic physician while also investigating powerful psychic and paranormal experiences in her work and personal life, Dr. Blackwell presents compelling evidence for telepathy, clairvoyance, near-death experiences (NDEs), life after death, the power of prayer, non-ordinary reality, and more.The book reveals how, after years of attempting to reconcile her extraordinary experiences, Dr. Blackwell transformed from a scientifically trained medic into a mystic, acknowledging there is far more to life - and to us - than science alone can explain. Her irreverent sense of humour (her account of meeting Prince Charles is unmissable) and her ability to integrate both orthodox and complementary medical practices create a thought-provoking, multi-layered, and often amusing read.By sharing her forays into non-ordinary reality, Dr. Blackwell encourages others to share their paranormal experiences without fear of being labelled ‘crazy'.BioFrom humble beginnings as the daughter of a bus driver and market gardener, growing up on a smallholding in rural Wales, Dr. Blackwell, BSc, AKC, FRCP, rose to become a leading authority in genito-urinary medicine. Immersed in orthodox medicine by day, she devoted her after-hours to the in-depth investigation of anomalous phenomena, energy healing, and metaphysics. Her innate psychic abilities offered profound insights into her patients' lives, psyches, and hidden traumas – insights that few modern doctors are privileged to experience.A passionate explorer of the natural world, with a deep-rooted interest in organic gardening, sustainable living and the mysteries of the cosmos, with years of experience in both scientific research and metaphysical studies, Dr. Blackwell shares her unique perspectives and knowledge through engaging blog posts. Her mission is to inspire others to appreciate the wonders of our universe, from the soil beneath our feet to the stars above. You can read more fascinating stories about her own and others' experiences at Dr Blackwell's website, where she encourages those who have had similar experiences to share them with her audience.https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0DV9KZSY5https://www.drblackwell.co.uk/ https://www.pastliveshypnosis.co.uk/https://www.patreon.com/ourparanormalafterlifeMy book 'Verified Near Death Experiences' https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0DXKRGDFP

Chronicling her dual professional life as a highly respected, Lancet-published academic physician while also investigating powerful psychic and paranormal experiences in her work and personal life, Dr. Blackwell presents compelling evidence for telepathy, clairvoyance, near-death experiences (NDEs), life after death, the power of prayer, non-ordinary reality, and more.The book reveals how, after years of attempting to reconcile her extraordinary experiences, Dr. Blackwell transformed from a scientifically trained medic into a mystic, acknowledging there is far more to life - and to us - than science alone can explain. Her irreverent sense of humour (her account of meeting Prince Charles is unmissable) and her ability to integrate both orthodox and complementary medical practices create a thought-provoking, multi-layered, and often amusing read.By sharing her forays into non-ordinary reality, Dr. Blackwell encourages others to share their paranormal experiences without fear of being labelled ‘crazy'.BioFrom humble beginnings as the daughter of a bus driver and market gardener, growing up on a smallholding in rural Wales, Dr. Blackwell, BSc, AKC, FRCP, rose to become a leading authority in genito-urinary medicine. Immersed in orthodox medicine by day, she devoted her after-hours to the in-depth investigation of anomalous phenomena, energy healing, and metaphysics. Her innate psychic abilities offered profound insights into her patients' lives, psyches, and hidden traumas – insights that few modern doctors are privileged to experience.A passionate explorer of the natural world, with a deep-rooted interest in organic gardening, sustainable living and the mysteries of the cosmos, with years of experience in both scientific research and metaphysical studies, Dr. Blackwell shares her unique perspectives and knowledge through engaging blog posts. Her mission is to inspire others to appreciate the wonders of our universe, from the soil beneath our feet to the stars above. You can read more fascinating stories about her own and others' experiences at Dr Blackwell's website, where she encourages those who have had similar experiences to share them with her audience.https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0DV9KZSY5https://www.drblackwell.co.uk/ https://www.pastliveshypnosis.co.uk/https://www.patreon.com/ourparanormalafterlifeMy book 'Verified Near Death Experiences' https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0DXKRGDFP

Myles Helfand and Laura Waters, M.D., FRCP, discuss recently published, clinically noteworthy findings from a trio of venerable HIV cohort studies. First, they review new data from the ATHENA study on non-AIDS events among so-called "HIV controllers." They then move on to recent findings from the START study regarding the link between ART initiation timing and cardiovascular disease risk. Finally, they explore new REPRIEVE data exploring the impact (or lack thereof) of statin use on non-cardiovascular events. ‡ Read (and share!) the full transcript: https://www.thebodypro.com/hiv/future-hiv-care-nuances-matter-april-2025 ‡ The pod production team: Our senior production manager is Alina Mogollon-Volk; our senior producer is Lizzie Warren; our associate production manager is Maui Voskova; our audio editor is Kim Buikema; and our executive producer is Myles Helfand.

In this episode, Chloe Orkin, MBChB, FRCP, MD, and Jean-Michel Molina, MD, PhD, discuss highlights from CCO's independent conference coverage of CROI 2025, including:Advances in HIV treatment based on results from CARESPotential HIV therapies in the pipeline, such as doravirine/islatravirEffects of broadly neutralizing antibodies on HIV treatment and cure Key clinical data on HIV and STI prevention obtained from PILLAR, HPTN 083, PURPOSE 1, and STOMPPresenters:Chloe Orkin, MBChB, FRCP, MDProfessor of Infection and InequitiesDean for Healthcare TransformationHonorary Consultant Physician, Barts Health NHS TrustFaculty of Medicine and DentistryQueen Mary University of LondonLondon, United KingdomJean-Michel Molina, MD, PhDProfessor of MedicineUniversity of Paris CiteDepartment of Infectious DiseasesSaint-Louis and Lariboisiere Hospitals, APHPParis, FranceLink to full program:bit.ly/3E1bAYQTo access all of our new podcast episodes, subscribe to the CCO Infectious Disease Podcast on Apple Podcasts, Google Podcasts, or Spotify. 

In this episode of “Answers From the Lab,” William Morice II, M.D., Ph.D., CEO and president of Mayo Clinic Laboratories, invited Min-Han Tan, M.B.B.S., FRCP, Ph.D., founding CEO and medical director of Lucence, to discuss liquid biopsy cancer testing. Mayo Clinic Laboratories and Lucence recently announced a collaboration to expand access to this cutting-edge cancer test that is designed to detect clinically relevant biomarkers in ctDNA and ctRNA.During their conversation, Dr. Morice and Dr. Tan explore:Inspiration for developing the liquid biopsy.Features that differentiate LiquidHALLMARK® from existing cancer tests.Patients who will benefit from the test and how an oncologist might use the results.The future potential of liquid biopsy advancements.

In this episode, Dr Gideon Hirschfield meets with patient advocate Jess Schnur to discuss challenges related to the diagnosis and management of primary biliary cholangitis (PBC) to provide actionable strategies for healthcare professionals to incorporate into patient care, including:Disease concerns and frequently asked questions from a patient perspectiveManaging symptomsTreatment options and supportive careImportance of awareness and educationPresenters:Gideon Hirschfield, MA, MB BChir, FRCP, PhDLily and Terry Horner Chair in Autoimmune Liver Disease ResearchProfessor, Division of Gastroenterology and HepatologyUniversity of TorontoDirector, The Autoimmune and Rare Liver Disease ProgrammeDirector, Francis Family Liver ClinicToronto General Hospital, University Health NetworkOntario, CanadaJess N. Schnur, BSN-RNNational PBC Patient AdvocateAmerican Liver FoundationDonation Support Services CoordinatorLifeline of OhioColumbus, OhioTo learn more, see the program Hear Me: Patient Perspectives on PBC

Cancer treatments can make eating a challenge, but the right nutrition is essential for maintaining strength and managing side effects. Oncology dietitians Karen Biggs, RD, MHSc. and Renée Ouellette, RD share practical tips for dealing with taste changes, appetite loss, and difficulty swallowing. Learn how small adjustments can make a big difference in keeping energy up and feeling better during treatment.DisclaimerThe Cancer Assist Show is hosted by Dr. Bill Evans, MD, FRCP, Past President of the Juravinski Hospital and Cancer Centre at HHS. Brought to you by the Cancer Assistance Program—an organization lending support to cancer patients and families of those affected by cancer. --- The Cancer Assist Show and its content represent the opinions of Dr. Bill Evans and guests to the podcast. Any views and opinions expressed by Dr. Bill Evans and guests are their own and do not represent those of their places of work. The content of The Cancer Assist Show is provided for informational, educational and entertainment purposes only, and is not intended as professional medical, legal or any other advice, or as a substitute or replacement for any such advice. The Cancer Assist Program, Dr. Bill Evans and guests make no representations or warranties with respect to the accuracy or validity of any information or content offered or provided by The Cancer Assist Show. For any medical needs or concerns, please consult a qualified medical professional. No part of The Cancer Assist Show or its content is intended to establish a doctor-patient or any other professional relationship. This podcast is owned and produced by the Cancer Assistance Program.

This content has been developed for healthcare professionals only. Patients who seek health information should consult with their physician or relevant patient advocacy groups.For the full presentation, downloadable Practice Aids, slides, and complete CME/AAPA information, and to apply for credit, please visit us at PeerView.com/QZC865. CME/AAPA credit will be available until March 3, 2026.Individualizing the PBC Care Pathway: From Baseline and Beyond In support of improving patient care, PVI, PeerView Institute for Medical Education, is jointly accredited by the Accreditation Council for Continuing Medical Education (ACCME), the Accreditation Council for Pharmacy Education (ACPE), and the American Nurses Credentialing Center (ANCC), to provide continuing education for the healthcare team.SupportThis activity is supported by an educational grant from Gilead Sciences, Inc.Disclosure information is available at the beginning of the video presentation.

This content has been developed for healthcare professionals only. Patients who seek health information should consult with their physician or relevant patient advocacy groups.For the full presentation, downloadable Practice Aids, slides, and complete CME/AAPA information, and to apply for credit, please visit us at PeerView.com/QZC865. CME/AAPA credit will be available until March 3, 2026.Individualizing the PBC Care Pathway: From Baseline and Beyond In support of improving patient care, PVI, PeerView Institute for Medical Education, is jointly accredited by the Accreditation Council for Continuing Medical Education (ACCME), the Accreditation Council for Pharmacy Education (ACPE), and the American Nurses Credentialing Center (ANCC), to provide continuing education for the healthcare team.SupportThis activity is supported by an educational grant from Gilead Sciences, Inc.Disclosure information is available at the beginning of the video presentation.

This content has been developed for healthcare professionals only. Patients who seek health information should consult with their physician or relevant patient advocacy groups.For the full presentation, downloadable Practice Aids, slides, and complete CME/AAPA information, and to apply for credit, please visit us at PeerView.com/QZC865. CME/AAPA credit will be available until March 3, 2026.Individualizing the PBC Care Pathway: From Baseline and Beyond In support of improving patient care, PVI, PeerView Institute for Medical Education, is jointly accredited by the Accreditation Council for Continuing Medical Education (ACCME), the Accreditation Council for Pharmacy Education (ACPE), and the American Nurses Credentialing Center (ANCC), to provide continuing education for the healthcare team.SupportThis activity is supported by an educational grant from Gilead Sciences, Inc.Disclosure information is available at the beginning of the video presentation.

Claire Harrison, DM, FRCP, FRCPath - Patient-Centred Care in Cytopenic Myelofibrosis: Collaborative Conversations on Treatment Goals and Decisions

Claire Harrison, DM, FRCP, FRCPath - Patient-Centred Care in Cytopenic Myelofibrosis: Collaborative Conversations on Treatment Goals and Decisions

Claire Harrison, DM, FRCP, FRCPath - Patient-Centred Care in Cytopenic Myelofibrosis: Collaborative Conversations on Treatment Goals and Decisions

This content has been developed for healthcare professionals only. Patients who seek health information should consult with their physician or relevant patient advocacy groups.For the full presentation, downloadable Practice Aids, slides, and complete CME/AAPA information, and to apply for credit, please visit us at PeerView.com/QZC865. CME/AAPA credit will be available until March 3, 2026.Individualizing the PBC Care Pathway: From Baseline and Beyond In support of improving patient care, PVI, PeerView Institute for Medical Education, is jointly accredited by the Accreditation Council for Continuing Medical Education (ACCME), the Accreditation Council for Pharmacy Education (ACPE), and the American Nurses Credentialing Center (ANCC), to provide continuing education for the healthcare team.SupportThis activity is supported by an educational grant from Gilead Sciences, Inc.Disclosure information is available at the beginning of the video presentation.

This content has been developed for healthcare professionals only. Patients who seek health information should consult with their physician or relevant patient advocacy groups.For the full presentation, downloadable Practice Aids, slides, and complete CME/AAPA information, and to apply for credit, please visit us at PeerView.com/QZC865. CME/AAPA credit will be available until March 3, 2026.Individualizing the PBC Care Pathway: From Baseline and Beyond In support of improving patient care, PVI, PeerView Institute for Medical Education, is jointly accredited by the Accreditation Council for Continuing Medical Education (ACCME), the Accreditation Council for Pharmacy Education (ACPE), and the American Nurses Credentialing Center (ANCC), to provide continuing education for the healthcare team.SupportThis activity is supported by an educational grant from Gilead Sciences, Inc.Disclosure information is available at the beginning of the video presentation.

This content has been developed for healthcare professionals only. Patients who seek health information should consult with their physician or relevant patient advocacy groups.For the full presentation, downloadable Practice Aids, slides, and complete CME/AAPA information, and to apply for credit, please visit us at PeerView.com/QZC865. CME/AAPA credit will be available until March 3, 2026.Individualizing the PBC Care Pathway: From Baseline and Beyond In support of improving patient care, PVI, PeerView Institute for Medical Education, is jointly accredited by the Accreditation Council for Continuing Medical Education (ACCME), the Accreditation Council for Pharmacy Education (ACPE), and the American Nurses Credentialing Center (ANCC), to provide continuing education for the healthcare team.SupportThis activity is supported by an educational grant from Gilead Sciences, Inc.Disclosure information is available at the beginning of the video presentation.

In this episode, Jim Garrity spotlights a new ruling on a little-known but powerful tool: the use of depositions as affidavits. As Garrity discusses, a deposition does not need to meet the requirements of trial-oriented Fed. R. Civ. P. 32 (which requires a showing that the party against whom the deposition is offered had notice and a chance to examine the deposition) when it is offered in proceedings that allow testimony by affidavit, such as at summary judgment.SHOW NOTESSurety v. Co. v. Dwight A. Herald, et al., Case No. 1:23-cv-00086-GNS-HBB, 2025 WL 627523 (W.D. Ky. Feb. 26, 2025) (deposition/examination under oath of witness taken in underlying state-court personal injury could be used in federal declaratory judgment actions at summary judgment time, as deposition meets form of affidavit)Diamonds Plus, Inc. v. Kolber, et al., 960 F. 2d 765 (8th Cir. 1992) (deposition need not be admissible at trial to be properly considered in opposition to motions for summary judgment; deposition inadmissible at trial because one of the defendants did not receive proper notice and did not attend the deposition was properly used to create issues of fact justifying denial of summary judgment)Hoover v. Switlik Parachute Co., 663 F.2d 964, 966-67 (9th Cir. 1981) (“Rule 56 ... plainly allows consideration of “affidavits” and we find nothing which requires that term to be construed within the limitations of Rule 32(a).”).First Gaston Bank of North Carolina v. City of Hickory, 691 S.E.2d 715 (Ct. App. N.C. 2010) (citing cases rejecting proposition that FRCP 32 limits use of depositions in proceedings where evidence in affidavit form is admissible; pointing out that to the extent a party objects that they didn't have an opportunity to cross-examine a witness whose deposition from some other cases being offered, “the same objection can frequently be made as to affidavits filed in connection with motions for summary judgment”)Tingey v. Radionics, 193 F. App'x 747, 765–66 (10th Cir. 2006) (reversing summary judgment where trial court, relying on FRCP 32, excluded from consideration in opposition to summary judgment a deposition that plaintiff took of physician in separate state proceeding, where defendant was not party to that proceeding and had not been given notice of deposition; depositions can be used as affidavits in proceedings where affidavits are admissible; to illustrate, “[p]arties may file affidavits in support of summary judgment without providing notice or an opportunity to cross-examine the affiant. See Fed.R.Civ.P. 56(c). The “remedy” for this non-confronted affidavit testimony is to file an opposing affidavit, not to complain that one was not present and permitted to cross-examine when the affidavit was signed. For this reason, the Ninth Circuit has permitted a party to introduce deposition testimony for summary judgment purposes against a party who was not present at the deposition, by construing the deposition as an affidavit. Hoover v. Switlik Parachute Co., 663 F.2d 964, 966–67 (9th Cir.1981)”)Nippon Credit Bank, Ltd. v. Matthews, 291 F.3d 738, 751 (11th Cir. 2002) (without analyzing scope and extent of application of FRCP 32, court broadly said that “Depositions are generally admissible provided that the party against whom they are admitted was present, represented, or reasonably noticed, Fed.R.Civ.P. 32(a), and are specifically allowed in consideration of summary judgment. Fed.R.Civ.P. 56(c). A deposition taken in a different proceeding is admissible if the party against whom it is offered was provided with an opportunity to examine the deponent. Fed.R.Evid. 804(b)(1).”)Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(c)(1)(A) (explicitly allowing citation to depositions for or against summary judgment)8 Charles Alan Wright & Arthur R. Miller, Federal Practice and Procedure § 2142 (1970))) (as are at least as good as affidavits and should be usable whenever an affidavit would be permissible, even where the conditions or requirements for use at trial under rule 32 are not met) 

This content has been developed for healthcare professionals only. Patients who seek health information should consult with their physician or relevant patient advocacy groups.For the full presentation, downloadable Practice Aids, slides, and complete CME/MOC/AAPA/IPCE information, and to apply for credit, please visit us at PeerView.com/CFZ865. CME/MOC/AAPA/IPCE credit will be available until February 23, 2026.Strengthening the Immunotherapy Paradigm in Advanced SCAC: Established & Emerging Roles of Immune-Based Platforms Across Lines of Therapy In support of improving patient care, this activity has been planned and implemented by PVI, PeerView Institute for Medical Education, and The Anal Cancer Foundation. PVI, PeerView Institute for Medical Education, is jointly accredited by the Accreditation Council for Continuing Medical Education (ACCME), the Accreditation Council for Pharmacy Education (ACPE), and the American Nurses Credentialing Center (ANCC), to provide continuing education for the healthcare team.SupportThis activity is supported by an educational grant from Incyte Corporation.Disclosure information is available at the beginning of the video presentation.

This content has been developed for healthcare professionals only. Patients who seek health information should consult with their physician or relevant patient advocacy groups.For the full presentation, downloadable Practice Aids, slides, and complete CME/MOC/AAPA/IPCE information, and to apply for credit, please visit us at PeerView.com/CFZ865. CME/MOC/AAPA/IPCE credit will be available until February 23, 2026.Strengthening the Immunotherapy Paradigm in Advanced SCAC: Established & Emerging Roles of Immune-Based Platforms Across Lines of Therapy In support of improving patient care, this activity has been planned and implemented by PVI, PeerView Institute for Medical Education, and The Anal Cancer Foundation. PVI, PeerView Institute for Medical Education, is jointly accredited by the Accreditation Council for Continuing Medical Education (ACCME), the Accreditation Council for Pharmacy Education (ACPE), and the American Nurses Credentialing Center (ANCC), to provide continuing education for the healthcare team.SupportThis activity is supported by an educational grant from Incyte Corporation.Disclosure information is available at the beginning of the video presentation.

This content has been developed for healthcare professionals only. Patients who seek health information should consult with their physician or relevant patient advocacy groups.For the full presentation, downloadable Practice Aids, slides, and complete CME/MOC/AAPA/IPCE information, and to apply for credit, please visit us at PeerView.com/CFZ865. CME/MOC/AAPA/IPCE credit will be available until February 23, 2026.Strengthening the Immunotherapy Paradigm in Advanced SCAC: Established & Emerging Roles of Immune-Based Platforms Across Lines of Therapy In support of improving patient care, this activity has been planned and implemented by PVI, PeerView Institute for Medical Education, and The Anal Cancer Foundation. PVI, PeerView Institute for Medical Education, is jointly accredited by the Accreditation Council for Continuing Medical Education (ACCME), the Accreditation Council for Pharmacy Education (ACPE), and the American Nurses Credentialing Center (ANCC), to provide continuing education for the healthcare team.SupportThis activity is supported by an educational grant from Incyte Corporation.Disclosure information is available at the beginning of the video presentation.

This content has been developed for healthcare professionals only. Patients who seek health information should consult with their physician or relevant patient advocacy groups.For the full presentation, downloadable Practice Aids, slides, and complete CME/MOC/AAPA/IPCE information, and to apply for credit, please visit us at PeerView.com/CFZ865. CME/MOC/AAPA/IPCE credit will be available until February 23, 2026.Strengthening the Immunotherapy Paradigm in Advanced SCAC: Established & Emerging Roles of Immune-Based Platforms Across Lines of Therapy In support of improving patient care, this activity has been planned and implemented by PVI, PeerView Institute for Medical Education, and The Anal Cancer Foundation. PVI, PeerView Institute for Medical Education, is jointly accredited by the Accreditation Council for Continuing Medical Education (ACCME), the Accreditation Council for Pharmacy Education (ACPE), and the American Nurses Credentialing Center (ANCC), to provide continuing education for the healthcare team.SupportThis activity is supported by an educational grant from Incyte Corporation.Disclosure information is available at the beginning of the video presentation.

This content has been developed for healthcare professionals only. Patients who seek health information should consult with their physician or relevant patient advocacy groups.For the full presentation, downloadable Practice Aids, slides, and complete CME information, and to apply for credit, please visit us at PeerView.com/HKW865. CME credit will be available until January 31, 2026.Finding the Heat in Cold Tumours: Potential for Perioperative Immunotherapy Strategies in Early Breast Cancer In support of improving patient care, PVI, PeerView Institute for Medical Education, is jointly accredited by the Accreditation Council for Continuing Medical Education (ACCME), the Accreditation Council for Pharmacy Education (ACPE), and the American Nurses Credentialing Center (ANCC), to provide continuing education for the healthcare team.SupportThis activity is supported by an educational grant from Merck Sharp & Dohme LLC, a subsidiary of Merck & Co., Inc.Disclosure information is available at the beginning of the video presentation.

This content has been developed for healthcare professionals only. Patients who seek health information should consult with their physician or relevant patient advocacy groups.For the full presentation, downloadable Practice Aids, slides, and complete CME information, and to apply for credit, please visit us at PeerView.com/HKW865. CME credit will be available until January 31, 2026.Finding the Heat in Cold Tumours: Potential for Perioperative Immunotherapy Strategies in Early Breast Cancer In support of improving patient care, PVI, PeerView Institute for Medical Education, is jointly accredited by the Accreditation Council for Continuing Medical Education (ACCME), the Accreditation Council for Pharmacy Education (ACPE), and the American Nurses Credentialing Center (ANCC), to provide continuing education for the healthcare team.SupportThis activity is supported by an educational grant from Merck Sharp & Dohme LLC, a subsidiary of Merck & Co., Inc.Disclosure information is available at the beginning of the video presentation.

This content has been developed for healthcare professionals only. Patients who seek health information should consult with their physician or relevant patient advocacy groups.For the full presentation, downloadable Practice Aids, slides, and complete CME information, and to apply for credit, please visit us at PeerView.com/HKW865. CME credit will be available until January 31, 2026.Finding the Heat in Cold Tumours: Potential for Perioperative Immunotherapy Strategies in Early Breast Cancer In support of improving patient care, PVI, PeerView Institute for Medical Education, is jointly accredited by the Accreditation Council for Continuing Medical Education (ACCME), the Accreditation Council for Pharmacy Education (ACPE), and the American Nurses Credentialing Center (ANCC), to provide continuing education for the healthcare team.SupportThis activity is supported by an educational grant from Merck Sharp & Dohme LLC, a subsidiary of Merck & Co., Inc.Disclosure information is available at the beginning of the video presentation.

This content has been developed for healthcare professionals only. Patients who seek health information should consult with their physician or relevant patient advocacy groups.For the full presentation, downloadable Practice Aids, slides, and complete CME information, and to apply for credit, please visit us at PeerView.com/HKW865. CME credit will be available until January 31, 2026.Finding the Heat in Cold Tumours: Potential for Perioperative Immunotherapy Strategies in Early Breast Cancer In support of improving patient care, PVI, PeerView Institute for Medical Education, is jointly accredited by the Accreditation Council for Continuing Medical Education (ACCME), the Accreditation Council for Pharmacy Education (ACPE), and the American Nurses Credentialing Center (ANCC), to provide continuing education for the healthcare team.SupportThis activity is supported by an educational grant from Merck Sharp & Dohme LLC, a subsidiary of Merck & Co., Inc.Disclosure information is available at the beginning of the video presentation.

This content has been developed for healthcare professionals only. Patients who seek health information should consult with their physician or relevant patient advocacy groups.For the full presentation, downloadable Practice Aids, slides, and complete CME information, and to apply for credit, please visit us at PeerView.com/HKW865. CME credit will be available until January 31, 2026.Finding the Heat in Cold Tumours: Potential for Perioperative Immunotherapy Strategies in Early Breast Cancer In support of improving patient care, PVI, PeerView Institute for Medical Education, is jointly accredited by the Accreditation Council for Continuing Medical Education (ACCME), the Accreditation Council for Pharmacy Education (ACPE), and the American Nurses Credentialing Center (ANCC), to provide continuing education for the healthcare team.SupportThis activity is supported by an educational grant from Merck Sharp & Dohme LLC, a subsidiary of Merck & Co., Inc.Disclosure information is available at the beginning of the video presentation.

This content has been developed for healthcare professionals only. Patients who seek health information should consult with their physician or relevant patient advocacy groups.For the full presentation, downloadable Practice Aids, slides, and complete CME information, and to apply for credit, please visit us at PeerView.com/HKW865. CME credit will be available until January 31, 2026.Finding the Heat in Cold Tumours: Potential for Perioperative Immunotherapy Strategies in Early Breast Cancer In support of improving patient care, PVI, PeerView Institute for Medical Education, is jointly accredited by the Accreditation Council for Continuing Medical Education (ACCME), the Accreditation Council for Pharmacy Education (ACPE), and the American Nurses Credentialing Center (ANCC), to provide continuing education for the healthcare team.SupportThis activity is supported by an educational grant from Merck Sharp & Dohme LLC, a subsidiary of Merck & Co., Inc.Disclosure information is available at the beginning of the video presentation.

This content has been developed for healthcare professionals only. Patients who seek health information should consult with their physician or relevant patient advocacy groups.For the full presentation, downloadable Practice Aids, slides, and complete CME information, and to apply for credit, please visit us at PeerView.com/HKW865. CME credit will be available until January 31, 2026.Finding the Heat in Cold Tumours: Potential for Perioperative Immunotherapy Strategies in Early Breast Cancer In support of improving patient care, PVI, PeerView Institute for Medical Education, is jointly accredited by the Accreditation Council for Continuing Medical Education (ACCME), the Accreditation Council for Pharmacy Education (ACPE), and the American Nurses Credentialing Center (ANCC), to provide continuing education for the healthcare team.SupportThis activity is supported by an educational grant from Merck Sharp & Dohme LLC, a subsidiary of Merck & Co., Inc.Disclosure information is available at the beginning of the video presentation.

This content has been developed for healthcare professionals only. Patients who seek health information should consult with their physician or relevant patient advocacy groups.For the full presentation, downloadable Practice Aids, slides, and complete CME information, and to apply for credit, please visit us at PeerView.com/HKW865. CME credit will be available until January 31, 2026.Finding the Heat in Cold Tumours: Potential for Perioperative Immunotherapy Strategies in Early Breast Cancer In support of improving patient care, PVI, PeerView Institute for Medical Education, is jointly accredited by the Accreditation Council for Continuing Medical Education (ACCME), the Accreditation Council for Pharmacy Education (ACPE), and the American Nurses Credentialing Center (ANCC), to provide continuing education for the healthcare team.SupportThis activity is supported by an educational grant from Merck Sharp & Dohme LLC, a subsidiary of Merck & Co., Inc.Disclosure information is available at the beginning of the video presentation.

In this episode, Jim Garrity talks about a tactic of some examining lawyers that should, but often doesn't, draw objections that their questions are “argumentative.” So, what is an improper, argumentative question or examination? Here, we're not talking about the questioner's tone or demeanor, i.e., arguing in the classic sense of yelling and bickering with the deponent. We're talking about questions where lawyers aren't really asking a question designed to elicit facts but are instead injecting their own commentary or viewpoint, or injecting insults, taunts, wisecracks, or similar language. "Argumentative" objections are objections to the form, and must be timely made or are waived.SHOW NOTESPeople v. Pawar, No. G037097, 2007 WL 477949, at *2 (Cal. Ct. App. Feb. 15, 2007) (“[W]ere they lying” queries are improper if they are merely argumentative. (Chatman, supra, 38 Cal.4th at pp. 381, 384.) In Chatman, the prosecutor asked the defendant how the safe at a store was opened. (Id. at p. 379.) The defendant replied “he could not say; he never touched the safe,” eliciting the prosecutor's query, “ ‘Well, is the safe lying about you?' “ (Ibid.) The Supreme Court held the question of whether an inanimate object was “lying” was argumentative , defining argumentative inquiry as “speech to the jury masquerading as a question” which “does not seek to elicit relevant, competent testimony, or often any testimony at all.” (Id. at p. 384.))Faile v. Zarich, No. HHDX04CV5015994S, 2008 WL 2967045, at *3 (Conn. Super. Ct. July 10, 2008) (Webster's. . . in the closest relevant definition, defines “argumentative” as “consisting of or characterized by argument: containing a process of reasoning: controversial”)Pardee v. State, No. 06-11-00226-CR, 2012 WL 3516485, at *6 (Tex. App. Aug. 16, 2012) (Steven Goode, et al., Texas Practice Series: Courtroom Handbook on Texas Evidence § 611 cmt. 12 (2012); see United States v. Yakobowicz, 427 F.3d 144, 151 (2d Cir.N.Y.2005) (defining argumentative as “summation-like remarks by counsel during the presentation of evidence”); accord Eddlemon v. State, 591 S.W.2d 847, 851 (Tex.Crim.App. [Panel Op.] 1979) (trial court did not abuse discretion in finding the question, “You don't believe your own offense report?” argumentative). In other words, an argumentative objection concerns whether counsel is attempting to “argue” the case, not whether the counsel is “arguing” with the witness”)United States v. Yakobowicz, 427 F.3d 144, 151 (2d Cir. 2005) (“During the presentation of evidence one of the most commonly sustained objections is that a particular question is argumentative, Fed.R.Evid. 611(a) advisory committee's note to Subdivision (a) to 1972 Proposed Rules, and any summation-like remarks by counsel during the presentation of evidence are improper and subject as a routine matter to being stricken, Mauet & Wolfson, supra, at 30”)Pardee v. State, No. 06-11-00226-CR, 2012 WL 3516485, at *6 (Tex. App. Aug. 16, 2012) ("Many common law objections—including the objection of “argumentative”—are incorporated in the Texas Rules of Evidence. The common law argumentative objection is now governed by Tex.R. Evid. 611 which concerns the mode of interrogation and presentation. The argumentative objection is an objection commonly used, but not commonly understood. Pardee argues the objection should have been sustained because the State was “arguing” with the defendant. Argumentative, though, does not concern counsel's demeanor or tone. Professors Wellborn, Goode, and Sharlot explain the argumentative objection as follows: Counsel may not, in the guise of asking a question, make a jury argument or attempt to summarize, draw inferences from, or comment on the evidence. In addition, questions that ask a witness to testify as to his own credibility are improper.")People v. Chatman, 38 Cal. 4th 344, 384, 133 P.3d 534, 563 (2006) The prosecutor's question about whether the safe was “lying” requires a different analysis. The question was argumentative. An argumentative question is a speech to the jury masquerading as a question. The questioner is not seeking to elicit relevant testimony. Often it is apparent that the questioner does not even expect an answer. The question may, indeed, be unanswerable. The prosecutor's question whether “the safe [was] lying” is an example. An inanimate object cannot “lie.” Professor Wigmore has called cross-examination the “greatest legal engine ever invented for the discovery of truth.” (5 Wigmore on Evidence (Chadbourne rev. ed.1974) § 1367, p. 32.) The engine should be allowed to run, but it cannot be allowed to run amok. An argumentative question that essentially talks past the witness, and makes an argument to the jury, is improper because it does not seek to elicit relevant, competent testimony, or often any testimony at all. Defendant had already explained he had no explanation for the safe being open. Asking whether the safe was “lying” could add nothing to this testimony”)People v. Imbach, No. E040190, 2008 WL 510482, at *7–8 (Cal. Ct. App. Feb. 27, 2008) ("The prosecutor asked, “You found that to be inappropriate but not your other son's addiction to child pornography?” When defendant objected that the question was argumentative, the trial court overruled that objection. Defendant asserted the second “argumentative” objection when defendant's mother said she did not know how to answer that question and the prosecutor asked, “Is that because you didn't want to know?” The trial court sustained the defendant's objection to this second question. Both questions are argumentative, because they both are speeches by the prosecutor masquerading as questions. (Chatman, supra, 38 Cal.4th at p. 384.) The trial court should have sustained both objections. However, we cannot say that by asking those two questions the prosecutor engaged in misconduct.")People v. Peoples, 62 Cal. 4th 718, 793–94, 365 P.3d 230, 288 (2016) (“Defendant observes that the prosecutor asked numerous argumentative questions when cross-examining defense witnesses. To list a few examples, the prosecutor asked defense expert Dr. Lisak, “how many hours are you into them for?” He said to defense expert Dr. Buchsbaum, “Let's quit guessing for awhile and look at the facts.” He said to defense expert Dr. Wu, “It's a pain in the butt to get these test scores.” And he asked prosecution expert Dr. Mayberg, “Did you have a heart attack last night when you looked at the raw data?”)People v. Burns, No. D081051, 2024 WL 2144151, at *15–17 (Cal. Ct. App. May 14, 2024), review denied (July 17, 2024) (excessive repetition of a question simply to make a point can cross line into improper argument”; “Burns makes a strong argument that the prosecutor's repetitive questioning regarding the drunk tank incident became argumentative. “An argumentative question is a speech to the jury masquerading as a question. The questioner is not seeking to elicit relevant testimony. Often it is apparent that the questioner does not even expect an answer. The question may, indeed, be unanswerable.” (People v. Chatman (2006) 38 Cal.4th 344, 384.) “An argumentative question that essentially talks past the witness, and makes an argument to the jury, is improper because it does not seek to elicit relevant, competent testimony, or often any testimony at all.” (Ibid.) Instead, it may be aimed at agitating or belittling the witness (People v. Lund (2021) 64 Cal.App.5th 1119, 1148), or designed to engage the witness in an argument (People v. Johnson (2003) 109 Cal.App.4th 1230, 1236)”)People v. Mazen, No. B300193, 2021 WL 164356, at *5 (Cal. Ct. App. Jan. 19, 2021) The court overruled defendant's argumentative objection to the following question: “Would [accidentally placing the car in neutral] been important information to tell [Morales]?” The court did not abuse its discretion when it overruled the objection. The question sought to elicit relevant testimony regarding defendant's theory that Mario was hit by accident (CALCRIM No. 510). (See People v. Chatman (2006) 38 Cal.4th 344, 384 [“[a]n argumentative question is a speech to the jury masquerading as a question” and does not seek to elicit relevant testimony].)”People v. Singh, No. H042511, 2018 WL 1046260, at *28 (Cal. Ct. App. Feb. 26, 2018) (“Each question anticipated an answer and was answerable; none was “a speech to the jury masquerading as a question”)People v. Basler, No. D068047, 2015 WL 9437926, at *23 (Cal. Ct. App. Dec. 23, 2015) ("Fung appears to identify three categories of objectionable questioning during his cross-examination by the prosecutor. The first category involves apparent sarcasm by the prosecutor. For example, after Fung provided additional details about his fight with another inmate while incarcerated, the prosecutor said, “Okay. You left that part out a couple of minutes ago; right?” Referencing the same fight, the prosecutor made light of Fung's claim of self-defense: “Did you have to defend yourself against him, too?” As another example, when Fung was discussing the extent of his injuries following the fight, the prosecutor said, “So, that's about how badly you were hurt? It looked like something you get by falling off a skateboard?” The court sustained objections to each of these questions, and a number of others, as argumentative." Also from Basler: "As we have noted, Fung contends the first two categories of questions were impermissibly argumentative. “An argumentative question is a speech to the jury masquerading as a question. The questioner is not seeking to elicit relevant testimony. Often it is apparent that the questioner does not even want an answer. The question may, indeed, be unanswerable.... An argumentative question that essentially talks past the witness, and makes an argument to the jury, is improper because it does not seek to elicit relevant, competent testimony, or often any testimony at all.” (People v. Chatman (2006)”)People v. Nanez, No. F064574, 2014 WL 1928307, at *14–15 (Cal. Ct. App. May 15, 2014) (citing examples of argumentative examination by prosecutor including (a) the prosecutor's remark “Convenient” when a witness said they did not remember a particular fact, and (b) when prosecutor commented on witnesses testimony by saying “So that's the lie you're going with?”, and (c) when prosecutor asked witness “You wouldn't tell us if you're lying, of course, right?” and when witness said he would, prosecutor replied “There's another lie,” causing court to strike prosecutor's comment from the record)People v. Strebe, No. D057947, 2011 WL 2555653, at *7 (Cal. Ct. App. June 28, 2011) (trial courses sustained objection to question as argumentative where prosecutor asked witness “Do you remember anything about that evening that might be detrimental to your case?” In essence arguing to jury that witness was lying and only selectively remembered favorable facts)People v. Higgins, 119 Cal. Rptr. 3d 856, 873–74 (Ct. App. 2011), as modified (Jan. 21, 2011), as modified on denial of reh'g (Feb. 4, 2011) (guilty verdict reversed in part due to argumentative questions; among other jabs; in case where defendant explained his conduct as motived by depression due to death of his daughter's friend, prosecutor asked, “You'd agree with me that it's pretty pathetic if you're using the memory of a dead 17–year–old kid as an excuse in this trial, wouldn't you? Would you agree with me? Is that the legacy that you want [the dead teen] to have?”; other examples of prosecutor's argumentative questions included “Oh, the door was unlocked,” and “Isn't that convenient that all of a sudden, right after you've committed the crimes, that that's when you come to?”; further held, “The rule is well established that the prosecuting attorney may not interrogate witnesses solely ‘for the purpose of getting before the jury the facts inferred therein, together with the insinuations and suggestions they inevitably contained, rather than for the answers”)People v. Dixon, No. D047342, 2007 WL 2745207, at *10 (Cal. Ct. App. Sept. 21, 2007)  Dixon asked Hernandez who had taken the photographs near the time of the injury. Hernandez testified that the audio-visual person at his school had taken photographs of his injury. Dixon then asked, “Is it computer enhancement? Those could be computer enhanced-.” The prosecutor interrupted, “That's argumentative.” The court sustained the prosecutor's objection")United States v. Browne, No. SACR 16-00139-CJC, 2017 WL 1496912, at *6 (C.D. Cal. Apr. 24, 2017) (For each witness, the Court did not end Defense counsel's cross-examination until it became excessively cumulative and argumentative, at which time the Court was well within its authority to restrain the questioning pursuant to Federal Rule of Evidence 611(a).”)Beving v. Union Pac. R.R. Co., No. 3:18-CV-00040, 2020 WL 6051598, at *12 (S.D. Iowa Sept. 8, 2020) (Defendant may object to prejudicial or argumentative references to counsel at trial as permitted by the Federal Rules of Evidence. See Fed. Rs. Evid. 403, 611(a)(3).)FRE 403: Argumentative questions may be viewed as unfairly prejudicial, misleading, or wasting time.FRE 611(a)(3), Witnesses and Presenting Evidence ((a) Control by the Court; Purposes. The court should exercise reasonable control over the mode and order of examining witnesses and presenting evidence so as to: (1) make those procedures effective for determining the truth; (2) avoid wasting time; and (3) protect witnesses from harassment or undue embarrassment.FRCP 30, Depositions, (d) Duration; Sanction; Motion to Terminate or Limit. (3) Motion to Terminate or Limit, (A) Grounds. At any time during a deposition, the deponent or a party may move to terminate or limit it on the ground that it is being conducted in bad faith or in a manner that unreasonably annoys, embarrasses, or oppresses the deponent or party. 

Host Ludwig Lin, MD, welcomes Raghavan Murugan, MD, MS, FRCP, FCCM, a professor and leading expert in critical care nephrology. They discuss the latest insights on fluid management strategies during continuous renal replacement therapy (CRRT), drawing from recent research and white papers. Dr. Murugan emphasizes the importance of updated education on CRRT fluid removal practices to enhance clinical outcomes and patient care in critical settings. This podcast is sponsored by Baxter Health.

The delivery of cancer care in Nigeria is impeded firstly by a lack of infrastructure, with a low number of hospital beds and skilled staff across the care pathway—an issue which has been compounded by the migration of skilled staff out of sub-Saharan Africa and to more developed countries. A lack of specialized equipment, such as radiotherapy machines, and the prohibitive costs of delivering cancer care are significant challenges as well. According to Dr. Modupe Elebute-Odunsi, challenges at the governmental level play a role as well, because in addition to a lack of skilled staff, there is a lack of developed cancer centers and a lack of funding, all of which prevent patients from accessing high-quality care. This great need inspired Dr. Elebute-Odunsi to establish the Marcelle Ruth Cancer Centre and Specialist Hospital in Lagos, Nigeria, which offers all the treatments patients need across the care continuum in one place. Guest: Modupe Elebute-Odunsi, MBBS, MD, FRCP, FRCPath Founder/CEO Marcelle Ruth Cancer Centre and Specialist Hospital Founder/Chair Board of Trustees Women In Healthcare Network Lagos, Nigeria Quote:  “We're a one-stop comprehensive cancer center...When patients walk in the door, they can [receive] all the treatments they require [here] from beginning to end.” Read more global perspectives from the international panelists who spoke at the October ACCC 41st National Oncology Conference in this ACCCBuzz blog. Additional Resources:  The Study of High-Cost Oncology Patients to Improve Care & Curb Costs – Oncology Issues Mobile App Eases Patient Cost-of-Care Conversations [PODCAST] Ep 03: Why Comprehensive Cancer Care Services Matter Providing Comprehensive Financial Advocacy Services in Rural America Navigation: A Critical Component in a Comprehensive Approach to Dismantling Health Inequities – Oncology Issues

Gideon Hirschfield, MB BChir, FRCP, PhD - Keeping Pace With the Latest in PBC: Practical Perspectives on What's New and What's Next

Gideon Hirschfield, MB BChir, FRCP, PhD - Keeping Pace With the Latest in PBC: Practical Perspectives on What's New and What's Next

In recent years, the legal profession has increasingly prioritized diversity in law firm hiring and litigation leadership, driven by demands from corporate clients, alumni, and judges. Efforts to increase the representation of women and non-white lawyers have become so integral that they are now reflected in proposed formal rules, such as the FRCP 16.1, which would require judges to consider identity characteristics when selecting leadership teams for multidistrict litigation (MDL). This potential codification raises important questions about the legality and implications of identity-based preferences in the legal profession. How should client preferences for diversity be balanced with Title VII commitments, and what role should diversity of background play in law firm hiring and the selection of MDL legal teams? This panel will explore these issues, examining both the legal and policy arguments surrounding identity-based preferencing in legal employment.Featuring:Dean andré douglas pond cummings, Dean and Professor of Law, Widener University Commonwealth Law SchoolProf. Darrell D. Jackson, Winston Howard Distinguished Professor of Law, University of Wyoming College of LawMr. Roger Severino, Vice President, Domestic Policy & The Joseph C. and Elizabeth A. Anderlik Fellow, The Heritage FoundationMs. Tobi Young, Senior Vice President Legal & Chief Corporate Affairs Officer, Cognizant; Board of Directors, HalliburtonModerator: Hon. Patrick J. Bumatay, Judge, United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit

Paul Wheatley-Price, BSc, MBChB, MD, FRCP (UK) / Parneet K. Cheema, MD - Addressing Key Challenges to Improve Outcomes in Patients With NSCLC With Rare Actionable Genomic Alterations

In today's episode, supported by PDS Biotech, we had the pleasure of speaking with Kevin Harrington, MD, PhD, FRCP, FRCR, FRSB, about the role of PDS0101 (Versamune HPV) in patients with human papillomavirus type 16 (HPV16)–positive head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC). Dr Harrington is head of the Division of Radiotherapy and Imaging at The Institute of Cancer Research in London, United Kingdom, as well as a fellow of the Royal College of Physicians and the Royal College of Radiologists. In our exclusive interview, Dr Harrington discussed current unmet needs for patients with recurrent/metastatic HNSCC, the rationale for the continued investigation of PDS0101 plus pembrolizumab (Keytruda) in patients with HPV16-positive HNSCC, and how the ongoing phase 3 VERSATILE-003 trial may change the treatment paradigm for patients with this disease. 

In this episode, Dr Camidge sits down with Duncan McLaren, MBBS, BSc, FRCR, FRCP, a consultant clinical oncologist at Spire Edinburgh Hospitals Murrayfield and Shawfair Park, as well as a professor at the Edinburgh Cancer Research Centre at The University of Edinburgh in Scotland. Drs Camidge and McLaren discuss Dr McLaren's unconventional journey to medical school, his experience as a clinical oncologist with expertise across oncology disciplines, and how his clinical research focus works to change the course of radiation therapy for genitourinary cancers.

On this episode of JHLT: The Podcast, the Digital Media Editors discuss a paper from the October issue of JHLT, entitled “Donor to recipient age matching in lung transplantation: A European experience.” Senior author Andrew Fisher, FRCP, PhD joins the podcast to discuss the paper. You'll hear about: European practices in lung transplantation and the donor population Main findings and takeaways How age disparities in donor matching affect outcomes Extended criteria for older donors For the latest studies from JHLT, visit www.jhltonline.org/current, or, if you're an ISHLT member, access your Journal membership at www.ishlt.org/jhlt. If you haven't yet tuned in for the first October episode of the podcast, scroll back in the episode history for the latest ISHLT guideline on the evaluation and care of cardiac transplant candidates. Don't already get the Journal and want to read along? Join the International Society of Heart and Lung Transplantation at www.ishlt.org for a free subscription, or subscribe today at www.jhltonline.org.

Incredible Secrets About Healing & Consciousness Revealed by Deepak Chopra! The WORLD FAMOUS mind-body expert, bestselling author of over 93 books, and founder of the Chopra Foundation, Dr. Deepak Chopra MD, FACP, FRCP, unveils RADICAL PROOF that all of our consciousnesses are intertwined....PLUS his Foolproof Equation for Happiness!  From his journey through conventional medicine to his mind-blowing pivot into the mind-body connection, Deepak dives deep into how our society is making us sick and what to do about it. He explains how to reduce stress, experience reality beyond our 5 senses, why science desperately needs spirituality, and exposes the truth about psychedelics (including his own experience with LSD as a teenager)! He discusses the 4 QUESTIONS you MUST ask to achieve ultimate awakening, why we're trapped in a “socially induced hallucination”, and how gratitude unlocks your soul's potential. Deepak Chopra also breaks down:- Are psychedelics a shortcut to higher consciousness, or do the risks outweigh the benefits?- His mind-blowing experience with LSD as part of a Harvard research study & how it shaped his beliefs on compassion and healing- How our mood and surroundings can change your biology & ability to heal- Why spiritual people heal faster from illness- Practical ways to find peace and unleash creativity anywhere you're at, even the most loud/stressful environments- A game-changing definition of LOVE that will reshape your world- His groundbreaking exploration of AI as a health tool And don't miss his thoughts on why we need to heal our current trauma to protect our future generations! Join us for this epic journey into the science of spirituality and the future of healing - TUNE IN to MBB today! Deepak Chopra's Sages & Scientists Harvard Symposium: https://www.sagesandscientists.org/Deepak Chopra's latest book, DIGITAL DHARMA: https://www.deepakchopra.com/book/digital-dharma/Deepak Chopra's A.I, Digital Deepak: https://digitaldeepak.ai/BialikBreakdown.comYouTube.com/mayimbialik

Inside the Issue: Integrating Antibody-Drug Conjugates into the Management of HR-Positive and Triple-Negative Metastatic Breast Cancer | Faculty Presentation 2: Other Targets for ADC Therapy in mBC — Professor Peter Schmid, FRCP, MD, PhD CME information and select publications

Today's roundup of new deposition-related cases focuses on four rulings. One offers a great strategy to exclude hostile deponents' deposition testimony, where they answer your opponents' questions but refuse to let you fully and fairly cross-examine them. A second touches on the age-old question of whether "Form!" or "Objection!" is enough or whether you must articulate the specific evidentiary basis. The third offers an idea for administering a slightly modified oath to immature deponents who might not understand the standard oath. The fourth looks at a novel approach one party took in noticing an individual witness with an attached, lengthy 30(b)(6) list of topics relating to matters that seemed better suited for a corporate representative.Thanks for listening! And be sure to check out the book upon which this podcast is based, 10,000 Depositions Later: The Premier Litigation Guide for Superior Deposition Practice. Available on Amazon and almost everywhere else books are sold. Now in it's fourth edition at 600 pages. It's a career-saving resource.SHOW NOTESPerrot v. Kelly, et al., Case No. 18-cv-10147, 2023 WL 11873009 (D. Mass. October 27, 2003) (reserving right to exclude deponent's testimony if witness continued to thwart plaintiff's opportunity to fully and fairly examine her, under FRE 804 relating to witness "unavailability"; court appears to equate refusal to give testimony with unavailability)B.P., et al. v. City of Johnson City, et al., No. 2:23-cv-71-TRM-JEM, 2024 WL 3461408 (E. D. Tenn. July 18, 2024) (refusing to limit lawyer to word "Objection" during depositions, and stating that lawyers have obligation to state the specific basis for the objection and not limit it to "objection" or "form" alone; further declining to sanction lawyer for longer narrative objections about incomplete documents because they were not intended to coach witness as to a particular answer)People v. Lopez, 550 P.3d 731 (Ct. App. Colo 2024) (affirming conviction of criminal defendant over objection that trial judge conducted modified administration of oath to 10-year old witness; finding that modified oath is appropriate for an immature witness who may not understand standard oath)Jacobs, et al. v. Journal Publishing Company, et al., Case No. 21-690-MW/SCY, 2024 WL 3401048 (D. N. M. July 12, 2024) (rejecting plaintiffs' effort to depose individual by serving FRCP 30(b)(6)-style deposition notice with lengthy attached topic list)See, 30(b)(6)-style Deposition Notice Served on Individual, PACER CM/ECF Doc. No. 135-1 (showing notice with attached topic list and list of documents to be brought by individual deponent) Jacobs, et al. v. Journal Publishing Company, et al., Case No. 21-690-MW/SCY, 2024 WL 3401048 (D. N. M. July 12, 2024)

In this episode, Jim Garrity discusses deposition protocol stipulations, which are agreements between the parties that establish the framework for noticing and conducting depositions. They're common in class-action and multi-district cases, but they're useful - and underutilized - in ordinary litigation as well. They can also be used to create internal deposition guidelines for law firms and legal organizations. Jim lists about three dozen common provisions in such agreements and offers practice tips on proposing and implementing them. Have a listen!SHOW NOTESStipulation and Order Governing Protocol for Fact Depositions and Rule 30(b)(6)/PMQ Depositions [CM/ECF Doc. 742), In re Social Media Adolescent Addiction/Personal Injury Products Liability Litigation, Case No. 4:22-md-03047-YGR (S. D. Cal. April 3, 2024) (36 pages)Protocol Governing Depositions, Dennis, et al. v. JPMorgan Chase & Co., et al., Case No. 1:16-cv-6496 (S. D. N. Y. June 23, 2020) [CM/ECF Doc. 419-1) (14 pages)Stipulation And Order Regarding Remote Depositions [CM/ECF Doc. 108], FTC v. Tapestry, Inc., et al., Case No. 1:24-cv-03109 (S. D. N. Y. June 6, 2024) (15 pages)Stipulation And [Proposed] Order Regarding Remote Depositions, In the Matter of Tapestry Inc., A Corp., & Capri Holdings Ltd., A Corp., Respondents., No. 9429, 2024 WL 3203213 (MSNET June 13, 2024) (related proceeding before Federal Trade Commission) (11 pages)Deposition Protocol Order, In Re Terrorist Attacks on September 11, 2001, Case No. 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN (S. D. N. Y. January 31, 2018) [CM/ECF Doc. 3894) (15 pages)Fed. R. Civ. P. 29(a) (rule on discovery stipulations between parties)Episode 22, FRCP 29(a) Stipulations: A Way to Save Time, Money & Headaches, 10,000 Depositions Later Podcast, released December 25, 2020 (30 minutes)