Podcasts about genome biology

The beginnings of our end — where the anus came from Our distant evolutionary ancestors had no anuses. Their waste was excreted from the same orifice they used to ingest food, much like jellyfish do today. Now a new study on bioRxiv that has yet to be peer-reviewed, scientists think they've found the evolutionary link in a worm with only a single digestive hole. Andreas Hejnol, from Friedrich Schiller University Jena, said he found genes we now associate with the anus being expressed in the worms in the opening where its sperm comes out, suggesting that in our evolutionary history a similar orifice was co-opted as a butt hole. Deepfake videos are becoming so real, spotting them is becoming increasingly diceyDetecting deepfake videos generated by artificial intelligence is a problem that's getting progressively worse as the technology continues to improve. One way we used to be able to tell the difference between a fake and real video is that subtle signals revealing a person's heart rate don't exist in artificially generated videos. But that is no longer the case, according to a new study in the journal Frontiers in Imaging. Peter Eisert, from Humboldt University and the Fraunhofer Heinrich-Hertz-Institute HHI in Germany, said detecting manipulated content visually is only going to become a lot more difficult going forward. Crows can use tools, do math — and now apparently understand geometryCrows are known to be among the most intelligent of animals, and a new study has explored their geometrical sophistication. Researchers including Andreas Nieder from the University of Tübingen found that crows can recognize and distinguish different kinds of quadrilateral shapes, an ability we had thought was unique to humans. The research was published in the journal Science Advances.There's gold in them thar magnetically charged neutron stars!Astronomers have discovered a new source of the universe's heavy elements — things like gold, platinum and uranium. A study led by astrophysicist Anirudh Patel found that magnetars — exotic neutron stars with ultra-powerful magnetic fields — may produce these elements in a process analogous to the way solar flares are produced by our Sun. The research, published in The Astrophysical Journal Letters, found that a single flare from a magnetar could produce the mass equivalent of 27 moons' worth of these heavy elements in one burst.It may not be big, but it's small — and stroppyYou might not expect an insect so tiny you need a magnifying glass to see it properly to be an aggressive defender of its territory, but that's because you haven't met the warty birch caterpillar. Its territory is just the tip of a birch leaf, but it defends it by threatening intruders with vigorous, if not precisely powerful, vibrations. Jayne Yack at Carleton University has been studying this caterpillar since 2008. This research was published in the Journal of Experimental Biology.Criminals beware — the microbiome leaves fingerprintsScientists have developed a new tool that can track location based on traces of the bacteria characteristic to different places. Eran Elhaik, from Lund University in Sweden, trained the AI tool using nearly 4,500 microbiome samples collected around the world from subway systems, soil and the oceans. He said they could identify the city source in 92 per cent of their urban samples, and in Hong Kong, where a lot of their data came from, they could identify the specific subway station samples were taken from with 82 per cent accuracy. The study was published in the journal Genome Biology and Evolution.

Characterizing the admixed African ancestry of African Americans | Genome Biology | Full Text (biomedcentral.com)    Are housing developers creating future slums by converting old offices? – YouTube    Identifying Unknown African American Lineages Using DNA | DNAeXplained – Genetic Genealogy (dna-explained.com)    Lupita Nyong'o's DNA Confirms Humankind was born of an African woman | […] The post Mitochondrial Eve, an East African woman who walked the Earth 200,000 years ago to whom all of humanity traces back. WHY are DNA kits adding African genes to White peoples test kits?  Is DNA real or all lies? appeared first on Psychopath In Your Life.

Chris Ragan, the founding Director of McGill University's Max Bell School of Public Policy, and the Chair of Canada's Ecofiscal Commission, joins Vassy Kapelos for a quick fact check on Canada's carbon pricing. On today's show: Listen to Vassy's full conversation with Francois-Phillipe Champagne on Newfoundland Premier Andrew Furey's call to halt the carbon tax increase.  Dr. Jim Dowling, a Senior Scientist of Genetics & Genome Biology, answers this week's 'The Explainer' question on gene therapy. The Daily Debrief Panel with Tim Powers, Scott Reid, and Kathleen Monk. Listen to Vassy's full conversation with Bob Rae, a Permanent Representative of Canada to the United Nations, on the road ahead for Haiti after the country's Prime Minister resigned over civil unrest. 

References Front Physiol. 2021; 12: 730829. Non-coding RNA Investig 2017. 1:5. Genome Biology 2011. volume 12, Article number: 236 RNA Biol . 2021 Nov 12;18(sup2):574-585. Hunter. R. 1975. "Cruel White Water" https://youtu.be/T-oBD3F74Nk?si=zsrEBN0JKan_FXdH --- Send in a voice message: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/dr-daniel-j-guerra/message Support this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/dr-daniel-j-guerra/support

On this episode of Unsupervised Learning, Razib talks to Adam Mastroianni, who runs the Experimental History Substack. Mastroianni was the inaugural guest on the Intrinsic Perspective podcast, hosted by Erik Hoel, where they discussed his post, The rise and fall of peer review - Why the greatest scientific experiment in history failed, and why that's a great thing (see also his follow-up, The dance of the naked emperors). Mastroianni opened a can of worms; the post has more than 800 likes and more than 330 comments. Razib asks Mastroianni about the fiercely positive and negative reactions to his contention that modern peer review has outlived its utility. They also unveil the historically contingent origins of the practice in the mid-20th century, and how it came to be seen as a holy enterprise necessary to science. Both agree that scientific publishing needs a paradigm shift; a topic that Razib tackled in 2014 with the Genome Biology comment Dragging a scientific publishing into the 21st century. Razib and Mastroianni then discuss Experimental History, a Substack devoted to social psychology and meta-science. Why has Mastroianni decided to devote a substantial amount of energy to this project, as opposed to just publishing in journals?  Experimental History touches on some of the experimental social psychology research Mastroianni has been involved in, but it also focuses on some of the generally understood findings in psychology and neuroscience, and why they're true or false. In a world of academic science saturated with Ph.D. level researchers, Razib and Mastroianni explore the communication possibilities inherent in the Substack model. Finally, Mastroianni unpacks his opinion that even many of the robust statistically significant findings in social psychology don't matter. He believes that the lack of a single theory blocks proper understanding in psychology, and many of the results in his field are both uninteresting and fail to lead to a nontrivial increase in knowledge.

Drei Gläser Milch sollte jeder Mensch am Tag für eine gesunde Ernährung zu sich nehmen - so hieß es jedenfalls lange! Doch in den vergangenen Jahren haben immer mehr Menschen aufgehört, Milch und Milchprodukte zu konsumieren, viele von ihnen aus Tierwohlgründen. Wissenschaftsjournalistin Yasmin Appelhans hat sich die Forschung rund um das Thema Milch angesehen. Im Gespräch mit Host Maja Bahtijarević erklärt sie, warum Menschen überhaupt einmal angefangen haben, Milch zu trinken und was sich dadurch für sie verändert hat. Außerdem geht es darum, ob Milch wirklich gesund ist oder nicht sogar krank machen kann - und um die Frage, wie sich unser Milchkonsum eigentlich auf das Klima auswirkt. Und wir fragen uns: Können Maske-tragende Kühe ihren Teil zum Klimaschutz beitragen?  DIE HINTERGRUNDINFORMATIONEN • Entwicklung des Milchkonsums in der Eurasischen Steppe: Jeong C, Wilkin S, Amgalantugs T, Bouwman AS, Taylor WTT, Hagan RW, et al. Bronze Age population dynamics and the rise of dairy pastoralism on the eastern Eurasian steppe. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 2018;115(48): E11248–E11255. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1813608115 • Milchverbrauch pro Kopf und Land: Per capita milk consumption. https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/per-capita-milk-consumption [Abgerufen am 1. März 2023] • Konsum von Milch und Milchprodukten in Deutschland: BMEL-Statistik: Milch und Milcherzeugnisse. https://www.bmel-statistik.de/ernaehrung-fischerei/versorgungsbilanzen/milch-und-milcherzeugnisse [Abgerufen am 15. März 2023] • Regionale Unterschied bei Laktoseintoleranz: Storhaug CL, Fosse SK, Fadnes LT. Country, regional, and global estimates for lactose malabsorption in adults: a systematic review and meta-analysis. The Lancet Gastroenterology & Hepatology. 2017;2(10): 738–746. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2468-1253(17)30154-1 • Milchkonsum im östlichen Afrika: Bleasdale M, Richter KK, Janzen A, Brown S, Scott A, Zech J, et al. Ancient proteins provide evidence of dairy consumption in eastern Africa. Nature Communications. 2021;12(1): 632. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-020-20682-3 • Laktasepersistenz in Sudan: Hollfelder N, Babiker H, Granehäll L, Schlebusch CM, Jakobsson M. The Genetic Variation of Lactase Persistence Alleles in Sudan and South Sudan. Genome Biology and Evolution. 2021;13(5): evab065. https://doi.org/10.1093/gbe/evab065 • Bericht zu Milch als Nahrungsmittel vom Max Rubner-Institut 2014: Max Rubner-Institut. Ernährungsphysiologische Bewertung von Milch und Milchprodukten und ihren Inhaltsstoffen: Bericht für das Kompetenzzentrum für Ernährung, Bayern November 2014. 2014 Nov [Accessed 29th March 2023]. https://www.openagrar.de/receive/openagrar_mods_00016213 [Abgerufen am 29. März 2023] • Veröffentlichung zu Milch als Nahrungsmittel 2018: Watzl MP Bernhard. Gesundheitliche Bewertung von Milch und Milchprodukten und ihren Inhaltsstoffen. Ernaehrungs Umschau International. 2018;2/2018: 22–33. https://doi.org/10.4455/eu.2018.006 • Veröffentlichung mit Theorie zur Entstehung von Krebs vom Nobelpreisträger zur Hausen: zur Hausen H. Red meat consumption and cancer: reasons to suspect involvement of bovine infectious factors in colorectal cancer. International Journal of Cancer. 2012;130(11): 2475–2483. https://doi.org/10.1002/ijc.27413 • Stellungnahme zu Bovine Meat and Milk Factors des Bundesintituts für Risikobewertung: Bundesinstitut Für Risikobewertung. Neue Erkenntnisse zu „Bovine Meat and Milk Factors“ (BMMF): Stellungnahme Nr. 036/2022 des BfR vom 30. November 2022. BfR-Stellungnahmen. 2022;2022: no. 036. https://doi.org/10.17590/20221130-121559 • Website mit seltsamen Korrelationen: Spurious correlations. http://tylervigen.com/spurious-correlations [Abgerufen am 4. März 2023] • Projekt InnoRind mit Forschung zur umweltfreundlichen und tierfreundlichen Rinderhaltung: Projekt InnoRind. https://www.innorind.uni-kiel.de/de [Abgerufen am 29. März 2023] • Informationen Für Landwirt*innen zur klimafreundlichen und stickstoffarmen Fütterung von Milchvieh: Fütterungsmonitoring. https://infothek.die-milchkontrolle.de/elearning/fuetterungsmonitoring/ [Abgerufen am 29. März 2023] • Zugabe zu Gülle kann Methanausstoß reduzieren: Holtkamp F, Clemens J, Trimborn M. Calcium cyanamide reduces methane and other trace gases during long-term storage of dairy cattle and fattening pig slurry. Waste Management. 2023;161: 61–71. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2023.02.018 • Umweltfreundlichkeit verschiedener Milchersatzprodukte gegenüber Kuhmilch (Our Word in Data): Environmental footprints of dairy and plant-based milks. https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/environmental-footprint-milks [Abgerufen am 1. März 2023] • Informationen zur kuhgebundenen Kälberaufzucht: Thünen-Institut, Kuhgebundene Kälberaufzucht. https://www.thuenen.de/de/themenfelder/nutztierhaltung-und-aquakultur/kuhgebundene-kaelberaufzucht# [Abgerufen am 29. März 2023]

Drei Gläser Milch sollte jeder Mensch am Tag für eine gesunde Ernährung zu sich nehmen - so hieß es jedenfalls lange! Doch in den vergangenen Jahren haben immer mehr Menschen aufgehört, Milch und Milchprodukte zu konsumieren, viele von ihnen aus Tierwohlgründen. Wissenschaftsjournalistin Yasmin Appelhans hat sich die Forschung rund um das Thema Milch angesehen. Im Gespräch mit Host Maja Bahtijarević erklärt sie, warum Menschen überhaupt einmal angefangen haben, Milch zu trinken und was sich dadurch für sie verändert hat. Außerdem geht es darum, ob Milch wirklich gesund ist oder nicht sogar krank machen kann - und um die Frage, wie sich unser Milchkonsum eigentlich auf das Klima auswirkt. Und wir fragen uns: Können Maske-tragende Kühe ihren Teil zum Klimaschutz beitragen?  DIE HINTERGRUNDINFORMATIONEN • Entwicklung des Milchkonsums in der Eurasischen Steppe: Jeong C, Wilkin S, Amgalantugs T, Bouwman AS, Taylor WTT, Hagan RW, et al. Bronze Age population dynamics and the rise of dairy pastoralism on the eastern Eurasian steppe. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 2018;115(48): E11248–E11255. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1813608115 • Milchverbrauch pro Kopf und Land: Per capita milk consumption. https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/per-capita-milk-consumption [Abgerufen am 1. März 2023] • Konsum von Milch und Milchprodukten in Deutschland: BMEL-Statistik: Milch und Milcherzeugnisse. https://www.bmel-statistik.de/ernaehrung-fischerei/versorgungsbilanzen/milch-und-milcherzeugnisse [Abgerufen am 15. März 2023] • Regionale Unterschied bei Laktoseintoleranz: Storhaug CL, Fosse SK, Fadnes LT. Country, regional, and global estimates for lactose malabsorption in adults: a systematic review and meta-analysis. The Lancet Gastroenterology & Hepatology. 2017;2(10): 738–746. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2468-1253(17)30154-1 • Milchkonsum im östlichen Afrika: Bleasdale M, Richter KK, Janzen A, Brown S, Scott A, Zech J, et al. Ancient proteins provide evidence of dairy consumption in eastern Africa. Nature Communications. 2021;12(1): 632. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-020-20682-3 • Laktasepersistenz in Sudan: Hollfelder N, Babiker H, Granehäll L, Schlebusch CM, Jakobsson M. The Genetic Variation of Lactase Persistence Alleles in Sudan and South Sudan. Genome Biology and Evolution. 2021;13(5): evab065. https://doi.org/10.1093/gbe/evab065 • Bericht zu Milch als Nahrungsmittel vom Max Rubner-Institut 2014: Max Rubner-Institut. Ernährungsphysiologische Bewertung von Milch und Milchprodukten und ihren Inhaltsstoffen: Bericht für das Kompetenzzentrum für Ernährung, Bayern November 2014. 2014 Nov [Accessed 29th March 2023]. https://www.openagrar.de/receive/openagrar_mods_00016213 [Abgerufen am 29. März 2023] • Veröffentlichung zu Milch als Nahrungsmittel 2018: Watzl MP Bernhard. Gesundheitliche Bewertung von Milch und Milchprodukten und ihren Inhaltsstoffen. Ernaehrungs Umschau International. 2018;2/2018: 22–33. https://doi.org/10.4455/eu.2018.006 • Veröffentlichung mit Theorie zur Entstehung von Krebs vom Nobelpreisträger zur Hausen: zur Hausen H. Red meat consumption and cancer: reasons to suspect involvement of bovine infectious factors in colorectal cancer. International Journal of Cancer. 2012;130(11): 2475–2483. https://doi.org/10.1002/ijc.27413 • Stellungnahme zu Bovine Meat and Milk Factors des Bundesintituts für Risikobewertung: Bundesinstitut Für Risikobewertung. Neue Erkenntnisse zu „Bovine Meat and Milk Factors“ (BMMF): Stellungnahme Nr. 036/2022 des BfR vom 30. November 2022. BfR-Stellungnahmen. 2022;2022: no. 036. https://doi.org/10.17590/20221130-121559 • Website mit seltsamen Korrelationen: Spurious correlations. http://tylervigen.com/spurious-correlations [Abgerufen am 4. März 2023] • Projekt InnoRind mit Forschung zur umweltfreundlichen und tierfreundlichen Rinderhaltung: Projekt InnoRind. https://www.innorind.uni-kiel.de/de [Abgerufen am 29. März 2023] • Informationen Für Landwirt*innen zur klimafreundlichen und stickstoffarmen Fütterung von Milchvieh: Fütterungsmonitoring. https://infothek.die-milchkontrolle.de/elearning/fuetterungsmonitoring/ [Abgerufen am 29. März 2023] • Zugabe zu Gülle kann Methanausstoß reduzieren: Holtkamp F, Clemens J, Trimborn M. Calcium cyanamide reduces methane and other trace gases during long-term storage of dairy cattle and fattening pig slurry. Waste Management. 2023;161: 61–71. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2023.02.018 • Umweltfreundlichkeit verschiedener Milchersatzprodukte gegenüber Kuhmilch (Our Word in Data): Environmental footprints of dairy and plant-based milks. https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/environmental-footprint-milks [Abgerufen am 1. März 2023] • Informationen zur kuhgebundenen Kälberaufzucht: Thünen-Institut, Kuhgebundene Kälberaufzucht. https://www.thuenen.de/de/themenfelder/nutztierhaltung-und-aquakultur/kuhgebundene-kaelberaufzucht# [Abgerufen am 29. März 2023]

This podcast is part of a miniseries of interviews with speakers from the 2022 annual conference of the Adelphi Genetics Forum - a learned society that aims to promote research and discussion concerning the scientific understanding of human heredity. Formerly known as the Galton Institute, and before that, the Eugenics Education Society, the society has changed its name to the Adelphi Genetics Forum to firmly reject and distance itself from the discredited and damaging ideas of its namesake, Francis Galton – widely viewed as the founder of eugenics.In this first episode, I spoke to Turi King, the President of the Adelphi Genetics Forum and Professor of Public Engagement and Genetics in the Department of Genetics and Genome Biology at the University of Leicester, to discover the story of the society and why it was finally time to change its name. You can find out more about the Adelphi Genetics Forum, including their grants, awards and publications, at adelphigenetics.org You can check out the rest of this series on the Genetics Unzipped podcast feed – just search for Genetics Unzipped on Spotify or wherever you get your podcasts. This series was produced by the team at First Create The Media – that's Kat Arney, Sally Le Page and Emma Werner, with help from Ed Prosser and Frankie Pike. Our music is Drops of H2O by J. Lang, licensed under Creative Commons.

Central American boas are the focus of this episode - we disentangle why some are large, and others are very small. Followed up by a Species of the Bi-Week with a stubby tail. Become a Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/herphighlights Full reference list available here: http://www.herphighlights.podbean.com Main Paper References: Card DC, Adams RH, Schield DR, Perry BW, Corbin AB, Pasquesi GIM, Row K, Van Kleeck MJ, Daza JM, Booth W, Montgomery CE, Boback SM, Castoe TA. 2019. Genomic Basis of Convergent Island Phenotypes in Boa Constrictors. Genome Biology and Evolution 11:3123–3143. DOI: 10.1093/gbe/evz226. Species of the Bi-Week: Oliver PM, Donnellan SC, Gunn BF. 2022. Plio–Pleistocene vicariance across arid Australia in the ‘Spiny Knob-tailed Geckos' (Nephrurus asper group), with the description of a new species from western Queensland. Australian Journal of Zoology 69:216–228. DOI: 10.1071/ZO22008. Other Mentioned Papers/Studies: Card, D. C., Schield, D. R., Adams, R. H., Corbin, A. B., Perry, B. W., Andrew, A. L., ... & Castoe, T. A. (2016). Phylogeographic and population genetic analyses reveal multiple species of Boa and independent origins of insular dwarfism. Molecular phylogenetics and evolution, 102, 104-116. Jack, K. M., Brown, M. R., Buehler, M. S., Cheves Hernadez, S., Ferrero Marín, N., Kulick, N. K., & Lieber, S. E. (2020). Cooperative rescue of a juvenile capuchin (Cebus imitator) from a Boa constrictor. Scientific Reports, 10(1), 1-7. Reynolds, R. G., Niemiller, M. L., & Revell, L. J. (2014). Toward a Tree-of-Life for the boas and pythons: Multilocus species-level phylogeny with unprecedented taxon sampling. Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution, 71, 201-213. Editing and Music: Podcast edited by Emmy – https://www.fiverr.com/emmyk10  Intro/outro – Treehouse by Ed Nelson Species Bi-week theme – Michael Timothy Other Music – The Passion HiFi, https://www.thepassionhifi.com

From scientist to entrepreneur. Victoria Stockman is a strategist, entrepreneur, and scientist who has consulted over 200 startups across a wide range of industries. She is also the CEO of Crosby. Based in NYC, CROSBY is a branding + business strategy firm that specializes in startups - early to growth stages. They are a team designers, copywriters, brand strategists, business strategists, developers and even scientists. Some of their clients include: 818 tequila, A24, Patagonia, Adidas. Prior to co-founding CROSBY, Victoria developed and designed a novel technology platform. Victoria holds a patent and has published in many journals including Nature Neuroscience, Genome Biology and PLoS One. If you're an entrepreneur or want to start a business, Victoria shares some great insight into the top mistakes brands/founders are making with their business, what her day-to-day looks like being a new mom, some of her favorite projects she's worked on, how she got her first client and how she makes the perfect pitch to clients. This is sponsored by Better Help. Use my link for 10% off! www.betterhelp.com/wellnowwhat

Dr. Greg Petsko is the Arthur J. Mahon Professor of Neurology and Neuroscience and Director of the Helen and Robert Appel Alzheimer's Disease Research Institute at Weill Cornell Medical College, as well as the Tauber Professor of Biochemistry and Chemistry, Emeritus, at Brandeis University. Greg is a structural biologist and biochemist by training, but he has entered into a new research field where he is working to find cures for neurodegenerative diseases like Alzheimer's disease, Parkinson's disease, and Lou Gehrig's disease. When he's not working, writing about science and society is something Greg enjoys and is passionate about. He received his PhD from the University of Oxford and worked at Wayne State University, MIT, and Brandeis University before joining the faculty at Cornell where he is today. He has received numerous awards and honors during his career, including the Pfizer Award in Enzyme Chemistry of the American Chemical Society and the Max Planck Prize. Greg is also a member of the National Academy of Sciences, the Institute of Medicine, the American Academy of Arts and Sciences, and the American Philosophical Society. He is the Past-President of the American Society for Biochemistry and Molecular Biology and is President of the International Union of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology. He has also written a column on science and society that is available as a book entitled Gregory Petsko in Genome Biology: the first 10 years. In our interview, Greg shares stories from his life and science.

Vector calculus is everywhere, but sadly good explanations are not. This week we talk about the div, grad, and curl operations. Div, Grad, Curl, and All That: An Informal Text on Vector Calculus (https://amzn.to/3fky5Lq) Fun Paper Friday Yanai, Itai, and Martin Lercher. "The two languages of science." Genome Biology 21.1 (2020): 1-9. (https://scholar.google.com/scholar?output=instlink&q=info:igPWCvk25sgJ:scholar.google.com/&hl=en&as_sdt=0,5&scillfp=7481915880690560990&oi=lle) Contact us: Show Support us on Patreon! (https://www.patreon.com/dontpanicgeo) www.dontpanicgeocast.com (http://www.dontpanicgeocast.com) SWUNG Slack (https://softwareunderground.org) @dontpanicgeo (https://twitter.com/dontpanicgeo) show@dontpanicgeocast.com John Leeman - www.johnrleeman.com (http://www.johnrleeman.com) - @geo_leeman (https://twitter.com/geo_leeman) Shannon Dulin - @ShannonDulin (https://twitter.com/ShannonDulin)

How do we remember all of the sequences, facts, and processes in our fields? Mnemonic devices! This week we chat about a few of our favorites. Fun Paper Friday Is having a hypothesis a bad thing? Yanai, Itai, and Martin Lercher. "A hypothesis is a liability." Genome Biology 21.1 (2020): 1-5. (https://genomebiology.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13059-020-02133-w) Contact us: Show Support us on Patreon! (https://www.patreon.com/dontpanicgeo) www.dontpanicgeocast.com (http://www.dontpanicgeocast.com) SWUNG Slack (https://softwareunderground.org) @dontpanicgeo (https://twitter.com/dontpanicgeo) show@dontpanicgeocast.com John Leeman - www.johnrleeman.com (http://www.johnrleeman.com) - @geo_leeman (https://twitter.com/geo_leeman) Shannon Dulin - @ShannonDulin (https://twitter.com/ShannonDulin)

On episode 18 of the GA4GH OmicsXchange podcast, we speak with Dr. Eric Green, Director of the National Human Genome Research Institute (NHGRI), on the Advances in Genome Biology and Technology (AGBT) Precision Health Meeting. Visit agbt.org to register for the Precision Health Meeting, which takes place 8–10 September, 2022 in San Diego, USA. View the transcript of the episode here.

There are many many opinions on how genetic engineering is affecting the future. But Beth Shapiro has an optimistic view of how humans seem to be much more conscious of the impact that they're having, and where genetic engineering fits into that impact. Beth Shapiro is an investigator at the Howard Hughes Medical Institute and professor of ecology and evolutionary biology r at the University of California, Santa Cruz (UCSC). She is also the director of evolutionary genomics at the UCSC Genomics Institute. Her lab's research focuses on a wide range of evolutionary and ecological questions, mostly involving the application of genomics techniques to better understand how species and populations evolve through time. She is also the author of a number of books including “Life as We Made It: How 50,000 Years of Human Innovation Refined―and Redefined―Nature,” and “How to Clone a Mammoth: The Science of De-Extinction.”Beth joins Greg to talk about how her career moved from studying bison to genetic engineering, megafaunal extinctions, and GMOs in our food.Episode Quotes:How science & genetics has evolvedI don't think anybody in the late 1990s or early 2000s had any idea how much we would learn by doing this. How much being able to reach directly into the past and pull genetic data directly from the past, like a snapshot into history, was going to change the way we think about foundational things like what makes a species.On human impactOur footprints, our fingerprints are on everything that's out there. Even the species that we're trying to protect and preserve. And I don't think that's a bad thing.The timing of megafaunal extinctionsThe timing of megafaunal extinctions around the world is different depending on which continent we're talking about. And it just so happens that that timing coincides with the archeological evidence of the first appearance of people in most parts of the world. What's difficult about this is that it also coincides in many places with really rapid and large scale climate changes. Show Links:Guest Profile:Faculty Profile at University of California, Santa CruzProfessional Profile at Howard Hughes Medical InstituteProfessional Profile at Advances in Genome Biology and TechnologyBeth Shapiro on LinkedInBeth Shapiro on TwitterBeth Shapiro on TEDxDeExtinctionHer Work:UCSC Paleogenomics LabBeth Shapiro on Google ScholarHow to Clone a Mammoth: The Science of De-ExtinctionLife as We Made It: How 50,000 Years of Human Innovation Refined—and Redefined—Nature 

Arutha Kulasinghe was pumped for the AGBT (Advances in Genome Biology and Technology) Conference this year. He is the Principal Investigator for the Clinical-oMx Lab at the University of Queensland. Dr. Kulasinghe has pioneered spatial transcriptomics using digital spatial profiling approaches in the Asia-Pacific region, contributing to world-first studies for lung, head, and neck cancer and COVID-19. Not gathering last year due to the pandemic, the AGBT conference has became a kind of revival for genome biologists.

There was a tweet thread at the end of the recent Advances in Genome Biology and Technology (AGBT) conference where researchers took a moment of silence for all the sequencing companies that have announced big plans at the conference and then died. It was clearly aimed at this year's sequencing tools entrant and buzz-generating Ultima Genomics. The company emerged from stealth the week before AGBT announcing the $100 genome with a purse of $600 million backed by funders including Khosla Ventures, Andreessen, and Founders Fund.

Hear from Dr. Tilde Carlow, Scientific Director of Genome Biology at NEB, who has dedicated her career to infectious disease research.

* Nature Paper Confirms RSR Rejection of 'Junk' DNA: A landmark study by 440 researchers working in 32 laboratories aro und the world has so far been able to identify function for 80 percent of the human genome! Real Science Radio co-hosts Bob Enyart and Fred Williams also present six minutes of audio from 1998 when leading evolutionist Eugenie Scott tells Bob that genetic scientists were "over the hump" and affirmatively knew that the pseudogenes had no function and that such junk DNA was therefore evidence against the existence of a Designer. Hear the fundamentalist Bible teacher disagree with the degreed scientist, and guess who science has vindicated? * Notice the Nucleotides in the Trash Bags: :) -->* Hear Eugenie Scott & Bob Spar on Junk DNA: At the beginning of this radio program, hear audio from 1998 from Bob and leading anti-creationist Eugenie Scott debating the merits of the Junk DNA argument! (And see more below). Hear also physicist Lawrence Krauss acknowledge to Bob Enyart that his friend Eugenie was wrong. * ENCODE Project Takes Out the Trash: The project leader for ENCODE (the Encyclopedia of DNA Elements) is predicting that eventually, we will learn that "100%" of the genome is functional. (ENCODE Consortium, Dunham, et al., Nature, 2012, pp. 57-74). When the scientist finally reaches the summit, he finds the theologian already there. * Famed Molecular Evolutionist in a Tough Spot: Please pray for Dan Graur. To a young-earth creationist who has been vindicated by ENCODE (and now through 2019 with mountains of consistent data continuously rising up), Dan Graur's angst is our celebration. In 2017 he published, desperately, that based on evolutionary assumptions the human genome cannot be more than at the very most 25% functional. Oh boy. Then in 2019 he acknowledged even more bluntly: If the human genome is indeed devoid of junk DNA as implied by the ENCODE project, then a long, undirected evolutionary process cannot explain the human genome. If, on the other hand, organisms are designed, then all DNA, or as much as possible, is expected to exhibit function. If ENCODE is right, then Evolution is wrong.  * 2019 Worm Update: Worm "junk DNA" turns out to control their ability to regenerate, says Harvard's Evolutionary Biology department. So, even with the worms Dr. Graur, it wasn't junk after all.   For this show, RSR recommends Dr. Don Johnson's Programming of Life DVD! * Junky Real Science Radio Shows - "Nature" Confirms Creationist Rejection of Junk DNA (this webpage) - Bob Debates an Evolutionist 1998 DVD (from our archives) - RSR: Enyart Exhumes Eugenie Scott (2005 radio program: show summary copied here...) * RSR: Bob Debates Ph.D. Evolutionist Eugenie Scott: One of the world's leading anti-creationists vs. Bob Enyart. The debate is decided in the first round, by TKO. That's after Bob asked the well-known scientist for any evidence that any high-level function had ever evolved, like eyesight, or hearing, or flight, or mobility in general? Through the hour-long debate, this evolutionist refused to offer any such evidence but finally settled on a claim of evidence against design, which was: junk DNA! * JUNK DNA: Eugenie Flubs Genetics Prediction, Creationist Hits the Bull's-eye. The negative evidence that Eugenie did offer was Junk DNA. This scientist, from her Darwinist worldview, therefore didn't offer scientific evidence but made this philosophical argument about what a Creator would or would not do; namely, that He wouldn't fill our genome with so much non-protein-coding DNA. While some simple worms have 20,000 genes, it is typically a small portion of DNA that actually codes for proteins. A human has only 20,500 genes, which fills only 2% of our genome. Yet the widespread evolutionary claim for decades (including through the last two decades, and for many, still held today) was that the rest of the genome was left-over evolutionary garbage. Debating this physical anthropologist, Bob Enyart was just a Christian fundamentalist talk show host who spoke from his biblical worldview. Bob argued that our knowledge of genetics was in its infancy, and that it was too early to make the determination that all those non-coding segments of DNA had no function. After this 1998 debate, the next decade of explosive genetic discoveries overwhelmingly validated this creationist perspective, so much so that aside from coding for 20,500 proteins, it is estimated that the remainder of the genome has approximately four million other functional regulatory segments of DNA. So much for junk. Fulfilled predictions, as the world saw with Einstein's 1919 eclipse prediction, go toward scientific credibility. However, Dr. Scott strongly rejected this creationist prediction making an extraordinary claim, which Bob immediately offered her to retract, that scientists currently knew everything they would ever need to know about genetics to conclusively state that all those regions were useless junk. Bob would love a rematch. But Eugenie Scott, (Ph.D. in Physical Anthropology, leading anti-creationist, and director of the National Center for Science Education), who had just debated evolution on a nationwide PBS television program, ended this one-hour program with Bob stating, "Well, I don't debate." * The Diet Pop Junk DNA Syndrome: Junk DNA = Junk Science. Junk DNA was a science stopper. The many Darwinists who strongly pushed (and many still do) the Junk DNA claim predicted that nearly 100% of the entire human genome, the portion that was non-coding, was mostly just left-over junk DNA. It's like a diet cola having NO sugar, NO calories, NO cholesterol, NO fiber, NO protein, NO carbs, NO sodium, NO fat. One wonders what in the world gives it its taste. So from the 1970s it's not surprising, assuming as they did that nearly 95% or so of the DNA was junk anyway, that evolutionists could make such sloppy claims about DNA reinforcing the Darwinian tree. However, now, with the List of Genomes that Just Don't Fit, evolutionary geneticists have falsified the claim that DNA confirms Darwinian predictions. And all that progress aside, the canard that there's nearly a 99% similarity between humans and chimps should have been falsified merely by a careful look at differences in brain and overall anatomy. * Tossing the Wright Brothers Materials and Tools: Consider the significance of the four million regulatory regions of the human genome as compared to the relatively tiny portion that codes for proteins. The creationist Wright Brothers' design, that is, their regulatory input, so-to-speak, dwarfed the importance of the particular kinds of materials and tools that built their airplane. Other tools and materials could suffice. But all the tools and materials in the world assembled for workers who had no design to begin with would not produce an airplane. Thus the regulatory portion of the genome, including that in epigenetics, very possibly may be the more significant part. And similarly, the design concept of a nucleus itself is far more important than what specific chemistry will implement it. * Another Bit of (Famous) Junk DNA Reclassified: (2013 Update.) First consider this analogy from astronomy. Cosmologists cannot show that a big bang could create the contents of the universe because it's impossible to formulate an explanation for the origin of something if you don't know what that something is! And 96% of what's supposedly in a "big bang universe", all that dark matter and dark energy, is of unknown composition. Thus it's no wonder that even the latest textbooks on big bang nucleosynthesis don't even mention, for example, the production of dark matter! Likewise, because geneticists have difficulty even to defining what a "gene" is (see Moran on Dawkins, for example), evolutionists have oversold their case in calling portions of a genome a "pseudogene". As it turns out, a piece of DNA spectacularly referred to as a functionless piece of junk by famed evolutionist Kenneth Miller apparently has important function, according to a 2013 paper in the journal Genome Biology and Evolution. There's a layman's explanation of this issue written by Casey Luskin. Leading evolutionists misunderstood and thus misused the beta-globin "pseudogene" to make what amounts to a religious argument about what a Designer may or may not be inclined to do. As Luskin explains, Darwinists claimed that "matching mistakes" in various species in this "pseudogene" disproved the claim of a designer. But as it turns out, those "matching mistakes" are actually conserved genetic functionality, so that like Darwinist arguments generally, this evolution claim was based on ignorance and it evaporated as science learned more. Additionally, however, (and this gets to the related question of how much marijuana is smoked by leading evolutionists) the theory of neo-Darwinism itself refutes this popular beta-globin pseudogene claim. For if this segment of DNA had no function (i.e., if it were junk) it would NOT have been conserved by natural selection! Mutations over millions of years would have altered any "mistaken" nucleotides. Thus, by the theory itself, we do not expect to see non-functioning segments of DNA with conserved sequences of junk that arose from mutations over millions of years. Thus, the fact that these segments were conserved pointed directly to their being conserved, and functional (and, by the way, to their being designed). * Can Evolution Proceed One Small Step at a Time? If it is true that there are no "small steps," logically or physically, between monochromatic and dichromatic vision, then at least for this wildly complex vision-system upgrade, Richard Dawkins' Mt. Improbable must be scaled in one huge step. And scaling such a complexity cliff in one step, he himself admits, would be very difficult to advocate. There are no Darwin-friendly small steps between eukaryote (nucleus) and prokaryote (no nucleus), nor between invertebrate and vertebrate, nor between monochromatic and dichromatic vision. Whether you are an extinct fossil or a living species, you either have a backbone or you don't; you either have a nucleus or you don't, you might have monochromatic or dichromatic vision, or not, but you don't have something in between. Post-show Note: Illustrating this nicely the Wikipedia article on transposons states, ironically that transposition elements, "are often considered 'junk DNA'. In Oxytricha... they play a critical role..." And from Scientific American, "The term 'junk DNA' repelled mainstream researchers from studying noncoding genetic material for many years." Today's Resource: Get the greatest cell biology video ever made! Getting this on DVD: - helps you to share it with others - helps keep Real Science Radio on the air, and - gets you Dr. Don Johnson's book as a bonus! Information is encoded in every cell in our DNA and in all living things. Learn how the common worldview of life's origin, chemical evolution, conflicts with our knowledge of Information Science. Finally, information Science is changing the way millions of people think about all living systems! Also, have you browsed through our Science Department in the KGOV Store? You just might LOVE IT! We offer a 30-day money back guarantee on all purchases.

Episode 16: Michael Trinh is an Immunology and Genome Biology student at the University of Toronto. He is also the Co-Founder of BioDojo, a community for students to learn about the frameworks for scientific innovation as well as providing them with a platform to learn about and engage with the biotech industry. In this episode, Michael gives his thoughts on everything from immune memory and developments in synthetic biology to implications of genetic editing and problems of uploading a consciousness. Towards the end, Michael also gives some excellent advice on how undergraduate students can get involved in research themselves.

In this episode of the Epigenetics Podcast, we caught up with Jane Skok from New York University School of Medicine to talk about her work on spatio-temporal alterations in chromosome dynamics. Studies demonstrating that nuclear organization and long-range chromatin interactions play essential roles in gene regulation have been the focus of the Skok Lab, where the team has played a leading role. Their initial studies focused on lymphocyte development and the control of V(D)J recombination, a key part of generating the diverse repertoire of B-cell antibodies and T-cell receptors. The Skok Lab was among the first to demonstrate the possibility of chromatin forming dynamic loops which lead to the formation of reversible intra-locus loops in the immunoglobulin and T-cell receptor loci and to a profound impact on the ability of B and T cells to generate receptor diversity.   References Roldán, E., Fuxa, M., Chong, W., Martinez, D., Novatchkova, M., Busslinger, M., & Skok, J. A. (2005). Locus “decontraction” and centromeric recruitment contribute to allelic exclusion of the immunoglobulin heavy-chain gene. Nature Immunology, 6(1), 31–41. https://doi.org/10.1038/ni1150 Skok, J. A. (2014). Taking a break from the lab: Can it really be done? Trends in Cell Biology, 24(12), 725–726. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tcb.2014.09.002 Proudhon, C., Snetkova, V., Raviram, R., Lobry, C., Badri, S., Jiang, T., Hao, B., Trimarchi, T., Kluger, Y., Aifantis, I., Bonneau, R., & Skok, J. A. (2016). Active and Inactive Enhancers Cooperate to Exert Localized and Long-Range Control of Gene Regulation. Cell Reports, 15(10), 2159–2169. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.celrep.2016.04.087 Lhoumaud, P., Sethia, G., Izzo, F., Sakellaropoulos, T., Snetkova, V., Vidal, S., Badri, S., Cornwell, M., Di Giammartino, D. C., Kim, K.-T., Apostolou, E., Stadtfeld, M., Landau, D. A., & Skok, J. (2019). EpiMethylTag: Simultaneous detection of ATAC-seq or ChIP-seq signals with DNA methylation. Genome Biology, 20(1), 248. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13059-019-1853-6 Nishana, M., Ha, C., Rodriguez-Hernaez, J., Ranjbaran, A., Chio, E., Nora, E. P., Badri, S. B., Kloetgen, A., Bruneau, B. G., Tsirigos, A., & Skok, J. A. (2020). Defining the relative and combined contribution of CTCF and CTCFL to genomic regulation. Genome Biology, 21(1), 108. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13059-020-02024-0   Related Episodes Identification of Functional Elements in the Genome (Bing Ren) Spatial Organization of the Human Genome (Wendy Bickmore) Chromatin Organization (Susan Gasser)   Contact Active Motif on Twitter Epigenetics Podcast on Twitter Active Motif on LinkedIn Active Motif on Facebook Email: podcast@activemotif.com

American Thought Leaders- PART 2: Dr. Robert Malone on Ivermectin, Escape Mutants, and the Faulty Logic of Vaccine Mandates. AMERICAN THOUGHT LEADERS PART 2: Dr. Robert Malone on Ivermectin, Escape Mutants, and the Faulty Logic of Vaccine Mandates In part one of this American Thought Leaders episode, mRNA vaccine inventor Dr. Robert Malone explained the latest research on COVID-19 vaccines, booster shots, and natural immunity. Now in part two, we take a closer look at repurposed drugs like ivermectin and how a universal vaccination policy could actually backfire—and bring about the emergence of vaccine-resistant escape mutants. At their core, vaccine mandates are not just unethical and divisive, but also “impractical and unnecessary,” says Dr. Malone. You can watch the first part of this episode here. Below is a list of references mentioned or related to the discussion in this episode:  “Ivermectin for preventing and treating COVID-19” — The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews “Use of Ivermectin Is Associated With Lower Mortality in Hospitalized Patients With Coronavirus Disease 2019” — Chest Journal “Review of the Emerging Evidence Demonstrating the Efficacy of Ivermectin in the Prophylaxis and Treatment of COVID-19” — American Journal of Therapeutics “Effects of Ivermectin in Patients With COVID-19: A Multicenter, Double-Blind, Randomized, Controlled Clinical Trial” — Clinical Therapeutics “Dexamethasone in Hospitalized Patients with Covid-19” — The New England Journal of Medicine “ACTIV-6: COVID-19 Study of Repurposed Medications” — NIH “Convergent antibody responses to the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein in convalescent and vaccinated individuals” — Cell Reports “Reduced sensitivity of SARS-CoV-2 variant Delta to antibody neutralization” — Nature The SARS-CoV-2 Delta variant is poised to acquire complete resistance to wild-type spike vaccines (Note: This is a preprint) “Mutation rate of COVID-19 virus is at least 50 percent higher than previously thought” — Phys.org “Infection and Vaccine-Induced Neutralizing-Antibody Responses to the SARS-CoV-2 B.1.617 Variants” — The New England Journal of Medicine “Why is the ongoing mass vaccination experiment driving a rapid evolutionary response of SARS-CoV-2?” — Trial Site News “The emergence and ongoing convergent evolution of the N501Y lineages coincides with a major global shift in the SARS-CoV-2 selective landscape” (Note: This is a preprint) “The Lambda variant of SARS-CoV-2 has a better chance than the Delta variant to escape vaccines” (Note: This is a preprint) “Imperfect Vaccination Can Enhance the Transmission of Highly Virulent Pathogens” — PLOS Biology “Vaccinated and unvaccinated individuals have similar viral loads in communities with a high prevalence of the SARS-CoV-2 delta variant” (Note: This is a preprint). “Fauci: Amount of virus in breakthrough delta cases ‘almost identical' to unvaccinated” — The Hill CDC: “Outbreak of SARS-CoV-2 Infections, Including COVID-19 Vaccine Breakthrough Infections, Associated with Large Public Gatherings — Barnstable County, Massachusetts, July 2021” “Predominance of antibody-resistant SARS-CoV-2 variants in vaccine breakthrough cases from the San Francisco Bay Area, California” (Note: This is a preprint) “New delta variant studies show the pandemic is far from over” — ScienceNews “Read: Internal CDC document on breakthrough infections” — The Washington Post “New UCSF study: Vaccine-resistant viruses are driving ‘breakthrough' COVID infections” — The Mercury News “Comparing SARS-CoV-2 natural immunity to vaccine-induced immunity: reinfections versus breakthrough infections” (Note: This is a preprint) “Having SARS-CoV-2 once confers much greater immunity than a vaccine—but vaccination remains vital” — Science “Differential effects of the second SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccine dose on T cell immunity in naïve and COVID-19 recovered individuals” (Note: This is a preprint) “SARS-CoV-2 variants of concern and variants under investigation in England” — Public Health England “Safety of the BNT162b2 mRNA Covid-19 Vaccine in a Nationwide Setting” — The New England Journal of Medicine “Real-World Study Captures Risk of Myocarditis With Pfizer Vax” — MedPage Today CDC: “Effectiveness of COVID-19 Vaccines in Preventing SARS-CoV-2 Infection Among Frontline Workers Before and During B.1.617.2 (Delta) Variant Predominance — Eight U.S. Locations, December 2020—August 2021” “CDC: Covid-19 Vaccine Effectiveness Fell From 91% To 66% With Delta Variant“ — Forbes “SARS-CoV-2 infection induces long-lived bone marrow plasma cells in humans” — Nature “Causes and consequences of purifying selection on SARS-CoV-2” — Genome Biology and Evolution “The reproductive number of the Delta variant of SARS-CoV-2 is far higher compared to the ancestral SARS-CoV-2 virus” — Journal of Travel Medicine Subscribe to the American Thought Leaders newsletter so you never miss an episode. You can also follow American Thought Leaders on Parler, Facebook, or YouTube. If you'd like to donate to support our work, you can do so here. Follow Epoch TV on Facebook and Twitter. 

American Thought Leaders- PART 1. Dr. Robert Malone, mRNA Vaccine Inventor, on Latest COVID-19 Data AMERICAN THOUGHT LEADERS https://www.theepochtimes.com/c-american-thought-leaders  PART 1: Dr. Robert Malone, mRNA Vaccine Inventor, on Latest COVID-19 Data, Booster Shots, and the Shattered Scientific ‘Consensus' “We need to confront the data [and] not try to cover stuff up or hide risks,” says mRNA vaccine pioneer Dr. Robert Malone. What does the most recent research say about the efficacy of COVID-19 vaccines? In this two-part episode, we sit down again with Dr. Malone for a comprehensive look at the vaccines, booster shots, repurposed drugs like ivermectin, and the ethics of vaccine mandates. Jan Jekielek: Dr. Robert Malone, it's such a pleasure to have you back on American Thought Leaders. Dr. Robert Malone: Always my pleasure, Jan, and thank you for the chance to come back and visit. Mr. Jekielek: I want to read you a few headlines that I've come across in the last few weeks since we did our recent interview, and give you a chance to speak to them. This is a drophead: “Robert Malone claims to have invented mRNA technology. Why is he trying so hard to undermine its use?” How do you react to this? Dr. Malone: That's the Atlantic hit piece. It was a very interesting article because it has a number of logic jumps and irregularities. Then it ends up contradicting itself in the last paragraph, and basically confirming that my assertions about having being the originator of the core technology are valid. I'm subjected to this meme that you didn't really do the things that you did in the late 1980s almost continuously, usually from internet trolls.  So really what the young author was picking up on was some internet memes that have been wrapped around the prior press push that Katie Kariko and Drew Weissman were the ones that had originated the technology. Now that was clearly false, but it was very actively promoted by their university, which holds a key patent, and then advanced through Stat News, Boston Globe, CNN, and then finally the New York Times. We challenged that, and in the case of the New York Times, they actually recut their interview and podcast with Katie Kariko to cut out the parts where she had claimed that she was the original inventor.  But how do I react to it, this kind of pejorative use of language to cast shade? It doesn't really bother me. I know what the facts are, and I have this massive amount of documentation. When people come at me with those things, I just say, “Hey, look, here it's on the website. Here are the documents, you can make your own assessment.”  The thing that bothers me about all of this, when they're personalizing character assassination on me and character attacks, is that it distracts from the issues. And it's not about me, this kind of chronic questioning of why would I be saying things about the ethics of what's going on? Why would I be raising concerns about the safety signals? I must have some ulterior motive.  There's an underlying theme to all this, that I must have some ulterior motive. This particular journalist asked me again, and again, and again, trying to get at, “What was my ulterior motive for trying to undermine these vaccines based on my technology?” It was so paradoxical, the push of a whole series of questions that he raised with me.  I don't know what it says about journalism or what it says about our culture, that we always assume that someone must have an ulterior motive. It's not sufficient to just be addressing an issue because it matters, because it is the ethically correct thing to do. There seems to be this assumption that everybody's got an angle. It says more about the author than it says about me.  This kind of casting shade and aspersions on me personally as a way to avoid addressing the underlying issues, I just see it as a kind of noise and also a little bit sad. It's almost an affirmation. If the strongest thing they can come up with is to try to attack and cast shade on whether or not I made a significant contribution that led to over nine patents during the late 1980s—if that's the worst they can throw at me, I'm doing pretty good. So that's how I see it. Mr. Jekielek: So you're not trying, “So hard to undermine the use of this vaccine technology.” Dr. Malone: No. My concern here, as I said in our prior interview, is that there's been a series of actions taken, policies taken, regulatory actions taken, that are at odds with how I've been trained with the norms as I've always understood them. The regulatory norms, the scientific norms—these things have been waived. For a lot of people, it doesn't make sense.  And recall, reeling back, what triggered this was this amazing podcast with Bret Weinstein and Steve Kirsch, where I don't think at that point in time the world had really heard anyone questioning the underlying safety data assumptions and ethics of what was being done. There was a widespread sense of unease about these mandates and efforts to force vaccinations, and expedite the licensure of this and deploy it globally on the basis of very abbreviated clinical trials. There was a widespread sense of uneasiness.  But people didn't really have language to express it. When that podcast happened, for some reason, it catalyzed global interest in a way that I didn't expect. I still have people writing me, “I just saw the Bret Weinstein DarkHorse Podcast.” Something happened there, where events came together. I expressed some things that I had just been observing that I felt were anomalous in how the government was managing the situation, in the nature of the vaccines, in the testing of the vaccines, and in the ethics of how they were being deployed and forced on children, plus other things in various countries, including the United States.  That triggered a whole cascade, but it wasn't because I had concerns about the technology or was casting shade on the technology, I've repeatedly made it clear that, in my opinion, these vaccines have saved lives. I get challenged on that all the time, by the way. There's a whole cohort that says, “Oh no, these aren't worth anything. They shouldn't be used at all. They're not effective.”  In my opinion, they've saved a lot of lives and they're very appropriate at this point in time. The risk benefit favors administration of these vaccines, even with all we've learned since in these last few months, it favors their administration to the elderly and the high-risk populations. So contrary to this thread of I'm trying to denigrate these and tear them down—no, I'm trying to say I'm all in favor, strongly in favor of ethical development and deployment of vaccines that are safe, pure, effective, and non-adulterated.  I'm really strongly dug in that we need to confront the data as it is, and not try to cover stuff up or hide risks or avoid confronting risks. In my opinion, the way that we get to good public policy  in public health is we not only recognize those risks, but we also constantly take the position of looking forward, looking for leading indicators of risk, performing risk mitigation, and monitoring for black swans and unexpected events surrounding that. That's where I come from, strongly believing that the norms that have been developed over the last 30 to 40 years in vaccinology should be maintained. We shouldn't jettison them just because we're having a crisis. Mr. Jekielek: Why don't we do a review? There's been a number of very significant papers in the last week or two that have come out with very robust data sets telling us, to my less educated eye, some very valuable information. If you agree, maybe you can review some of these for us. I know you've been studying every one of these in some detail. Dr. Malone: The emergence of the Delta variant, whether originally in India and then subsequently in the UK and then in Israel, has really thrown back the public health enterprise globally and in these countries, because there were assumptions made about the effectiveness of the current vaccines and their ability to contain the outbreak. There was almost a social contract set up between the vaccine recipients and the governments and public health authorities. That social contract was, “Despite what you may have heard about the risks of some of these products and the fact that we admittedly did rush them, we're protecting your health. If you take these products, you will be safe.” That's the social contract. “Despite all these other concerns, you will be safe, and you won't have to retake them. You'll be protected.” People believed they had a shield if they bought in and did this. And then the Delta variant came along, and suddenly that was no longer valid. The assumption that had been made, the social contract, was somehow broken. First we found out, if you'll recall this cascade of events—we had Pfizer disclose that the durability, the length of time that the vaccine would provide protection was not as expected. It was something like six months. This came out of the Israeli data. Mr. Jekielek: Just to be clear, are we talking about protection from infection or protection from disease? Dr. Malone: That's a whole other rabbit hole. It really was protection from infection and spread that was the main parameter of concern with the six month data. You may recall that announcement was made unilaterally by Pfizer based on the Israeli data, and then immediately contradicted by Dr. Fauci saying that this wasn't true and Pfizer had no right to make these statements, and they hadn't discussed it with him. Pfizer then apologized and backed down.  And a week later, the U.S. government announced, that in fact, we were going to need to have boosters. Then there was the announcement that the government had contracted to buy the boosters that were going to be deployed at eight months. Then more data came out. Now most recently the government is saying, “We may have to have boosters at five months.” There was emergency use authorization that this third dose would be deployed to elderly and immunocompromised. And now we're talking about everybody needing it.  So this was the logic, “Take the dose, take the two shots or the one-shot for J&J and you'll be protected. We'll get out of this because we'll reach herd immunity. The whole problem is that we just don't have enough people that are being compliant with this.” Remember, this goes back to July 4th.  July 4th was the goal when we were going to have 70 per cent vaccine uptake. We didn't meet that. And there was a lot of discomfort with the Israeli data. Then all of this new information is rolled out, the Israeli data in particular, having to do with the increasing number of infections and hospitalizations.  At first the position was that this was only occurring in the unvaccinated cohort. Then that became increasingly untenable and it became clear that it was occurring in the vaccinated cohort. The same became true with the UK data set, which is stronger than the American monitoring system. They do a lot more sequence analysis.  So now we had this paradox that those that had been vaccinated, while the data still suggested that they're largely protected from disease and death and more protected than the unvaccinated from disease and death, they're no longer protected from infection. It became clear within the data, and through multiple sources, that the levels of virus replication in the individuals, even who had been vaccinated previously, was the same or higher as the levels of virus replication in those that had been un-vaccinated. And also that those that had been vaccinated and had breakthrough infections, which is what we're talking about, were also shedding virus and able to spread virus.  So that raised the prospect that they were kind of the new super spreaders, because they would have less apparent disease and yet still be shedding high levels of virus. Then we started to see some signs suggesting that there may be some differences in the nature or onset or titers of disease in those that had been infected beyond six months after their vaccination point. This is the waning phase.  That set up a situation where a lot of folks were on edge. There were still a lot of media pushing that this was a pandemic of the unvaccinated, but that became increasingly untenable as the data rolled in. You've referred to this paper that came out. There were actually three in a row that came out almost immediately after the license was issued for the BioNTech product.  There was a paper published in the New England Journal of Medicine that had an odd structure in which they related adverse events associated with the virus infection and a much more comprehensive assessment of adverse events associated with the vaccines. By juxtaposing these two data sets in the same manuscript, the case was made that, “Yes, we have this significantly enhanced spectrum of adverse events associated with the vaccine beyond what had been previously disclosed. We were all focused on the cardio-toxicity.”  But now, additional adverse events, and things that we discussed when we had our last chat as parent adverse events, these are now fairly well-documented in this New England Journal article, things like viral reactivation. So this is the shingles, for instance.  The paper attempts to make the case that, “The vaccines have a lot of adverse events, but the disease has a lot of adverse events also, and the disease is worse. Also there's a lot of overlap between these adverse events associated with the disease and the vaccine.” But the messaging was focused in that manuscript that it was far worse to get the disease than to have the adverse events associated with the vaccine.  That's a little bit of a false analogy, because the vaccine ostensibly would be deployed to 80 or 90 per cent of the population. And in terms of this wave of Delta, we might see something like 20 or 30 per cent of the population infected if we're lucky. Then there's an imbalance of who's at risk with the vaccine versus who's at risk for the infection, but that was the construct. Mr. Jekielek: And just to be clear, what do you mean by 20 to 30 per cent, if we're lucky? Where do those numbers come from? Dr. Malone: I've seen data suggesting that the total population right now that's been infected in the United States is something like about 20 per cent of the total population. We don't have that widespread of an uptake of infection in the U.S. or in the UK. UK data also shows those kinds of numbers. They're reflected in a cohort that have had a natural infection and recovered from that, and then acquired the immune response associated with that.  It's seen in the numbers, for instance, in those cases where there is an accounting, such as in the Great Britain database, the British database, where they say the fraction of the population that's been vaccinated, and then the fraction of the population that's acquired natural immunity. It's also covered in the CDC slide deck that was leaked. I don't think that was available when we had our last conversation.  At the early outset, at the front edge of the Delta outbreak here in the United States, there was a key slide deck that was disclosed to the Washington Post without approval by a CDC employee. Within that slide deck, it showed a number of confidential internal assessments that weren't intended to be shared with the public. Those assessments also included an estimate that we had something like 50 per cent of the population that had accepted vaccine at that point in time. In addition, there was something like 20 per cent of the population that had been infected.  So if you add those two, if you were to consider natural infection as providing some degree of protection against the virus, then we would move from something like 50 per cent vaccine uptake to something like 70 per cent of the population at that point in time that had actually acquired some form of immunity either through vaccination or infection. So that's the basis of my seat-of-the-pants estimate.  In addition, in the CDC slide deck, the government revealed in two key slides that were at the center of that deck, that their epidemiologic calculations and projections were such that the reproductive coefficient of Delta was something in the range of eight. There's other papers that suggest it's more like a little over five, that it was as infectious as chickenpox approximately, which is highly infectious, about two to three times more infectious than the Alpha strain was.  Based on those projections and some assumptions about the percent of the population that had been naturally infected, and the percent of the population that had taken up vaccine, and some assumptions about the effectiveness of mask use in protecting either an individual from being infected by a third party that wasn't using masks or protecting a third party from infection from somebody that was using a mask and was infected—there were a series of projection curves about how that could impact on the spread of the virus.  Basically when you work through those curves, what they demonstrated was that even if we had 100 per cent vaccine uptake with these vaccines, where the technical term is leaky, that do not provide perfect protection against infection, that we would not be able to stop the spread of the virus through the U.S. population. We would slow it. So that's where those estimates come from.  That's where that assessment that is being used as the basis for advocating widespread mask deployment throughout the United States, that's where that policy comes from. It's a CDC analysis that if we don't use masks, then the virus will spread quite rapidly. If we do have full compliance with mask use, we can slow it down a bit. And so that's why we have these various mask mandates throughout the United States now. Mr. Jekielek: Fascinating. You started talking about natural immunity here. I thought it was some of the most interesting, robust data, at least to my eye. Again, you're the one who's going to be speaking on this. Dr. Malone: I agree, and a lot of people agree. It was covered in Science magazine. It's still a pre-print, but it was robust enough, and well enough constructed that even on the basis of the pre-print, Science magazine went ahead and made the clear point. Really, throughout the world, there was recognition that this new data coming out of Israel, as I recall, demonstrated that the term that's often used is natural immunity. It's an odd term, but it's now in common language.  What that means is protection afforded by having been infected and recovered from infection, which will generate a broad immune response. And it's now been shown in that paper and others that the breadth of that immune response in terms of memory T and B cell populations is more diverse and more long lasting than the breadth of immune response elicited by the spike based vaccines alone.  That data that you're alluding to showed that this natural immunity is broader and more durable, which contradicted some studies that the CDC had developed. So we were in a kind of tension. Which is the real data, the CDC data, or these other papers that are evaluated memory T and B cell populations? Which is true? We have multiple truths or multiple pieces of data, plus different groups claiming it's one way or the other.  Then this data was dropped about the evidence of protection. It seems to indicate and be consistent with the claims that the breadth and durability of the immune response was superior with the natural infection in recovery. There's also evidence that there's a significant, depending on the timeframe, six to twenty-fold improvement in protection from infection and disease associated with the natural immunity acquired from prior infection, compared to that conferred by the vaccine.  So now the public, in their social contract with the public health agencies, is faced with the situation where they had been told that natural immunity was not as protective, and that they can't rely on that. If you've been previously infected, you should still get both doses of vaccine, and this vaccination would provide broad, durable protection. It would protect you, and it would protect your elders from you potentially spreading disease to them.  Now, those things have all come into question. The population is still reeling from that. We have kind of dug into these camps. My sense is that people haven't really fully processed what this means. It is profound.  We were discussing before we started shooting, that I had a long podcast interview today and a kind of advisory session with a group of Latin American physicians and scientists that were evaluating public policy for vaccine rollout versus early treatment options for the different cohorts that they have to protect. They were seeing this data from the eyes of folks that really haven't had good access to vaccines, but are facing the prospects that their countries could execute vaccine contracts and bring in these vaccines. They are asking the question, “Does this make sense for us? Is this good policy? Should our country invest in these mRNA vaccines?”  That is why they were talking to me. “What are we going to get for it if we do this? What's going to be the benefit to our population?” It was a very level-headed discussion. But they were pushing me in this, getting back to this theme of me being the vaccine skeptic. They were the ones pushing me saying, “We just don't see the value here for our populations. We don't see a compelling case when these products aren't stopping the spread. They are going to have to be re-administered fairly frequently if they're to be effective?”  Now, the other thing that comes out of this, a concern that the World Health Organization hasn't really come to terms with—I'm speaking of the CDC and the WHO and the whole global infrastructure, including the Israeli government—is one of now mandating a third jab. So in Israel, if you haven't received all three, you're not considered fully vaccinated. Mr. Jekielek: You have a six month window, if I'm not mistaken. Dr. Malone: Precisely. But one of the things about the Israeli data is that they vaccinated in such a bolus, in such a short push, because they have such a compliant population, that essentially, they have a spike in vaccinated persons. So they're all moving concurrently through that six month window now.  There was a pivotal interview with the director of the CDC and she was asked, “Do we have any data? Do we have data, or do we just have hope about the benefits of the third dose?” And she, to her credit, acknowledged that we don't have data. All we have is hope.  Here's the problem with that. Vaccine responses are not linear. More is not better. There are many cases where if you dose more or dose more frequently or move beyond a prime and a boost, you can actually quench the immune response. You can move into “high zone tolerance.” You can move into a situation where your immune responses drop.  Now there's a little bit of foreshadowing on this in another paper that's out where they looked at the effects of vaccination post-infection. Remember this was the policy, that those like me that have been infected should go ahead and take two jabs, take two doses of vaccine. Mr. Jekielek: Which you did. Dr. Malone: Which I did, hoping that it would be helpful for a long COVID period. That data hasn't really played out that way. And there's a paper showing that you can actually quench T-cell responses. You get an improved kind of a super immune response, they assert in that manuscript, after a single dose when you've been previously infected. But with the second dose, your T-cell population actually gets quenched, which is consistent with high zone tolerance.  So if that paper was to be expanded and verified with more robust numbers, it would suggest that one dose after natural infection would be a good thing. Two doses would be a bad thing. Now that's the equivalent of three doses if you think about it, natural infection being dose one. So to say that we don't have any data is a little misleading. We have some leading indicators that suggest that it might not be such a good idea. And now, that data will come out from Israel. The conservative position to take is time will tell, and then we will know.  The Israelis continue to be in the throes of a very active Delta virus infection surge right now. There's some other very intriguing tidbits going on here in this whole public policy of vaccines versus no vaccines, versus universal vaccines, versus the Barrington position that we should selectively vaccinate those that are at high risk. Mr. Jekielek: The Great Barrington Declaration? Dr. Malone: Yes, the Great Barrington Declaration. After that whole matrix of decisions, in comes Sweden. You may recall that Sweden was roundly criticized for this naive notion that they weren't going to vaccinate. They were going to allow the virus to have its will with the population. They have backtracked from that now, to be technically accurate. They have about 40 per cent vaccine uptake and they've acknowledged that position was naive and counterproductive. They had excess deaths initially in the high-risk cohorts.  But what they did do was have a lot more natural infection with alpha and beta strains. And now that Delta is moving through the region, they have an extremely low mortality rate, often hitting zero on any one day—in comparison to some of their neighbors that didn't take that policy, and didn't have such widespread natural infection. Like Finland, for example, where they deployed vaccine very avidly and had good uptake, they're having the exponential growth rate curve that's happening in many other Northern European countries right now. Mr. Jekielek: I'm going to comment here. This is very interesting because you're interpreting this data a bit differently than Dr. Martin Kulldorff, who is from Sweden.  His commentary in a recent interview we did was simply that there were no mandates of any sort ever in Sweden, yet their vaccine use is actually quite high. He said it's one of the higher rates that exist. But he didn't factor in this time period that you said at the beginning, where there was this idea of letting the natural infections happen. And you're saying the reason their rates are zero mortality is because of that. Dr. Malone: Yes. It is a very reasonable explanation for what's happened there. It's a differentiator between them and some of their neighboring countries. They did have that early policy and they did have fairly widespread infection. So that would be consistent with the data suggesting that natural infection is providing broader and more durable immunity.  This gets to the logic of a selective deployment of vaccines to those that are at highest risk. For that fragment of the population, let's say below 65, depending on where you want to cut the line, 60, 65, 70, some people go down to 55, not providing vaccine coverage to those individuals unless they're in a very high risk population, morbidly obese, or with immunologic deficiencies—that may be a more enlightened public policy.  By the way, it is one more consistent with the WHO position that we still have limited vaccine supply, and it would be far more appropriate and equitable to deploy that vaccine supply more broadly globally to protect the elders in particular throughout the world, rather than this focus on universal vaccination.  Now with a booster, a third booster, a third dose, there's been multiple statements by the WHO that they believe this is not ethical. Now, I had another interview today with a journalist podcaster who is from South Africa but living in France, and very aware of the French resistance that's developing now to vaccines with all those protests. Mr. Jekielek: To vaccine mandates, correct? Dr. Malone: In particular, yes. His point was that if you look at this through the eyes of emerging economies, this Western focus on universal vaccination of their populations and now a third vaccine for their populations and their unwillingness to share the technology is a form of imperialism and hegemony. The Western nations have access to this technology and these doses and they're not willing to share it with the rest of the world.  So we've got a series of things here where this kind of imbalance in distribution of these vaccines as a resource is creating or exacerbating concerns that exist widely in economically disadvantaged countries. There's just not a level playing field and we're all in this boat together with this disease. Yet we're not being equitable in distribution of the countermeasures that are available. Mr. Jekielek: This is fascinating, even as others that you're speaking with are asking, “Do we even need these at this point?” That's fascinating. Dr. Malone: Yes, I agree. So what does this mean? I don't know. What I sense is, again, we're in one of those moments where there is chaos. There's lack of structure and consensus about how to move forward. And my sense is, getting back to the U.S. government, we're in a position now where a lot of the core assumptions underlying the vaccine strategy have been called into question. We don't really know what's on the other side.  Then on top of that, it's becoming increasingly apparent that these repurposed drugs and other agents that could provide protection and mitigate death and disease, if they were deployed early in outpatient environments, access to those that are being actively suppressed. That's another one of those, “This doesn't make sense,” kind of problems. It is causing a lot of questioning about the motivations of those that are guiding public policy right now. The second part of this episode will be released on Saturday, Sept. 4, at 7 p.m. ET. Below is a list of references mentioned or related to the discussion in this episode:  “Vaccinated and unvaccinated individuals have similar viral loads in communities with a high prevalence of the SARS-CoV-2 delta variant” (Note: This is a preprint). “Fauci: Amount of virus in breakthrough delta cases ‘almost identical' to unvaccinated” — The Hill CDC: “Outbreak of SARS-CoV-2 Infections, Including COVID-19 Vaccine Breakthrough Infections, Associated with Large Public Gatherings — Barnstable County, Massachusetts, July 2021” “Predominance of antibody-resistant SARS-CoV-2 variants in vaccine breakthrough cases from the San Francisco Bay Area, California” (Note: This is a preprint) “New delta variant studies show the pandemic is far from over” — ScienceNews “Read: Internal CDC document on breakthrough infections” — The Washington Post “New UCSF study: Vaccine-resistant viruses are driving ‘breakthrough' COVID infections” — The Mercury News “Comparing SARS-CoV-2 natural immunity to vaccine-induced immunity: reinfections versus breakthrough infections” (Note: This is a preprint) “Having SARS-CoV-2 once confers much greater immunity than a vaccine—but vaccination remains vital” — Science “Differential effects of the second SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccine dose on T cell immunity in naïve and COVID-19 recovered individuals” (Note: This is a preprint) “SARS-CoV-2 variants of concern and variants under investigation in England” — Public Health England “Safety of the BNT162b2 mRNA Covid-19 Vaccine in a Nationwide Setting” — The New England Journal of Medicine “Real-World Study Captures Risk of Myocarditis With Pfizer Vax” — MedPage Today CDC: “Effectiveness of COVID-19 Vaccines in Preventing SARS-CoV-2 Infection Among Frontline Workers Before and During B.1.617.2 (Delta) Variant Predominance — Eight U.S. Locations, December 2020—August 2021” “CDC: Covid-19 Vaccine Effectiveness Fell From 91% To 66% With Delta Variant“ — Forbes “SARS-CoV-2 infection induces long-lived bone marrow plasma cells in humans” — Nature CDC: “Reduced Risk of Reinfection with SARS-CoV-2 After COVID-19 Vaccination — Kentucky, May-June 2021” “Causes and consequences of purifying selection on SARS-CoV-2” — Genome Biology and Evolution “The reproductive number of the Delta variant of SARS-CoV-2 is far higher compared to the ancestral SARS-CoV-2 virus” — Journal of Travel Medicine “Mutation rate of COVID-19 virus is at least 50 percent higher than previously thought” — Phys.org “Differential effects of the second SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccine dose on T cell immunity in naïve and COVID-19 recovered individuals” (Note: This is a preprint) Subscribe to the American Thought Leaders newsletter so you never miss an episode. You can also follow American Thought Leaders on Parler, Facebook, or YouTube. If you'd like to donate to support our work, you can do so here. Follow Epoch TV on Facebook and Twitter. 

American Thought Leaders- PART 1. Dr. Robert Malone, mRNA Vaccine Inventor, on Latest COVID-19 Data AMERICAN THOUGHT LEADERS https://www.theepochtimes.com/c-american-thought-leaders  PART 1: Dr. Robert Malone, mRNA Vaccine Inventor, on Latest COVID-19 Data, Booster Shots, and the Shattered Scientific ‘Consensus' “We need to confront the data [and] not try to cover stuff up or hide risks,” says mRNA vaccine pioneer Dr. Robert Malone. What does the most recent research say about the efficacy of COVID-19 vaccines? In this two-part episode, we sit down again with Dr. Malone for a comprehensive look at the vaccines, booster shots, repurposed drugs like ivermectin, and the ethics of vaccine mandates. Jan Jekielek: Dr. Robert Malone, it's such a pleasure to have you back on American Thought Leaders. Dr. Robert Malone: Always my pleasure, Jan, and thank you for the chance to come back and visit. Mr. Jekielek: I want to read you a few headlines that I've come across in the last few weeks since we did our recent interview, and give you a chance to speak to them. This is a drophead: “Robert Malone claims to have invented mRNA technology. Why is he trying so hard to undermine its use?” How do you react to this? Dr. Malone: That's the Atlantic hit piece. It was a very interesting article because it has a number of logic jumps and irregularities. Then it ends up contradicting itself in the last paragraph, and basically confirming that my assertions about having being the originator of the core technology are valid. I'm subjected to this meme that you didn't really do the things that you did in the late 1980s almost continuously, usually from internet trolls.  So really what the young author was picking up on was some internet memes that have been wrapped around the prior press push that Katie Kariko and Drew Weissman were the ones that had originated the technology. Now that was clearly false, but it was very actively promoted by their university, which holds a key patent, and then advanced through Stat News, Boston Globe, CNN, and then finally the New York Times. We challenged that, and in the case of the New York Times, they actually recut their interview and podcast with Katie Kariko to cut out the parts where she had claimed that she was the original inventor.  But how do I react to it, this kind of pejorative use of language to cast shade? It doesn't really bother me. I know what the facts are, and I have this massive amount of documentation. When people come at me with those things, I just say, “Hey, look, here it's on the website. Here are the documents, you can make your own assessment.”  The thing that bothers me about all of this, when they're personalizing character assassination on me and character attacks, is that it distracts from the issues. And it's not about me, this kind of chronic questioning of why would I be saying things about the ethics of what's going on? Why would I be raising concerns about the safety signals? I must have some ulterior motive.  There's an underlying theme to all this, that I must have some ulterior motive. This particular journalist asked me again, and again, and again, trying to get at, “What was my ulterior motive for trying to undermine these vaccines based on my technology?” It was so paradoxical, the push of a whole series of questions that he raised with me.  I don't know what it says about journalism or what it says about our culture, that we always assume that someone must have an ulterior motive. It's not sufficient to just be addressing an issue because it matters, because it is the ethically correct thing to do. There seems to be this assumption that everybody's got an angle. It says more about the author than it says about me.  This kind of casting shade and aspersions on me personally as a way to avoid addressing the underlying issues, I just see it as a kind of noise and also a little bit sad. It's almost an affirmation. If the strongest thing they can come up with is to try to attack and cast shade on whether or not I made a significant contribution that led to over nine patents during the late 1980s—if that's the worst they can throw at me, I'm doing pretty good. So that's how I see it. Mr. Jekielek: So you're not trying, “So hard to undermine the use of this vaccine technology.” Dr. Malone: No. My concern here, as I said in our prior interview, is that there's been a series of actions taken, policies taken, regulatory actions taken, that are at odds with how I've been trained with the norms as I've always understood them. The regulatory norms, the scientific norms—these things have been waived. For a lot of people, it doesn't make sense.  And recall, reeling back, what triggered this was this amazing podcast with Bret Weinstein and Steve Kirsch, where I don't think at that point in time the world had really heard anyone questioning the underlying safety data assumptions and ethics of what was being done. There was a widespread sense of unease about these mandates and efforts to force vaccinations, and expedite the licensure of this and deploy it globally on the basis of very abbreviated clinical trials. There was a widespread sense of uneasiness.  But people didn't really have language to express it. When that podcast happened, for some reason, it catalyzed global interest in a way that I didn't expect. I still have people writing me, “I just saw the Bret Weinstein DarkHorse Podcast.” Something happened there, where events came together. I expressed some things that I had just been observing that I felt were anomalous in how the government was managing the situation, in the nature of the vaccines, in the testing of the vaccines, and in the ethics of how they were being deployed and forced on children, plus other things in various countries, including the United States.  That triggered a whole cascade, but it wasn't because I had concerns about the technology or was casting shade on the technology, I've repeatedly made it clear that, in my opinion, these vaccines have saved lives. I get challenged on that all the time, by the way. There's a whole cohort that says, “Oh no, these aren't worth anything. They shouldn't be used at all. They're not effective.”  In my opinion, they've saved a lot of lives and they're very appropriate at this point in time. The risk benefit favors administration of these vaccines, even with all we've learned since in these last few months, it favors their administration to the elderly and the high-risk populations. So contrary to this thread of I'm trying to denigrate these and tear them down—no, I'm trying to say I'm all in favor, strongly in favor of ethical development and deployment of vaccines that are safe, pure, effective, and non-adulterated.  I'm really strongly dug in that we need to confront the data as it is, and not try to cover stuff up or hide risks or avoid confronting risks. In my opinion, the way that we get to good public policy  in public health is we not only recognize those risks, but we also constantly take the position of looking forward, looking for leading indicators of risk, performing risk mitigation, and monitoring for black swans and unexpected events surrounding that. That's where I come from, strongly believing that the norms that have been developed over the last 30 to 40 years in vaccinology should be maintained. We shouldn't jettison them just because we're having a crisis. Mr. Jekielek: Why don't we do a review? There's been a number of very significant papers in the last week or two that have come out with very robust data sets telling us, to my less educated eye, some very valuable information. If you agree, maybe you can review some of these for us. I know you've been studying every one of these in some detail. Dr. Malone: The emergence of the Delta variant, whether originally in India and then subsequently in the UK and then in Israel, has really thrown back the public health enterprise globally and in these countries, because there were assumptions made about the effectiveness of the current vaccines and their ability to contain the outbreak. There was almost a social contract set up between the vaccine recipients and the governments and public health authorities. That social contract was, “Despite what you may have heard about the risks of some of these products and the fact that we admittedly did rush them, we're protecting your health. If you take these products, you will be safe.” That's the social contract. “Despite all these other concerns, you will be safe, and you won't have to retake them. You'll be protected.” People believed they had a shield if they bought in and did this. And then the Delta variant came along, and suddenly that was no longer valid. The assumption that had been made, the social contract, was somehow broken. First we found out, if you'll recall this cascade of events—we had Pfizer disclose that the durability, the length of time that the vaccine would provide protection was not as expected. It was something like six months. This came out of the Israeli data. Mr. Jekielek: Just to be clear, are we talking about protection from infection or protection from disease? Dr. Malone: That's a whole other rabbit hole. It really was protection from infection and spread that was the main parameter of concern with the six month data. You may recall that announcement was made unilaterally by Pfizer based on the Israeli data, and then immediately contradicted by Dr. Fauci saying that this wasn't true and Pfizer had no right to make these statements, and they hadn't discussed it with him. Pfizer then apologized and backed down.  And a week later, the U.S. government announced, that in fact, we were going to need to have boosters. Then there was the announcement that the government had contracted to buy the boosters that were going to be deployed at eight months. Then more data came out. Now most recently the government is saying, “We may have to have boosters at five months.” There was emergency use authorization that this third dose would be deployed to elderly and immunocompromised. And now we're talking about everybody needing it.  So this was the logic, “Take the dose, take the two shots or the one-shot for J&J and you'll be protected. We'll get out of this because we'll reach herd immunity. The whole problem is that we just don't have enough people that are being compliant with this.” Remember, this goes back to July 4th.  July 4th was the goal when we were going to have 70 per cent vaccine uptake. We didn't meet that. And there was a lot of discomfort with the Israeli data. Then all of this new information is rolled out, the Israeli data in particular, having to do with the increasing number of infections and hospitalizations.  At first the position was that this was only occurring in the unvaccinated cohort. Then that became increasingly untenable and it became clear that it was occurring in the vaccinated cohort. The same became true with the UK data set, which is stronger than the American monitoring system. They do a lot more sequence analysis.  So now we had this paradox that those that had been vaccinated, while the data still suggested that they're largely protected from disease and death and more protected than the unvaccinated from disease and death, they're no longer protected from infection. It became clear within the data, and through multiple sources, that the levels of virus replication in the individuals, even who had been vaccinated previously, was the same or higher as the levels of virus replication in those that had been un-vaccinated. And also that those that had been vaccinated and had breakthrough infections, which is what we're talking about, were also shedding virus and able to spread virus.  So that raised the prospect that they were kind of the new super spreaders, because they would have less apparent disease and yet still be shedding high levels of virus. Then we started to see some signs suggesting that there may be some differences in the nature or onset or titers of disease in those that had been infected beyond six months after their vaccination point. This is the waning phase.  That set up a situation where a lot of folks were on edge. There were still a lot of media pushing that this was a pandemic of the unvaccinated, but that became increasingly untenable as the data rolled in. You've referred to this paper that came out. There were actually three in a row that came out almost immediately after the license was issued for the BioNTech product.  There was a paper published in the New England Journal of Medicine that had an odd structure in which they related adverse events associated with the virus infection and a much more comprehensive assessment of adverse events associated with the vaccines. By juxtaposing these two data sets in the same manuscript, the case was made that, “Yes, we have this significantly enhanced spectrum of adverse events associated with the vaccine beyond what had been previously disclosed. We were all focused on the cardio-toxicity.”  But now, additional adverse events, and things that we discussed when we had our last chat as parent adverse events, these are now fairly well-documented in this New England Journal article, things like viral reactivation. So this is the shingles, for instance.  The paper attempts to make the case that, “The vaccines have a lot of adverse events, but the disease has a lot of adverse events also, and the disease is worse. Also there's a lot of overlap between these adverse events associated with the disease and the vaccine.” But the messaging was focused in that manuscript that it was far worse to get the disease than to have the adverse events associated with the vaccine.  That's a little bit of a false analogy, because the vaccine ostensibly would be deployed to 80 or 90 per cent of the population. And in terms of this wave of Delta, we might see something like 20 or 30 per cent of the population infected if we're lucky. Then there's an imbalance of who's at risk with the vaccine versus who's at risk for the infection, but that was the construct. Mr. Jekielek: And just to be clear, what do you mean by 20 to 30 per cent, if we're lucky? Where do those numbers come from? Dr. Malone: I've seen data suggesting that the total population right now that's been infected in the United States is something like about 20 per cent of the total population. We don't have that widespread of an uptake of infection in the U.S. or in the UK. UK data also shows those kinds of numbers. They're reflected in a cohort that have had a natural infection and recovered from that, and then acquired the immune response associated with that.  It's seen in the numbers, for instance, in those cases where there is an accounting, such as in the Great Britain database, the British database, where they say the fraction of the population that's been vaccinated, and then the fraction of the population that's acquired natural immunity. It's also covered in the CDC slide deck that was leaked. I don't think that was available when we had our last conversation.  At the early outset, at the front edge of the Delta outbreak here in the United States, there was a key slide deck that was disclosed to the Washington Post without approval by a CDC employee. Within that slide deck, it showed a number of confidential internal assessments that weren't intended to be shared with the public. Those assessments also included an estimate that we had something like 50 per cent of the population that had accepted vaccine at that point in time. In addition, there was something like 20 per cent of the population that had been infected.  So if you add those two, if you were to consider natural infection as providing some degree of protection against the virus, then we would move from something like 50 per cent vaccine uptake to something like 70 per cent of the population at that point in time that had actually acquired some form of immunity either through vaccination or infection. So that's the basis of my seat-of-the-pants estimate.  In addition, in the CDC slide deck, the government revealed in two key slides that were at the center of that deck, that their epidemiologic calculations and projections were such that the reproductive coefficient of Delta was something in the range of eight. There's other papers that suggest it's more like a little over five, that it was as infectious as chickenpox approximately, which is highly infectious, about two to three times more infectious than the Alpha strain was.  Based on those projections and some assumptions about the percent of the population that had been naturally infected, and the percent of the population that had taken up vaccine, and some assumptions about the effectiveness of mask use in protecting either an individual from being infected by a third party that wasn't using masks or protecting a third party from infection from somebody that was using a mask and was infected—there were a series of projection curves about how that could impact on the spread of the virus.  Basically when you work through those curves, what they demonstrated was that even if we had 100 per cent vaccine uptake with these vaccines, where the technical term is leaky, that do not provide perfect protection against infection, that we would not be able to stop the spread of the virus through the U.S. population. We would slow it. So that's where those estimates come from.  That's where that assessment that is being used as the basis for advocating widespread mask deployment throughout the United States, that's where that policy comes from. It's a CDC analysis that if we don't use masks, then the virus will spread quite rapidly. If we do have full compliance with mask use, we can slow it down a bit. And so that's why we have these various mask mandates throughout the United States now. Mr. Jekielek: Fascinating. You started talking about natural immunity here. I thought it was some of the most interesting, robust data, at least to my eye. Again, you're the one who's going to be speaking on this. Dr. Malone: I agree, and a lot of people agree. It was covered in Science magazine. It's still a pre-print, but it was robust enough, and well enough constructed that even on the basis of the pre-print, Science magazine went ahead and made the clear point. Really, throughout the world, there was recognition that this new data coming out of Israel, as I recall, demonstrated that the term that's often used is natural immunity. It's an odd term, but it's now in common language.  What that means is protection afforded by having been infected and recovered from infection, which will generate a broad immune response. And it's now been shown in that paper and others that the breadth of that immune response in terms of memory T and B cell populations is more diverse and more long lasting than the breadth of immune response elicited by the spike based vaccines alone.  That data that you're alluding to showed that this natural immunity is broader and more durable, which contradicted some studies that the CDC had developed. So we were in a kind of tension. Which is the real data, the CDC data, or these other papers that are evaluated memory T and B cell populations? Which is true? We have multiple truths or multiple pieces of data, plus different groups claiming it's one way or the other.  Then this data was dropped about the evidence of protection. It seems to indicate and be consistent with the claims that the breadth and durability of the immune response was superior with the natural infection in recovery. There's also evidence that there's a significant, depending on the timeframe, six to twenty-fold improvement in protection from infection and disease associated with the natural immunity acquired from prior infection, compared to that conferred by the vaccine.  So now the public, in their social contract with the public health agencies, is faced with the situation where they had been told that natural immunity was not as protective, and that they can't rely on that. If you've been previously infected, you should still get both doses of vaccine, and this vaccination would provide broad, durable protection. It would protect you, and it would protect your elders from you potentially spreading disease to them.  Now, those things have all come into question. The population is still reeling from that. We have kind of dug into these camps. My sense is that people haven't really fully processed what this means. It is profound.  We were discussing before we started shooting, that I had a long podcast interview today and a kind of advisory session with a group of Latin American physicians and scientists that were evaluating public policy for vaccine rollout versus early treatment options for the different cohorts that they have to protect. They were seeing this data from the eyes of folks that really haven't had good access to vaccines, but are facing the prospects that their countries could execute vaccine contracts and bring in these vaccines. They are asking the question, “Does this make sense for us? Is this good policy? Should our country invest in these mRNA vaccines?”  That is why they were talking to me. “What are we going to get for it if we do this? What's going to be the benefit to our population?” It was a very level-headed discussion. But they were pushing me in this, getting back to this theme of me being the vaccine skeptic. They were the ones pushing me saying, “We just don't see the value here for our populations. We don't see a compelling case when these products aren't stopping the spread. They are going to have to be re-administered fairly frequently if they're to be effective?”  Now, the other thing that comes out of this, a concern that the World Health Organization hasn't really come to terms with—I'm speaking of the CDC and the WHO and the whole global infrastructure, including the Israeli government—is one of now mandating a third jab. So in Israel, if you haven't received all three, you're not considered fully vaccinated. Mr. Jekielek: You have a six month window, if I'm not mistaken. Dr. Malone: Precisely. But one of the things about the Israeli data is that they vaccinated in such a bolus, in such a short push, because they have such a compliant population, that essentially, they have a spike in vaccinated persons. So they're all moving concurrently through that six month window now.  There was a pivotal interview with the director of the CDC and she was asked, “Do we have any data? Do we have data, or do we just have hope about the benefits of the third dose?” And she, to her credit, acknowledged that we don't have data. All we have is hope.  Here's the problem with that. Vaccine responses are not linear. More is not better. There are many cases where if you dose more or dose more frequently or move beyond a prime and a boost, you can actually quench the immune response. You can move into “high zone tolerance.” You can move into a situation where your immune responses drop.  Now there's a little bit of foreshadowing on this in another paper that's out where they looked at the effects of vaccination post-infection. Remember this was the policy, that those like me that have been infected should go ahead and take two jabs, take two doses of vaccine. Mr. Jekielek: Which you did. Dr. Malone: Which I did, hoping that it would be helpful for a long COVID period. That data hasn't really played out that way. And there's a paper showing that you can actually quench T-cell responses. You get an improved kind of a super immune response, they assert in that manuscript, after a single dose when you've been previously infected. But with the second dose, your T-cell population actually gets quenched, which is consistent with high zone tolerance.  So if that paper was to be expanded and verified with more robust numbers, it would suggest that one dose after natural infection would be a good thing. Two doses would be a bad thing. Now that's the equivalent of three doses if you think about it, natural infection being dose one. So to say that we don't have any data is a little misleading. We have some leading indicators that suggest that it might not be such a good idea. And now, that data will come out from Israel. The conservative position to take is time will tell, and then we will know.  The Israelis continue to be in the throes of a very active Delta virus infection surge right now. There's some other very intriguing tidbits going on here in this whole public policy of vaccines versus no vaccines, versus universal vaccines, versus the Barrington position that we should selectively vaccinate those that are at high risk. Mr. Jekielek: The Great Barrington Declaration? Dr. Malone: Yes, the Great Barrington Declaration. After that whole matrix of decisions, in comes Sweden. You may recall that Sweden was roundly criticized for this naive notion that they weren't going to vaccinate. They were going to allow the virus to have its will with the population. They have backtracked from that now, to be technically accurate. They have about 40 per cent vaccine uptake and they've acknowledged that position was naive and counterproductive. They had excess deaths initially in the high-risk cohorts.  But what they did do was have a lot more natural infection with alpha and beta strains. And now that Delta is moving through the region, they have an extremely low mortality rate, often hitting zero on any one day—in comparison to some of their neighbors that didn't take that policy, and didn't have such widespread natural infection. Like Finland, for example, where they deployed vaccine very avidly and had good uptake, they're having the exponential growth rate curve that's happening in many other Northern European countries right now. Mr. Jekielek: I'm going to comment here. This is very interesting because you're interpreting this data a bit differently than Dr. Martin Kulldorff, who is from Sweden.  His commentary in a recent interview we did was simply that there were no mandates of any sort ever in Sweden, yet their vaccine use is actually quite high. He said it's one of the higher rates that exist. But he didn't factor in this time period that you said at the beginning, where there was this idea of letting the natural infections happen. And you're saying the reason their rates are zero mortality is because of that. Dr. Malone: Yes. It is a very reasonable explanation for what's happened there. It's a differentiator between them and some of their neighboring countries. They did have that early policy and they did have fairly widespread infection. So that would be consistent with the data suggesting that natural infection is providing broader and more durable immunity.  This gets to the logic of a selective deployment of vaccines to those that are at highest risk. For that fragment of the population, let's say below 65, depending on where you want to cut the line, 60, 65, 70, some people go down to 55, not providing vaccine coverage to those individuals unless they're in a very high risk population, morbidly obese, or with immunologic deficiencies—that may be a more enlightened public policy.  By the way, it is one more consistent with the WHO position that we still have limited vaccine supply, and it would be far more appropriate and equitable to deploy that vaccine supply more broadly globally to protect the elders in particular throughout the world, rather than this focus on universal vaccination.  Now with a booster, a third booster, a third dose, there's been multiple statements by the WHO that they believe this is not ethical. Now, I had another interview today with a journalist podcaster who is from South Africa but living in France, and very aware of the French resistance that's developing now to vaccines with all those protests. Mr. Jekielek: To vaccine mandates, correct? Dr. Malone: In particular, yes. His point was that if you look at this through the eyes of emerging economies, this Western focus on universal vaccination of their populations and now a third vaccine for their populations and their unwillingness to share the technology is a form of imperialism and hegemony. The Western nations have access to this technology and these doses and they're not willing to share it with the rest of the world.  So we've got a series of things here where this kind of imbalance in distribution of these vaccines as a resource is creating or exacerbating concerns that exist widely in economically disadvantaged countries. There's just not a level playing field and we're all in this boat together with this disease. Yet we're not being equitable in distribution of the countermeasures that are available. Mr. Jekielek: This is fascinating, even as others that you're speaking with are asking, “Do we even need these at this point?” That's fascinating. Dr. Malone: Yes, I agree. So what does this mean? I don't know. What I sense is, again, we're in one of those moments where there is chaos. There's lack of structure and consensus about how to move forward. And my sense is, getting back to the U.S. government, we're in a position now where a lot of the core assumptions underlying the vaccine strategy have been called into question. We don't really know what's on the other side.  Then on top of that, it's becoming increasingly apparent that these repurposed drugs and other agents that could provide protection and mitigate death and disease, if they were deployed early in outpatient environments, access to those that are being actively suppressed. That's another one of those, “This doesn't make sense,” kind of problems. It is causing a lot of questioning about the motivations of those that are guiding public policy right now. The second part of this episode will be released on Saturday, Sept. 4, at 7 p.m. ET. Below is a list of references mentioned or related to the discussion in this episode:  “Vaccinated and unvaccinated individuals have similar viral loads in communities with a high prevalence of the SARS-CoV-2 delta variant” (Note: This is a preprint). “Fauci: Amount of virus in breakthrough delta cases ‘almost identical' to unvaccinated” — The Hill CDC: “Outbreak of SARS-CoV-2 Infections, Including COVID-19 Vaccine Breakthrough Infections, Associated with Large Public Gatherings — Barnstable County, Massachusetts, July 2021” “Predominance of antibody-resistant SARS-CoV-2 variants in vaccine breakthrough cases from the San Francisco Bay Area, California” (Note: This is a preprint) “New delta variant studies show the pandemic is far from over” — ScienceNews “Read: Internal CDC document on breakthrough infections” — The Washington Post “New UCSF study: Vaccine-resistant viruses are driving ‘breakthrough' COVID infections” — The Mercury News “Comparing SARS-CoV-2 natural immunity to vaccine-induced immunity: reinfections versus breakthrough infections” (Note: This is a preprint) “Having SARS-CoV-2 once confers much greater immunity than a vaccine—but vaccination remains vital” — Science “Differential effects of the second SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccine dose on T cell immunity in naïve and COVID-19 recovered individuals” (Note: This is a preprint) “SARS-CoV-2 variants of concern and variants under investigation in England” — Public Health England “Safety of the BNT162b2 mRNA Covid-19 Vaccine in a Nationwide Setting” — The New England Journal of Medicine “Real-World Study Captures Risk of Myocarditis With Pfizer Vax” — MedPage Today CDC: “Effectiveness of COVID-19 Vaccines in Preventing SARS-CoV-2 Infection Among Frontline Workers Before and During B.1.617.2 (Delta) Variant Predominance — Eight U.S. Locations, December 2020—August 2021” “CDC: Covid-19 Vaccine Effectiveness Fell From 91% To 66% With Delta Variant“ — Forbes “SARS-CoV-2 infection induces long-lived bone marrow plasma cells in humans” — Nature CDC: “Reduced Risk of Reinfection with SARS-CoV-2 After COVID-19 Vaccination — Kentucky, May-June 2021” “Causes and consequences of purifying selection on SARS-CoV-2” — Genome Biology and Evolution “The reproductive number of the Delta variant of SARS-CoV-2 is far higher compared to the ancestral SARS-CoV-2 virus” — Journal of Travel Medicine “Mutation rate of COVID-19 virus is at least 50 percent higher than previously thought” — Phys.org “Differential effects of the second SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccine dose on T cell immunity in naïve and COVID-19 recovered individuals” (Note: This is a preprint) Subscribe to the American Thought Leaders newsletter so you never miss an episode. You can also follow American Thought Leaders on Parler, Facebook, or YouTube. If you'd like to donate to support our work, you can do so here. Follow Epoch TV on Facebook and Twitter. 

American Thought Leaders- PART 2: Dr. Robert Malone on Ivermectin, Escape Mutants, and the Faulty Logic of Vaccine Mandates. AMERICAN THOUGHT LEADERS PART 2: Dr. Robert Malone on Ivermectin, Escape Mutants, and the Faulty Logic of Vaccine Mandates In part one of this American Thought Leaders episode, mRNA vaccine inventor Dr. Robert Malone explained the latest research on COVID-19 vaccines, booster shots, and natural immunity. Now in part two, we take a closer look at repurposed drugs like ivermectin and how a universal vaccination policy could actually backfire—and bring about the emergence of vaccine-resistant escape mutants. At their core, vaccine mandates are not just unethical and divisive, but also “impractical and unnecessary,” says Dr. Malone. You can watch the first part of this episode here. Below is a list of references mentioned or related to the discussion in this episode:  “Ivermectin for preventing and treating COVID-19” — The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews “Use of Ivermectin Is Associated With Lower Mortality in Hospitalized Patients With Coronavirus Disease 2019” — Chest Journal “Review of the Emerging Evidence Demonstrating the Efficacy of Ivermectin in the Prophylaxis and Treatment of COVID-19” — American Journal of Therapeutics “Effects of Ivermectin in Patients With COVID-19: A Multicenter, Double-Blind, Randomized, Controlled Clinical Trial” — Clinical Therapeutics “Dexamethasone in Hospitalized Patients with Covid-19” — The New England Journal of Medicine “ACTIV-6: COVID-19 Study of Repurposed Medications” — NIH “Convergent antibody responses to the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein in convalescent and vaccinated individuals” — Cell Reports “Reduced sensitivity of SARS-CoV-2 variant Delta to antibody neutralization” — Nature The SARS-CoV-2 Delta variant is poised to acquire complete resistance to wild-type spike vaccines (Note: This is a preprint) “Mutation rate of COVID-19 virus is at least 50 percent higher than previously thought” — Phys.org “Infection and Vaccine-Induced Neutralizing-Antibody Responses to the SARS-CoV-2 B.1.617 Variants” — The New England Journal of Medicine “Why is the ongoing mass vaccination experiment driving a rapid evolutionary response of SARS-CoV-2?” — Trial Site News “The emergence and ongoing convergent evolution of the N501Y lineages coincides with a major global shift in the SARS-CoV-2 selective landscape” (Note: This is a preprint) “The Lambda variant of SARS-CoV-2 has a better chance than the Delta variant to escape vaccines” (Note: This is a preprint) “Imperfect Vaccination Can Enhance the Transmission of Highly Virulent Pathogens” — PLOS Biology “Vaccinated and unvaccinated individuals have similar viral loads in communities with a high prevalence of the SARS-CoV-2 delta variant” (Note: This is a preprint). “Fauci: Amount of virus in breakthrough delta cases ‘almost identical' to unvaccinated” — The Hill CDC: “Outbreak of SARS-CoV-2 Infections, Including COVID-19 Vaccine Breakthrough Infections, Associated with Large Public Gatherings — Barnstable County, Massachusetts, July 2021” “Predominance of antibody-resistant SARS-CoV-2 variants in vaccine breakthrough cases from the San Francisco Bay Area, California” (Note: This is a preprint) “New delta variant studies show the pandemic is far from over” — ScienceNews “Read: Internal CDC document on breakthrough infections” — The Washington Post “New UCSF study: Vaccine-resistant viruses are driving ‘breakthrough' COVID infections” — The Mercury News “Comparing SARS-CoV-2 natural immunity to vaccine-induced immunity: reinfections versus breakthrough infections” (Note: This is a preprint) “Having SARS-CoV-2 once confers much greater immunity than a vaccine—but vaccination remains vital” — Science “Differential effects of the second SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccine dose on T cell immunity in naïve and COVID-19 recovered individuals” (Note: This is a preprint) “SARS-CoV-2 variants of concern and variants under investigation in England” — Public Health England “Safety of the BNT162b2 mRNA Covid-19 Vaccine in a Nationwide Setting” — The New England Journal of Medicine “Real-World Study Captures Risk of Myocarditis With Pfizer Vax” — MedPage Today CDC: “Effectiveness of COVID-19 Vaccines in Preventing SARS-CoV-2 Infection Among Frontline Workers Before and During B.1.617.2 (Delta) Variant Predominance — Eight U.S. Locations, December 2020—August 2021” “CDC: Covid-19 Vaccine Effectiveness Fell From 91% To 66% With Delta Variant“ — Forbes “SARS-CoV-2 infection induces long-lived bone marrow plasma cells in humans” — Nature “Causes and consequences of purifying selection on SARS-CoV-2” — Genome Biology and Evolution “The reproductive number of the Delta variant of SARS-CoV-2 is far higher compared to the ancestral SARS-CoV-2 virus” — Journal of Travel Medicine Subscribe to the American Thought Leaders newsletter so you never miss an episode. You can also follow American Thought Leaders on Parler, Facebook, or YouTube. If you'd like to donate to support our work, you can do so here. Follow Epoch TV on Facebook and Twitter. 

トリパノソーマのキネトコアについて話しました。Show notes トリパノソーマ キネトコア(動原体) セントロメア Misleading Chat 7. In the golden age of molecular biology (researchat.fm) … シドニー・ブレナー回 41. Single is not bad (researchat.fm) Akiyoshist … Akiyoshiさんファンの呼称 Akiyoshi Lab Bungo Akiyoshi ハルキスト Akiyoshi and Gull. Cell (2014) … Discovery of unconventional kinetochores in kinetoplastids Tromer et al., Open Biology (2021) … Repurposing of synaptonemal complex proteins for kinetochores in Kinetoplastida 体細胞分裂 (mitosis) 減数分裂 (meiosis) 2倍体 相同組換え 相同染色体 姉妹染色体 … sister chromatids コヒーシン シナプトネマコンプレックス double strand break … DNAの二本鎖が切断されること Spo11 Bloomfield. Annu Rev Microbiol (2018) … Dicty(キイロタマホコリカビ)はspo11がないが、減数分裂時に相同組換えを行う。 Cas9 DNAトポイソメラーゼ キアズマ … chiasma。chiasmaがない減数分裂のことをachiasmaと呼ぶ。 Rasmussen. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. (1977) … “Meiosis in Bombyx mori females”: カイコのメスで見られるachiasmata John et al., Front Cell Dev Biol. (2016) … “Achiasmy: Male Fruit Flies Are Not Ready to Mix”: ハエのオスにおけるachiasmataに関する総説 Xia et al., Genome Biology(2007) … カイコの性細胞におけるspo11発現の論文(Additional Data 5) 48. XXXXXYYYYY (researchat.fm) … 性の多様性について。XYやZW型についても解説しています。 Garg and Martin. Genome Biol. Evol. (2016) … “Mitochondria, the Cell Cycle, and the Origin of Sex via a Syncytial Eukaryote Common Ancestor”: mitosisとmeiosisの進化について 水素仮説 William F Martin Muller's rachet 水平伝播(horizontal gene transfer) アフリカ睡眠病 ナガナ病 ツェツェバエ キネトプラスト キネトプラスト類(kinetoplastids) Benne et al., Cell (1986) … “ Major transcript of the frameshifted coxII gene from trypanosome mitochondria contains four nucleotides that are not encoded in the DNA”: RNA editing in Trypanosoma Berriman et al., Science (2005)…The genome of the African trypanosome Trypanosoma brucei 中心体 微小管 ホモログ Ogbadoyi et al., Chromosoma (2000) … “Architecture of the Trypanosoma brucei nucleus during interphase and mitosis”: Trypanosomaのキネトコア様構造を電子顕微鏡で観察した論文 Peacock et al., Communications Biology (2021) … “Sequential production of gametes during meiosis in trypanosomes”: trypanosomaのmeiosisについて Weir et al., eLife (2021) … “Population genomics reveals the origin and asexual evolution of human infective trypanosomes”: asexual eukaryoteのTrypanosoma brucei gambienseについて(減数分裂がないというよりはsexがないというべき？) Déjardin and Kingston. Cell (2009) … “Purification of Proteins Associated with Specific Genomic Loci”: PICh法の論文 Thomas Cavalier-Smith LECA … The last eukaryotic common ancestor システム生物学 収斂進化 CENP-A Dinoflagellate… 渦鞭毛藻 Dinokaryon 無脊椎動物の発生 … 団勝磨先生ら著 ヒドロキシルメチルウラシル Talbert et al., The kinetochore (2009) … “Evolution of Centromeres and Kinetochores: A Two-Part Fugue” セントロメアとキネトコアの進化についての論文。Henikoff lab ファインマン デーモンコア プルトニウムは温かい What I cannot create, I do not understand. … 自分で作れないものは、理解していない。 Synthetic biology … 合成生物学 ツイート1 … EMBO, HSFP, Wellcome Trustによるサポート KKT1 uniprot Akiyoshi et al., Genes Dev. (2009) … Quantitative proteomic analysis of purified yeast kinetochores identifies a PP1 regulatory subunit Akiyoshi et al., Nature (2010) … Tension directly stabilizes reconstituted kinetochore-microtubule attachments 精製した動原体を用いた動原体とスピンドル微小管との結合の再構成 … 新着論文レビュー。秋吉さんの博士時代の論文解説 トリパノソーマのもつ型破りな動原体タンパク質の発見 … 新着論文レビュー。トリパノソーマのキネトコア論文の日本語解説 Sue Biggins Sue Biggins先生のインタビュー Sue Biggins先生のiBiology ドブジャンスキー 高井研 44. Tabasheer (researchat.fm) … 伊藤篤太郎、南方熊楠を含む、1800年代後半、Natureに投稿した日本人研究者について話しました。 Editorial notes 次のシリーズにも期待したいです (soh) 話し始めで構想からはずれてしまったため、アワアワしてしまいました。色々とっちらかってすいませんでした。次回チャンスがあればもう少しまとめられるようがんばります。(tadasu) キネトコアって名前かっこいい(coela)

Award-winning journalist and economist Tim Harford explains three simple rules for understanding statistics and evaluating truth in the news. Then, you’ll learn about why our microbiomes may have come from dirt.  Additional resources from Tim Harford: Pick up "The Data Detective: Ten Easy Rules to Make Sense of Statistics" on Amazon: https://amzn.to/3ad1dQ4  Tim Harford's website: https://timharford.com/  Tim Harford on Twitter: https://twitter.com/TimHarford  Microbes in dental plaque are more like soil microbes than tongue microbes, which suggests our microbiomes came from dirt by Cameron Duke Caldwell, A. (2020, December 15). Microbes in dental plaque look more like relatives in soil than those on the tongue. EurekAlert! https://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2020-12/uocm-mid121420.php  Shaiber, A., Willis, A. D., Delmont, T. O., Roux, S., Chen, L.-X., Schmid, A. C., Yousef, M., Watson, A. R., Lolans, K., Esen, Ö. C., Lee, S. T. M., Downey, N., Morrison, H. G., Dewhirst, F. E., Mark Welch, J. L., & Eren, A. M. (2020). Functional and genetic markers of niche partitioning among enigmatic members of the human oral microbiome. Genome Biology, 21(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s13059-020-02195-w  Subscribe to Curiosity Daily to learn something new every day with Cody Gough and Ashley Hamer. You can also listen to our podcast as part of your Alexa Flash Briefing; Amazon smart speakers users, click/tap “enable” here: https://www.amazon.com/Curiosity-com-Curiosity-Daily-from/dp/B07CP17DJY See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

What were the pre-Christian religious traditions of England like? This two part series serves as an introduction to Anglo-Saxon paganism. In this podcast we will look at the evidence we have for the pagan gods of the Anglo-Saxons and will compare them to what we know about the Norse equivalents that Vikings worshipped. At times it is also necessary to use Indo-European comparative mythology to understand the gods and goddesses of the Anglo-Saxons. “Anglo-Saxon paganism” refers to the Germanic pagan traditions brought to Britain in the 5th century and which persisted in surprising ways even after the Christianisation of Anglo-Saxon England over the 7th and 8th century. (This podcast is also available as a video on YouTube and Odysee)Sources:Chaney, W. A. 1972. The Cult of Kingship in Anglo-Saxon England: The Transition from Paganism to Christianity, The Germanic Review: Literature, Culture, Theory, 47:2, 141-143Das, R. et al. 2016. Localizing Ashkenazic Jews to Primeval Villages in the Ancient Iranian Lands of Ashkenaz, Genome Biology and Evolution, Volume 8, Issue 4.Dowden, K. 2000. European Paganism: The Realities of Cult from Antiquity to the Middle Ages. London and New York: Routledge. p. 229.Dumezil, G. 1988. ‘Mitra-Varuna: An Essay on Two Indo-European Representations of Sovereignty’Ealdorblotere, T. 2020. To Hold the Holytides.Faussett, B. 1856, Inventorium Sepulchrale. An Account of Some Antiquities dug up at Gilton, Kingston, Sibertswold, Bafriston, Beakesbourne, Chartham, and Crundale, in the County of Kent, from A.D. 1757 to A.D. 1773 (London 1856).Grimm, J. 1835. Deutsche Mythologie.Helmbrecht, M. 2012. A winged figure from Uppåkra HelmbrechtKemble, J. M. 1876. The Saxons in EnglandKershaw, K. 2000. ‘The one-eyed god: Odin and the (Indo-)Germanic Männerbünde’ (Journal of Indo-European studies monograph).Nordberg, Andreas. 2006. Jul, disting och förkyrklig tideräkning: Kalendrar och kalendariska riter i det förkristna Norden. Kungl. Gustav Adolfs Akademien för svensk folkkultur: UppsalaNorth, R. 1997 Heathen gods in Old English literature. Cambridge University Press.North, R. Old English 'wopes hring' and the Old Norse myth of BaldrPollington, S. 2011. The Elder Gods: The Otherworld of Early EnglandReaves, W. 2018. Odin's Wife: Mother Earth in Germanic MythologyRowsell, T. 2011. Woden and his Roles in Anglo-Saxon Royal Genealogy.Schiffels, S., Haak, W., Paajanen, P. et al. Iron Age and Anglo-Saxon genomes from East England reveal British migration history. Nat Commun 7, 10408 (2016). Stenton, F. 1943. Anglo-Saxon England. OxfordWerner, J. 1964. Herkuleskeule und Donar-Amulett. Jahrb. RGZM 11, 176–197.

On this ID The Future from the vault, Casey Luskin examines a paper in Genome Biology and Evolution which argues that the famous beta-globin pseudogene is functional. Why is this pseudogene famous? Well, it’s been Exhibit A — literally, offered as evidence in a court case — for critics of intelligent design who argue that our genome is full of useless, functionless junk, and therefore can’t be a product of design. Biologist Kenneth Miller argued in court that its appearance in multiple species, including gorillas and chimpanzees, strongly suggests Neo-Darwinian evolution and a common ancestor, since what designer would stick the useless gene in different species? Instead, Miller and others have theorized, the random mutation that produced the pseudogene occurred Read More › Source

Un breve comentario sobre el estudio publicado en la revista médica The Lancet, donde los investigadores explican como aumentan las probabilidades de muerte en personas que han sufrido una pérdida sentimental importante, es decir, como tantos autores han cantado una y otra vez, que si es posible morir por un corazón roto...Lea sobre lo comentado en "Un corazón romántico roto si puede ser peligroso".Este trabajo de la Universidad de Utrecht complementa otros sobre temas relacionados, como el estudio publicado en Genome Biology, según el cual las personas solitarias son mas propensas a enfermarse y morir jóvenes, tocado en el programa "La soledad enferma" y el articulo "La bioquimica de la soledad".Duración: 00:05:54.Durante la narración se escuchan, brevemente, How can you mend a broken heart (de Barry y Robin Gibb) y la versión que Dyango hace de la creación de Charles Aznavour, Morir de amor. En consideración a los derechos de autor y conexos, solo fueron usados unos pocos compases permitidos de cada canción.SALUDyTecnologia es un portal de tecnologiahechapalabra.com, coordinado por el Dr. Isaac Mosquera.Encuentre más archivos multimedia de Salud&Tecnologia en TecnologiaHechaPalabra.com.Imagen: walpaperlist.com

In this episode of the Epigenetics Podcast, we caught up with Dr. Hodaka Fujii, Professor of Biochemistry and Genome Biology at Hirosaki University Graduate School of Medicine and School of Medicine, to talk about his work on the development of locus-specific ChIP technologies. The goal of conventional chromatin immunoprecipitation (ChIP) assays is to find genomic locations of transcription factor binding or genome-wide profiles of histone tail modifications.  In contrast to that, the guest of this episode, Dr. Fujii, has developed methods such as insertional chromatin immunoprecipitation (iChIP) and engineered DNA-binding molecule-mediated chromatin immunoprecipitation (enChIP) to identify the factors that are binding to specific sites on the genome. In iChIP, LexA binding sites are inserted into the genomic region of interest. In parallel, the DNA-binding domain of LexA, fused with FLAG epitope tags and a nuclear localization signal, is expressed in the same cells. After crosslinking and chromatin preparation, the resulting chromatin is immunoprecipitated with an antibody against the tag. This allows proteins or RNA interacting with the region of interest to be analyzed with the appropriate downstream application. The enChIP takes a similar approach, but does not require insertion of the LexA binding sites. Instead, a FLAG-tagged dCas9 protein together with the respective guide RNA are used to target the region of the genome of interest. After the IP and the purification DNA, RNA, or proteins can be analyzed accordingly. The lack of the requirement of to insert the LexA binding sites into the genome makes enChIP much more straightforward than iChIP. In this interview, we discuss the story behind how Dr. Fujii got into the field of epigenetics, how he developed iChIP, and how the method was improved over the years. Furthermore, we discuss the development of enChIP and how this can be used as an alternate method to Hi-C.   References   Akemi Hoshino, Satoko Matsumura, … Hodaka Fujii (2004) Inducible Translocation Trap (Molecular Cell) DOI: 10.1016/j.molcel.2004.06.017 Akemi Hoshino, Hodaka Fujii (2009) Insertional chromatin immunoprecipitation: a method for isolating specific genomic regions (Journal of Bioscience and Bioengineering) DOI: 10.1016/j.jbiosc.2009.05.005 Toshitsugu Fujita, Hodaka Fujii (2013) Efficient isolation of specific genomic regions and identification of associated proteins by engineered DNA-binding molecule-mediated chromatin immunoprecipitation (enChIP) using CRISPR (Biochemical and Biophysical Research Communications) DOI: 10.1016/j.bbrc.2013.08.013 Toshitsugu Fujita, Miyuki Yuno, … Hodaka Fujii (2015) Identification of Non-Coding RNAs Associated with Telomeres Using a Combination of enChIP and RNA Sequencing (PLOS ONE) DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0123387 Toshitsugu Fujita, Miyuki Yuno, Hodaka Fujii (2016) Efficient sequence-specific isolation of DNA fragments and chromatin by in vitro enChIP technology using recombinant CRISPR ribonucleoproteins (Genes to Cells) DOI: 10.1111/gtc.12341 Toshitsugu Fujita, Miyuki Yuno, … Hodaka Fujii (2017) Identification of physical interactions between genomic regions by enChIP-Seq (Genes to Cells) DOI: 10.1111/gtc.12492 Toshitsugu Fujita, Fusako Kitaura, … Hodaka Fujii (2017) Locus-specific ChIP combined with NGS analysis reveals genomic regulatory regions that physically interact with the Pax5 promoter in a chicken B cell line (DNA Research) DOI: 10.1093/dnares/dsx023   Contact   Active Motif on Twitter Epigenetics Podcast on Twitter Active Motif on Linked-In Active Motif on Facebook eMail: podcast@activemotif.com

Scientists renamed human genes because of Microsoft Excel by Grant Currin Vincent, J. (2020, August 6). Scientists rename human genes to stop Microsoft Excel from misreading them as dates. The Verge; The Verge. https://www.theverge.com/2020/8/6/21355674/human-genes-rename-microsoft-excel-misreading-dates Ziemann, M., Eren, Y., & El-Osta, A. (2016). Gene name errors are widespread in the scientific literature. Genome Biology, 17(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s13059-016-1044-7 Bruford, E. A., Braschi, B., Denny, P., Jones, T. E. M., Seal, R. L., & Tweedie, S. (2020). Guidelines for human gene nomenclature. Nature Genetics, 52(8), 754–758. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41588-020-0669-3  A new study finds that the person you choose isn't as important as the relationship you build by Kelsey Donk Betuel, E. (2020, July 27). Landmark study on 11,196 couples pinpoints what dating apps get so wrong. Inverse; Inverse. https://www.inverse.com/mind-body/dating-study-predicts-happy-relationships  Joel, S., Eastwick, P. W., Allison, C. J., Arriaga, X. B., Baker, Z. G., Bar-Kalifa, E., Bergeron, S., Birnbaum, G. E., Brock, R. L., Brumbaugh, C. C., Carmichael, C. L., Chen, S., Clarke, J., Cobb, R. J., Coolsen, M. K., Davis, J., de Jong, D. C., Debrot, A., DeHaas, E. C., … Wolf, S. (2020). Machine learning uncovers the most robust self-report predictors of relationship quality across 43 longitudinal couples studies. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 117(32), 19061–19071. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1917036117  Why don't we sneeze or burp in our sleep?by Ashley Hamer (Listener question from Natalie) Shieh, M. (2017). Is it possible to sneeze while you are sleeping? Popular Science. https://www.popsci.com/sneeze-sleep/  Villazon, L. (2019). Can you sneeze in your sleep? BBC Science Focus Magazine; BBC Science Focus Magazine. https://www.sciencefocus.com/the-human-body/can-you-sneeze-in-your-sleep/  ‌Do people sneeze in their sleep without waking up? (2008, July 31). Mentalfloss.Com. https://www.mentalfloss.com/article/19227/do-people-sneeze-their-sleep-without-waking  ‌Repasky, D. (2019, January 3). Swallowing Air with CPAP (Aerophagia): Causes and Solutions | CPAP.com Blog. CPAP.Com Blog. https://www.cpap.com/blog/swallowing-air-with-cpap-aerophagia/  ‌Karamanolis, G., Triantafyllou, K., Tsiamoulos, Z., Polymeros, D., Kalli, T., Misailidis, N., Liakakos, T., & Ladas, S. D. (2009). Effect of Sleep on Excessive Belching. Journal of Clinical Gastroenterology, 1. https://doi.org/10.1097/mcg.0b013e3181bd885e  ‌Bredenoord, A. J. (2013). Management of Belching, Hiccups, and Aerophagia. Clinical Gastroenterology and Hepatology, 11(1), 6–12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cgh.2012.09.006 ‌Imran Khawaja, Spurling, B. C., & Shantanu Singh. (2020, July 19). REM Sleep Behavior Disorder. Nih.Gov; StatPearls Publishing. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK534239/  ‌Brain Basics: Understanding Sleep | National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke. (2020). Nih.Gov. https://www.ninds.nih.gov/Disorders/patient-caregiver-education/understanding-sleep#2  Subscribe to Curiosity Daily to learn something new every day with Ashley Hamer and Natalia Reagan (filling in for Cody Gough). You can also listen to our podcast as part of your Alexa Flash Briefing; Amazon smart speakers users, click/tap “enable” here: https://www.amazon.com/Curiosity-com-Curiosity-Daily-from/dp/B07CP17DJY See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Learn about how a mutation that evolved to protect us against malaria actually makes us more prone to other diseases; and why astronauts are using old sailing technology (sextants) to navigate through space. Plus: a special update from Cody! A mutation that makes us prone to autoimmune diseases evolved to protect us from malaria by Cameron Duke Khan, N., de Manuel, M., Peyregne, S., Do, R., Prufer, K., Marques-Bonet, T., Varki, N., Gagneux, P., & Varki, A. (2020). Multiple Genomic Events Altering Hominin SIGLEC Biology and Innate Immunity Predated the Common Ancestor of Humans and Archaic Hominins. Genome Biology and Evolution, 12(7), 1040–1050. https://doi.org/10.1093/gbe/evaa125  McRae, M. (n.d.). Humans Might Be So Sickly Because We Evolved to Avoid a Single Devastating Disease. ScienceAlert. Retrieved August 13, 2020, from https://www.sciencealert.com/we-evolved-a-way-to-beat-a-deadly-infection-but-it-made-us-vulnerable-to-other-diseases  ‌Varki, A. (2008). Sialic acids in human health and disease. Trends in Molecular Medicine, 14(8), 351–360. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.molmed.2008.06.002  Astronauts Are Using Old Sailing Technology in Space by Elizabeth Howell Holt, G. N., Wood, B. Sextant Navigation on the International Space Station: A Human Space Exploration Demo. (February 2019). NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS). NASA.gov. https://ntrs.nasa.gov/citations/20190001296  International Space Station Cupola Observational Module. (2011). NASA. https://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/station/structure/elements/cupola.html  Apollo 13 Accident. (2016). Nasa.gov. https://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/planetary/lunar/ap13acc.html  Subscribe to Curiosity Daily to learn something new every day with Cody Gough and Ashley Hamer. You can also listen to our podcast as part of your Alexa Flash Briefing; Amazon smart speakers users, click/tap “enable” here: https://www.amazon.com/Curiosity-com-Curiosity-Daily-from/dp/B07CP17DJY See omnystudio.com/policies/listener for privacy information.

Peter T. resume los resultados de un estudio publicado en Genome Biology, segun el cual las personas solitarias son más propensas a enfermarse y morir jóvenes. Según los autores del trabajo la causa podría ser que sus sistemas inmunes estan fuera de control.Destaca en sus comentarios que, según Steve Cole, uno de los cientificos participantes en el trabajo, "el impacto biológico del aislamiento social llega a algunos de nuestros procesos internos mas básicos, la actividad de nuestros genes".Igualmente, Peter recuerda que estudios anteriores ya sugerian que las personas que se describieron a si mismas como solitarias y que tenian poco apoyo social eran más propensas a morir prematuramente y a tener infecciones, alta presión arterial, insomnio y cáncer.Duracion: 00:03:41.Imagen: quepasajujuy.com.arConozca mas sobre este tema leyendo "La bioquimica de la soledad" y "Efectos en la salud por el aislamiento y la soledad".Encuentre más archivos multimedia de Salud&Tecnologia en TecnologiaHechaPalabra.com.

Learn about some of the most common causes for hearing loss and how you can protect your ears from them, from author David Owen. You’ll also learn about how woolly mammoth DNA has given us new insight into what made them go extinct. Additional resources from David Owen: Part 1 of our interview https://curiositydaily.com/its-never-too-early-to-protect-your-hearing-w-david-owen-and-why-you-should-work-in-90-minute-spurts/ Pick up “Volume Control: Hearing in a Deafening World” on Amazon https://amzn.to/32l0dU5  Additional publications by David Owen https://amzn.to/2vW2xoy  Official website https://www.davidowen.net/ Articles by David Owen in The New Yorker https://www.newyorker.com/contributors/david-owen  Mammoth DNA gives clues as to what wiped them out by Grant Currin Study resurrects mammoth DNA to explore the cause of their extinction. (2020). EurekAlert! https://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2020-02/oupu-srm020720.php   Fry, E., Kim, S. K., Chigurapti, S., Mika, K. M., Ratan, A., Dammermann, A., Mitchell, B. J., Miller, W., & Lynch, V. J. (2020). Functional architecture of deleterious genetic variants in the genome of a Wrangel Island mammoth. Genome Biology and Evolution. https://doi.org/10.1093/gbe/evz279   Timeline of the human condition. (2016). Southampton.ac.uk. http://www.southampton.ac.uk/~cpd/history.html   Subscribe to Curiosity Daily to learn something new every day with Cody Gough and Ashley Hamer. You can also listen to our podcast as part of your Alexa Flash Briefing; Amazon smart speakers users, click/tap “enable” here: https://curiosity.im/podcast-flash-briefing

Dr. Jacob Corn, ACT’s 2015 Plenary Lecturer, is a Professor of Genome Biology at the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology in Zurich. The Corn Laboratory develops next-generation genome editing and regulation technologies for fundamental biological discovery and to develop potential therapies for human genetic diseases. In this episode, he will describe how CRISPR may impact the treatment of rare diseases, while providing context for drug safety evaluation. Potential applications and ethical considerations for livestock and human organ development will be covered, in addition to primary concerns about the future of CRISPR. Dr. Corn will share what he considers to be the key milestones, greatest advancements, and unforeseen surprises in the evolution of CRISPR technologies.

From Praveen’s childhood, growing up in a Hindu family, to his later conversion to Christianity and his entry into science, he has gained great insight into the science and faith conversation. With grace and humility, Praveen shares some of that insight as he considers what it means to be made in the image of God in light of our understanding of evolution and DNA. He has long felt the importance of fostering healthy dialogue among Christians and the scientific community and discusses how such a dialogue might actually bring us closer together. Praveen Sethupathy is a Professor in the Department of Biomedical Sciences at Cornell University, where he directs a research laboratory focused on human genomics and complex diseases. Praveen received his B.A. in Computer Science from Cornell University, his Ph.D. in Genomics and Computational Biology from the University of Pennsylvania, and he continued his training in genomics and gene regulation as a post-doctoral fellow with Dr. Francis S. Collins at the National Institutes of Health. Praveen was recently selected by Genome Technology as one of the nation’s top 25 rising young investigators in genomics. He has published nearly fifty articles in scientific journals, including Science, Nature Communications, PNAS, and Genome Biology and serves on the advisory board for AAAS Dialogue on Science, Ethics, and Religion as well as the Board of Directors for BioLogos. Find a conversation about this episode at the BioLogos Forum.

We are pleased to welcome Professor Turi King from the Department of Genetics and Genome Biology at the University of Leicester to talk about the 2019 publication of the 'Forensic Investigation of a Shawl Linked to the "Jack the Ripper" Murders by Jari Louhelainen, Ph.D and David Miller, Ph.D in the Journal of Forensic Sciences. Professor King led the famous genome sequencing project on the remains of Richard III and we are very grateful for the time she was able to spend with us discussing this topic. Joining the round table discussion were numerous Ripperologists. Those who questioned the Professor were: Robert House, the author of 'Jack the Ripper and the Case for Scotland Yard's Prime Suspect'. Steve Blomer, researcher and writer. Jon Rees, researcher, writer and lecturer. Brian Young, researcher, writer and lecturer. Hosted by Jonathan Menges Very special thanks to Chris Phillips, Paul Begg, Tom Wescott and John Malcolm.

In the final installment of our two-part series on India, we examine how race and caste have been aligned, disputed, and separated for political ends since the early twentieth century. And we finally get rid of that peacock! Here are some resources for the show: Amar Chitra Katha comic books: https://www.amarchitrakatha.com/us/ ​Bamshad, Michael, et al. . 2001 Genetic Evidence on the Origins of Indian Caste Populations. Genome Research 11(6): 994–1004. Basu, Analabha, Neeta Sarkar-Roy, and Partha P. Majumder. 2016 Genomic reconstruction of the history of extant populations of India reveals five distinct ancestral components and a complex structure. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 113(6): 1594-1599. Beteille, Andre. 1967 Race and Descent as Social Categories in India. Daedalus 96(2): 444-463. Chavda, A.L. 2017. Propagandizing the Aryan Invasion Debate: A Rebuttal to Tony Joseph. Dirks, Nicholas. 2001 Castes of Mind: Colonialism and the Making of Modern India. Princeton University Press. [we included this last time, but it’s so central to what we’re discussing that it deserves mention again] Guha, Sumit. 1998 Lower Strata, Older Races, and Aboriginal Peoples: Racial Anthropology and Mythical History Past and Present. The Journal of Asian Studies 57(2): 423-441. Joseph, Tony. 2017. How genetics is settling the Aryan migration debate. The Hindu. Mosse, David. 2018 Caste and Development: Contemporary Perspectives on a Structure of Discrimination and Advantage. World Development 110: 422-436. Parameswaran, Radhika, and Kavitha Cardoza.. 2009 Melanin on the Margins: Advertising and the Cultural Politics of Fair/Light/White Beauty in India. Journalism & Communication Monographs 11(3): 213-274. Reddy, Deepa S.. 2005 The Ethnicity of Caste. Anthropological Quarterly 78(3): 543-584. Reich, David, Kumarasamy Thangaraj, Nick Patterson, Alkes L. Price, and Lalji Singh. 2009 Reconstructing Indian population history. Nature 461(7263): 489. Rosenberg, Noah A., Saurabh Mahajan, Catalina Gonzalez-Quevedo, Michael GB Blum, Laura Nino-Rosales, Vasiliki Ninis, Parimal Das et al. . 2006 Low levels of genetic divergence across geographically and linguistically diverse populations from India. PLoS Genetics 2(12): e215. Sengupta, Dhriti, Ananyo Choudhury, Analabha Basu, and Michele Ramsay. 2016 Population stratification and underrepresentation of Indian subcontinent genetic diversity in the 1000 genomes project dataset. Genome Biology and Evolution 8(1): 3460-3470. Shah, A., J. Lerche, R. Axelby, D. Benbabaali, B. Donegan, J. Raj, V. Thakur. 2018 Ground Down by Growth: Tribe, Caste, Class and Inequality in Twenty-First-Century India. London: Pluto Press. Sharma, Smriti. 2015 Caste-Based Crimes and Economic Status: Evidence from India. Journal of Comparative Economics 43(1): 204–226 Silva, Marina, Marisa Oliveira, Daniel Vieira, Andreia Brandão, Teresa Rito, Joana B. Pereira, Ross M. Fraser et al. . 2017 A genetic chronology for the Indian Subcontinent points to heavily sex-biased dispersals. BMC Evolutionary Biology 17(1): 88. (https://bmcevolbiol.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12862-017-0936-9) Viswanath, Rupa. 2014 The Pariah Problem: Caste, religion, and the Social in Modern India. Columbia University Press.

Dr. Cheeseman and his team are coming up with new ways to look at different strains of malaria. Alieu Dia, Ph.D. and Ian Cheeseman, Ph.D., use flow cytometry to study malaria parasites.   Malaria is a mosquito-borne disease that kills hundreds of thousands of people around the world every year. Scientist Ian Cheeseman, Ph.D., of Texas Biomed specializes in the genetics of the parasite that causes malaria. His newest study published in the journal Genome Biology and Evolution was recently highlighted in the Editors Choice section of the prestigious journal Science. “At the basic level we simply do not know what’s in a malaria infection, even though this has profound implications for how we think about treating and eradicating this disease,” Cheeseman said. Using various technologies, these scientists are literally cracking open cells and using single cell DNA sequencing to discover previously unknown characteristics of malarial infections.

Researchers seeking information about genes and genetic variants face the challenge of needing to search multiple databases, each with their own unique set of formatting issues. To unlock the information they are seeking, they often must spend hours wading through databases, restructuring data, and addressing nonstandard annotations. A groups of scientists at The Scripps Research Institute is addressing that problem through the development of two web services—MyGene.info and MyVariant.info—that pull data from multiple databases and provide a uniform structure for the information. We spoke to Chunlei Wu, associate professor of molecular medicine at Scripps Research Institute, about the services, the challenges in maintaining and keeping current these rapidly growing data sets, and how they are changing research into genetic-based disorders. The team's study in Genome Biology about the services can be found at http://bit.ly/1U88uAW.

Dr. Greg Petsko is the Arthur J. Mahon Professor of Neurology and Neuroscience and Director of the Helen and Robert Appel Alzheimer's Disease Research Institute at Weill Cornell Medical College, as well as the Tauber Professor of Biochemistry and Chemistry, Emeritus, at Brandeis University. He received his PhD from the University of Oxford and worked at Wayne State University, MIT, and Brandeis University before joining the faculty at Cornell where he is today. He has received numerous awards and honors during his career, including the Pfizer Award in Enzyme Chemistry of the American Chemical Society and the Max Planck Prize. Greg is also a member of the National Academy of Sciences, the Institute of Medicine, the American Academy of Arts and Sciences, and the American Philosophical Society. He is the Past-President of the American Society for Biochemistry and Molecular Biology and is President of the International Union of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology. He has also written a column on science and society that is available as a book entitled Gregory Petsko in Genome Biology: the first 10 years. Greg is here with us today to tell us all about his journey through life and science.

More than with any other major disease, the understanding and treatment of cancer is being transformed by genomics. And these are early days. John McPherson has been involved in sequencing since the original Human Genome Project. He now directs the Genome Technologies Program at the Ontario Institute for Cancer Research. John chaired a panel on cancer genomics at the recent AGBT, or Advances in Genome Biology and Technology conference, and shares his thoughts on this year's meeting.

Welcome to another podcast brought to you by the AKC Canine Health Foundation. In this podcast we hear from Dr. Kerstin Lindblad-Toh and Dr. Elinor Karsson, two of our most prominent oncology genetics researchers. Dr. Lindblad-Toh is a professor in comparative genomics at Uppsala University and the Scientific Director of Vertebrate Genome Biology at the Broad Institute. Dr. Karlsson is a postdoctoral fellow at Harvard University and was recently awarded the Charles A. King Trust Postdoctoral Fellowship. In this podcast we learn about the research that is refining the genes and gene signatures associated with osteosarcoma and how this may lead to better treatments. Initial findings have been published in the open access journal Genome Biology, entitled "Genome-wide analyses implicate 33 loci in heritable dog osteosarcoma, including regulatory variants near CDKN2A/B."  For information on how to participate in this research study, visit the CHF website.  This podcast was made possible thanks to the generous support of the Kenneth A. Scott Charitable Trust, A KeyBank Trust.        

Açık Bilim Cepyayını'nın ikincisini, evrim genetiği üzerinde çalışan Dr. Ömer Gökçümen ile yaptık. Dr. Ömer Gökçümen Dr. Gökçümen hâlen Harvard Üniversitesi Tıp Fakültesi'nde ekip lideri olarak çalışıyor. İlgi alanı, canlı evrimindeki değişiklikleri, genetik yöntemler kullanarak araştırmak olarak özetlenebilir. Şu anda, aynı genlerin değişik hayvanlardaki kopya sayılarını inceleyerek primat (maymun, şempanze ve insan) evrimini inceliyor. Bunun yanı sıra yazıya da önem veriyor, Shepherds of Arcadia adlı bir güncenin kurucusu, ve Radikal gazetesinde yazıları yayınlanıyor. Etkinliklerini güncesinden takip edebilirsiniz. Kendisine söyleşi için bir kez daha teşekkür ederiz. Şekil 1. Kopya sayısı değişikliğine bir örnek olarak kopya sayısının artışı. DNA'nın çoğalması esnasında bir hata sonucu bir kromozom bölgesinden iki kopya üretiliyor. (Şekil: Wikipedia'dan değiştirilerek alınmıştır.) Notlar Kopya sayısı değişiklikleri bir değişinim (mutasyon) türüdür (Şekil 1). Bu değişinim, hücrenin kalıtım (genetik) malzemesi olan DNA'nın çoğaltılması sırasındaki bir hata sonucu bir genin birden çok kopyasının yapılması ya da eksilmesi şeklindedir. Söyleşide sık sık adı geçen genom terimi, bir canlının genlerinin tamamını ifade ediyor. Odaklandığımız makalede, makak, şempanze ve insan genomlarında çok miktarda kopya sayısı içeren genler, genom bölgeleri ve bunların işlevleri inceleniyor. Makaleye erişim ücretsiz: Ömer Gökçümen vd., 2011. Refinement of primate copy number variation hotspots identifies candidate genomic regions evolving under positive selection. Genome Biology 12:R52. Söyleşide anılan, King ve Wilson'un tarihi makalesi: Mary-Claire King ve A. C. Wilson, 1975. Evolution at two levels in humans and chimpanzees. Science 188: 107-116. Değişik insan grupları arasındaki amilaz geni sayısı değişiklileri hakkında şu makaleyi okuyabilirsiniz: George H. Perry vd., 2007. Diet and the evolution of human amylase gene copy number variation. Nature Genetics 39: 1256-1260. Söyleşide andığım çorba tarifi benzetmesi, Richard Dawkins'in The Blind Watchmaker (Kör Saatçi) kitabında yer alıyor.