Podcasts about Genome

Genome researcher Michael Snyder believes health wearables, such as smart watches and glucose monitors, can transform medicine, shifting from reactive to predictive. (In fact, he's such a big fan of these devices that he wears eight of them every single day.) From spotting an illness days before symptoms appear to helping prevent the onset of diabetes, learn why the future of health care may be on your wrist. And stick around after his talk for a deep dive conversation with our guest host for the week, author and podcaster Manoush Zomorodi, into the ideas he shared on stage and beyond.This is episode four of a seven-part series airing this week on TED Talks Daily, where Manoush — and the seven speakers she curated for TED2026 — explore how you can live a healthier life in our high-tech era.To hear more from Manoush, listen to TED Radio Hour wherever you get your podcasts. Check out her new book, Body Electric, to learn more about the hidden health costs of the digital age. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Genes carry the biological information to make specific living things. Evolution says that simpler living things evolved first and more complex life evolved later. This would lead us to believe that more complex living things would have developed more genes. The creation approach suggests that each creature was designed with the genetic material necessary for its survival in its intended environment. As a result, the genetic complexity of living things would be related to the way it lives, not to its place in a supposed evolutionary hierarchy.Evolutionary scientists today are puzzled with the publication of the completed genome of the common fruit fly. The fruit fly has a nervous system, complex body plan and even an immune system and is the first animal to have its genome mapped. The puzzle arises with the discovery that the fruit fly has between 13,000 and 14,000 genes. The lowly roundworm, said by evolution to be among the first land creatures, should be genetically simple, yet it has over 18,000 genes. The genetic differences between the worm and the fly speak of design. The sightless worm relies on smell to make its living, so it has about 1,000 genes involved in its olfactory system. The sighted fly relies much less on smell and has less than 100 genes for detecting scents.This simply illustrates that truly scientific findings will never contradict the Bible by supporting evolution.Psalm 119:73"Thy hands have made me and fashioned me; give me understanding, that I may learn Thy commandments."Prayer: Dear Father, help me to keep my nervous system healthy through wholesome stimulation and thoughts so that it can always be a source of my thanksgiving to You in all things. In Jesus Name. Amen.Ref: Science News, pp. 382 383, "Fly Genome Creates a Buzz." Image: APHIS-Moore Air Base, Protection and Quarantine Science and Technology Insect Management and Molecular Diagnostics Laboratory, USDAgov, PD, Wikimedia Commons. To support this ministry financially, visit: https://www.oneplace.com/donate/1232/29?v=20251111

Welcome to the forty-second episode of the Zoology Ramblings Podcast! In this episode, Emma and Robi return with busy updates, including Robi's recent fieldwork adventures in Africa and Emma's bittersweet time at work wrapping up a year-long programme with the Wildlife Champions she supports. For their species of the week, Emma goes rogue and Robi goes cute. Emma talks about the death ball sponge and Robi talks about his adventures looking for pygmy hippos in West Africa. For their local conservation stories, Robi delves into the genomic fragility of Europe's Grey Wolves and Emma pays tribute to Sir David Attenborough, who recently celebrated his 100th birthday. To end, Emma talks about the rise in trafficking of the golden lion tamarin and Robi shares some exciting news about the discovery of two species of marsupial thought to only exist in the fossil record. Robi Watkinson is a Conservation Biologist and wildlife filmmaker specialising in the spatial and movement ecology of large carnivores, camera trapping survey methods, rewilding, metapopulation dynamics and conservation planning. He has an MSc in Conservation Biology from the FitzPatrick Institute of African Ornithology, and the Institute of Communities and Wildlife in Africa, University of Cape Town. He is based between Cape Town and London, and has strong interests in equitable and inclusive conservation, palaeontology and wildlife taxonomy and evolution!Emma Hodson is a Zoologist and wildlife content creator, currently working in the community and engagement team at Avon Wildlife Trust. Emma's role as a Wildlife Champions Project Officer involves supporting and upskilling people to take action for nature in their local communities. Emma has experience in remote wildlife fieldwork, and has been part of Arctic fox, macaw and cetacean research teams in Iceland, Peru and Wales respectively. She has also been involved in animal care and rehabilitation work in Costa Rica and South Africa. Emma is particularly passionate about the interface between community engagement and wildlife monitoring, and enjoys running workshops and giving talks on topics including camera trapping, beaver ecology and rewilding. You can follow more of our weird and wonderful wildlife adventures on instagram: @zoologyramblingspodcast & @robi_watkinson_wildlife & @emma_hodson_wildlife

Last 4 days before regular tickets sell out at AI Engineer World's Fair - this is the single biggest gathering of AI Engineers, Founders, Leaders, and Researchers in the world. Attendees get >$5000 worth of sponsor credits and talk tracks are looking FANTASTIC. Join us!The AI scaling debate always focuses on the question of “how do we get more GPUs?” but the better question may be: how do we make the most of ones we already have.The fact that a frontier lab like xAI could be running at sub-10% MFU (Model FLOPs Utilization) is just a hint at what the real problem may be.For context, older frontier-scale training runs were already much higher than 10%. GPT-3 was around 21% MFU. Gopher was around 32%. Megatron-Turing NLG was around 30%. PaLM reached around 46%. And our guest Anjney says best-in-class MFU today is closer to 60–70%.It's not necessarily that xAI is uniquely incompetent (it's clear they have talented folks) but rather the priorities may be flipped in the GPU arms race.While GPU access is a bottleneck, simply increasing CapEx won't automatically translate to better models as frontier AI is increasingly a systems problem: scheduling, utilization, networking, kernels, frameworks, data pipelines, parallelism, cluster reliability, and the thousand small decisions that determine whether your theoretical FLOPs become real training progress.From building Discord's developer platform and backing frontier AI companies like Anthropic, Mistral, Black Forest Labs, and Periodic Labs to now building AMP's independent compute grid, Anjney Midha has spent years close to the real bottlenecks of AI scaling. In this episode, Anjney joins swyx at Periodic Labs to unpack why the AI race is not just about buying more GPUs, why 95% utilization would have been considered an outage at Google, and why the next era of AI infrastructure has to be more aligned, more efficient, and more responsible.We go deep on AMP's vision for a compute grid that makes FLOPs flow like megawatts, the difference between full-stack AI labs and horizontal pooling, why AI data centers need community buy-in, and how compute markets could evolve into something closer to an independent system operator. Anjney also explains why DeepMind's unpublished research points to a market failure, why end-of-life prediction remains one of the most important AI applications he has thought about for fourteen years, and why “output maxing” may become a new discipline for frontier systems.We also discuss Anthropic's culture, why “luck favors the prepared mind” in coding models, how Claude cracked coding, why too much capital too early can make AI labs fragile, what Periodic Labs is trying to do with science and superconductors, why great researchers can become great CEOs, and why Silicon Valley is both deeply missionary and deeply mercenary.We discuss:* Why 95% utilization was considered an outage at Google* Why AI infrastructure waste compounds at frontier-lab scale* Why “move fast and break things” does not work for AI data centers* How data center backlash, power grids, and community incentives shape AI scaling* AMP's vision for making FLOPs flow like megawatts* Why compute needs an independent system operator* How interruptible demand and dynamic prioritization worked inside Google* Why DeepMind research hoarding creates negative externalities* AMP's 1.2GW base-load ambition and the need for 6GW of spike capacity* Why end-of-life prediction could become one of AI's most important healthcare applications* Frontier Systems, output maxing, and full-stack alignment* Why APIs and abstraction layers become lossy as organizations scale* Superconductors, standards, and the dream of lossless systems* SF Compute, open protocols, and the future of compute marketplaces* Why non-NVIDIA chips can still benefit from NVIDIA's reference architecture* Trust boundaries and why chip startups need visibility into future model architectures* Why VCs often underestimate researchers as CEOs* Scientists as star athletes of the mind* Why great CEOs need to be confrontational up and down the stack* Why leading the frontier matters more than “winning”* How Anthropic cracked coding* Why culture is fragile, not a permanent moat* Why hardship was a feature, not a bug, for Anthropic* Why Anthropic's P0 was coding from day one* Periodic Labs, physics as the constraint, and technical reality* Silicon Valley mercenaries, missionary teams, and what happens after a breakthroughAnjney Midha* LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/anjney* X: https://x.com/AnjneyMidhaAMP PBC* Website: https://amppublic.com/* X: https://x.com/amppublicTimestamps00:00:00 Introduction00:00:09 Why AI Compute Is Being Wasted00:03:17 Responsible Infrastructure and Data Center Backlash00:06:07 AMP Grid: Making FLOPs Flow Like Megawatts00:12:41 Foundry, Frontier Labs, and Research Hoarding00:14:42 Gigawatt-Scale Compute and End-of-Life Prediction00:24:08 Frontier Systems, Output Maxing, and Alignment00:27:38 Compute Markets, SF Compute, and Non-NVIDIA Chips00:32:57 Trust Boundaries, Co-Design, and Researcher CEOs00:38:17 AI Coachella and First-Principles Thinking00:42:43 Leading vs Winning in Frontier AI00:45:54 How Anthropic Cracked Coding00:48:25 Culture, Hardship, and Anthropic's P000:54:03 Periodic Labs, Physics, and Silicon Valley Mercenaries00:56:26 Rishi Valley, Singapore, and Money as a Measure00:58:47 Closing ThoughtsTranscriptIntroduction: Anjney Midha, AMP, and Compute WasteSwyx [00:00:00]: We're in Periodic Labs with Anjney Midha, CEO, founder of AMP. Welcome.Compute Utilization: Node Allocation, MFU, and AlignmentAnjney [00:00:09]: Thanks for having me. At Google, there are two types of utilization usually, right? That you're measuring in these clusters. One is node allocation, and then the other's MFU. Node utilization is usually like what percentage of cards in the data center are just, used, and that, if it's not at, 95%-Swyx [00:00:29]: There is no excuseAnjney [00:00:29]: There's no excuse, right? I think 95% at Google, which is where my co-founder, Seb, came from, he built the Borg, PBorg/GQM scheduler at Google, and there I think 95% was considered an outage, so 96% node utilization is, should be standard. And most single-tenant clusters are not running at that. So that's one. And then MFU should be, I would say the best in class today is somewhere between 60 and 70%. I think this is a leadership question, right? Fundamentally it's an alignment question, which is are the people who are funding the cluster and then deploying the cluster actually aligned? And sometimes theoretically they are, but in practice the number of people in the chain, the supply chain between, the capital and all the way to whoever's managing the cluster and then whoever's measuring what the output is, are just so many, degrees of separation away that, the, The Have you ever heard the radian metaphor, which is at the beginning of an arc, if you have two arcs that are two lines that are just off by a few degrees, that-Swyx [00:01:33]: It spreads outAnjney [00:01:34]: It spreads out, right? Or at scale. And I think what's happening is a lot of cluster implementations and infrastructure, a lot of frontier labs and other teams, that's what's happening, is they're, they initialize the plan, which is kind of like North Star with a team that wants to do good, but then they're, required to scale so fast instead of iteratively that the wastage just compounds really fast at scale. And so I think we know the answer, which is just do iterative bring ups. If you spend time with people who've been in the semiconductor industry or the DSN industry for a long time, this is not new, and I don't think AI should be an excuse. Sure. Something What is new? Okay. We have a lot of new capabilities, but that doesn't mean just abandon common sense. Common sense should always be in fashion. ? AI scaling doesn't change the in fact, if anything, AI scaling should be putting a premium on the value of common sense and infrastructure because the margin of error now is so much lower and the costs of wastage are so much higher. And the cost of wastage, by the way, is not just economic. I'm, obviously I'm, I'm an investor, or I'm an investor by background. Over the last few years now we're running an AI infrastructure business called, AMP. And I think that it's okay to say this time is different on the capabilities front. We are genuinely getting capabilities at, of the, of a kind we haven't had before. That doesn't give you an excuse to say this time is different for everything, especially infrastructure. So look, I love the hacker mindset and the hustler mindset. Now, that's great for the startup mindset, but you remember this moment where Zuck went from saying, “Move fast, break things” to, move-Responsible Infrastructure and Data Center BacklashSwyx [00:03:10]: Fast and stable infrastructureAnjney [00:03:11]: Move fast with stable infrastructure. I think now we need to move fast with, responsible infrastructure. People are going to ask where the impact is. There was a really In our class yesterday, Scott Nolan, who's the founder of General Matter, came by at Stanford to speak about energy bottlenecks. And he had a phenomenal idea. He said, “if you look at the marginal unit economics of compute per hour,” he goes, “let's call it, $4 an hour. If you're having to bring up a new data center in a new community, why not just say we're going to charge 4.50 an hour, and that marginal impact or that marginal increase, we just literally take that and give it to the local community as cash?” I can tell you as a customer of that compute, I would love that. I'd be happy to pay an additional 50 cents per hour at scale.Swyx [00:03:57]: Wow. Yeah.Anjney [00:03:58]: Because if that means the public benefit is so clear to the communities that the data centers are coming up in, I'm going to feel like that compute is much more reliable. Up to 20% of all data centers this year in the US, my understanding is are at risk.Swyx [00:04:13]: Of community backlash?Anjney [00:04:14]: Correct. Of not getting the community support they need to get brought up.Swyx [00:04:19]: Wow. That's a huge number.Anjney [00:04:20]: Yeah. Now, we, I think we should dig into what that number is. I think it's a little bit of overstated. These things can get over-reported, but it-Swyx [00:04:27]: They don't just care about jobs. They care about all the other stuff around it, right? They care about power grid, they care about environments-Anjney [00:04:33]: Power grid, permitting, and so on. And imagine I think if you said there's a new AI deal. If we're bringing up a data center in your community, we're actually going to reduce the cost of your electricity bill. Okay, now we're talking. Right? The community's going, “Okay. Now this is a deal. I feel like a partner in this.” Right now that's not happening. There will be audits, there will be investigations, and when the, when the regulators come, I don't know when it's going to be, the folks who are moving fast and breaking things in the name of AI progress better be prepared. That's certainly not how we're procuring compute. Or we're, we're trying as much as we can to work with partners who have long-term track records. Many of whom, by the way, are not, AI providers. I think this whole idea of neoclouds being somehow this new category is a lot of marketing speak. There are really good, reliable, trusted data center providers in America who've been around 20 plus years. I love those folks. They know how to Sure. Are they sponsoring happy hours at NeurIPS? No. Are they legibly listed in Build? No. Are they hanging out in my, in, situational awareness parties? No. But they're adults. I trust them.Swyx [00:05:44]: They can run LAN. They can run power.Anjney [00:05:45]: They can run LAN, power, and shell. They have credit histories. We sit down, we have a conversations. Many of them live in Silicon Valley. They've, they've had to deal with the boom and bust cycles of the internet, and I love those folks. They are stable infrastructure partners and thinkers. And I think there's a lot of short-term thinking going on in the compute layer, and it's going to catch up to us. It's not going to be good.AMP Grid: Making FLOPs Flow Like MegawattsSwyx [00:06:07]: You talk about aligning incentives, and, I would think that aligning incentives means you have the full stack in one company, which is xAI and OpenAI, right? So you as a standalone infrastructure layer, why are you somehow more aligned to your portfolio companies than people who just own the whole thing?Anjney [00:06:28]: In systems design, right, there's, there's two regimes of, architecture, right? You have integration, and then you have pooling and utilization, right? So the Or rather, the way to increase utilization often is you can do systems integration where you collapse a lot of process into one node, or you can pull out a process from a node and share that amongst various That resource amongst several different nodes. And so we see the AMP grid, which is, the, what, the system we're building here, which is basically a compute grid. We're trying to do for compute what the electric grid-Swyx [00:07:02]: PowerAnjney [00:07:02]: Yeah, what the power grid did for electricity. It-- this is a pooling and utilization layer across clouds, And so we're actually the opposite of a full stack integration like approach.Swyx [00:07:12]: Super horizontal.Anjney [00:07:13]: Where it's much more horizontal and it's, it's multi-cloud, it's multi-silicon. The goal is to try to make FLOPs flow like megawatts, and that is very hard to do today for many reasons. There's stranded pools of compute all over the place and there's no fungibility. And so right now we do it at the level of scheduling, and we often do it at the economic layer. But as we start to announce what we're working on, it's extraordinary like how many folks are coming out of the woodworks and saying, “Hey, I'm actually working on a way to make compute fungible at this part of the stack and that part of the stack.” And as a grid, we'd like all of these folks to participate on the grid. There's, people often ask me, “Andra, are you a new cloud?” And I go, “No, actually neoclouds are suppliers.” sometimes they'll ask, “Are you a venture capital firm?” I go, “No, actually they are, they are demand like sort of off-takers of the grid.” We see ourselves as what's called an independent system operator. So if you study the history of the electric grid, once it became legible to a lot of factories and industrial sort of participants that, hey, actually it turns out pooling is a good idea. We should pool our generators instead of all having a generator running at half capacity in our backyard. There was a need for an independent entity who could coordinate all these parties. Transmission line, power generation, facilities, transmission lines, factories, and that neutral coordination mechanism is very critical. In order-- If you study like the history of grids, the most enduring ones were those that never owned their own assets. They were ones that had, or often started with long-term anchors who are uncorrelated sources of demand, a steel factory, a shoe mill or whatever in a particular town who weren't competitive, where the steel factory want to spike up at night, the shoe mill wanted to spike up during the day. So then you pool and you share, right? So each of you is guaranteed some base load, but then you kind of schedule your spikes to drive a peak utilization across the town. The gold standard, so to speak, historically, has been these utility companies like PJM Interconnect in the northeast of America, where they, over many years became this what's called an ISO, an independent system operator of the grid. So that's how we see ourselves. Economically, that's what we are. From a technical perspective, we started at the scheduling layer because Seb and Mihai, who, run engineering here, built that at-Swyx [00:09:28]: Did your schedulingAnjney [00:09:28]: They did that at Google. And, -Swyx [00:09:32]: And you have infra shops from Discord as well.Anjney [00:09:35]: I have some.Swyx [00:09:35]: I don't know, I don't know if Discord is like the primary identity, but what-whatever, I'm just kind of-Anjney [00:09:39]: No, D-Discord was-Swyx [00:09:40]: Choosing a well-known name.Anjney [00:09:42]: Well, I So I was running the developer platform there. The internal infrastructure I was not responsible for. That was actually a guy by the name of Mark Smith, who was extraordinary. And yes, Discord did pool So Discord is actually a counter example. I had the chance to learn a lot about fully, full stack infra there because-Swyx [00:09:56]: It's the same thing, yeahAnjney [00:09:57]: It's the, it's the other architecture which is, Discord built its own WebRTC vo-voice and video infra. So like Discord did not use-Swyx [00:10:08]: For the calls, yeah.Anjney [00:10:09]: Yeah, did not For communication, Discord did not use third party infra. It was all built in-house. And then the way you maximize utilization was you pool demand from the world's 200 million plus monthly active gamers, right? And so that's, that's how those stacks were constructed. Again, in systems design, the two concepts that keep coming up over and over again are abstraction and composition, right? And-Swyx [00:10:31]: Bundling and unbundlingAnjney [00:10:33]: Bundling and unbundling, abstraction, composition, like verticalization and-Swyx [00:10:36]: HorizontalAnjney [00:10:36]: Horizontalization. So in that sense, AMP is an independent system operator of the grid. We pool demand, we pool supply from a number of partners we trust At about 1.3 gigawatt scale over four years. And then we pool demand from some of the world's best, research labs and so on. We're sitting at one, periodic labs who need extraordinary long-term demand. And the idea is that, each of them is guaranteed base load on the grid, but they can spike up and down flexibly on, for compute, with much shorter timelines as needed. That was roughly the design of the program I came up with at a16z called Oxygen. The same-- That was the same design of the GQM, BorgX, Borg GQM implementation at Google that Mihai and Seb had built. Which was that how do you allow, teams inside of Google, on the internal infrastructure to be guaranteed capacity, for their base workloads? But when they need to spike up on research, how could they ensure that was sufficiently there? And of course, the big innovation that was not discovered, but kind of implemented in the space, this infra space maybe three, four years ago at Google was the idea of interruptible demand, right? Where you just queue up a bunch of jobs and through this like sort of credit system, there can be a bidding mechanism.Swyx [00:11:53]: Like priorities.Anjney [00:11:54]: It's a dynamic prioritization Basically. And jobs can get interrupted based on somebody else who's saying, “what? I have 10 tokens, 10 credits I want to spend on this job.” Another like team lead, research lead is “Genie 3 or whatever is only worth five, credits, and NanoBanana2 is worth 10 credits,” and so the NanoBanana job gets priority. That's a, that's a made up example.Swyx [00:12:15]: It's very real. Brain Marketplace was real. And, we've, we've covered this on the pod with David Luan, who was-Anjney [00:12:20]: Oh, great. OkaySwyx [00:12:20]: Was there. And the criticism is that, well, actually sometimes you need central command to go all in on a thing. And actually sometimes capitalism via credits doesn't work. Not, this is not a criticism of AMP. I'm just saying, this is a thing that has been tried, internally within Google, and it led to Google missing GPT.Foundry, Frontier Labs, and Research HoardingAnjney [00:12:41]: Like, we structured ourself essentially very similarly to Google. We are structured as a holdings company. So, Alphabet holdings is Alphabet holdings, and then they've got these subsidiaries called Google and-Swyx [00:12:51]: Other betsAnjney [00:12:52]: Other bets and so on. We've got, AMP holdings, and we've got our infrastructure business, and then we've got a capital business called Foundry that incubates new frontier AI labs or invests in them as venture capital, like Periodic. We put a few hundred million dollars into Anthropic from our fund earlier this year. So wherever we feel like teams are making progress, especially researchers and so on who've pushed the frontier inside of existing labs like DeepMind, I find, there comes a point where they feel misaligned with the dictatorship of Alphabet holdings. And at that point, sometimes the dictatorship doesn't want them anymore. And they're “Thank you. You've done your job here. You've kind of helped us through the zero to one phase, and for whatever reason, we're going to deprioritize your amazing, omni model or whatever it is, and instead we're going to prioritize coding.” And, I think that's a tragedy, but I get it. They're Sergey and team are running their own business there. But that doesn't mean we the rest of us should sit around waiting for that progress to get unlocked for the rest of the world and humanity. If you think about how much extraordinary research has happened inside of DeepMind over the last 10 years, I, Demis and Sergey and those guys did such a great job. But at the end of the day, so much of that has never seen the light of day?Swyx [00:14:00]: Or they're like papers only, but they never actually shipped it to production or-Anjney [00:14:03]: What's worse is the paper is actually not even being published anymore ‘cause there's a six-month embargo inside of DeepMind, right? We've heard about this where a paper comes out, and then I think there's a six-month embargo window where if anybody on the business team says, “This could be interesting” It's embargoed for life.Swyx [00:14:18]: Exactly. So the stuff that gets published is the stuff that's not good enough.Anjney [00:14:21]: There's an adverse selection problem, basically. Yeah. At this point-Swyx [00:14:25]: It's, it's a common complaint at NeurIPS, by the way, that's “Well, why would I look at the papers that are the trash of GDM?”Anjney [00:14:31]: Again, I think it's a tragedy. I get it. They're running their business, but the rest of the I think there's negative externalities of research being hoarded, and so that'there's a market failure. And somebody needs to unlock that research, and we can't do it on our own. We only have 1.2 gigawatts of compute. That's nothing. That's about $40 billion of cloud spend. We're going to need a lot-Gigawatt-Scale Compute and End-of-Life PredictionSwyx [00:14:51]: By the way, is that's a new number. I haven't, haven't come across that gigawatt number. That's huge.Anjney [00:14:56]: Yeah. And to be clear, we haven't secured all of it. That's how much demand we have started to secure. I think publicly we haven't actually confirmed how much we have for this year. In order-Swyx [00:15:04]: Where do you want to get to?Anjney [00:15:06]: I think the steady state would be that we have a base load pool Of 1.2 gigawatts at all times Of base load capacity. For spike capacity, right now my estimate is we need roughly six gigawatts over the next four years for all our teams to feel like they were able to keep moving the frontier, whatever they're working on, whether it's, like superconductor discovery over here. There's a new investment we're working on right now, which is in the end of life prediction space in healthcare. It's extraordinary how much you can, you can give this was actually my graduate school work. I went to grad school for bioinformatics at Stanford Med. And I know we-Swyx [00:15:40]: Econ, MCS, bio.Anjney [00:15:41]: So my-- I was this really weird cat where, I was never satisfied with my major options. So at one point I was an econ major, then I was a CS major, then I was a MCS major called mathematical computational science, and they decided they were going to end that major. So I took all that coursework, and I applied it to grad school, my graduate degree in bioinformatics, which was the master's program, and then I thought I was going to do a PhD. I never ended up doing it. I dropped out and went to work at Kleiner. But I was lucky enough to apprentice with this professor at, Stanford Med. His name is Nigam Shah, and he was working on end of life prediction. Stanford is one of the only research facilities in America that has a longitudinal patient data set that's larger at scale. I think it's at least 12 million patient lives. The only larger data set is at the VA, the Veterans Affairs, of America. And to do research, like do any deep learning and so on that data set, it was called the STRIDE data set at that time, you had to be a Stanford Med School affiliate, which is why I went and enrolled in the bioinformatics department. End of deep learning was early. Nigam Shah had the visibility-- the vision to see that, you could do end of life prediction to help palliative care. In America, the, over 30% of all Medicare, Medicaid spend, at least at that time, was spent on end of life care. And what's we grew up in Asia, so we all-- Yeah, at least I won't speak for you, but I have A very different relationship with death than I find folks who grew up in America do. In America, spiritually and culturally, especially in Western societies where Christianity, the Christian tradition sort of frames death as this terminal point, there's often a judgment day and so on. The way we view death is with a finality. In Indian culture, in Hindu culture, death is one-Swyx [00:17:35]: Also, he's Buddhist as well.Anjney [00:17:36]: You're Buddhist, yeah. So it's one, it's one step in a journey of many lives, right? And so, I grew up in this city called Chennai in the south of India, and when people die, you dance on the street. There's like a procession where your body is carried to be cremated and your family, like celebrates and there's drums and so on. It's this huge thing. And, It's because the idea is that you're going to be reincarnated. You've been liberated from the responsibilities of this life, and now you're onto your next. It's a new It's like going off to a new college or whatever, right? And so it was so alien to me when I got here as an undergrad- That the medical system works backwards from that assumption that we have to view death as this terminal thing and delay it, postpone it's a bad thing. And so at the time, clinical decision support in the United States was this very primitive field. Even to this day, physicians in the United States often will tell you when you have a terminal disease, this is your, we've diagnosed you, which is great. Our ability to diagnose you is extraordinary. You have somewhere between six months to six years to live. What do you do with that information? The error bars are so high that then you In times of uncertainty, we default to culture, and when the culture is let's-- this is a bad thing, I've got to prolong my life, then you start doing things like And just to, just sort of from a systems perspective, what's going on there is Physicians often feel like they need to provide such high error bars because there's always some uncertainty in end of life diagnosis, and if you provide the wrong Diagnosis or recommendation to your patient, you can be sued for medical malpractice. And then your license can be taken away. It can be catastrophic for your career. In contrast, if in countries where that's not the case, what you often observe is that patients, physicians are quite prescriptive with their recommendation. They say, “Hey, this is your condition. The literature says that you probably have this much time on Earth left. My expert opinion is that you are an outlier or whatever.” And they try to be more prescriptive, and that empowers a patient, right? ‘Cause then a patient can say, “I trust my doctor. They said on average, I have six months to live, but if I do these things, I may have a shot because of my particular predispositions or my genetic history or whatever.” And that empowers you to go about your life in a actually more scientific way than leaning on religion, culture, spirituality, and so on. In contrast, here, because of that medical malpractice sort of thing looming over your head, a physician never gives you a clear recommendation. So instead you say, “Okay, Doc, well, let's try it all.” And then you start a whole regime of drugs and therapies, and then you often spend weeks and weeks in the hospital, and that deteriorates your quality of life. And when that deteriorates your quality of life, you instead of spending your last few days doing the things you love with your family, you're spending it on a hospital bed. And that ends up being thirty percent of Medicare and Medicaid. So it's worse for the patients. The doctors feel terrible. The American taxpayer is paying a huge amount of money. And so this is why Nigam Shah, who was this professor at Stanford, said, “Anjney, if there's “ I kind of sat down with him. I was this young, I'd, I was twenty-one, and I was “I want to work on a big problem.” He's “The big problem is end of life care.” And so we tried to do deep learning to say, to-- So we started trying to run deep learning on these tried patient data sets to say, “Could you have an AI system make a recommendation that is orders of magnitude more precise about how much time you have left once you've been diagnosed with a terminal condition than a human?” And then if we can get that precision to be high enough, then you can empower the patient. And it turns out the tech works. Like it's-- Once you get the data set, like RL works. Honestly, even regression models work. You don't need to get that fancy. At the time, we were just trying, doing like very simple neural nets.Swyx [00:21:54]: Simple solutions, yeah.Anjney [00:21:54]: Today, what we can do with RL is extraordinary. The problem remains then and now is regulatory, because you actually can't shift the burden of the wrong clinical diagnoses from the physician to the AI system. And so at that time, I got quite disillusioned ten years ago for, twelve years ago where, ‘cause I felt I just didn't have the resources to influence regulation. Today, I'm very lucky. I'm in a different place. I've, I'm a lot older, and so I've been spending a lot of time on my next incubation, which is how can we unlock the, patient empowerment by training AI models to do end of life prediction much, with much more precision and ac-Swyx [00:22:37]: Oh, wow. You're still focused on this the whole time.Anjney [00:22:40]: The-- I haven't been able to get, this out of my mind a single day for the last fourteen years. This is the hill I want, I would like to die on. There's two, I would say. What? I actually, I'd prefer not to die.Swyx [00:22:51]: Yeah, exactly.Anjney [00:22:52]: But I think two bipartisan issues, I think two issues that should be bipartisan in America are how do we empower patients to make the right clinical decisions at the end of their life, such that we're reducing the taxpayer burden with science? It's just good old science, and AI can help here. And the second is, net positive data centers, ‘cause I think that's the biggest critical bottleneck on training and good enough AI models to help people at the end of their life. So there's sort of two sides of the, of the same scaling bottleneck curve, but those two, we formed AMP as a public benefit corporation. My wife and I, who you've met, you've met Viv. Her passion is education. Her family is a long line of educators and so on, and, of physicists. And so this class is my attempt to stop being the black sheep of the family and be a, an educator. But if I'm not educating, the thing I would be doing is working, on these two problems, whether on the political spectrum or as a researcher back at, in some lab. And my hope is if anyone's listening to this podcast, if they're passionate about either of those two topics, I'd love to hear from them. We'll, we'll we can share the contact in the show notes, but, we're looking for people to join both of those missions on the, on the political side as well as on the medical side, on the research side.Frontier Systems, Output Maxing, and AlignmentSwyx [00:24:08]: You said, this is a discipline that you want to form. You call it's called variously called Frontier System. It's variously called One Person Frontier Lab. What is the ideal name or shape of this? Like the, what is the mission?Anjney [00:24:24]: Of the class?Swyx [00:24:26]: Of the discipline that you're, exploring, right? I The class is called Frontier Systems. But like for me, maybe one phrase is you're, you're just anti-waste, right? Which is wasting GPUs, wasting in human and Medicare. But is there, is there a broader theme that I'm, that maybe you can encapsulate more succinctly?Anjney [00:24:45]: Yeah. The, from an engineering perspective, it's very simple. It's output maxing. It's the, it's the department of output maxing.Swyx [00:24:51]: Making the most of what we have.Anjney [00:24:52]: Exactly. I'm a huge believer in optimal outcomes. I think both in America and other countries, we are losing our appreciation for nuance, and this is the thing of And AI is the same case, right? Oh, the bitter lesson holds. Okay, fine. But that doesn't mean you just like throw 500 GB300, 500,000 GB300s at your suboptimal model scaling and you waste a bunch of compute. It also doesn't mean that, the most optimal is to have like 50 different architectures where there isn't enough standardization. One of the reasons Anthropic has had extraordinary sort of velocity is ‘cause they picked the transform architecture and said, “This is simple. Let's double down on it,” right? And now luckily there's enough investment going to the space that we can afford other architectures, but at the time, investment was just too fragmented into other architectures, so that arguably unlocked scaling. So I think there's a philosophy. I think we all owe it to ourselves to do output maxing with a new capability called AI on a global level. I think if I was starting a new department at Stanford, depending on how fuzzy or technical I wanted to be, I'd probably call it the Department of Alignment. Like-Swyx [00:25:59]: It's an overloaded termAnjney [00:26:01]: But it is, But alignment really Is a hard problem. And I think when you unlock it, full stack alignment is super hard in any organization and in any system. Like in a, in a venture capital firm, if you can have full stack alignment between your limited partners and your, the founders who are creating the value and ultimately the public that owns the IPO stock, that is a gift that keeps giving. And when you study the history of these systems, when they start off, they usually start out small scale where the feedback loop is actually so tight that there's alignment. And then the more you try to scale, the more division of labor happens, the more specialization happens, and at each step you add abstractions. And wherever there's an API interface, there's like loss. There's communication loss. And so I think a really cool thing would be for us to figure out is there a way for us to have our cake and eat it too as an engineering discipline? Is there a way to actually scale up and scale out Without losing any alignment, without lossy transmission?Swyx [00:27:01]: You mean standards?Anjney [00:27:02]: So standards is one way. The other way is you just have net new capabilities. So like what we're trying to do here is discover new superconductors. A room temperature superconductor would be a lossless transmission mechanism for energy. We would have flying cars. We are right within a few years of having a new room temperature superconductor. So I think those are the two. You either have to standardize On protocols or API specs that allow lossless communication, or you can come up with a whole new capability that unlocks so much abundance, the standardization doesn't matter ‘cause you just unlock net new capacity. This, the, so this is what I spend my days thinking about these days.Compute Markets, SF Compute, and Non-NVIDIA ChipsSwyx [00:27:38]: No, I think every infra person at, who wants scale and wants to output max does eventually end up thinking about this. We don't have time to go into it, but we have done an episode with SF Compute-Anjney [00:27:50]: Oh, coolSwyx [00:27:50]: That is trying to standardize The futures contract for compute. I don't, I don't know how that's going by the way, but like at some point this will be public.Anjney [00:27:57]: Oh, I think Evan is awesome and SF Compute is the kind of effort that I hope we can accelerate because what often happens is these exchanges are very hard to get, they, it's hard to bootstrap them, right? Because they often require-- There's many inefficiencies between parties. There's trust boundary inefficiencies in infrastructure because you don't trust, one part of the stack doesn't trust another part of the stack to give them visibility. There's capital markets inefficiencies, there's operational efficiencies. So if you can inject like a single shock to the system of a ton of compute demand or supply, then you can accelerate, these new flywheels. And so my hope is one day, or soon, if SF Compute needs extra like has excess capacity, they just hook it up to the grid and they get flooded with demand from us. And on the other side, if they have a ton of demand but they don't have supply, they just again hook up to the grid and it's a two-way protocol where they can just hook up to our capacity. And I don't think we're too far from that. Today our working implementation of it is mostly through a group of labs, universities, and a few sort of trusted parties who are, who all feel like they're in alignment to borrow an over sort of used word. But our hope is to just have it be an open protocol that anyone can hook up to on-Swyx [00:29:20]: Hook up for demand or hook up for supply? In primarily demand, it sounds like. Like you-Anjney [00:29:25]: No, bothSwyx [00:29:26]: You would want to offer demand.Anjney [00:29:27]: Both. Yeah. Unfortunately, what's happened in the last six weeks is, we thought we'd have a bunch of excess capacity by the end of this year. It's all gone.Swyx [00:29:37]: It's exploding.Anjney [00:29:38]: It, yeah. It's all gone. And so I have, my text messages are full of friends, we know many of these people, these are founders who've raised billions of dollars in San Francisco going, “Oh, any chance you have like 50 nodes in the next few weeks?”Swyx [00:29:51]: What is the scope for, non-Nvidia, right? You have Lisa Su coming and, Rainer Pope as well. And so There is a lot of demand for, more performance Alternative architectures and all that. At the same time, this hurts your standardization.Anjney [00:30:11]: I don't think so. So actually Rainer's a great example, right? Rainer is a CEO and founder of, MatX. I actually had him by for office hours in the class earlier today, and there was an insight he brought up that I hadn't considered before, which is when they decided to pick the standard For their data center, they picked the NVIDIA reference architecture. So the MatX chips Just plug in to any site that has an NVIDIA bring up planned. And, the-Swyx [00:30:42]: It's just software then. It's, it's not the-Anjney [00:30:44]: A-Swyx [00:30:44]: Hardware.Anjney [00:30:46]: Well, from an input and IO perspective It's the same footprint as an NVIDIA rack.Swyx [00:30:52]: That makes sense.Anjney [00:30:53]: Where they have done, innovated a bunch from what I can tell is on systems co-design. Which is where a lot of the gains are to be had. And so he picked He was “Anjney, we, there's just so much work to do when you're building a new chip company.”Swyx [00:31:08]: Can't fight every front.Anjney [00:31:08]: You just can't fight on every front. So my question to him was, “Well, you're working on this new chip. Their tape-out is next year. What, who are you going to partner with to host the chips?” And he said, “Whoever will host them. That's just not, that's not my focus.” And I said, “But how did you “ you decided back to our earlier systems design question, he decided that, he didn't want to be a full, fully integrated chip provider. The bottleneck they're focused on is the logic die, and they, he feels they can crank out a ton of performance gains through co-design there. But then that means you delegate, to our question earlier, it, you he's the data center provider is a different part of the stack, and so then he's dependent on that part of the ecosystem to host his chips to get the performance gains to the customer. So now you have another abstraction, and you might have loss. So I asked him, “How do you prevent loss?” And back to your point, he said, “I just picked the NVIDIA standard ‘cause I didn't want to Like I wanted to piggyback off of an existing protocol.” And that, what's great about NVIDIA is that reference architecture is known.Swyx [00:32:15]: Open.Anjney [00:32:15]: It's open. They've published it. So Jensen's actually enabled someone like Rainer to build a chip company like MatX, and I don't see them as competitive. The compute demand is so high. Like, I don't I think NVIDIA's not able to meet the demands of production, so we just need more chips. And I think it's very smart what MatX has done, which is say, “We're just going to we're not going to innovate on the data center design ‘cause actually, thank you, Jensen, you've done all the hard work. Where we can innovate is somewhere else.” And I think that's, that's very healthy. I think that's how we unblock new bottlenecks. And my view is these, the, chip teams like MatX, who have arrived at the insight that co-design is the way, The primary bottleneck for them is trust boundary. To do co-design well, you need visibility into the next model generation as soon as possible ‘cause it takes two years to tape out. So if by the time I bring my chip to market, your model architecture's changed, I'm host. Now, when he was inside Google, he was sitting next to the Gemini team. He was on Palm or whatever.Trust Boundaries, Co-Design, and Researcher CEOsSwyx [00:33:19]: His co-founder was the, was one, was one of the Palm guys, I think.Anjney [00:33:23]: Yes. Yes, exactly. So when you're inside the trust boundary of Google, then your systems co-design loop is super tight. When you leave as a founder, one of the biggest risks you take is now you're outside the trust boundary. And so what I love doing is helping chip teams who can help us unlock more capacity for the independent ecosystem access to trust. Because when I If I've been, involved with a lab from day one, and I was lucky enough to work with Anthropic, and then I'm on the board of Mistral and helped Black Forest Labs get started. I think at this point I'm on six or seven different teams.Swyx [00:33:57]: Only six? I feel like my mental number was going to be 13, but yeah, it's-Anjney [00:34:02]: No, I go deep with one at a time.Swyx [00:34:04]: You're founding CEO of Arena.Anjney [00:34:07]: Nah, that was an, that was an-Swyx [00:34:08]: Administrative CEOAnjney [00:34:09]: It was an administrative five-month gig where Whalen and Anastasios were graduating from their PhDs, and they didn't need a product team. So I helped recruit the head of engineering product and design. But Anastasios has always been the CEO of that company. I played a pinch-hitting I'm an intern. I was CEO intern For five months. -Swyx [00:34:33]: I interviewed him, and he's he's very well-spoken. I think he's a debate, former debate, champion. But also very quantitative and mathematical, which is-Anjney [00:34:41]: He-Swyx [00:34:41]: Such a unicorn.Anjney [00:34:43]: See, what's amazing about him? If you look at his output, he's an output maxer. By the time he was graduating from his PhD, which he only graduated last year, he had published more work with a citation count than, people twice his age. But at the same time, he'd already started a project called LLM Arena that was being used by millions of people As a side project. And time and time again, what I've realized is venture capitalists suck at seeing human beings as, dynamic agents where-Swyx [00:35:14]: They want to put you in a boxAnjney [00:35:15]: They want to put you in a box.Swyx [00:35:15]: This is your thing.Anjney [00:35:16]: So the first time I got introduced to Anastasios, somebody had told me “Oh, he's amazing, but he's a researcher.” I was “what? What do you mean he's a researcher?” That's what-Swyx [00:35:28]: Like he's not a CEO, not a founder.Anjney [00:35:29]: Not a CEO, exactly. I was “Are you crazy? Do you Have you met Dario?” Dario's a scientist. He's gone from zero to, what will soon be a trillion-dollar company in four years. Being a CEO, nominally speaking, is not that hard. Being a good CEO is hard. Being a great CEO actually requires a level of performance that scientists who have already published at the top of their field have accomplished. It is super hard to be a competitive scientist. To publish in academia over the last 20, 30 years, to make it to the top of your discipline at a place like Berkeley, you are a star athlete. Like, you are an athlete of the mind, and you perform at the highest levels. And to get there, whether you're, Anastasios or Whalen at Berkeley, or you are Robin, who-Swyx [00:36:23]: BFL, yeahAnjney [00:36:24]: With Black Forest, who created Stable Diffusion, or if you're, like Guillaume at Meta, who created Llama before he started Mistral. The amount of human leadership you have to demonstrate to get the resources, like get the trust of the organization, publish it, put it up. I would just fund researchers all day Right? If who have contributed already to the field. If they've, if they've put SOTA out there, they're, they're star athletes already. If they haven't done SOTA Look, they can still be good CEOs, but then I find the failure mode is that they just don't want to be CEOs, they primarily want to publish, and that's okay, too. One of the things we do with the AMP Grid is we donate excess compute. We have two nonprofits, like university labs. We carved out like a couple thousand H100s. But I do think there's extraordinary research being done on university campuses. My father-in-law's a physicist. He's a professor. Extraordinary work in physics, and we need that. But if you want to be a CEO, what you need to be willing To do is be super confrontational, outside of science. Like within the scientific community, some of the best researchers are very confrontational about their convictions, right? This architecture is right. To be a great CEO, you basically have to be willing to be confrontational up and down the stack.Swyx [00:37:41]: To your own team.Anjney [00:37:42]: To your own team-Swyx [00:37:43]: To customersAnjney [00:37:43]: Hiring, recruiting customers. Well, I would say, Yeah, pretty much to everyone Everybody. Of course-Swyx [00:37:50]: I see, I feel a little bit of that in my own work, but yeah, I can't imagine the stakes that Dario has had to go through. It's, it's pretty insane.Anjney [00:37:56]: No, I don't think the stakes are that different From how you're feeling it, right? Stakes are personal scaling vectors, right? The stakes that seem so low to you, like having this podcast where you can talk to somebody and just have a you're an extraordinary communicator, right? Like already in this conversation, you've pulled more out of me than most people, and I've been on 12 podcasts in the last two weeks.AI Coachella and First-Principles ThinkingSwyx [00:38:17]: I think I, we've just seen each other enough that there's some base trust.Anjney [00:38:20]: There's base trust.Swyx [00:38:20]: And I think, and I know that you, that I've done my homework and like I know that trust is a big deal for you, so.Anjney [00:38:27]: I think trust is about consistency, and you and I have seen each other In the community for years, right? Like, I remember the first time we met was at NeurIPS in New Orleans. I don't know if you remember that, luncheon.Swyx [00:38:38]: Oh my God.Anjney [00:38:39]: Reiko had set up this Reiko's amazing, and he set up this luncheon and-Swyx [00:38:43]: Yeah, I was “Who's this Discord guy?” I'm “Okay.” But-Anjney [00:38:45]: No, you weren't-Swyx [00:38:46]: You were just “You made some investments.”Anjney [00:38:47]: You were much less polite. You were “Who's this VC?” You're like-Swyx [00:38:51]: No, I Was I? Oh my God.Anjney [00:38:53]: It was-Swyx [00:38:53]: I'm so sorryAnjney [00:38:53]: It was visible on your face.Swyx [00:38:54]: I'm so sorry. But you weren't, you weren't The introduction was bad. I was I didn't know who you were.Anjney [00:39:00]: The, see, this is the thing about context, right? Like, but then I think I heard your accent. And I was “Are you-”Swyx [00:39:06]: Singapore, yeahAnjney [00:39:06]: “Are you Singaporean?” And you're “Yeah.” And I said, “I went to high school, JC, in Singapore.” And then the ice broke. But This is the there are in the scientific community, sometimes the stakes are very high for people who haven't had the emotional, what is called EQ Coaching and mentorship, right? Which is like to have scientific impact, you often need to be a extraordinary emotional, like emotionally in tune person with the folks you're trying to influence. And so what comes so naturally to you is actually a super high stakes thing to other people. And so I wouldn't assume that Dario's more stressed out than you. These things are you'd be surprised how similar and small sometimes the problems are to you That some of the world's biggest, leaders are facing. And that's what I've learned from this class. The guest speakers are Sam, Satya, Jensen.Swyx [00:40:01]: AI Coachella.Anjney [00:40:02]: Yeah. It's AI Coachella, right? So we got to get all the headliners, and they're I'm very lucky that some of these people have either mentored me over the years or I've done business with them. And when you, take the performative stuff out and any assumptions you may have about these people that you read in the press or on Twitter, We're all just humans. We're all trying to get along. And what's so special about this moment is AI is forcing, like scaling, the bitter lesson is forcing a lot of people to revise their assumptions for how the world works and go back to first principles or go and educate themselves. So the kind of people I was, I won't name who this person is, but I was at an event last week in Texas and, ran to somebody who said, “Anjney, I came across the class. What do you think about real time action prediction models?” And I was, don't know how happy it made me feel when they asked me that question. I know they've done the work. They've challenged themselves. I'm, they didn't ask me, “What do you think of world models?” They said, “What do you think of n-”Swyx [00:41:04]: Real time action predictionAnjney [00:41:05]: “action, real time action prediction models?” World models, don't get me wrong, are cool and everything, but you and I both know that is a layer of abstraction that is sometimes not usefully precise enough. Right? Ours-Swyx [00:41:16]: There's like four different kinds of world models.Anjney [00:41:17]: Yes, exactly.Swyx [00:41:18]: We've done the part with general intuition, by the way, which is very focused on, -Anjney [00:41:22]: Oh, cool. Yes. I love Pim. Pim is great. And this is what I love about people who've done that level of work. They realize they're not in competition with people who the rest of the world thinks they're in competition with.Swyx [00:41:34]: Because they're not in the category, they're in the specific thing they're trying to do.Anjney [00:41:37]: They're focused on their mission, and they have a systems understanding of the bottleneck they're trying to solve. And when somebody else says, “I'm working on real time, action prediction models too,” Pim goes, “Oh, I love that person. I want, I can learn from them.” But the minute they're “Oh, that person's a world model person,” it's “like which type of world model person?” But mostly they're just trying to figure out if it's a waste of their time, because we don't have enough time. So, Pim, for example, is super, loves this other company I work with we've talked about called Black Forest Labs. And he's mentioned to me multiple times that he's so, He thinks what Flux is doing is really cool. Andy Blattman came by and spoke in the class. And what I find over and over again is for people who do the work, who can be usefully precise enough about like what is actually going on in the world of frontier research, The sense of camaraderie is still well and alive, but it gets lost sometimes when you have to like abstract The technical complexities in, business terms And then the VCs are “How are you different from that world model?” I'm going to say Where do I even start to explain this stuff? And then the misalignment creeps in.Leading vs. Winning in Frontier AISwyx [00:42:43]: This is good. Yeah, I think, people listening get a sense of, what it is like to operate at a real level, like yourself, rather than at, the journalist level, where you have to sort of put everyone in, a rough category and create a narrative of competition, and who's winning today, who's behind.Anjney [00:42:58]: It-- this idea of winning is so Weird to me.Swyx [00:43:03]: You do want to win. You want you want competitiveness.Anjney [00:43:06]: No, I think you want to lead.Swyx [00:43:07]: You want SOTA.Anjney [00:43:07]: No, I think you want to lead. Yes, so you want to push the frontier. You want to push the SOTA. You want to do something that hasn't been done before. You want to capture value, but you don't want to capture so much value that, people think you're unaligned with your mission or trying to do what's best for the world. You want to capture enough value that you can keep innovating, right? And I think that people want to lead, they don't really This idea of winning and losing, again, I love Jensen. He's a, he's a leader. The mindset that he talked about on Dwarkesh's podcast, right? He's “I didn't wake up with a loser mindset.” I think that was awesome, right? Because he's, he's an engineer. Dwarkesh has done the work. So there's at least-- even though the, to me, it was very obvious they're talking about the same thing, they just passed each other. They just had to basically, Jensen has this, five-layer cake abstraction of how the industry works. And Dwarkesh had, I think from that podcast, had more of, a pre-training, mid-training, post-training systems loop concept.Swyx [00:44:04]: It's just a factor of who he talks to, right? Again, it's very clear.Anjney [00:44:06]: It's the systems It's the abstraction, the mental models, the It's the whole-- Dude, so much of the problem in the world is reasoning by analogy. And then the assumptions that are held invisibly.Swyx [00:44:19]: Yeah, I've, I've said, this is actually the best time in human history for first principles thinkers. Because everything you think will happen is actually now coming true.Anjney [00:44:28]: Correct. And the venture capital community is, notorious for this, where people look-- In times of uncertainty, they, cling to axioms that ended up being true from the previous era, and they kind of like proclaim them with confidence as if they're truths, but they're not. And it's very important to see the distinction between a heuristic and an axiom. An axiom can be proven-Swyx [00:44:55]: Like from internal consistency point of viewAnjney [00:44:56]: With internal consistency. A heuristic is a way you kind of a shortcut. And my God, the number of people I have had to put up with over the last few years who proclaim-- use heuristics As axioms to judge people, to judge which companies are going to succeed or the number of people who are “Oh, yeah, Anthropic, they're just training models right now,” but this one continue.Swyx [00:45:22]: Because that's a B2B SaaS?Anjney [00:45:23]: Yeah, the, like Which over the fullness of time, if you squint at it, maybe. But the way you arrive there is so important that you can-- you just, you can dismiss people. Here's what happened, right? What happened is Anthropic basically achieved takeoff in October of last year. That training run-Swyx [00:45:41]: Whatever, three seven?Anjney [00:45:42]: I forget the numbers now, but whatever that checkpoint was-Swyx [00:45:45]: We saw the cognition.Anjney [00:45:46]: Yeah. Right? You probably-- The, to those of us in the community, especially once post-training was done and it was released in December-Swyx [00:45:52]: Yeah. Can I sneak a sneaky question in there? I don't know if you have a perspective, maybe you don't, I just The number one question is how did Anthropic crack coding, right? Because Claude One, Claude Two, okay, like it was part of it, but it wasn't a big deal. And the leading hypothesis, it's a lucky dice roll that was then compounded, right? Like it was like Mildly better, but then they saw it and they were “Okay, let's really invest.”How Anthropic Cracked CodingAnjney [00:46:17]: I had this very annoying teacher. I went to this boarding school called Rishi Valley in India, which is like this, bird preserve. It's like three hundred and fifty acres of bird preserve in rural India, and there was no technology for seven years. There was this teacher, I won't name them, but they would have this-- I hated it every time he said this to me. He was “Luck fa-favors the prepared mind,” which is like a common saying, but the way he delivered it, always grated me, ‘cause he was always I was always one of those kids who got, a good grade without trying very hard. ‘Cause like high middle school is not that hard if you, if you're generally, paying attention and so on. And there was this one time where I-- But then I would get an eighty percent grade, and he would keep pushing me to say “The reason you didn't get the ninety-five plus percent is because you're not that lucky.” And I would say, “What do you mean?” ‘Cause I would think that I deserved that grade, and I would sometimes argue with him. And he'd say, “You didn't have a prepared mind. If you want to get lucky again “ There was basically one time where I got like ninety-five or ninety-six on this, on this subject, and I, now that I felt entitled. I was “Okay, I'm going to keep doing this,” and I didn't. And then he was “Luck favors a prepared mind. You got lucky last time, but you got to stay prepared.” And I didn't understand what he meant. Now, as I'm older, I'm okay, these adults actually knew a thing or two. Anthropic has been the most prepared company for four years. And so then when the right, context data comes in, the right developers start sending in, the right context diffs, Sure, you could say you got lucky, but if you ask me, they're pr-pretty damn prepared with paranoia for like four years. And you have to remember, it was so hard for them to get going early on that they had to do so much more with so much less that you just have to be prepared to be so efficient.Swyx [00:48:06]: Yes. There's numbers on their burn compared to OpenAI. I've, I've written about it, but they are so much more efficient in their, in their tech stack.Anjney [00:48:14]: It's not even It's not funny.Swyx [00:48:14]: Not even close.Anjney [00:48:15]: Yeah. But it's so clear, right? Like how to output max for the world. They have been prepared, and you could call that luck, but Luck favors the prepared mind.Culture, Hardship, and Anthropic's P0Swyx [00:48:25]: This is one of those things that I was going over some of your old lectures and, you were data, people think it's a moat and actually it's culture and actually it's team Actually. And I, it's-- there's different levels of moats, and this is the ultimate one that determines everything else. Which you can then compoundAnjney [00:48:43]: You're saying culture is the ultimate moat? Yeah. But the thing about culture is it's very fragile. So moats, I don't think they're-- there's very few moats I found that are actually moats. They're-- It's, it's a nice concept, but in reality, you have to replenish your culture. Ben Horowitz was, the speaker in CS153 on Tuesday, and I asked him this question about the culture bottleneck in teams because, there are several AI teams-Swyx [00:49:09]: His book, Hard Things About Hard ThingsAnjney [00:49:11]: Hard Thing About Hard Things. But more concretely, there are so many AI labs today that have all the cash they need, they have all the compute they need, and they're still not able to ship anything SOTA. And then you start seeing people leave and so on, and my diagnosis, it's, is it's the culture. And so I asked him, Ben, they're-- He's been one of the most aggressive investors in AI labs. He goes back to this thing which resonates in my mind a lot. It-- When I used to work at a16z, I would, book a conference room, and right outside the conference room, which is closest to the toilet ‘cause it was the fastest way for me to go use the bathroom between Zoom meetings-Swyx [00:49:45]: Oh my God, I'll put maxing my toilet optimization. Okay, never mind.Anjney [00:49:48]: It was not healthy in hindsight, but maybe this is TMI. But anyway, outside that conference on the wall was this quote that was printed that said, “Culture is not a set of beliefs, it's a set of actions.” And it's by Bushido, is this, Japanese philosopher. And if you stop taking the actions that demonstrate the mission alignment to what you've said to your team and to your-- the world matters to you, then your culture starts to fray. So it's not actually a moat, I would say. It's a very brittle, fragile thing that requires daily tending to like a garden. But if you figure out the system to keep that garden tended, which I think ultimately comes down to knowing yourself ‘cause you most naturally, if you're authentic and so on, you'll naturally make trade-offs that seem effortless to you, but that reinforce your culture. And then That becomes this very hard thing for other people to catch up to. And at Anthropic, from day one, there was this mission like-- missionary like zeal and belief that, hey, these capabilities will scale. These systems are stochastic, not deterministic. There will be error bars, and until we crack interpretability, there's risk. And at some point, people will go-- stop using Claude just for coding. They'll use it in some mission-critical context where there's-- it'll throw off a bug, and then people are going to come blame them, and they want to be on the right side of history where they said, “Yes, this is a powerful technology. We think it's going to change the world, And we want to be very measured and scientific about the fact that, ‘Hey, guys, these are stats models, statistical models.' That's how statistics works.” ultimately, when you're training neural nets, it is just a statistical system. And I think that Belief that safety is important and that it might seem toy-like in the early days, and sometimes, you could say, “Anjney, they totally over-exaggerated the risk,” like two years ago when they said, “Let's not launch Claude One,” or whatever. Well, okay, maybe in hindsight, but hindsight is twenty/twenty. And at the time, they didn't know how that model would be used, and to them it felt existential if somebody came and said, “You weren't responsible. It-- This wrote a bug.” The liability associated with that is massive. So how do you prevent against that? Well, day in, day out, you say safety. And when you start deviating from that, you have the team hold you accountable, you have the world hold you accountable, and I think that becomes a moat over time. At some point, that moat will get challenged and so on, and then it become fragile. I hope it endures because that's the beauty of having founders run the show, ‘cause they can make really hard trade-offs to do mission alignment. The hardest part is in the earliest days when you don't have a group of people who are going through difficulty, stress, crisis together, then your culture doesn't get defined sharply enough, and that's what I'm worried about right now, is there's so much money going to these labs. There's no hardship. There's no-Swyx [00:52:50]: To anyone who knowsAnjney [00:52:51]: There's no to anyone who knows. And that, in hindsight, was a feature, not a bug for Anthropic. The number of people who said no, the number of people who said, “Sorry, we're all doing investors in OpenAI,” that is competitive difference. It forces you to really understand, what is the hill you want to die on at the expense of everything else. What's the P zero? And there, P zero from day one was coding. The reason, the mechanism system there was if we crack coding, Then we will crack AGI. Our mission is AGI. We want to get there safely. If we focus on codin

In Episode 2 of our pediatric neurology series, we explore how advances in diagnostic technology have transformed the field of neurology. Our guests discuss the evolution of neurologic evaluation - from early ultrasound imaging to CT and MRI - and how modern imaging has revolutionized the ability to diagnose and understand neurologic disease in children.Host Paul Wirkus, MD, FAAP and guest Josh Bonkowsky, MD also examine the growing role of genomic testing, which is increasingly available in clinical practice and providing families with greater diagnostic clarity. Alongside these advances come important philosophical and ethical questions: What is the value of diagnosing a condition when no cure exists? How much information do families want, and how should that information be shared?Our guest discusses a “leveled results” approach to genomic testing, emphasizing shared decision-making and giving families meaningful input into how much information they receive. Throughout the episode, the focus remains on helping patients and families make informed decisions while navigating uncertainty with compassion and transparency.Have a question? Email questions@vcurb.com. Listener questions will be answered in episode four. For more information about available credit, visit vCurb.com.ACCME Accreditation StatementThis activity has been planned and implemented in accordance with the accreditation requirements and policies of the Colorado Medical Society through the joint providership of Kansas Chapter, American Academy of Pediatrics and Utah Chapter, AAP.  Kansas Chapter, American Academy of Pediatrics is accredited by the Colorado Medical Society to provide continuing medical education for physicians. AMA Credit Designation StatementKansas Chapter, American Academy of Pediatrics designates this live activity for a maximum of 1.0 AMA PRA Category 1 Credits™. Physicians should claim only the credit commensurate with the extent of their participation in the activity.

The talk explores the historical relationships that exist between the development and the evolution of embryos. What is the link between our developmental origin as individuals (a fertilized egg), on the one hand, and our evolutionary origin as a group of individuals (an ancestral population), on the other hand? And these embryos, are they really extraordinary constructions relying on carefully accumulated, multiple sets of precisely encoded instructions or instead, could they be the mere and only obligatory result of a chaotic program haphazardly built during the past hundreds million years? Speaker Denis Duboule, Professor of Genetics and Chair of Evolution of Development and Genomes, Collège de France, Paris Organized by Claude Desplan, Silver Professor of Biology and Neuroscience, Department of Biology, NYU

Let me know your thoughts about the podcast. Thank you for listening!A doctor looked me in the eye and gave me a number: two to five years. I'm not sharing that for shock value. I'm sharing it because I refuse to let a statistic become my story, especially after living with cancer for 14 years, surviving lung surgery, recurrence, and a long run on targeted therapies that eventually stopped working.Now I'm on chemotherapy every three weeks, and the week after treatment can flatten me. I talk honestly about what that feels like and what I'm trying to do anyway: keep teaching, keep connecting, keep living. I also explain why I take prognosis timelines with a grain of salt. Medicine is real, but it's also moving fast. Genome testing, new research, and unexpected breakthroughs can change what's possible, and I want you to hold that hope without drifting into denial.Then I get to what I believe is my “answer” to cancer: joy. Not the kind that shows up when life is easy, but the kind you practice on purpose. I share how a simple smile can change my whole day, why food and cooking have become a reliable source of happiness, and how small rituals give me something to look forward to even when I feel awful. Most importantly, I talk about bringing joy to other people through hosting, one-on-ones, and classes and why I believe that loving and helping people is a powerful spiritual and emotional force.If you get something from this, subscribe, share it with someone who needs strength, and leave a review so more people can find the show. What's one small joy you're choosing this week?

What do your DNA test results, extraterrestrials, and a Florida man in a G-string have in common? Absolutely nothing... which makes this week's episode perfect.First, we dive into a wild whistleblower claim alleging the CIA has been combing through consumer DNA databases like 23andMe and Ancestry in a secret hunt for alien-human hybrids. Is this the smoking gun of UFO disclosure? A government genetic dragnet? Or just another conspiracy theory with a suspicious amount of chromosome-based confidence?Then we head to Florida, where a 74-year-old man allegedly turned a quiet neighborhood into an unwanted performance art installation while wearing little more than a G-string and repeatedly asking strangers to jump rope. It's the kind of story that raises important questions, such as "why?" and "please stop."From secret alien bloodlines to barely concealed retirement hobbies, Hysteria 51 explores the strange, the absurd, and the headlines that make humanity seem like it might actually need alien supervision. Buckle up. The truth is out there... but common sense may have already left the building this week on Hysteria 51.Links & Resources

This episode was originally released on November 15, 2022Things aren't always what they seem on the surface, especially when it comes to our oceans. So many mysteries hum below its watery surface. So, you may just have to use your ears when it's too dark to see exactly what's going on down there.Dr. Kaylee Byers looks into the ocean giants that lurk in the depths and the unique songs they share with us. She sits down with whale biologist Dr. Jennifer Allen on how whale songs are imparting a cultural exchange between populations that are hundreds of miles apart. Filmmaker Joshua Zeeman shares his journey to find the infamously dubbed 'Loneliest Whale'. And Paeleobiologist Dr. Travis Park from the Museum of Natural History in London tells us how whales developed their unique singing superpowers by taking us back through millions of years of evolution. Finally, researcher Grace Baer brings us to a remote west coast station studying whale populations and the effects of ocean traffic noise.It's a whale-sized episode taking you on a listening journey into this wonderful watery world!Special thanks to Captain Gaelen Krause of the Island Odyssey, for capturing recordings on his journey to search for whales along the British Columbia coast.Resources:1. Southern Resident Killer Whale Research Project | Parks Canada2. Whales learn songs from each other in a cultural 'deep dive' | phys.org3. Whale-monitoring robots are oceanic eavesdroppers with a mission | Popular Science4. Whale Songs Are Getting Deeper | The Atlantic5. The search for the loneliest whale in the world | The Guardian6. The Loneliest Whale: The Search for 52 | Bleecker Street Media7. BTS (방탄소년단) Whalien 52' MV | BigHit Entertainment7. Watkins Marine Mammal Sound Database | Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution8. Underwater Noise Pollution Is Disrupting Ocean Life - But We Can Fix it | TIME9. Convergent evolution in toothed whale cochleae | BMC Evolutionary Biology10. Evolutionary Basis of High-Frequency Hearing in the Cochleae of Echolocators Revealed by Comparative Genomics | Oxford Academic11. Genome-culture coevolution promotes rapid divergence of killer whale ecotypes | Nature12. DNA Suggests Cultural Traits Affect Whale Evolution | Science13. San Francisco: Dead Whale Opens Seafood Season | Universal International Newswire14. Songs of the Humpback Whale | Roger Payne, CRM Records15. Whaling Commission | Associated Press Archive16. Monaco - International Whaling Commission | Associated Press Archive17. Bubble Net Feeding | BC Whales18. Cool Genomics Facts - Fact 4 & 5: Environmental DNA | Genome British Columbia

Denis DubouleCollège de FranceÉvolution du développement et des génomesAnnée 2025-2026Colloque - L'évolution des mécanismes du développementSymposium - The Evolution of Developmental MechanismsStefan Mundlos: Synthetic Genomics and Large Cargo Genome Engineering for the Study of Evolutionary Traits'Speaker:Stefan MundlosMax Planck Institute for Molecular Genetics, Berlin, Germany

The Hidden Genome Inside Every CellMost of us learned that mitochondria are the “powerhouse of the cell.”What we didn't learn?They carry their own DNA — and that DNA may hold crucial answers to aging, neurodegeneration, and rare childhood diseases.In this episode of Research Renaissance, host Deborah Westphal speaks with Dr. Stefan Isaac, Assistant Professor at Boston University and 2025 Toffler Scholar, about how mitochondrial DNA is organized, regulated, and why its dysfunction may contribute to diseases ranging from Leigh syndrome to Alzheimer's.

1) History-making entrepreneurial scientist CRAIG VENTER, died last week at the age of 79. The New York Times obituary leads with these words, “A risk-taking outsider, he brought speed, competition, and controversy to one of science's biggest races.” In 2000, his team published the first sequence of the human genome – earlier and for far less money than the government-sponsored Human Genome Project. Here's our 2008 conversation, on the release of his memoir, A LIFE DECODED: MY GENOME: MY LIFE. Learn more at jcvi.org 2) In the second half, my 2008 conversation with MacArthur Award winning evolutionary biologist STUART KAUFFMAN about his book, REINVENTING THE SACRED: A NEW VIEW OF SCIENCE, REASON, AND RELIGION. The two of us get excited as we work our way toward his notion that the ceaseless creativity of the universe may be the best way yet to think about God. Learn more at stuartkauffman.com

Pioneering geneticist J. Craig Venter, who revolutionized biology with his role in sequencing the human genome, died last week in San Diego. In this hour, we look back at Venter's scientific contributions and consider whether our expectations for the medical and scientific transformations from DNA mapping have been realized. How has our knowledge of the human genome changed our understanding of how life works on a molecular level, and how much could it continue to change with the new powers of AI? Guests: Dr. Fyodor Urnov, professor of Molecular Therapeutics, University of California, Berkeley; scientific director, Innovative Genomics Institute (IGI) Philip Ball, science writer, his most recent book is How Life Works: A User's Guide to the New Biology Michael Marshall, science writer, his most recent book is The Genesis Quest: The Geniuses and Eccentrics on a Journey to Uncover the Origin of Life on Earth Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Genome-wide noninvasive prenatal testing (GW-NIPT) was introduced in 2015 and became widely available in 2019. Nonetheless, we are still learning more about this important prenatal screening test. In January 2026, the ACOG released a new PA on this, which we will also review in this episode. Our main publication ti review, however, will be the AJOG May 2026's systematic review and meta-analysis on the finding of “genome-wide” cfDNA discordant results and what this may mean for the pregnancy. Although rare, this may lead (over a third of cases) to some adverse perinatal issues. Listen in for details. 1. ACOG PA Jan 2026: Screening for Fetal Chromosomal Abnormalities2. AJOG May 2026: https://click.notification.elsevier.com/CL0/https:%2F%2Fwww.ajog.org%2Farticle%2FS0002-9378(25)00865-8%2Ffulltext%3Fdgcid=raven_jbs_etoc_email/1/0100019d9ec37d7b-c586438d-021a-4097-8db3-c158e6f97c9b-000000/Vq6ksekOuvTxcv8OEZZ2uBesCg_hG6qlhqU_BlCnAK4=452

In this JCO PO Article Insights episode, host Carolyn Lineen summarizes the article, "Prognostic Significance of Blood-Based Multicancer Detection in Circulating Tumor DNA: Five-Year Outcomes Analysis" bySwanton et al. LINK TO FULL TRANSCRIPT

On this week's solo episode, Mike Petrilli explores a big question: What would it look like to define an evidence-based model for American elementary schools—and could AI help us get there? Drawing on his long view of school reform, he considers what most schools have in common, where they fall short, and whether a clearer, research-backed playbook could improve outcomes at scale.This is a work-in-progress idea, and Mike wants your feedback. Share your thoughts at mpetrilli [at] fordhaminstitute [dot]org.Then on the Research Minute, Amber Northern examines new evidence on special education, finding that after students are identified for services, their achievement rebounds significantly—suggesting that individualized supports may boost learning more than previously understood.Recommended content: Both/and on test scores & school inspections —Michael J. Petrilli, SCHOOLEDFollow the Science to School: Evidence-based Practices for Elementary Education — Michael J. Petrilli, Kathleen Carroll, and Barbara DavidsonAn ode to elementary schools —Michael J. Petrilli, Thomas B. Fordham InstituteSpecial Education Substantially Improves Learning: Evidence from Three States — Stephanie G. Coffey, Joshua Goodman, Amy Ellen Schwartz, Leanna Stiefel, Marcus A. Winters and Yunee H. Yoon, NBER (2026)Feedback Welcome: Have ideas for improving our show? We would love to hear them. Send them to thegadfly@fordhaminstitute.org

In this explainer episode, we've asked Lisa Beaton, Panel Member and Parent Representative for SWAN UK, to tell us about the Participant Panel. You can also find a series of short videos explaining some of the common terms you might encounter about genomics on our YouTube channel. If you've got any questions, or have any other topics you'd like us to explain, let us know on podcast@genomicsengland.co.uk. You can download the transcript or read it below. Florence: What is the Participant Panel at Genomics England? My name is Florence Cornish and today I'm joined with Lisa Beaton, who is a Parent Representative for Syndrome Without a Name, Swan UK, and a member of the Participant Panel. And we have a special episode today because it is to celebrate the 10th anniversary, so a decade of the Participant Panel at Genomics England. Lisa, I think it would be good to start with a quick rundown of what the Participant Panel is. If you had to describe it in a few sentences, what would you say? Lisa: Ooh, that's tricky actually, to cram all our wealth of expertise and knowledge into that, I guess in just a few sentences. But essentially, we are a group of lay people who have all contributed by way of being on genomic studies, such as the 100,000 Genome, for our data to be held in the NGRL, the National Genomic Research Library. We may have joined because our children or another family member have a disorder or a syndrome or a condition that requires further genetic testing. So, there are panel members who represent from different cancer communities, there's panel members who have connections with rare disease, and then there's panel members like myself who come from the undiagnosed community, where we joined to essentially try and find a diagnosis in respect of our daughter. The majority of us don't have any kind of medical background. We're all just individuals who collectively are really interested in where genomics and genetics is going to take us in the future. But probably most importantly, we all feel a sense of responsibility to ensure that there's equity of access, to diversify, to basically ensure that the lived experience of real-life people become more than just the data point to the scientific and research community. We, we are real people. Florence: Yeah. And could you explain a little bit more about the practical role of the panel? So what you aim to do as a group and what it involves to be a part of it? Lisa: Certainly. So as a panel, we meet either in person or on Teams approximately four times a year. So quarterly. We also get to listen to what we call 'Lunch and Learns', which have been absolutely fascinating. It's different people from different areas of the scientific and research community who will come along and talk to us about their latest discovery or what new things have been found. What's in pipelines, what we can be looking forward to. There's all sorts of different aspects of that. So currently a project that's been quite well known in the news is the Generation Study, the study of newborns. There have been research interviews and meetings around cancer studies. It's really exciting actually because every time there's something kind of new to learn or to see where progress is going, and that is just, I guess that's what most of us are there for, really just to see it in action. The role of the panel really is there to hold accountability, to ensure that, you know, data is being kept in a safe and secure manner, to ask any questions that we have about that. I think probably, we are all just members of the public, so our interests are widely there to ensure, you know, we're representing what we feel we would want to know, and therefore, hopefully in connection with what other members of who have kindly donated their genetic information and material towards studies so we, we can hold that agency for them and just to get more information, knowledge, share that out there with power. Power to the people, as it were! Florence: I'm interested if there's anything in particular that comes to mind that the panel has achieved that you are especially proud of, or that you are the most proud of. Lisa: Again, I think to squash that into just kind of one or two sentences is probably impossible, because there's so many things that panel members are proud of. One of the things that has definitely, we feel made a huge difference is the Plain Language Guide. We are absolutely adamant that, you know, everything should be as clear and easy to understand as possible. It's all very well having all the, the science and researchers who, you almost speak like a different language. For us, to get that passionately back to everybody who, who can be involved at different levels. You know, if you've contributed your time, your information, your DNA to research, then everybody who's done that, whether they speak English as a first language or second language, or if they have any kind of say, learning disability or just different socioeconomic experience, et cetera, it's really key that across the board everybody can, can access the language and terminology that is used around genetics. To summon up a point that has been used time and again, but is so, so crucial: nothing about us, without us. Florence Cornish: I can confirm, I'm a very big fan of the Language Guide. I use it all the time, I share it all the time. It's amazing, and you should be very proud of it. Lisa: Well, we definitely are. When I first joined the panel, one of the things I found really hard was I came into a room and I already had a bit of imposter syndrome. There were lots of terms being flung around in kind of, and acronyms. It's something we all do in everyday life, and you know, the more used to them you are the more you use them. But actually it's to go back and remind ourselves what those are. You don't want to be sort of 10 steps behind because you're constantly having to go back and, and look something up. So if you've got that guide there with you, if we ensure that everything is written as plainly and simply, whilst not dumbing anything down, just ensuring that it is accessible, that's incredibly important. Florence: Yeah, completely. So it's been really great to hear about what the panel does and, and the vital role that they play, and you've given a really great example there. But I thought it might also be nice to hear about what being part of the panel has meant for you and how it's impacted you just as a person, I guess, if you feel comfortable to share more about that. Lisa: Yes, definitely. So as I said, when I joined the panel, I did have a bit of imposter syndrome. Um, I don't have a medical background. I've gained 17+ years of medical experience because of our undiagnosed child, and I suppose I've gleaned quite a lot of information along the way, but clearly I'm not a geneticist. I'm not a doctor. I know what I know and I'm comfortable with that. I think joining the panel for me gave me back some of who I am as a person. Over the years, I've been 'mum' a lot of the time. Medical professionals in particular face-to-face, utilise that term. And I know it's not meant in any kind of patronising way, but being part of the panel has, has made me become sort of myself as a person again, I'm more than just 'mum'. It's enabled me to meet with fellow parents and caregivers and kind of share that common bond. Although we all come from different pathways and walks of life, be that the cancer pathway or the rare disease pathway, or the undiagnosed pathway, or in our case a combination of rare and undiagnosed, we share so many different things in common and our experience of commonalities, even if we've come about it from a different pathway, and that gives agency and strength, I think to us as individuals. We know what we are going through, that lived experience, that real voice really brings it back and I know from chatting to members of Genomics England and being at different networking events that they really hear us when they meet us, we are so much more than just the data. Florence: Yeah. Thank you for sharing that. And in connection to that, I just wanted to finish off by giving you the opportunity to say, is there one thing that you wish people knew about patient advocacy in general? Lisa: Yes, come and join us would be my message. We need more people. We definitely need more diversity. We want to hear from everybody and anybody, you know, genetics, genomics affects all of us. By 2035, I think it is, that it's predicted that more than 50% of medical such encounters will be with a genomic connection. And so to ensure that, you know, we are representing all members of communities across the board, we need more and more people particularly people of different backgrounds, would be something that I would be very keen to see the panel kind of move and diversify into. Florence: And so, for anyone listening that does want to get involved, how would they go about doing that? Lisa: So, I think there's probably quite a number of ways. I personally saw some information on Facebook. They're across different social media - X, Instagram, et cetera. So, there's definitely more information there. Obviously type in their website, Genomics England, and there's different links on the pages there. And come, come and join us. We're a very friendly bunch. Florence: Thank you so much, Lisa, for sharing more about the Participant Panel and the vital role they play and have done for the last 10 years. Lisa: Thank you so much for inviting me to be a part of this. Florence: If you want to hear more explainer episodes like this, you can find them on our website at www.genomicsengland.co.uk or wherever you get your podcasts. Thank you for listening.

People are always asking where’s the beef, but never WHO’S THE BEEF?

Azim Surani, Director of Research at the Gurdon Institute and Professor Emeritus at University of Cambridge, received the Kyoto Prize in Basic Sciences, specifically in the field of Life Sciences and Medicine, for his work in demonstrating how male and female mammalian genomes receive distinct imprints during germ cell development. Genomic imprinting introduced a novel concept to Mendelian genetics and is a now fundamental principle in the life sciences. Surani's research has contributed to developmental biology and epigenetics, along with a wide range of life science fields including physiology, regenerative medicine, reproductive medicine, and plant science. Series: "Kyoto Prize Symposium" [Science] [Show ID: 41117]

Azim Surani, Director of Research at the Gurdon Institute and Professor Emeritus at University of Cambridge, received the Kyoto Prize in Basic Sciences, specifically in the field of Life Sciences and Medicine, for his work in demonstrating how male and female mammalian genomes receive distinct imprints during germ cell development. Genomic imprinting introduced a novel concept to Mendelian genetics and is a now fundamental principle in the life sciences. Surani's research has contributed to developmental biology and epigenetics, along with a wide range of life science fields including physiology, regenerative medicine, reproductive medicine, and plant science. Series: "Kyoto Prize Symposium" [Science] [Show ID: 41117]

Azim Surani, Director of Research at the Gurdon Institute and Professor Emeritus at University of Cambridge, received the Kyoto Prize in Basic Sciences, specifically in the field of Life Sciences and Medicine, for his work in demonstrating how male and female mammalian genomes receive distinct imprints during germ cell development. Genomic imprinting introduced a novel concept to Mendelian genetics and is a now fundamental principle in the life sciences. Surani's research has contributed to developmental biology and epigenetics, along with a wide range of life science fields including physiology, regenerative medicine, reproductive medicine, and plant science. Series: "Kyoto Prize Symposium" [Science] [Show ID: 41117]

Azim Surani, Director of Research at the Gurdon Institute and Professor Emeritus at University of Cambridge, received the Kyoto Prize in Basic Sciences, specifically in the field of Life Sciences and Medicine, for his work in demonstrating how male and female mammalian genomes receive distinct imprints during germ cell development. Genomic imprinting introduced a novel concept to Mendelian genetics and is a now fundamental principle in the life sciences. Surani's research has contributed to developmental biology and epigenetics, along with a wide range of life science fields including physiology, regenerative medicine, reproductive medicine, and plant science. Series: "Kyoto Prize Symposium" [Science] [Show ID: 41117]

Azim Surani, Director of Research at the Gurdon Institute and Professor Emeritus at University of Cambridge, received the Kyoto Prize in Basic Sciences, specifically in the field of Life Sciences and Medicine, for his work in demonstrating how male and female mammalian genomes receive distinct imprints during germ cell development. Genomic imprinting introduced a novel concept to Mendelian genetics and is a now fundamental principle in the life sciences. Surani's research has contributed to developmental biology and epigenetics, along with a wide range of life science fields including physiology, regenerative medicine, reproductive medicine, and plant science. Series: "Kyoto Prize Symposium" [Science] [Show ID: 41117]

Last September, scientists used an AI model to design genomes for entirely new bacteriophages (viruses that infect bacteria). They then built them in a lab. Many were viable. And despite being entirely novel some even outperformed existing viruses from that family.That alone is remarkable. But as today's guest — Dr Richard Moulange, one of the world's top experts on 'AI–Biosecurity' — explains, it's just one of many data points showing how AI is dissolving the barriers that have historically kept biological weapons out of reach.For years, experts have reassured us that 'tacit knowledge' — the hands-on, hard-to-Google lab skills needed to work with dangerous pathogens — would prevent bad actors from weaponising biology. So far, they've been right.But as of 2025 that reassurance is crumbling. The Virology Capabilities Test measures exactly this kind of troubleshooting expertise, and finds that modern AI models crushed top human virologists even in their self-declared area of greatest specialisation and expertise — 45% to 22%.Meanwhile, Anthropic's research shows PhD-level biologists getting meaningfully better at weapons-relevant tasks with AI assistance — with the effect growing with each new model generation.Richard joins host Rob Wiblin to discuss all that plus:What AI biology tools already existWhy mid-tier actors (not amateurs) are the ones getting the most dangerous boostThe three main categories of defence we can pursueWhether there's a plausible path to a world where engineered pandemics become a thing of the pastThis episode was recorded on January 16, 2026. Since recording this episode, Richard has seconded to the UK Government — please note that his views expressed here are entirely his own.Links to learn more, video, and full transcript: https://80k.info/rmAnnouncements:Our new book is available to preorder: 80,000 Hours: How to have a fulfilling career that does good is written by our cofounder Benjamin Todd. It's a completely revised and updated edition of our existing career guide, with a big new updated section on AI — covering both the risks and the potential to steer it in a better direction, and how AI automation should affect your career planning and which skills one chooses to specialise in. Preorder now: https://geni.us/80000HoursWe're hiring contract video editors for the podcast! For more information, check out the expression of interest page on the 80,000 Hours website: https://80k.info/video-editorChapters:Cold open (00:00:00)Who's Richard Moulange? (00:00:31)AI can now design novel genomes (00:01:11)The end of the 'tacit knowledge' barrier (00:04:34)Are risks from bioterrorists overstated? (00:18:20)The 3 key disasters AI makes more likely (00:22:41)Which bad actors does AI help the most? (00:30:03)Experts are more scary than amateurs (00:41:17)Barriers to bioterrorists using AI (00:46:43)AI biorisks are sometimes dismissed (and that's a huge mistake) (00:48:54)Advanced AI biology tools we already have or will soon (01:04:10)Rob argues that the situation is hopeless (01:09:49)Intervention #1: Limit access (01:18:16)Intervention #2: Get AIs to refuse to help (01:32:58)Intervention #3: Surveillance and attribution (01:42:38)Intervention #4: Universal vaccines and antivirals (01:56:38)Intervention #5: Screen all orders for DNA (02:10:00)AI companies talk about def/acc more than they fund it (02:19:52)Can you build a profitable business solving this problem? (02:26:32)This doesn't have to interfere with useful science (much) (02:30:56)What are the best low-tech interventions? (02:33:01)Richard's top request for AI companies (02:37:59)Grok shows governments lack many legal levers (02:53:17)Best ways listeners can help fix AI-Bio (02:56:24)We might end all contagious disease in 20 years (03:03:37)Video and audio editing: Dominic Armstrong, Milo McGuire, Luke Monsour, and Simon MonsourMusic: CORBITCamera operator: Jeremy ChevillotteTranscripts and web: Elizabeth Cox and Katy Moore

This week's host, John Arndt, is joined by Peter Molnar to chat building a high-resolution genomic atlas of the oceans. Peter is the Co-Founder & Board Chair of the Ocean Genome Atlas Project (OGAP), with the mission to produce a global genomic atlas of the world's oceans, providing critical information for planetary health, evolutionary and fundamental biology, and biomedicines of the future. Hear how sailing brought his family to the Bay Area, why he started looking under the water, the super cool tech behind the OGAP boats, a status report on the health of the Bay today, and what we can learn from Copenhagen when it comes to the water. Learn more about Peter and help out the mission at OGAPvoyage.org

A fundamental question in biology is: how did humans acquire their unique characteristics? What allows us to stand upright, while our primate ancestors walked on all fours? What brain alterations drove our increased intelligence and allowed us to perceive our own mortality? One of the mechanisms that has been hypothesized to be involved is changes in gene expression elicited by nucleotide alterations in non-coding regions of the human genome. Miles Wilkinson, a professor in the Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology, and Reproductive Sciences at UC, San Diego, discusses a class of DNA sequences hypothesized to have this role. These human accelerated regions (HARs) are segments of DNA that exhibit 3 characteristics that—together—make them prime candidates for specifying human-specific traits by altering patterns of gene expression. First, HARs have rapidly changed in sequence specifically in the human lineage. Second, HARs are highly conserved in sequence, indicating they that must have been selected for the ability to confer one or more function in higher organisms. Third, the vast majority of HARs are in the non-coding portion of animal genomes, indicating that most are likely to have a regulatory function. Series: "CARTA - Center for Academic Research and Training in Anthropogeny" [Science] [Show ID: 41300]

A fundamental question in biology is: how did humans acquire their unique characteristics? What allows us to stand upright, while our primate ancestors walked on all fours? What brain alterations drove our increased intelligence and allowed us to perceive our own mortality? One of the mechanisms that has been hypothesized to be involved is changes in gene expression elicited by nucleotide alterations in non-coding regions of the human genome. Miles Wilkinson, a professor in the Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology, and Reproductive Sciences at UC, San Diego, discusses a class of DNA sequences hypothesized to have this role. These human accelerated regions (HARs) are segments of DNA that exhibit 3 characteristics that—together—make them prime candidates for specifying human-specific traits by altering patterns of gene expression. First, HARs have rapidly changed in sequence specifically in the human lineage. Second, HARs are highly conserved in sequence, indicating they that must have been selected for the ability to confer one or more function in higher organisms. Third, the vast majority of HARs are in the non-coding portion of animal genomes, indicating that most are likely to have a regulatory function. Series: "CARTA - Center for Academic Research and Training in Anthropogeny" [Science] [Show ID: 41300]

A fundamental question in biology is: how did humans acquire their unique characteristics? What allows us to stand upright, while our primate ancestors walked on all fours? What brain alterations drove our increased intelligence and allowed us to perceive our own mortality? One of the mechanisms that has been hypothesized to be involved is changes in gene expression elicited by nucleotide alterations in non-coding regions of the human genome. Miles Wilkinson, a professor in the Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology, and Reproductive Sciences at UC, San Diego, discusses a class of DNA sequences hypothesized to have this role. These human accelerated regions (HARs) are segments of DNA that exhibit 3 characteristics that—together—make them prime candidates for specifying human-specific traits by altering patterns of gene expression. First, HARs have rapidly changed in sequence specifically in the human lineage. Second, HARs are highly conserved in sequence, indicating they that must have been selected for the ability to confer one or more function in higher organisms. Third, the vast majority of HARs are in the non-coding portion of animal genomes, indicating that most are likely to have a regulatory function. Series: "CARTA - Center for Academic Research and Training in Anthropogeny" [Science] [Show ID: 41300]

A fundamental question in biology is: how did humans acquire their unique characteristics? What allows us to stand upright, while our primate ancestors walked on all fours? What brain alterations drove our increased intelligence and allowed us to perceive our own mortality? One of the mechanisms that has been hypothesized to be involved is changes in gene expression elicited by nucleotide alterations in non-coding regions of the human genome. Miles Wilkinson, a professor in the Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology, and Reproductive Sciences at UC, San Diego, discusses a class of DNA sequences hypothesized to have this role. These human accelerated regions (HARs) are segments of DNA that exhibit 3 characteristics that—together—make them prime candidates for specifying human-specific traits by altering patterns of gene expression. First, HARs have rapidly changed in sequence specifically in the human lineage. Second, HARs are highly conserved in sequence, indicating they that must have been selected for the ability to confer one or more function in higher organisms. Third, the vast majority of HARs are in the non-coding portion of animal genomes, indicating that most are likely to have a regulatory function. Series: "CARTA - Center for Academic Research and Training in Anthropogeny" [Science] [Show ID: 41300]

A fundamental question in biology is: how did humans acquire their unique characteristics? What allows us to stand upright, while our primate ancestors walked on all fours? What brain alterations drove our increased intelligence and allowed us to perceive our own mortality? One of the mechanisms that has been hypothesized to be involved is changes in gene expression elicited by nucleotide alterations in non-coding regions of the human genome. Miles Wilkinson, a professor in the Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology, and Reproductive Sciences at UC, San Diego, discusses a class of DNA sequences hypothesized to have this role. These human accelerated regions (HARs) are segments of DNA that exhibit 3 characteristics that—together—make them prime candidates for specifying human-specific traits by altering patterns of gene expression. First, HARs have rapidly changed in sequence specifically in the human lineage. Second, HARs are highly conserved in sequence, indicating they that must have been selected for the ability to confer one or more function in higher organisms. Third, the vast majority of HARs are in the non-coding portion of animal genomes, indicating that most are likely to have a regulatory function. Series: "CARTA - Center for Academic Research and Training in Anthropogeny" [Science] [Show ID: 41300]

Our final component overview episode for Twilight's Fall! From here on out it's gonna get weirder and more specific so study up this week with Hunter and Blasto as they sit down again for another absolute barn burner of an overview. Every single Genome and Paradigm is spoken aloud into our microphones. I hope you have been following along with the Twilight's Fall episodes because going forward we're going to be changing how we cover this stuff and it's going to get more specific and complicated. This will all be on the test! The Old King's Crown Campaign page: The Old King's Crown Second Printing and New Songs of Home Expansion Music provided by Ben Prunty. Find more at benpruntymusic.com or benprunty.bandcamp.com Additional Music and Sounds by Brian Kupillas. https://wanderinglake.bandcamp.com/ Art by Sun Sanders  To learn more about our Discord, Patreon, Merch, and more, visit https://spacecatspeaceturtles.com/

Listen & subscribe on Apple, Spotify, YouTube.Welcome everyone to the weekly San Diego Tech News!I'm Neal Bloom from Rising Tide Partners.My co-host in this episode is Fred Grier, journalist and author of The Business of San Diego substack. He covers the ins-and-outs of the startup world including breaking news, IPOs, fundraising rounds, and M&A through his newsletter.Before we dive in, we wanted to thank and ask our listeners to help us grow the show, leave a review and share with one other person who should be more plugged in with the SD Tech Scene. Thank you for the support and for helping us build the San Diego Startup Community!3/12* Seasats visit debrief* BlueNalu tasting debrief* SD Angel Academy Debrief* $100 Genome by Element Bio* New fundings:* Candid Therapeutics reverse merger of $500M+* Spinogenix * Qureator* NuFund Ventures Closes Most Successful Year Since 2021* BAE Systems wins support contract for F-16* Carlsbad proposed for undersea hub for cables between US and AustraliaCurated Events List – For full list – check The Social CoyoteLongevity Innovation Forum 2026 March 11San Diego AgTech Gathering March 19March Mingle March 25SD AI x Bio March 26 This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit risingtidepartners.substack.com/subscribe

In this episode of the Epigenetics Podcast, we talked with Oliver Bell from the University of Southern California in Los Angeles about his work on chromatin-based regulatory systems that encode cellular memory and their implications for development and disease. The Interview starts with Dr. Bell describing his early career contributions to understanding the functionality of histone methylation in facilitating dosage compensation and gene silencing. His efforts at dissecting the complexities of epigenetic regulation culminate in significant discoveries that highlight the nuanced effects of chromatin adjustments on gene activity and stability across cell divisions. As we progress, Dr. Bell shares details about his postdoctoral research, where he engineered systems to study chromatin remodeling and the maintenance of transcriptional states through development. His innovative use of induced proximity to manipulate chromatin modifiers offers groundbreaking approaches to understanding how epigenetic states can be established and sustained, alongside the implications for therapeutic strategies in cancer treatment. An important aspect of our discussion centers on his identification of the ZFP462 protein, which plays a critical role in neurodevelopmental disorders. Dr. Bell outlines his lab's ongoing research into deciphering how this zinc finger protein interacts with enhancers to influence gene regulation in embryonic stem cells and its potential connection to specific diseases. This leads to an engaging dialogue about the relationship between 3D genome organization and epigenetic regulation, focusing on how disruptions in chromatin architecture may affect gene expression. Towards the end of our conversation, we touch upon the emerging potential of AI in epigenetic research, exploring how advances in technology could facilitate the screening of small molecules targeted at chromatin-modifying complexes. Dr. Bell offers a forward-looking perspective on the future applications of this research, revealing his aspirations for therapeutic developments based on his findings. References Bell, O., Wirbelauer, C., Hild, M., Scharf, A. N., Schwaiger, M., MacAlpine, D. M., Zilbermann, F., van Leeuwen, F., Bell, S. P., Imhof, A., Garza, D., Peters, A. H., & Schübeler, D. (2007). Localized H3K36 methylation states define histone H4K16 acetylation during transcriptional elongation in Drosophila. The EMBO journal, 26(24), 4974–4984. https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.emboj.7601926 Hathaway, N. A., Bell, O., Hodges, C., Miller, E. L., Neel, D. S., & Crabtree, G. R. (2012). Dynamics and memory of heterochromatin in living cells. Cell, 149(7), 1447–1460. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cell.2012.03.052 Moussa, H. F., Bsteh, D., Yelagandula, R., Pribitzer, C., Stecher, K., Bartalska, K., Michetti, L., Wang, J., Zepeda-Martinez, J. A., Elling, U., Stuckey, J. I., James, L. I., Frye, S. V., & Bell, O. (2019). Canonical PRC1 controls sequence-independent propagation of Polycomb-mediated gene silencing. Nature communications, 10(1), 1931. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-019-09628-6 Yelagandula, R., Stecher, K., Novatchkova, M. et al. ZFP462 safeguards neural lineage specification by targeting G9A/GLP-mediated heterochromatin to silence enhancers. Nat Cell Biol 25, 42–55 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41556-022-01051-2 Bsteh, D., Moussa, H.F., Michlits, G. et al. Loss of cohesin regulator PDS5A reveals repressive role of Polycomb loops. Nat Commun 14, 8160 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-023-43869-w Related Episodes Effects of DNA Methylation on Chromatin Structure and Transcription (Dirk Schübeler) Polycomb Proteins, Gene Regulation, and Genome Organization in Drosophila (Giacomo Cavalli) Transcription and Polycomb in Inheritance and Disease (Danny Reinberg) Contact Epigenetics Podcast on Mastodon Epigenetics Podcast on Bluesky Dr. Stefan Dillinger on LinkedIn Active Motif on LinkedIn Active Motif on Bluesky Email: podcast@activemotif.com

In this episode of the Epigenetics Podcast, we talked with Patrick Murphy from Cornell University about his work on gene regulation and cellular identity. Dr. Murphy's research focuses on the molecular mechanisms that govern gene expression through transcriptional and chromatin-based regulatory networks. At the start of the Interview Dr. Murphy describes an innovative single-molecule analytical approach he developed during his early research. This method enables the simultaneous detection of multiple epigenetic marks and contributes to his foundational studies on chromatin biology. Focusing on chromatin states, he introduces the concept of placeholder nucleosomes which are specialised nucleosomes that play key roles in maintaining a permissive chromatin state and facilitating gene activation during embryonic development. The discussion further explores Dr. Murphy's transition from studying Drosophila to working with zebrafish, highlighting his focus on chromatin reprogramming during zygotic genome activation. He presents data from his collaborations that reveal intriguing roles for specific chromatin marks, emphasising how these discoveries hold potential for understanding gene expression regulation in both zebrafish and mammalian models. Dr. Murphy also shares insights into a project investigating the impacts of paternal cigarette smoke on offspring health, which led to an exploration of systemic inflammation responses and their lasting effects on gene expression in the brain. This unique intersection of basic and translational research underlines the wide-ranging implications of his findings. References Murphy, P. J., Cipriany, B. R., Wallin, C. B., Ju, C. Y., Szeto, K., Hagarman, J. A., Benitez, J. J., Craighead, H. G., & Soloway, P. D. (2013). Single-molecule analysis of combinatorial epigenomic states in normal and tumor cells. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 110(19), 7772–7777. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1218495110 Murphy, P. J., Wu, S. F., James, C. R., Wike, C. L., & Cairns, B. R. (2018). Placeholder Nucleosomes Underlie Germline-to-Embryo DNA Methylation Reprogramming. Cell, 172(5), 993–1006.e13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cell.2018.01.022 Park, B. J., Hua, S., Casler, K. D., Cefaloni, E., Ayers, M. C., Lake, R. F., Murphy, K. E., Vertino, P. M., O'Connell, M. R., & Murphy, P. J. (2025). CUT&Tag overcomes biases of ChIP and establishes chromatin patterns for repetitive genomic loci. iScience, 28(11), 113757. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.isci.2025.113757 Related Episodes Pioneer Transcription Factors and Their Influence on Chromatin Structure (Ken Zaret) In Vivo Nucleosome Structure and Dynamics (Srinivas Ramachandran) Nucleosome Positioning in Cancer Diagnostics (Vladimir Teif) Contact Epigenetics Podcast on Mastodon Epigenetics Podcast on Bluesky Dr. Stefan Dillinger on LinkedIn Active Motif on LinkedIn Active Motif on Bluesky Email: podcast@activemotif.com

In this EUVC Live at GoWest episode, Olivier Tonneau, Founding Partner Quantonation, Jeppe Høier, Co-Host at EUVC Corporate, Paolo Pio, Co-founder and General Partner at Exceptional Ventures, Fergus Bell, Founder and Managing Partner at The Players Fund, and Prashant Agarwal, Chairman and Managing Director at Scandian xplore one defining question:How does Europe turn frontier innovation into global scale?Across quantum, corporate capital, longevity, and sport, the same pattern emerges: Europe doesn't lack talent or research. It lacks the capital and market architecture required to scale strategic industries fast enough to stay independent.Olivier opens with Europe's quantum paradox. Europe supplies a meaningful share of deployed quantum computers globally, with strong startup and research clusters across the Nordics, France, Germany, and the UK. The science is world-class — but the financing is breaking. Over the last 12 months, the funding ratio between Europe and the US has shifted from roughly 1:2 to nearly 1:7, accelerating US scale-up, public listings, and acquisition pressure. Europe has 12–24 months to respond — not to avoid failure, but to avoid becoming the lab while others become the market.Jeppe shifts the lens to corporates. Corporate venture capital represents roughly 25% of global VC volume, yet the average lifespan of a CVC unit is only 3.7 years. His argument is blunt: most corporates launch venture arms believing they are “doing VC,” when they are actually building a strategic instrument without the operating system required to sustain it. Without durable governance — and a clear Build, Buy, Partner model — corporate venture becomes fragile instead of strategic.Paolo reframes health and longevity as deep tech moving at software speed. Genome sequencing has collapsed from decades to hours. mRNA proved that biology timelines can compress dramatically. With AI now embedded in diagnostics and discovery, health is entering an exponential era — and venture is being pulled with it.The session closes with a thesis most investors still underestimate. Fergus and Prashant argue sport is no longer entertainment — it is venture infrastructure. Athletes and rights holders are becoming capital allocators and distribution rails. Elite sport has evolved into a real-world deployment environment for deep tech, health tech, AI, and performance systems — where validation happens under pressure and at global scale.The takeaway across all five perspectives is clear:Europe invents early.But scale requires architecture.Late-stage capital depth.Liquidity.Corporate integration.Coordination.What's covered:00:30 Europe's scale question — five lenses on one problem02:00 Quantum's paradox — Europe leads in science, not in financing05:00 The 1:7 funding gap — why the next 12–24 months matter07:00 What Europe can do — capital architecture, procurement, scale funds11:30 Corporate venture — 25% of global VC, but structurally fragile13:30 Why CVCs fail — the 3-year vs 6-year test and governance gaps16:30 Longevity as deep tech — health moving at software speed21:30 AI in health — diagnostics, discovery, and exponential biology27:30 Sport as venture infrastructure — athletes and rights holders as rails34:30 Deep tech in sport — validation, performance systems, adoption under pressure40:00 Final takeaway — Europe has innovation; it needs scale architecture

here ya go

Geneticist Adrian Woolfson shares his insights on designing life with artificial biological intelligence, the possibility of creating new species, and the responsibility that comes with rewriting the rules of evolution. Adrian Woolfson is the co-founder of Genyro, a California-based biotechnology company specialising in synthetic genome design and construction. Born in London, he studied medicine at Balliol College, Oxford, and was formerly the Charles and Katherine Darwin Research Fellow at Darwin College, Cambridge, working at the MRC Laboratory of Molecular Biology. He is the author of the critically acclaimed Life Without Genes: The History and Future of Genomes and An Intelligent Person's Guide to Genetics. He has authored over 160 scientific papers, book chapters, reviews, and patents, and is a regular contributor to the Wall Street Journal and Science magazine. Bonus episode recorded live from the World Governments Summit 2026 at the House of Impact on 03 February 2026. Full-Video Version: https://youtu.be/ejHgoD1Wt5I  ABOUT THE HOST Luke Robert Mason is a British-born futures theorist who is passionate about engaging the public with emerging scientific theories and technological developments. He hosts documentaries for Futurism, and has contributed to BBC Radio, BBC One, The Guardian, Discovery Channel, VICE Motherboard and Wired Magazine. CREDITS In Partnership with the Dubai Future Foundation Producer & Host: Luke Robert Mason Join the conversation on Facebook, Instagram, and Twitter at @FUTURESPodcast Follow Luke Robert Mason on Twitter at @LukeRobertMason Subscribe & Support the Podcast at http://futurespodcast.net

In this episode of the Epigenetics Podcast, we talked with Srinjan Basu from Imperial College London to talk about his work on how chromatin architecture and epigenetic mechanisms orchestrate developmental gene expression programs. We begin by exploring Dr. Basu's early work at Harvard which involved pioneering Raman-based label-free imaging, allowing the study of chromatin dynamics in live tissue. Here, he tackles technical challenges faced in visualizing DNA interactions, emphasizing the shift from 2D to 3D analysis and the importance of real-time observation of chromatin behavior under various conditions. This segues into his groundbreaking research on single transcription factors interacting with chromatin, revealing subtle but significant changes in the dynamics of gene regulation. We transition into the complexities of chromatin architecture as Dr. Basu recounts his efforts in mapping the entire mouse genome in single pluripotent cells, unearthing unexpected heterogeneity among cells. This heterogeneity raises intriguing questions about its impact on cellular function, prompting ongoing investigations into chromatin dynamics and the role of remodeling complexes like NuRD in cell fate transitions. Dr. Basu elucidates how recent studies have begun to bridge the gaps in understanding how transcription factors and chromatin dynamics interact during cellular decisions, particularly emphasizing the influence of mechanical signals and the intrinsic properties of cells. His research underscores the idea that stem cells undergo a preparatory phase for differentiation, highlighting the critical balance of intrinsic and extrinsic factors that govern genetic expression and cellular outcomes. We also talk about Dr. Basu's current research trajectory, focusing on enhancing imaging techniques to study gene dynamics in tissue contexts relevant to developmental biology and disease states. He illustrates a vision for future projects that integrate advanced imaging tools to investigate transcription factor dynamics and chromatin interactions in live cells and embryos, furthering the understanding of decision-making processes in cellular contexts. References Stevens TJ, Lando D, Basu S, et al. 3D structures of individual mammalian genomes studied by single-cell Hi-C. Nature. 2017 Apr;544(7648):59-64. DOI: 10.1038/nature21429. PMID: 28289288; PMCID: PMC5385134. Basu S, Needham LM, Lando D, et al. FRET-enhanced photostability allows improved single-molecule tracking of proteins and protein complexes in live mammalian cells. Nature Communications. 2018 Jun;9(1):2520. DOI: 10.1038/s41467-018-04486-0. PMID: 29955052; PMCID: PMC6023872. Related Episodes Advanced Optical Imaging in 3D Nuclear Organisation (Lothar Schermelleh) Analysis of 3D Chromatin Structure Using Super-Resolution Imaging (Alistair Boettiger) Single-Molecule Imaging of the Epigenome (Efrat Shema) Contact Epigenetics Podcast on Mastodon Epigenetics Podcast on Bluesky Dr. Stefan Dillinger on LinkedIn Active Motif on LinkedIn Active Motif on Bluesky Email: podcast@activemotif.com

Exposing Radical Candidates, Malpractice Verdicts, and Failing Electric BusesWelcome to another episode of the Last Gay Conservative podcast with your host, Chad Law! In this episode, Chad dives into a variety of pressing topics, from the failure of Vermont's electric bus fleet in cold weather to the rise of unelectable, dangerously radical candidates in early primaries. He also covers a landmark medical malpractice verdict in New York related to transgender surgery on a minor, highlighting how it's forcing changes in medical practices nationwide. Additionally, Chad discusses the backlash against 'white savior' activists in anti-ICE protests and the nonsense around climate alarmism impacting public policies. Tune in for Chad's satirical takes, along with serious discussions on how conservative values can still shape effective policies. Don't forget to text or call 866-LAST-GAY to share your thoughts after the show!00:00 Introduction and Show Overview00:33 Vermont's Electric Buses Fail in Winter00:46 Rise of Radical Candidates in Early Primaries01:01 Transgender Medical Malpractice Case01:49 Satirical Science Segment: mRNA Vaccine and Furry Gene03:02 Impact of mRNA Vaccine on Behavior06:40 Self-Test for mRNA Vaccine Side Effects08:25 Serious Discussion on Early Voting and Radical Candidates09:05 GOP's Struggle in State Primaries19:36 Malpractice Verdict in Transgender Surgery Case23:40 Medical Ethics and the Dangers of Rushed Decisions24:20 The Reality of Waiting and Psychological Support26:16 Legal and Ethical Implications of Medical Practices29:37 The Failure of Vermont's Electric Bus Fleet30:58 Historical Lessons on Energy Policy and Innovation39:41 The Pitfalls of Performance Activism44:59 Concluding Thoughts on Conservatism and Individual Freedom

How to Fix Boring Brand Podcasts If we're going to be perfectly honest, many branded podcasts are either boring or they sound just like a recycled commercial. To win the hearts and minds of your B2B target audience, you must move beyond generic corporate messaging and create high-quality content that addresses your listeners' needs. So how can brands produce engaging content that will resonate with their audiences, and what strategic role does B2B storytelling play?That's why we're talking to Jen Moss (Co-Founder and Chief Creative Officer, JAR Podcast Solutions), who shared her expertise and strategic insights on how to fix boring brand podcasts. During our conversation, Jen discussed the importance of creating engaging brand podcasts that build trust and loyalty. She explained why B2B podcasts should go beyond product promotion and focus on deeper stories and societal issues. Jen also highlighted the need for creative courage, proper planning, rigorous pre-production, and engagement with the audience. She advised against rushing into production without proper ideation and marketing budget. Jen also underscored the power of authentic B2B storytelling and cautioned against relying too heavily on AI for content creation. https://youtu.be/sVlsvotzFEE Topics discussed in episode: [02:22] The definition of a successful brand podcast: It shouldn’t just be a CEO talking about products, but rather a way to facilitate deeper conversations on industry issues.  [05:12] Why brands need “creative courage” to stand out in a saturated market, including experimenting with fiction or narrative formats.  [08:32] How to tell a good B2B story by focusing on “beats,” high stakes, and the transparent struggle rather than just the solution.  [17:28] The top pitfalls in podcasting: Failing to budget for marketing, ignoring audience analytics, and drop-off rates.  [29:25] A real-world example of how Genome BC used human storytelling to make complex scientific topics accessible and engaging.  [37:40] Why using AI purely for speed and volume is a mistake, and why the mission of podcasting should be connection, not efficiency. Companies and links mentioned: Jen Moss on LinkedIn  JAR Podcast Solution  Genome BC Bumper Ira Glass Cory Doctorow Nice Genes! Podcast Another Round Podcast Hot Ones Podcast Transcript Christian Klepp, Jen Moss Jen Moss  00:00 Podcasting, especially audio podcasting, I will say, is a sacred space between the ears. You are literally whispering in people’s ears if they don’t like what they’re hearing, if they start to feel like you’re shilling to them, they will yank out the earbuds and it’s game over for you. Christian Klepp  00:17 If we’re going to be perfectly honest, many brand podcasts are either boring or they just sound like a commercial. To win the hearts and minds of your target audience, you need to create content that serves your listeners and is something they actually want to hear. So how can you achieve that? And what role does B2B Marketing play in producing successful brand podcasts? Welcome to this episode of the B2B Marketers in the Mission podcast, and I’m your host, Christian Klepp, today I’ll be talking to Jen Moss, who will be answering that question. She is the Co-Founder and Chief Creative Officer of JAR Podcast Solutions, which helps create quality podcasts that earn trust. Tune in to find out more about what this B2B Marketers Mission is, okay, and I’m gonna say, Jen Moss, welcome to the show. Jen Moss  01:05 Thank you so much for having me. Christian Klepp  01:07 Great to have you on. We’ve had such a fantastic conversation before. I hit record. I probably should have recorded this earlier, but in any case, Jen Moss  01:14 Yes, if anyone needs any parenting tips, we got your back. Christian Klepp  01:18 Absolutely, absolutely that that book is coming out soon on Amazon. I’m just kidding, But Jen, really looking forward to this conversation, because, man, we are going to cover a topic which, you know, might rock the boat a little bit, but it’s all, you know, constructive, and you know, it’s all for the sake of growing in a positive way, right? Jen Moss  01:35 I think so, Christian Klepp  01:36 At least I like to think so. Jen Moss  01:38 That is the goal. Christian Klepp  01:39 Absolutely, absolutely, all right, so here it comes. So Jen, you’re on a mission to help brands craft story first, podcasts that earn trust, build loyalty and connect deeply with the audiences that matter most. So for today’s conversation, I’d like to zero in on the following topic. Here comes how to fix boring brand podcasts. I know we’ve got a ton to talk about, but let’s kick off this conversation with two questions, and I’m happy to repeat them. So what is it about brand podcasting that you wish more people understood? And number two is, where do most brand podcasts go wrong. Jen Moss  02:22 Okay, so those are both great questions, so that what is a branded podcast is probably a good place to start. A lot of people might think that it’s, you know, the CEO of a company talking about their products and services ad nauseam. And if you happen to want to buy those products and services, maybe you would listen to it, because you could get more information, like, kind of an informational, almost transactional thing. I think that’s what a lot of people imagine when they hear the words branded podcast. However, that there’s a lot more to branded podcasting than that, and a lot of the smarter sort of, I would say, savvy brands, the ones with kind of sophisticated marketing campaigns that are multifaceted, are looking at podcasting as a way to tell deeper stories, engage with conversations that are ongoing in society that really matter so, sort of a chance for the brand to show its stripes a little bit, and an opportunity to offer something to a target audience that is sort of like a kind of a gift. You know, like we’re going to give you something of value that you actually will benefit from or enjoy, learn something from, be emotionally moved by, you know, hear a good story, and it’ll be in an area that the brand cares about, that that kind of ticks the boxes in terms of, like, what are the brand’s values, but is not specifically, and this is very important, is not specifically related to the brand’s products and services, per se. So it’s more like, okay, the brand maybe exists in a certain wider industry, and there’s an issue in that industry that keeps coming up, or a new technology that’s affecting everything, something like that, something that needs to be talked about. And so they’ll, they’ll set out to kind of facilitate those kinds of conversations through their podcasts. And a branded podcast doesn’t need to be just a one on one interview. It could be, it could be a fiction podcast if you were feeling extra frisky and creative that day, you know, if you wanted to do something fun, like I had a conversation with a solar company not that long ago, and we actually pitched them a fiction podcast about a world powered by sun. And because we thought the opportunity for a solar panel company to sponsor a fiction podcast about a world powered by sun like sci-fi would be, would be exciting and different. Christian Klepp  05:11 How did that go? Jen Moss  05:12 Yeah, well, we didn’t end up getting that job because they didn’t have the creative courage to do it. And so this is, this is the kind of conversation that I’m always on with brands is like, have the creative courage to do something that’s a little out of the ordinary because there’s 500 million podcasts or whatever, so you’ve got to stand out. And so you’ve got to think about how to stand out, and one of the best ways to do that is to do something different that hasn’t been done before. For example, there is a great branded fiction podcast called Murder in HR, and it’s by an online HR platform company. And, you know, like, it’s just a scripted fiction true, true crime. It’s not really true because it’s scripted fiction podcast. But, you know, it’s kind of different and fun. So, so there’s stuff like that. There’s, you know what we would call narrative podcasting, which is a mixture of script and clip, where you’re kind of combining on scene recordings with interview tape, with narration, and kind of thoughtfully braiding all those things together, like an NPR (National Public Radio) storytelling experience or a CBC (Canadian Broadcasting Corporation) storytelling experience. So there’s all of that that can be part of branded podcasting, and so I just frankly think it’s kind of lazy when brands just decide that they’re going to talk about themselves indefinitely in a podcast. If I want to learn about a brand, I and buy something from them, I’ll go to their website. But if the brand wants to win hearts and minds and raise awareness and build trust and kind of operate on that deeper level to widen their impact. That’s where a podcast, and sponsoring a podcast, or getting behind the production of a podcast can really help. So that’s, I mean, I guess that kind of answers your second question, where do brands go wrong? And it’s usually with just doing the obvious, doing the thing that they think is the most direct route to a customer. And with podcasting, I try to remind people there is a difference between a customer and an audience. A customer is someone who already, at least wants to know more about your product and is thinking of buying maybe they’ve bought from you before. An audience may include those customers, but it may include other people as well who have a wider array of interests and are not yet, do not yet know that they need to buy a new pair of running shoes, but then the next time they need a new pair of running shoes, they may think of you because of that excellent podcast they listen to where you had all those celebrities on talking about the things that motivate them to push harder and go faster, right? So it’s just sort of, it’s a little bit of a roundabout way of winning customers by winning hearts and minds is how I would describe it. Christian Klepp  08:03 Yeah, winning hearts and minds. I like that. Now. That was a great way to open up this conversation. And thanks for sharing that I had two follow up questions for you. So let’s start with, you know, people loving to hear a good story, so let’s, let’s, let’s take a step back, because remember, the audience of this podcast. They’re mostly B2B Marketers. So from a B2B context, what would you how would you define what a good story is? Jen Moss  08:32 Yeah, that’s a great question. So I mean, a good story is told beat by beat, this happened, and then this happened, and then this happened. And here’s the lesson we took from it. Is one of the ways that it has been boiled down, I believe, by Ira Glass, you know, icon of podcasting. So I think you know thinking about even with B2B storytelling, if you’re telling a story that’s based in your industry, and you’re trying to position yourselves as thought leaders in that space. And let’s say you’re interviewing someone who is another company that sells a particular product, and you’re talking to them about a case study, instead of saying, like, what is the product and how does it work, try saying, tell us a story about a problem that someone was having. Start with the stakes, like, what would have happened if they didn’t solve that problem, what was at stake, then build to like how that problem got solved, and perhaps the product or service was involved, right, right? But build to how the problem was solved, so that there’s a bit of an arc from A to B to C to D, so that you start with a problem, work towards a solution. And and make sure to take the time to identify the stakes, like, what would have happened if it didn’t work. Where did it go wrong along the way? Where were the points where you thought, this is not going to work worse? We’re we’re hooped, you know, make sure that when you are telling stories, you’re actually telling the whole story, not just the win, not like we solved it this way, this way and this way. And aren’t we great? Nobody cares. That’s just bragging, and it comes across very badly in podcasting, podcasting, especially audio podcasting, I will say, is a sacred space between the ears. You are literally whispering in people’s ears. If they don’t like what they’re hearing, if they start to feel like you’re shilling to them, they will yank out the earbuds and it’s game over for you, right? They’ll go look at something else or go walk their dog, right? So you really have to just really focus in on the beat by beat. How are you going to hold attention throughout? You can also use sound design to support the tension arc of the story. And don’t be afraid to show the tough stuff, the hard stuff, the stuff that didn’t work, the stuff that even makes you look a bit foolish. We tried this as a brand. It didn’t work. We failed, but what we learned from that was this, right, if you can be a little bit transparent and a little bit more real, you will win hearts and minds, like I said, and if you want, if you can’t do that, people have a nose for BS, and they will smell it, and they will not take you as seriously. So it’s like a sacred duty to tell the truth, which is, which is challenging in a branded space where it’s all about spin and messaging and stuff like that. But the more you can do that, the more credible your content will be. Christian Klepp  11:56 Absolutely, absolutely. Yeah, on that topic, the ones I love the most, of the guys that say, like, you know, I, um, I lost my job and I moved to my parents basement, and now I’m making multiple six figures, all within the span of 12 months. Jen Moss  12:10 I mean, amazing, amazing. Not true, but also, at least they understand the tension arc. Christian Klepp  12:17 Yes, that’s certainly one way of looking at it, yeah, second follow up question. And I love this, like, creative courage, right? Jen Moss  12:28 Yeah. Christian Klepp  12:29 Not many people have it, if we’re going to be perfectly honest, right? Jen Moss  12:32 Yeah, I’m realizing that. I’m realizing that the older I get, the more I realize how rare it actually is creative courage. Yeah. Christian Klepp  12:40 Here’s the thing, like, Why do you think that that’s so prevalent, even in in the podcast space? Is it because it’s it because it’s it’s the unknown that people are worried about, like, what if it doesn’t work? Jen Moss  12:50 Yeah, if you think about podcasting, especially in a branded space, but really in any space, yeah, it’s a vulnerable act. You’re putting yourself out there, you’re putting your brand out there, you’re putting your stories out there, you’re putting your company out there. You’re putting, in some cases, your job on the line, right, by spending budget on this thing, right? So the so the stakes are real for the people involved, and it’s tricky, because striving for perfection right out of the gate is possibly a mistake. I think that podcasting has always been kind of an organic form where it evolves over time. You’ve got to study the audience data and see whether what you’re doing is actually resonating with your audience, and if it’s not, you’ve got to be prepared to pivot and change and adapt the storytelling, the timing, the pacing, the music, all of those things have to be a little bit up for grabs if the audience isn’t resonating. So I do think, I do think there’s that to consider, yeah. Christian Klepp  13:53 And I suppose people’s tastes very right, like, what people find is creative is very can be very subjective. Jen Moss  14:01 The creative bravery thing is tricky because of all the reasons I listed, but also because you’re right. It means different things to different people, like for a bank or some sort of finance institution or a pharma company in a very heavily regulated industry, to be like creatively brave in their storytelling is pretty difficult. It’s been, it’s been compared to putting up a tent in the rain, right? Trying to be creative in a corporate environment, putting up a tent in the rain with your spouse is one way to think about Christian Klepp  14:34 Putting up a tent in the rain with your spouse. And there’s a T-Rex sitting… Jen Moss  14:38 Graded by a bunch of Russian judges, yeah. Christian Klepp  14:42 Absolutely. Jen Moss  14:43 Yeah. It’s tricky, and so to maintain the principles of creativity within that environment is hard. So the principles of creativity include brainstorming, ideation, adaptation, experimentation, so trial and trial and error a little bit, and eventually, you through that process, that iterative process, you arrive at a really great finished work of art, hopefully. But those people who have not been through the creative process and trusted a bunch of you know flaky writers with their with their goals before, and I say that as a flaky writer, it’s it can be hard to trust the creative process if you’re not used to going through it. So if you are working in an industry where everything is about quarterly planning, everything is planned down to the minutia. List, list, list, bullet point, bullet point, bullet point, check, check, check, box. And then somebody’s coming in and saying, Well, what about if we explored this? And let’s discuss, Let’s hypothetically explore this topic. You know, there are personality types out there, and a lot of them are working in corporate jobs who are just like, No, I don’t know how to do that. I don’t trust it, and it totally freaks me out. So that kind of I would call it, like floating the creative balloon and batting it around for a while before you make a decision. Trying to create room for that process to happen before you launch your podcast is quite important, and giving proper space and time to that creative process is something that I think the more corporate and kind of button down podcasting becomes, the more I’m seeing that we have to fight that, because we have to be accountable with our timelines. We have to be accountable with our messaging. We have to be accountable with all this stuff. So that’s all very important. Brand safety matters. But if you don’t allow space for that creative ideation phase, and I would, I would argue, frankly, ongoing space within your process, then you will not rise the balloon as high as you could. You could probably still do something that is regularly released and has decent sound quality. So check, check, but is it going to win hearts and minds of audiences? Is it going to stand out 500 million other podcasts? No, it is not. Yeah. So that’s why it matters. Christian Klepp  17:17 Absolutely, absolutely. Moving on to key pitfalls to avoid. What are they and what should folks be doing instead? Jen Moss  17:28 I mean, there’s so there’s so many pitfalls. I don’t know where to start … Christian Klepp  17:32 Try to condense them into like, maybe, like the five, the top five that you’ve seen. Jen Moss  17:36 Well, let’s look at maybe, let’s look at the phases of doing a podcast, pre-production, production and post-production. So in pre-production, I think the big pitfalls are failing to allow time and space for creative ideation, rushing into it without proper consideration. I think failing to set aside budget to market your podcast can be a mistake, and I think budget for marketing is quite important because, well, we’ll get into that in post production, but one of the important ways for people to find podcasts is through ads on other podcasts, and that costs money. So there’s a little aspect of a pay to play nature that kind of creeps into podcasting. I think it’s important to be realistic about that. It’s not the only way to promote a podcast. There’s many good, organic ways, but if you can reserve some budget for marketing, I think it’s a good idea to do so. And yeah, I would say in pre-production, failure to think big and kind of have embraced blue sky thinking early on, what could this podcast be? Who is it for? Right? Those are very important questions. So at JAR, we have a system. We call the JAR system. It’s job, audience, result, and in pre production, that’s where we really focus on job and audience. What is the job of the podcast? Why are you doing it? Who is the audience? Who is it for? What do they need? Where do they hang out? Are they on audio platforms? Are they on video platforms? Are they YouTubers? Like, what you know? Who are you talking to, and why? Is very important. So job and audience, and then with production, once you get into that big phase. That’s where I think, I sort of say it’s like, point your skis and go, but also bend your knees, because things are going to come up and so, for example, I always recommend having three or four possible guests lined up to service an episode. Because if the first one that you’re going after falls through due to timing and unavailability in your production timeline, an amateur podcaster would just be like, well, that’s okay. I’ll wait till October, when you’re free, whereas I’m saying, no, no. So if you want to do a podcast on this topic, and it’s important to do it now because timeliness matters, then you need to have a couple of other options that are backup options for that guest if they’re unavailable, so things like that. So prepping backups to your backups for your guests is a really good idea so that you can keep your production moving forward and stay focused on the ideas that you’re you’ve determined to explore. So making a plan and then doing your best to stick to it, I think, but keeping your knees bent critically within that plan. Some people have said, Well, is it kind of like you write like a podcast Bible? And I’m like, No, it’s more of a pirate code, but you do need to have a code like there needs to be a plan going forward, but it can change. And then post production, I think the biggest thing is people fail to study their analytics, or fail to understand and interpret their analytics. So if you’re not looking at your audience data, then you’re not getting the most out of that those analytics platforms. So you should be looking at your Spotify data. You should be looking at your apple, podcast data, your YouTube data, the data from your hosting platform. At JAR, we use a company called Bumper. They’re a Canadian company that does a really nice job of pulling together a dashboard which shares a lot of valuable information about about how your podcast is performing. So you can actually see things like, Oh, I made a 30 minute podcast, but everyone’s dropping off at 21 minutes. I wonder why. So either make it really much more interesting at the 21 minute mark, or make a shorter podcast. That’s what the audience data is telling you, right? So being receptive and flexible, keeping your knees bent throughout is very important, and then using that data to feed back into the creative cycle, so that it becomes this circular process of testing and learning, studying the results, making changes, and you’re gradually honing your podcast into something that your audience really, really responds to. So that’s those are the pitfalls that we try to steer people through and around. Christian Klepp  22:08 That is a great list. And you probably, for those that are listening to the audio version of this, I was, I was nodding the whole time, but, um, one of the things that I would add in there, which I’ve seen happen, and it’s happened to me, and I’m not gonna say who it is, but like, you know, one of the things that they immediately did after having me as a guest on is they pushed me into a follow up call, which big surprise was a was a sales pitch. It’s like, Thank you for being on our show. By the way. Would you like to buy some advertising space in our magazine? Would you like to exhibit in our, you know, upcoming event. You know, for small business, you know, we only charge $10,000 you know, it’s not that much. It’s like, Jen Moss  22:47 For a lot of small businesses, that is a lot, right? Christian Klepp  22:50 Exactly. Jen Moss  22:50 It’s kind of like, to me, if you think of it like dating, you want to play a little bit cool, like, it’s great. You can think of a podcast as a networking tool, absolutely, but it’s you have to just not be like Johnny obvious about it, like, maybe, maybe wait a few months and then reach out and say, Hey, we’re having a special promotion, and we’re you people who have been on our show get a reduced rate or something like that. Sure. Christian Klepp  23:19 Yeah, exactly. Jen Moss  23:20 Or just trust the universe. You could also try that, which would be, I had a great you like you and I had a great connection on this podcast. We chat very well. We even talked before the recording about parenting. So, like, we kind of click. So like, if there were ever anything that we could help each other with, I’m sure we would at least be somewhat amenable to it, and maybe that’s enough. Maybe that’s enough, right? Christian Klepp  23:45 Yeah, probably, probably. Jen Moss  23:46 Yeah. So I think yes, it’s an opportunity to network, but it is also in the same way that yeah, between people’s ears is a sacred space. Also when someone comes on your show as an unpaid guest, which most podcasts? I think it’s worth pointing out that most podcast guests are unpaid, so they’re doing that out of the sort of the free desire of exchange of ideas, right? And so respecting that in and of itself is very important. And this is why podcasting has risen to such heights is because it is really grounded in that kind of authentic communication, where people are really trying to figure stuff out together, that’s it, and it’s wonderful, and it’s amazing. And so you got to respect that. You got to let that be enough sometimes Christian Klepp  24:36 Absolutely, absolutely, wow. So you’ve kind of touched on this already, but in our previous conversation, you mentioned that in podcasting, and this does this is not unique to just the B2B space alone, but like in podcasting in general, the story comes first, not the product or the promo. So please elaborate on that. Jen Moss  24:58 No one is going to listen a 30 minute ad, right? It’s just not gonna happen. As soon as they detect the fact that you’re selling, they’re gone. If you want to have some follow up product information in your show notes, or, you know, I wouldn’t necessarily recommend that, but you could, I suppose, or on your website, great. But the purpose of a podcast is not necessarily that sort of bottom of funnel sales. The purpose of a podcast is, is, it’s a top of funnel engagement opportunity, right? So you’re really, you’re you can build trust, you can build awareness, you can reach new people, and the way you do that is by being relevant and authentic and telling good stories in a way that holds attention. So my own background is from, you know, years of working in radio, documentary storytelling and things like that, I really learned how every, every piece of the story matters. You really have to break down the story arc. Like I said. You got to examine the stakes. You got to think about pacing. All of these things are critical and a funny thing too that I’ve learned I also teach creative writing, and one of the things that one of the lessons that I share with my students, is that the more specific you are in your storytelling, the more it will resonate universally. So through the specific example comes the universal ‘aha' moment. Whereas if you go in with a bunch of like, I’m like, I’m doing right now, if you go in with a bunch of principles, like, here’s what you got to do, and here’s, here’s the rules, and you should follow these rules, 10 Steps to heaven. Kind of, kind of formulas that might work in a, in a sort of, like a bullet point list on the internet, but in podcasting, that doesn’t really work. It’s, it’s more of a, it’s more of a like, I mean, they say the devil is in the details, but I actually think so are the angels like you really like, if I were to tell you a story about a time I worked with a client, let me think of a real example, Like, okay, Genome, BC (Bristish Columbia) is a client of ours. They are a non-profit here in British Columbia in Canada, and they are dedicated to promoting Genomic Science, and specifically they’re promoting the ability of Genomic Science to solve big problems that the world is facing, okay, like global warming type level problems, right? So that’s great. So how do we tell that story? How do we tell that specifically, we could have a bunch of egg heads on to talk about their research, and we do, we have, it’s a science podcast. We have lots of eggheads, and they’re great, you know, but we have to balance that with like people who are impacted by the issues that the science is trying to address. So we did a piece recently about an episode about genetic testing for, you know, heart problems and things like that, and how we with the study of the human genome, we know with the study of the human genome, we now know so much more about about how to spot those problems almost before they happen, because of your genetic predisposition to certain problems. So we told that story by finding a high schooler who had had a heart attack because of a genetic problem that he didn’t know about. And we told that story beat by beat. I was on the field. This happened. My parents got a call. We talked to his parents, we interviewed everybody. They all told the story about the time the son had the heart attack. They all told it separately in their own way, and we intercut it into this really tense, like, you know, exciting, really piece of storytelling. Then we brought on the scientists to talk about the power of genomic testing and genetic testing and genetic awareness around these health issues, but we first establish why it matters, and it matters because it affects people’s lives. So if you’re doing storytelling and you can connect your ideas to something that’s real, then you’re going to you kind of, you win, you win the storytelling day. Christian Klepp  29:27 Oh, that’s an that’s an excellent example. And, and I hear you, the easier path would have been to just invite the scientists on, or whoever it was, and they go on and talk about all of their research, and Jen Moss  29:39 Which is amazing stuff. But I don’t know if you’ve interviewed any scientists. Lately. They can be a little dry, they can be a little dense and hard to listen to. Christian Klepp  29:47 I’ve interviewed I’m associate professors. Does that count? Jen Moss  29:52 Yeah, it does. Yeah. People get very granular, right when they’re studying a very specific interest, like that, and that’s what makes them so incredible at their jobs, and I have huge respect for these scientists and and for our host, who is a scientist, credibility also matters with with your core target audience. So it’s not like we de emphasize the science, we just frame the science with important storytelling that helps the wider audience understand why this matters. So if you think about your core target audience, and then you think about people who are just adjacent to that, what would it take those people, the ones who are kind of peering over the fence at your brand, you know, or at your topic? So we say that that particular show for Genome BC, it’s for scientists and for the science curious sort of thing. And so we try to remember the science curious folk when we’re doing our storytelling. It doesn’t mean that we dumb it down. It means that we open our arms and we try to write it in a way that’s inclusive to a slightly wider audience, while still delivering excellent, groundbreaking, scientific insight that is timely and relevant. It’s a hard line to walk. Actually. Christian Klepp  31:07 It is. Jen Moss  31:07 It takes a lot of skill and it takes a lot of attention, but if you get it right, you know that show, that show, is winning every award we enter. Christian Klepp  31:17 Wow, yeah, remind me what the name of the show was again. Jen Moss  31:20 Oh, it’s called Nice Genes, like G-E-N-E-S yes, yeah. And then they have a short form one called Genes Shorts. Christian Klepp  31:27 Genes shorts, okay? Because why not? All right, Jen Moss  31:30 Because why not. Trying to have a little fun. So what’s gonna stand out? Right? We thought, you know, Nice Genes!, exclamation mark. That’ll stand out. Christian Klepp  31:38 Yeah, absolutely, absolutely, Jen, you’ve given us plenty of insights already and some actionable tips, but just imagine that there’s somebody out there that’s listening to the show and they’re like, gosh, you know what we are exactly in this situation right now. What advice would you give them? Like, maybe, like, three to five things they can take action on right now that they can help launch a podcast that is not boring and that doesn’t sound like PR (Public Relations). Jen Moss  32:06 So probably the best thing you could do is do a little bit of like light competitive research. So have a look at what other podcasts are in your space, in your topic area, right? And check out this. This is going to sound mean, but check out what’s wrong with them. Like, actually go and listen to as many of them as you can. Maybe give yourself a week to do that and make make a point of listening to five a day for a week. And then you’ll start to see, okay, the vast majority of these, they don’t have good sound quality, like the host doesn’t have a proper microphone. Or the vast majority of these, the lighting is terrible, or the vast majority of these, they’re asking the same questions over and over again, and, oh, I saw that guest on three different podcasts, right? So if that’s happening, then ask yourself the next logical question, which is, how can we be different? How can we find our own kind of quadrant to step into? How can we rewrite the book here and do something unexpected that still meets our values, that still targets the right audience, but does it in a way that is going to just shake things up a little bit and challenge people’s expectations of us and and our own expectations of ourselves. So don’t take the lowest hanging fruit, at least until you’ve considered some of the other options. And it may be that you’re like, No, I actually really want to do a straight interview podcast, because I really want to have deep conversations with people like this, like this podcast does, and that’s great, but then you know, like you’ve chosen that for a reason, like you’ve you’ve given it due consideration. And then within that, even within a if you’re planning to do a straight ahead interview podcast, is there’s no shame in that. But even thinking about, like, what would make your interview podcast different? So it’s the it. Could you describe it at a cocktail party as, like, it’s the one where they blank, blank, blank, right? Could you describe it in one sentence, and is it going to be memorable that sentence? There was a show I used to watch years ago and listen to where, what was it called? It was called Another Round, and it was one of the first shows where they would drink and podcast, but they would do a ton of Political Research, these two journalists, and then they would interview someone, while getting increasingly sloshed, the guest and the two hosts, and they would get increasingly sloshed, and the questions would become more and more but, I mean, they were very successful. They had, they were on WNYC. They had Hillary Clinton on when she was running for president. So, like, it this, this is the kind of thing I’m saying. Like, I’m not saying everyone should drink in podcasts. Us. No, let’s be clear. That’s not my message. Yeah, my message is, what makes your podcast, what makes you distinct in the way you’re delivering your podcast? What is your framing device? What is the lens that you’re bringing to it? Christian Klepp  35:12 Yeah, right, yeah. No, no, I hear you. I hear you. Jen Moss  35:15 Yeah. So I think those would be my biggest pieces of advice. Is just to spend the time trying to, trying to position yourself differently. Christian Klepp  35:25 No, fantastic, fantastic. It reminds me of, I think the show was called in the Hot Seat, and it was by a cyber security firm, and they were, they were bringing in somebody that was, and I didn’t actually realize there was such a role, but this is the person that’s actually responsible for negotiating with cyber criminals. Jen Moss  35:45 Whoa, that’s I’m immediately interested. Christian Klepp  35:48 That’s a pretty intense job, right? So, yeah, when they have all that ransomware and what have you right? So this is the guy that negotiates like, release all our release all our data, right? So anyways, the host asks him the questions, and with every question, they’re basically eating chicken wings with a different type of hot sauce. Jen Moss  36:10 Oh, yeah, yeah. Christian Klepp  36:11 And the more intense question, yeah, Jen Moss  36:14 Hot ones, yeah, yeah, yeah. Christian Klepp  36:15 The more intense the question gets, the hotter the sauce becomes. Jen Moss  36:19 Yes. That’s a great show. It’s they have all kinds of interesting people on it, and it’s interesting to watch people’s reactions shift as they get more and more overwhelmed by heat. Yeah. So that’s another super example of a framing device. I mean, arguably, that one’s a bit of a gimmick. Christian Klepp  36:36 Sure. Jen Moss  36:37 You don’t necessarily need to do something that obvious. It might be something like, on this show, we always ask a certain question, or we’re always trying to get at sort of, I would call it like, the the underlying idea of this show is we’re always trying to expose this concept, like, maybe you’re trying to prove that work life balance is important, and that’s your overarching goal, and that’s the lens that you bring to your to your all of your conversations that you have. So every time you’re able to, you bring up that theme in some way and explore it with a new guest. So just whatever it is, whatever the lens is, or the device that you’re framing with, it’s just important to be intentional about that? Christian Klepp  37:21 Yeah, absolutely, absolutely. All right, Jen, I have a feeling that you’ve been on your soapbox this whole time, but please just stay up there a while longer, while I ask you this question. All right, and a status quo in your area of expertise that you passionately disagree with and why? Jen Moss  37:40 Okay, well, right now there’s, am I allowed to mention the AI (Artificial Intelligence) please? Christian Klepp  37:49 Absolutely. Jen Moss  37:49 Okay. Well, right now there’s a lot of discussion around AI driven content, and one of the ways that it’s being sort of sold to people in the industry is that it will allow you to put out more content quicker. And I can see lots of advantages to AI in the production pipeline. For example, it can be helpful with research if you’re as long as you double fact check it. It can be helpful with correcting certain things in editing. You know, if a host mispronounces a word, or you need to do like, you need to remove some background noise. AI tools can be really, really helpful. So I’m not knocking ai i i teach it. For example, I teach creative writing for new media, and I’m very interested. I’m currently building an AI VR (Virtual Reality) poetry machine with some students. So, you know, I spent a lot of time thinking about AI, and I like it and hate it. It’s a double edged sword. But what I don’t agree with is that we should be measuring the efficacy of a tool based on how fast and how often it allows us to put out content. I just don’t think that an onslaught of mediocre content is what people want. I think it’s killing the internet. Corey Doctorow would say he would call it the in shittification of the internet. And it is already, it is already happening, right? He got check it out. He’s got a book out. Christian Klepp  39:22 Okay. Jen Moss  39:22 And so that’s, you know, that’s what I worry about, is that it’s becoming like a big content hose. And so then I actually believe that the way forward, in order to actually have your message heard and received by your intended audience is to really hold on to that authenticity piece. I would rather see people do things less often, but do them better and remember that quality matters. And if we can’t remember that, then the internet is just going to be a bunch of bots talking to each other, and it’s just stupid. I just think it’s stupid. So that’s the that’s, that’s, if you know, not to put too fine a point on it, podcasting is, is not about efficiency. It’s about communication. It’s about connection. It’s about contact. It’s about humans talking to humans. And if it’s, if you fail to recognize that it’s sort of at your peril, you know, Christian Klepp  40:23 Absolutely, absolutely. And I mean, it goes back to the point you were making at the beginning of this conversation. I mean, if you want to create a show that stands out and that’s different, right, then you probably shouldn’t be churning out vanilla content, right? Using AI. Jen Moss  40:39 Doesn’t work. Christian Klepp  40:39 That’s not the way to do it, right? Jen Moss  40:41 Go ahead, but no one will listen to it. So you’ll be able to be like, Look, I I tick, tick, tick. I put out this many episodes, or this many social media clips, or whatever it is. But what’s what are your consumption rates like? Are the right? Are the right people finding your content? Are they engaging with you? Is it moving the needle for you in terms of your goals, the job of the podcast? Like these are all the things that people really need to consider before they sort of hop on the AI bus, I think. And again, I’m not a Luddite, yeah. I use AI daily despite its rather terrifying environmental impact, yeah, yeah, but it’s become almost a ubiquitous tool that’s difficult to avoid in our line of work. But I do think that some people are really taking it too far, and it’s because they’re misunderstood. They’re misunderstanding the mission. The mission is not volume and efficiency. The mission is connection. Christian Klepp  41:41 Absolutely, absolutely Jen, wow. What a conversation. Well, at the very least this episode is not boring, right? Jen Moss  41:50 Like, I mean, I don’t know, ask my ask my 20 something daughter. Christian Klepp  41:58 Different strokes are different folks, I’m gonna say, but thank thank you so much for coming on and for sharing your expertise and experience with the listeners. So please, a quick introduction to yourself and how folks out there can get in touch. Jen Moss  42:09 with you. Oh, so the best way to get in touch with me would probably be through the JAR podcasts website, jarpodcasts.com and I’m also just Jen@jarpodcasts.com. Christian Klepp  42:22 Fantastic, fantastic. Once again. Jen Moss, thank you for your time. Take care, stay safe and talk to you soon. Jen Moss  42:29 Awesome. Thank you. Okay. Christian Klepp  42:30 Bye, for now. Jen Moss  42:31 Bye.

This week we're looking at government plans to start sequencing the DNA of every newborn baby in England within the next decade. Each newborn would undergo whole genome sequencing to assess their risk of hundreds of diseases, under NHS plans.It promises a revolution in spotting disease early - but are there also risks?And use of nicotine pouches is rising, especially among young men. But these little sachets that fit under the top lip aren't yet regulated – so what do we know about the potential harms? Finally, as the cold weather continues, James gets a lesson in walking like a penguin to see if it helps avoid trips, slips and falls… Presenter: James Gallagher Producers: Tom Bonnett, Alice-Lipscombe-Southwell and Thomas Hunt Production coordinator: Stuart Laws Content editor: Ilan Goodman

In this episode of the Epigenetics Podcast, we talked with Peggy Farnham from the Keck School of Medicine at USC about her work on establishing the ChIP Method in mammalian cells. In this episode, we dive into the relationship between transcription factors, chromatin dynamics, and gene expression with Professor Peggy Farnham from the Keck School of Medicine at USC. Professor Farnham shares her profound insights into how her groundbreaking research has reshaped our understanding of gene regulation and its implications in cancer. We explore how she has been a pioneer in mapping the genome-wide landscape of regulatory proteins, illuminating the molecular logic behind transcriptional control and its disruption in cancer biology. The interview starts with her instrumental role in adapting chromatin immunoprecipitation (ChIP) technology from yeast to human cells. Professor Farnham reflects on the technical challenges she faced during this transition, such as the quest for visibility of signals in mammalian systems. Her ability to innovate and troubleshoot challenges led to significant advancements in techniques that allow for the rapid identification of transcription factor binding sites, fundamentally changing the landscape of epigenetic research. As the discussion progresses, we learn about Professor Farnham's active involvement in the ENCODE project, where she contributed to high-resolution mapping of transcription factors and regulatory elements in human cells. She articulates her appreciation for collaborative efforts in science, highlighting how working within a consortium harnesses the collective expertise of diverse research groups. This collaboration not only bolstered the credibility of the data produced but also propelled the field forward in understanding the complexity of gene regulation. Through her participation in various projects, such as the Psyc-ENCODE consortium and the Roadmap Epigenome Mapping Consortium, Professor Farnham shares insights into her investigation of epigenetic variations, particularly in relation to complex disorders like schizophrenia. Her findings underscore the nuances of enhancer variability among individuals and the implications for understanding disease mechanisms, thereby advancing our knowledge of genetic regulation and its contributions to diverse biological outcomes. Moreover, the episode highlights Professor Farnham's reflective understanding of emerging technologies in the field. She discusses the evolution of methods that allow researchers to investigate gene regulation at single-cell resolution, recognizing the significant implications these innovations have for our comprehension of cellular differentiation and the transcriptional landscape. References Weinmann AS, Bartley SM, Zhang T, Zhang MQ, Farnham PJ. Use of chromatin immunoprecipitation to clone novel E2F target promoters. Molecular and Cellular Biology. 2001 Oct;21(20):6820-6832. DOI: 10.1128/mcb.21.20.6820-6832.2001. PMID: 11564866; PMCID: PMC99859. Wells J, Farnham PJ. Characterizing transcription factor binding sites using formaldehyde crosslinking and immunoprecipitation. Methods (San Diego, Calif.). 2002 Jan;26(1):48-56. DOI: 10.1016/s1046-2023(02)00007-5. PMID: 12054904. Rhie SK, Schreiner S, Witt H, et al. Using 3D epigenomic maps of primary olfactory neuronal cells from living individuals to understand gene regulation. Science Advances. 2018 Dec;4(12):eaav8550. DOI: 10.1126/sciadv.aav8550. PMID: 30555922; PMCID: PMC6292713. Tak YG, Hung Y, Yao L, et al. Effects on the transcriptome upon deletion of a distal element cannot be predicted by the size of the H3K27Ac peak in human cells. Nucleic Acids Research. 2016 May;44(9):4123-4133. DOI: 10.1093/nar/gkv1530. PMID: 26743005; PMCID: PMC4872074. Related Episodes The Effect of lncRNAs on Chromatin and Gene Regulation (John Rinn) CpG Islands, DNA Methylation, and Disease (Sir Adrian Bird) The Future of Protein–DNA Mapping (Mitch Guttman) MLL Proteins in Mixed-Lineage Leukemia (Yali Dou) Contact Epigenetics Podcast on Mastodon Epigenetics Podcast on Bluesky Dr. Stefan Dillinger on LinkedIn Active Motif on LinkedIn Active Motif on Bluesky Email: podcast@activemotif.com

Has Modern Technology Killed Evolution?  Modern advancements allow us to live in extreme environments and survive conditions that would've once  been fatal. Do these technological leaps mean our species has finally bypassed the ancient laws of biological evolution? Our expert explains how our unique development might actually be working in harmony with these environmental pressures rather than against them.Guest: Steve Reilly, PhD, assistant professor of genetics, Yale School of Medicine The Schizophrenia Spectrum: Early Warning Signs And Vague Symptoms  While Hollywood often portrays schizophrenia in its most extreme form, the actual progression of the disorder is much different than what we see on screen. This week, our expert explains why these symptoms are frequently misdiagnosed, how they can affect anyone under the right neurological conditions, and why identifying early warning signs is the most effective way to change the long-term outlook for patients.Guest: Dr. Christopher Correll, professor of psychiatry, Zucker School of Medicine, chief medical officer, MedLin Medical Notes: How Cancer Hijacks Our Internal Clock, The Dangers Of Dirt, And Is Alcohol Ever Good For You?  How cancer hijacks our internal clock. Why we should be wary of dirt. Science may have found a cure for nightmares. Is alcohol ever good for you? Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

Has Modern Technology Killed Evolution?  Modern advancements allow us to live in extreme environments and survive conditions that would've once  been fatal. Do these technological leaps mean our species has finally bypassed the ancient laws of biological evolution? Our expert explains how our unique development might actually be working in harmony with these environmental pressures rather than against them.Guests: Steve Reilly, PhD, assistant professor of genetics, Yale School of MedicineHost: Elizabeth WestfieldProducer: Kristen Farrah Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

In this episode of Longevity by Design, host Dr. Gil Blander sits down with Dr. Wei-Wu, Executive Chairman at Human Longevity, Inc. Together, they explore how advances in genome sequencing, AI, and multi-layered diagnostics are changing the fight against age-related diseases. Wei-Wu shares why understanding your own genetic risks and combining them with other health data leads to better prevention and a longer healthspan.Wei-Wu explains the value of integrating genome sequencing, advanced imaging, and liquid biopsy to catch diseases like cancer early, before symptoms appear. He draws on real-world examples, including how combining different tests can spot cancers that single methods might miss. The conversation highlights how technology brings down costs, making once-rare insights widely available, and how each person stands to benefit from personalized risk profiles.The episode closes with practical advice: use today's tools to become the CEO of your own health. Wei-Wu urges listeners to embrace data-driven, individualized care and stresses that no single tool or habit holds all the answers. Instead, true longevity comes from a holistic, ongoing approach, one that uses all available knowledge to prevent disease and extend both life and health.Guest-at-a-Glance

FOLLOW RICHARD Website: https://www.strangeplanet.ca YouTube: @strangeplanetradio Instagram: @richardsyrettstrangeplanet TikTok: @therealstrangeplanet EP. #1289 THE GENOME GRAB: How Government, Big Tech & Big Medicine Are Claiming Your Child's DNA Tonight on Strange Planet, we expose a quiet revolution unfolding in American medicine — one that could redefine parenthood, privacy, and human identity itself. The U.S. government, backed by Big Medicine, Big Tech, and Big Data, is laying the groundwork for mass newborn genome sequencing: decoding nearly every letter of a child's DNA at birth and storing it indefinitely. Attorney and child-welfare advocate Leah Wilson joins me to reveal how this program works, who profits, and why parents may soon lose control over their children's biological destiny. This isn't science fiction. It's happening now — and the stakes couldn't be higher. GUEST: Leah Wilson, JD, is an attorney, child-welfare advocate, and co-founder of Stand for Health Freedom, the organization currently suing the CDC in a landmark challenge to federal vaccination policy. She is one of America's most fearless voices exposing how genomic data is harvested, stored, and weaponized under the banners of “precision medicine” and “public health.” Wilson is also co-author of Reclaim Vitality, written with her husband, Dr. Nick Wilson, revealing how families can exit the machinery of conventional medicine. Her work uncovers a chilling reality: a global genetic arms race is already underway — and our children are on the front lines. WEBSITE: https://askdrwilson.libsyn.com BOOK: Reclaim Vitality: A Guide to Exit Conventional Medicine and Live Naturally SUPPORT OUR SPONSORS!!! FOUND – Smarter banking for your business Take back control of your business today. Open a Found account for FREE at Found dot com. That's F-O-U-N-D dot com. Found is a financial technology company, not a bank. Banking services are provided by Lead Bank, Member FDIC. Join the hundreds of thousands who've already streamlined their finances with Found. HIMS - Making Healthy and Happy Easy to Achieve Sexual Health, Hair Loss, Mental Health, Weight Management START YOUR FREE ONLINE VISIT TODAY - ⁠HIMS dot com slash STRANGE⁠ ⁠https://www.HIMS.com/strange⁠ MINT MOBILE Premium Wireless - $15 per month. No Stores. No Salespeople. JUST SAVINGS Ready to say yes to saying no? Make the switch at MINT MOBILE dot com slash STRANGEPLANET. That's MINT MOBILE dot com slash STRANGEPLANET BECOME A PREMIUM SUBSCRIBER!!!⁠ ⁠https://strangeplanet.supportingcast.fm⁠ Three monthly subscriptions to choose from. Commercial Free Listening, Bonus Episodes and a Subscription to my monthly newsletter, InnerSanctum. Visit ⁠https://strangeplanet.supportingcast.fm⁠ Use the discount code "Planet" to receive $5 OFF off any subscription. We and our partners use cookies to personalize your experience, to show you ads based on your interests, and for measurement and analytics purposes. By using our website and services, you agree to our use of cookies as described in our Cookie Policy. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit ⁠megaphone.fm/adchoices Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://strangeplanet.supportingcast.fm/

Dr. Jason Vassy, is a primary care physician at the VA Boston Healthcare System. He leads the Genomes to Veterans Research Program, which focuses on bringing genomic tools into everyday Veteran care. His goal is help VA use genetic information in order to improve Veterans health, he emphasizes, “How can we use a Veteran's genetic makeup to help improve their healthcare?” he clarifies that while not all conditions require genetic testing, “in the areas where we know doctors should be using genetic testing… how do we make it easier for them?” This work shows how VA is staying ahead when it comes to health and technology.In Dr. Vassy's VA study on pharmacogenetics for depression, he found that Veterans who received DNA-guided medication choices fared better, stating, “Patients that got that kind of testing were more likely to have a medication that was a better match for their DNA and had lower rates of depressive symptoms.” His team also used data from the Million Veteran Program (MVP) to identify Veterans with a genetic form of extremely high cholesterol, noting, “We reached back out… and got them connected to clinical genetic testing, increased surveillance, and treatment.” These actions helped Veterans and their families reduce their risk of early heart disease.In addition, Vassy leads the nationwide PROGRESS Study, which uses genetic risk to guide prostate cancer screening for men ages 55 to 70. Vetertans can enroll online and submit a saliva kit from home. “Prostate cancer is the most common cancer in men,” Vassy said, and genetic guidance may allow VA to detect dangerous cancers earlier while reducing harm from over-screening. He also stresses that VA protects genetic information with the strictest safeguards: “These data are password-protected, encrypted… only people with a right to access it can do so.”Looking ahead, Vassy believes genomic medicine will increasingly shape preventive care as technology advances and costs fall. He encourages Veterans to start by knowing their family history and talking with their providers about potential genetic risks, noting, “Genetics is just another tool in the toolbox for how to manage a concern you bring to your provider.” Veterans can explore opportunities to participate in ongoing research and learn more about genomic testing throughout VA's national programs.Resourceshttps://www.genomes2people.org/research/genomes2veterans/https://www.research.va.gov/mvp/https://www.progress-study.org/https://www.va.gov/washington-dc-health-care/programs/pharmacogenomics/https://www.va.gov/southern-nevada-health-care/stories/pharmacogenomics-and-how-the-va-is-improving-the-efficacy-of-medicine-through-dna/ https://www.research.va.gov/services/amp/precision_oncology.cfm 

My guest is Michael Snyder, PhD, professor of genetics at Stanford and an expert in understanding why people respond differently to various foods, supplements, behavioral and prescription interventions. We discuss how to optimize your health and lifespan according to what type of glucose responder you are, which genes you express, your lifestyle and other factors. Dr. Snyder also explains the key ages when you need to be particularly mindful about following certain health practices. We also discuss how people respond in opposite ways to different fiber types. This episode ought to be of interest and use to anyone seeking to understand their unique biological needs and how to go about meeting those needs. Sponsors AGZ by AG1: https://drinkag1.com/huberman Wealthfront*: https://wealthfront.com/huberman David: https://davidprotein.com/huberman Eight Sleep: https://eightsleep.com/huberman Function: https://functionhealth.com/huberman *This experience may not be representative of the experience of other clients of Wealthfront, and there is no guarantee that all clients will have similar experiences. Cash Account is offered by Wealthfront Brokerage LLC, Member FINRA/SIPC. The Annual Percentage Yield (“APY”) on cash deposits as of December 27,‬ 2024, is representative, subject to change, and requires no minimum. Funds in the Cash Account are swept to partner banks where they earn the variable‭ APY. Promo terms and FDIC coverage conditions apply. Same-day withdrawal or instant payment transfers may be limited by destination institutions, daily transaction caps, and by participating entities such as Wells Fargo, the RTP® Network, and FedNow® Service. New Cash Account deposits are subject to a 2-4 day holding period before becoming available for transfer. Timestamps 00:00 Michael Snyder 03:33 Healthy Glucose Range, Continuous Glucose Monitors CGM, Hemoglobin A1c 09:02 Individual Variability & Food Choice, Glucose Spikes & Sleepiness 12:18 Sponsors: AGZ by AG1 & Wealthfront 15:16 Glucose Spikes, Tools: Post-Meal Brisk Walk; Soleus “Push-Ups”; Exercise Snacks 21:06 Glucose Dysregulation, Diabetes & Sub-Phenotypes, Tool: Larger Morning Meal 28:34 Exercise Timing, Muscle Insulin Resistance 30:49 Diabetes Subtyping, Weight, Glucose Control; Incretins 35:41 GLP-1 Agonists, Diabetes, Tool: Muscle Maintenance & Resistance Training 38:40 Metformin, Berberine, Headaches 41:01 GLP-1 Agonists, Cognition, Longevity, Tool: Habits Support Medication; Cycling 47:41 Subcutaneous vs Visceral Fat, Organ Stress 49:10 Sponsors: David & Eight Sleep 51:58 Meal Timing & Sleep, Tools: Post-Dinner Walk, Routines, Bedtime Consistency 57:16 Microbiome, Immune System & Gut; Diet & Individual Variability 1:02:52 Fiber Types, Cholesterol & Glucose, Polyphenols 1:09:50 Food As Medicine; Fiber, Microbiome & Individual Variability; Probiotics 1:18:48 Sponsor: Function 1:20:35 Profiling Healthy Individuals, Genomes, Wearables 1:26:31 Whole-Body MRIs, Nodules, Healthy Baseline, Early Diagnosis 1:34:07 Sensors, CGM, Sleep, Heart Rate Variability HRV, Tools: Mindset Effects, Increase REM 1:39:30 HRV, Sleep, Exercise, Tool: Long Exhales; Next-Day Excitement & Sleep 1:42:48 Organ Aging, “Ageotypes”; Biological Age vs Chronological Age 1:49:41 Longevity, Health Span, Genetics, Blue Zones 1:52:19 Epigenetics, Viral Infection & Disease 1:58:54 ALS, Heritability; Neuroprotection, Nicotine 2:03:47 Air Quality, Allergies, DEET & Pesticides, Inflammation, Mold; Microplastics 2:15:02 Single-Drop Blood Test & Biomarkers, Wearables, Observational Trials 2:20:33 Acupuncture, Blood Pressure 2:26:40 Immersive Events & Mental Health Benefits 2:34:59 Data, Nutrition & Lifestyle; Siloed Health Care vs Personalized Medicine 2:43:06 Zero-Cost Support, YouTube, Spotify & Apple Follow & Reviews, Sponsors, YouTube Feedback, Social Media, Neural Network Newsletter Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices