Podcasts about Human services

Michelle Hale, Preparedness Program Director with the Office of Preparedness and Response at the Utah Department of Health and Human Services, shares what her state learned about responding to critical public health challenges amid a surge of wildfires in the state; Catherine Murphy, Senior Analyst of Government Affairs at ASTHO, discusses the federal health policy update she authored on notable legislative priorities for the end of the year; ASTHO's PH-HERO Workforce Resource Center provides resources to address moral injury, burnout, resilience, and retention for public health agency leaders and team members; and ASTHO's Legislative Alerts will ensure you don't miss any legislative or policy movements that affect public health.  ASTHO Web Page: Public Health Preparedness ASTHO Health Policy Update: Health Legislative Priorities for the Remainder of 2025 ASTHO Web Page: PH-HERO Workforce Resource Center ASTHO Web Page: Legislative Alerts  

Dr. Ralph Ford, chancellor of Penn State Behrend, talks with Dr. Ala Stanford, a pediatric surgeon and Alumni Fellow, about her work with the Black Doctors COVID-19 Consortium and the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, where she served as a regional director. 

Benjamin Zarn v. Minn. Dept. of Human Services

The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services appears to be quietly considering Palantir to support its yearslong efforts to build a national provider directory for health care providers and patients across the country. Federal spending records show Palantir to be one of four recipients to receive awards from the Department of Health and Human Services and CMS containing the phrase “national provider directory” and “proof of concept.” The four separate contracts, made public Sept. 30, award $1 to each company and are set to expire Nov. 13. Two sources familiar with the efforts told FedScoop these contracts are for a prototype product with CMS. One source confirmed the prototype is for the agency's national provider directory, an effort the agency has been exploring for years. CMS has suggested the directory could serve as a centralized data hub for health care provider and facility information nationwide. The move marks the latest sign of civilian agencies' growing interest in Palantir, which offers extensive data integration and analytics capabilities. The Department of Energy is requesting proposals for the buildout and maintenance of AI data centers and energy generation infrastructure in and around Oak Ridge National Laboratory. In an RFP published last week, the national lab's site and environmental management offices said they are seeking proposals from entities interested in entering into long-term leases in Oak Ridge, Tenn. The work on those DOE sites would include “designing, financing, permitting, developing, constructing, installing, owning, maintaining, operating, and decommissioning AI data center and/or energy generation infrastructure,” per the posting. For those sites, Oak Ridge is specifically seeking construction of data center facilities with specialized computing equipment, cooling facilities, infrastructure for energy supply, transmission and storage, and other related equipment and facilities. The DOE said entities responding to the RFP could be private-sector companies with experience in the development and operation of AI data centers, advanced computing facilities or energy storage. The Daily Scoop Podcast is available every Monday-Friday afternoon. If you want to hear more of the latest from Washington, subscribe to The Daily Scoop Podcast  on Apple Podcasts, Soundcloud, Spotify and YouTube.

Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., the Secretary of Health and Human Services, clearly does not like SSRIs (selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors), the most popular form of antidepressant on the market. They're used by millions of Americans on a daily basis. He has tried to tie SSRIs to school shooters despite a lack of evidence to that effect. He has suggested that it's harder to go off SSRIs than it is to quit heroin. It's not. Molly Olmstead, a reporter for Slate who has been covering this story closely, says that this does not mean that the government is about to try to ban SSRIs and leave patients without the medicines that may be keeping them alive. But she explains that yes, we are in the midst of a very active anti-SSRI PR campaign by Kennedy and his supporters in the so-called Make America Healthy Again movement and that campaign could presage a much more aggressive set of actions.Thank you to all our listeners who support the show as monthly members of Maximum Fun.Check out our I'm Glad You're Here and Depresh Mode merchandise at the brand new merch website MaxFunStore.com!Hey, remember, you're part of Depresh Mode and we want to hear what you want to hear about. What guests and issues would you like to have covered in a future episode? Write us at depreshmode@maximumfun.org.Depresh Mode is on BlueSky, Instagram, Substack, and you can join our Preshies Facebook group. Help is available right away.The National Suicide Prevention Lifeline: 988 or 1-800-273-8255, 1-800-273-TALKCrisis Text Line: Text HOME to 741741.International suicide hotline numbers available here: https://www.opencounseling.com/suicide-hotlines 

In this episode, Michael sits down with Kym to talk about how businesses can not only survive but thrive with artificial intelligence. After her company lost 80% of its revenue due to executive orders, Kym led a bold pivot into AI. She shares how her team automated workflows, cut costs, and freed up resources to launch new ventures. Michael points out why this kind of hands-on experience sets her apart in guiding other organizations through AI transformation. Why Strategy Matters Did you know that 95% of AI implementations fail? Michael and Kym dig into the reasons why. Too many organizations jump in without understanding their current systems, creating more chaos instead of solutions. The two stress the importance of starting with an AI audit—identifying inefficiencies and revenue leaks—before ever choosing a tool. AI and Organizational Insight Michael and Kym highlight the gap between executive views and front-line experiences. By listening to employees who work closest to the systems, leaders can uncover real bottlenecks and opportunities. They argue that AI should enhance processes, not replace people, and that smart adaptation to current economic conditions matters more than long-term guesswork. Addressing Employee Concerns Kym addresses the fear of AI taking jobs. Instead, she frames AI as a companion—augmenting employees' abilities and giving them space for creativity and productivity. Michael adds that when used wisely, AI helps businesses find new growth opportunities and sharpen their focus. Both stress the importance of thoughtful planning, privacy safeguards, and data responsibility. Technology's Broader Impact The conversation also explores how innovations like predictive analytics are already woven into everyday life, from mortgages to personalized ads. Michael emphasizes using technology to increase efficiency and create meaningful work, while also recognizing the ongoing debates around privacy and data use. Skills That Transfer Kym also shares how her background in nursing shaped her approach to consulting, underscoring the power of transferable skills. She encourages listeners to examine their own roles, projects, and metrics for growth opportunities. Michael closes by highlighting Kym's expertise and her commitment to helping businesses and communities adapt to an AI-driven world. About Kym Ali Kym Ali is an award-winning Registered Nurse, dynamic speaker, and CEO of Kym Ali Consulting, a boutique firm specializing in leadership development, workplace wellness, coaching, and AI-driven solutions for modern leaders. With more than 20 years of nursing experience — including five years abroad helping launch Qatar's first Women's and Children's Hospital — Kym brings a rare global perspective to building healthy, high-performing organizations. Her expertise has been trusted by federal agencies, Fortune 500 companies, and global institutions like the Department of Health and Human Services, Pfizer, Stanford University, and Meta, where she has consistently earned client satisfaction ratings above 96 percent. Recognized as a 2024 Enterprising Woman of the Year, recipient of a Maryland Governor Citation, and ranked among the Top 25 Speakers of 2023, Kym blends proven leadership strategies with AI innovation and wellness practices to help leaders prevent burnout, navigate uncertainty, and inspire engaged, motivated teams. LinkedIn - https://www.linkedin.com/in/leadershiptransformer/  

About 158,000 Minnesotans are looking for new options for Medicare now that the local company UCare is dropping their Medicare Advantage plan. The insurance company isn't the only one to no longer offer Medicare Advantage— it's not as financially beneficial as it once was. Enrollment opened last week, and this shift is causing people to scramble for new affordable options for medical insurance. Kelli Jo Greiner is a health care policy analyst for the Minnesota Board on Aging and the Minnesota Department of Human Services. She joined Minnesota Now host Nina Moini to explain coverage options.

Ralph welcomes Professor Roddey Reid to break down his book “Confronting Political Intimidation and Public Bullying: A Handbook for the Trump Era and Beyond.” Then, we are joined by the original Nader's Raider, Professor Robert Fellmeth, who enlightens us on how online anonymity and Artificial Intelligence are harming children.Roddey Reid is Professor Emeritus at the University of California, San Diego where he taught classes on modern cultures and societies in the US, France, and Japan. Since 2008 he has researched and published on trauma, daily life, and political intimidation in the US and Europe. He is a member of Indivisible.org San Francisco, and he hosts the blog UnSafe Thoughts on the fluidity of politics in dangerous times. He is also the author of Confronting Political Intimidation and Public Bullying: A Handbook for the Trump Era and Beyond.I think we still have trouble acknowledging what's actually happening. Particularly our established institutions that are supposed to protect us and safeguard us—many of their leaders are struggling with the sheer verbal and physical violence that's been unfurling in front of our very eyes. Many people are exhausted by it all. And it's transformed our daily life to the point that I think one of the goals is (quite clearly) to disenfranchise people such that they don't want to go out and participate in civic life.Roddey ReidWhat's broken down is…a collective response, organized group response. Now, in the absence of that, this is where No King's Day and other activities come to the fore. They're trying to restore collective action. They're trying to restore the public realm as a place for politics, dignity, safety, and shared purpose. And that's been lost. And so this is where the activists and civically engaged citizens and residents come in. They're having to supplement or even replace what these institutions traditionally have been understood to do. It's exhilarating, but it's also a sad moment.Roddey ReidRobert Fellmeth worked as a Nader's Raider from 1968 to 1973 in the early days of the consumer movement. He went on to become the Price Professor of Public Interest Law at the University of San Diego (where he taught for 47 years until his retirement early this year) and he founded their Children's Advocacy Institute in 1983. Since then, the Institute has sponsored 100 statutes and 35 appellate cases involving child rights, and today it has offices in Sacramento and DC. He is also the co-author of the leading law textbook Child Rights and Remedies.I think an easy remedy—it doesn't solve the problem totally—but simply require the AI to identify itself when it's being used. I mean, to me, that's something that should always be the case. You have a right to know. Again, free speech extends not only to the speaker, but also to the audience. The audience has a right to look at the information, to look at the speech, and to judge something about it, to be able to evaluate it. That's part of free speech.Robert FellmethNews 10/17/25* In Gaza, the Trump administration claims to have brokered a ceasefire. However, this peace – predicated on an exchange of prisoners – is extremely fragile. On Tuesday, Palestinians attempting to return to their homes were fired upon by Israeli soldiers. Defense Minister Israel Katz claimed those shot were “terrorists” whose attempts to “approach and cross [the Yellow Line] were thwarted.” Al Jazeera quotes Lorenzo Kamel, a professor of international history at Italy's University of Turin, who calls the ceasefire a “facade” and that the “structural violence will remain there precisely as it was – and perhaps even worse.” We can only hope that peace prevails and the Palestinians in Gaza are able to return to their land. Whatever is left of it.* Despite this ceasefire, Trump was denied in his bid for a Nobel Peace Prize. The prize instead went to right-wing Venezuelan dissident María Corina Machado. Democracy Now! reports Machado ran against Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro in 2023, but was “barred from running after the government accused her of corruption and cited her support for U.S. sanctions against Venezuela.” If elected Machado has promised to privatize Venezuela's state oil industry and move Venezuela's Embassy in Israel from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem, and in 2020, her party, Vente Venezuela, “signed a pact formalizing strategic ties with Israel's Likud party led by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.” Machado has also showered praise on right-wing Latin American leaders like Javier Milei of Argentina and following her victory, praised Trump's “decisive support,” even telling Fox News that Trump “deserves” the prize for his anti-Maduro campaign, per the Nation.* Machado's prize comes within the context of Trump's escalating attacks on Venezuela. In addition to a fifth deadly strike on a Venezuelan boat, which killed six, the New York Times reports Trump has ordered his envoy to the country Richard Grenell to cease all diplomatic outreach to Venezuela, including talks with President Maduro. According to this report, “Trump has grown frustrated with…Maduro's failure to accede to American demands to give up power voluntarily and the continued insistence by Venezuelan officials that they have no part in drug trafficking.” Grenell had been trying to strike a deal with the Bolivarian Republic to “avoid a larger conflict and give American companies access to Venezuelan oil,” but these efforts were obviously undercut by the attacks on the boats – which Democrats contend are illegal under U.S. and international law – as well as Secretary of State Marco Rubio labeling Maduro a “fugitive from American justice,” and placing a $50 million bounty on his head. With this situation escalating rapidly, many now fear direct U.S. military deployment into Venezuela.* Meanwhile, Trump has already deployed National Guard troops to terrorize immigrants in Chicago. The Chicago Sun-Times reports Pope Leo XIV, the first American Pope and a Chicago native, met with Chicago union leaders in Rome last week and urged them to take action to protect immigrants in the city. Defending poor immigrants is rapidly becoming a top priority for the Catholic Church. Pope Leo has urged American bishops to “speak with one voice” on the issue and this story related that “El Paso bishop Mark Seitz brought Leo letters from desperate immigrant families.” Chicago Cardinal Blase Cupich, also at the meeting with Leo and the union leaders, said that the Pope “wants us to make sure, as bishops, that we speak out on behalf of the undocumented or anybody who's vulnerable to preserve their dignity…We all have to remember that we all share a common dignity as human beings.”* David Ellison, the newly-minted CEO of Paramount, is ploughing ahead with a planned expansion of his media empire. His next target: Warner Bros. Discovery. According to the Hollywood Reporter, Ellison already pitched a deal to WB CEO David Zaslav, but the $20 per share offer was rejected. However, Ellison is likely to offer a new deal “possibly…backed by his father Larry Ellison or a third party like Apollo [Global Management].” There is also talk that he could go directly to the WBD shareholders if the corporate leadership proves unresponsive. If Ellison is intent on this acquisition, he will need to move fast. Zaslav is planning to split the company into a “studios and HBO business,” and a Discovery business, which would include CNN. Ellison is clearly interested in acquiring CNN to help shape newsroom perspectives, as his recent appointment of Bari Weiss as “editor-in-chief” of CBS News demonstrates, so this split would make an acquisition far less of an attractive prospect. We will be watching this space.* In another Ellison-related media story, Newsweek reports Barron Trump, President Trump's 19-year-old son, is being eyed for a board seat at the newly reorganized Tik-Tok. According to this story, “Trump's former social media manager Jack Advent proposed the role at the social media giant, as it comes into U.S. ownership, arguing that the younger Trump's appointment could broaden TikTok's appeal among young users.” Barron is currently enrolled in New York University's Stern School of Business and serves as an “ambassador” for World Liberty Financial, the “Trump family's crypto venture.” TikTok U.S., formerly owned and operated by the Chinese company ByteDance, is being taken over by a “consortium of American investors [including Larry Ellison's] Oracle and investment firm Silver Lake Partners,” among others.* As the government shutdown drags on, the Trump administration is taking the opportunity to further gut the federal government, seeming to specifically target the offices protecting the most vulnerable. According to NPR, “all staff in the [Department of Education] Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services (OSERS), with the exception of a handful of top officials and support staff, were cut,” in a reduction-in-force or RIF order issued Friday. One employee is quoted saying “This is decimating the office responsible for safeguarding the rights of infants, toddlers, children and youth with disabilities.” Per this report, OSERS is “responsible for roughly $15 billion in special education funding and for making sure states provide special education services to the nation's 7.5 million children with disabilities.” Just why exactly the administration is seeking to undercut federal support for disabled children is unclear. Over at the Department of Health and Human Services, headed by Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., HHS sent out an RIF to “approximately 1,760 employees last Friday — instead of the intended 982,” as a “result of data discrepancies and processing errors,” NOTUS reports. The agency admitted the error in a court filing in response to a suit brought by the employees' unions. Even still, the cuts are staggering and include 596 employees at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and 125 at the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, to name just a few. This report notes that other agencies, including the Departments of Justice, Treasury and Homeland Security all sent out inaccurately high RIFs as well.* The Lever reports Boeing, the troubled airline manufacturer, is fighting a new Federal Aviation Administration rule demanding additional inspections for older 737 series planes after regulators discovered cracks in their fuselages. The rule “would revise the inspection standards…through a regulatory action called an ‘airworthiness directive.'...akin to a product recall if inspectors find a defective piece of equipment on the plane…in [this case] cracks along the body of the plane's main cabin.” The lobbying group Airlines for America is seeking to weaken the rule by arguing that the maintenance checks would be too “costly” for the airline industry, who would ultimately have to bear the financial brunt of these inspections. Boeing is fighting them too because such a rule would make airlines less likely to buy Boeing's decaying airplanes. As this report notes, Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy – who oversees the FAA – “previously worked as an airline lobbyist…[and] Airlines for America recently selected the former Republican Governor of New Hampshire, Chris Sununu to be their chief executive officer.”* In more consumer-related news, Consumer Reports has been conducting a series of studies on lead levels in various consumer products. Most recently, a survey of protein powders and shakes found “troubling levels of toxic heavy metals,” in many of the most popular brands. They write, “For more than two-thirds of the products we analyzed, a single serving contained more lead than CR's food safety experts say is safe to consume in a day—some by more than 10 times.” Some of these products have massively increased in heavy metal content just over the last several years. CR reports “Naked Nutrition's Vegan Mass Gainer powder, the product with the highest lead levels, had nearly twice as much lead per serving as the worst product we analyzed in 2010.” The experts quoted in this piece advise against daily use of these products, instead limiting them to just once per week.* Finally, in a new piece in Rolling Stone, David Sirota and Jared Jacang Maher lay out how conservatives are waging new legal campaigns to strip away the last remaining fig leaves of campaign finance regulation – and what states are doing to fight back. One angle of attack is a lawsuit targeting the restrictions on coordination between parties and individual campaigns, with House Republicans arguing that, “because parties pool money from many contributors, that ‘significantly dilutes the potential for any particular donor to exercise a corrupting influence over any particular candidate' who ultimately benefits from their cash.” Another angle is a lawsuit brought by P.G. Sittenfeld, the former Democratic mayor of Cincinnati – who has already been pardoned by Trump for accepting bribes – but is seeking to establish that “pay-to-play culture is now so pervasive that it should no longer be considered prosecutable.” However, the authors do throw out one ray of hope from an unlikely source: Montana. The authors write, “Thirteen years after the Supreme Court gutted the state's century-old anti-corruption law, Montana luminaries of both parties are now spearheading a ballot initiative circumventing Citizens United jurisprudence and instead focusing on changing state incorporation laws that the high court rarely meddles with.The measure's proponents note that Citizens United is predicated on state laws giving corporations the same powers as actual human beings, including the power to spend on politics. But they point out that in past eras, state laws granted corporations more limited powers — and states never relinquished their authority to redefine what corporations can and cannot do. The Montana initiative proposes to simply use that authority to change the law — in this case, to no longer grant corporations the power to spend on elections.” Who knows if this initiative will move forward in Montana, but it does provide states a blueprint for combatting the pernicious influence of Citizens United. States should and must act on it.This has been Francesco DeSantis, with In Case You Haven't Heard. Get full access to Ralph Nader Radio Hour at www.ralphnaderradiohour.com/subscribe

Dr. Tevi Troy, former Deputy Secretary of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Senior Fellow and at the Ronald Reagan Institute, and best-selling presidential historian, on the peace deal in the Gaza war between the State of Israel and the terrorist group Hamas, the growing powers of the presidency in the 21st Century, last night’s New York City mayoral debate, and more!See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

On previous episodes of Plain Talk, North Dakota Insurance Commisisoner Jon Godfread and Chris Jones, the former head of the state Department of Health and Human Services who is just wrapping up a stint as an adviser in President Donald Trump's administration, argued that health care pricing is opaque. They said that lack of transparency contributes to spiraling health care costs, and thus the rising cost of health insurance. Godfread, specifically, pointed to research his office has done in North Dakota -- he's called it a "secret shopper" study -- showing wide disparities in pricing for routine procedures between the state's hospitals. In some cases, the price difference is as much as 600%. For his part, Jones said that spiral prices for care, driving spiral prices for insurance, are bringing us "precipitously close to having a significant issue with access to health care." What do the people who charge those prices have to say about it? Tim Blasl, the president of the North Dakota Hospital Association, said that while care providers do make prices available, that's usually not what those providers actually charge. "Typically we don't collect those charges," he said on this episode of Plain Talk. "I would say 90 to 93% of our payments that we receive, whether it's from the federal government and CMS, or state Medicaid, or commercial, those have been sort of predetermined already. So even though we have a charge, we are not collecting what we charge." "We do have to establish a charge," he continued, "but, again, if you have insurance in this country, you are not paying what that charge is. You're paying that negotiated rate that's been determined between the payer and the provider." As for the secret shoppers? Blasl wondered if some of the differences could be the different ways hospitals calculate prices. A single procedure could require care from different groups within a hospital -- anesthesiology, radiation, etc. -- and when some hospitals provide a quote, they might be including prices for the entire bundle of care that procedure requires or just one part of it. During the legislative session earlier this year, Rep. Jared Hendrix, a Republican from Fargo, introduced House Bill 1594, which would have implemented new state-level requirements for price transparency from hospitals. Why did Blasl's organization oppose it? Because it was duplicative. "The state wanted to make it a requirement, you know back in the last session, and we felt that was just another layer, because it mirrored what the federal government was doing," Blasl said. "If you look at what that bill required hospitals to do, it's the same thing as what CMS requires us to do today," he continued. "We just felt like it's a federal requirement now, why should we be spending state dollars to monitor it on the state level when the feds do it already?" he added. If you want to participate in Plain Talk, just give us a call or text at 701-587-3141. It's super easy — leave your message, tell us your name and where you're from, and we might feature it on an upcoming episode. To subscribe to Plain Talk, search for the show wherever you get your podcasts or use one of the links below. Apple Podcasts | Spotify | YouTube | Pocket Casts | Episode Archive

On previous episodes of Plain Talk, North Dakota Insurance Commisisoner Jon Godfread and Chris Jones, the former head of the state Department of Health and Human Services who is just wrapping up a stint as an adviser in President Donald Trump's administration, argued that health care pricing is opaque. They said that lack of transparency contributes to spiraling health care costs, and thus the rising cost of health insurance. Godfread, specifically, pointed to research his office has done in North Dakota -- he's called it a "secret shopper" study -- showing wide disparities in pricing for routine procedures between the state's hospitals. In some cases, the price difference is as much as 600%. For his part, Jones said that spiral prices for care, driving spiral prices for insurance, are bringing us "precipitously close to having a significant issue with access to health care." What do the people who charge those prices have to say about it? Tim Blasl, the president of the North Dakota Hospital Association, said that while care providers do make prices available, that's usually not what those providers actually charge. "Typically we don't collect those charges," he said on this episode of Plain Talk. "I would say 90 to 93% of our payments that we receive, whether it's from the federal government and CMS, or state Medicaid, or commercial, those have been sort of predetermined already. So even though we have a charge, we are not collecting what we charge." "We do have to establish a charge," he continued, "but, again, if you have insurance in this country, you are not paying what that charge is. You're paying that negotiated rate that's been determined between the payer and the provider." As for the secret shoppers? Blasl wondered if some of the differences could be the different ways hospitals calculate prices. A single procedure could require care from different groups within a hospital -- anesthesiology, radiation, etc. -- and when some hospitals provide a quote, they might be including prices for the entire bundle of care that procedure requires or just one part of it. During the legislative session earlier this year, Rep. Jared Hendrix, a Republican from Fargo, introduced House Bill 1594, which would have implemented new state-level requirements for price transparency from hospitals. Why did Blasl's organization oppose it? Because it was duplicative. "The state wanted to make it a requirement, you know back in the last session, and we felt that was just another layer, because it mirrored what the federal government was doing," Blasl said. "If you look at what that bill required hospitals to do, it's the same thing as what CMS requires us to do today," he continued. "We just felt like it's a federal requirement now, why should we be spending state dollars to monitor it on the state level when the feds do it already?" he added. If you want to participate in Plain Talk, just give us a call or text at 701-587-3141. It's super easy — leave your message, tell us your name and where you're from, and we might feature it on an upcoming episode. To subscribe to Plain Talk, search for the show wherever you get your podcasts or use one of the links below. Apple Podcasts | Spotify | YouTube | Pocket Casts | Episode Archive

Politico releases an article exposing leaked out-of-context messages between members of the Young Republican National Federation. Cheryl Hines, the wife of HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., goes on “The View” and defends the MAHA movement and RFK Jr.'s credibility after Sunny Hostin calls him the “least qualified Health and Human Services secretary that we have had in history.” The teens who jumped ex-DOGE staffer “Big Balls” avoid jail time and receive a shockingly light sentence. Newly revealed documents show that Oregon is spending more money on health care for illegal aliens than it is on its own state police.   ► Subscribe to “Sara Gonzales Unfiltered”! https://www.youtube.com/@SaraGonzalesUnfiltered?sub_confirmation=1    Today's Sponsors:   ► Birch Gold Text SARA to 989898 to claim your eligibility and get your free info kit.   ► Fatty15 Get an additional 15% off on their 90-day subscription Starter Kit by going to https://www.fatty15.com/SARA and using code SARA at checkout.   ► PreBorn  Donate securely at https://www.preborn.com/sara or dial #250, keyword “BABY.” Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

An avalanche of information besets us on what to eat. It comes from the news, from influencers of every ilk, from scientists, from government, and of course from the food companies. Super foods? Ultra-processed foods? How does one find a source of trust and make intelligent choices for both us as individuals and for the society as a whole. A new book helps in this quest, a book entitled Food Intelligence: the Science of How Food Both Nourishes and Harms Us. It is written by two highly credible and thoughtful people who join us today.Julia Belluz is a journalist and a contributing opinion writer for the New York Times. She reports on medicine, nutrition, and public health. She's been a Knight Science Journalism Fellow at MIT and holds a master's in science degree from the London School of Economics and Political Science. Dr. Kevin Hall trained as a physicist as best known for pioneering work on nutrition, including research he did as senior investigator and section chief at the National Institutes of Health. His work is highly regarded. He's won awards from the NIH, from the American Society of Nutrition, the Obesity Society and the American Physiological Society. Interview Transcript Thank you both very much for being with us. And not only for being with us, but writing such an interesting book. I was really eager to read it and there's a lot in there that people don't usually come across in their normal journeys through the nutrition world. So, Julia, start off if you wouldn't mind telling us what the impetus was for you and Kevin to do this book with everything else that's out there. Yes, so there's just, I think, an absolute avalanche of information as you say about nutrition and people making claims about how to optimize diet and how best to lose or manage weight. And I think what we both felt was missing from that conversation was a real examination of how do we know what we know and kind of foundational ideas in this space. You hear a lot about how to boost or speed up your metabolism, but people don't know what metabolism is anyway. You hear a lot about how you need to maximize your protein, but what is protein doing in the body and where did that idea come from? And so, we were trying to really pair back. And I think this is where Kevin's physics training was so wonderful. We were trying to look at like what are these fundamental laws and truths. Things that we know about food and nutrition and how it works in us, and what can we tell people about them. And as we kind of went through that journey it very quickly ended up in an argument about the food environment, which I know we're going to get to. We will. It's really interesting. This idea of how do we know what we know is really fascinating because when you go out there, people kind of tell us what we know. Or at least what they think what we know. But very few people go through that journey of how did we get there. And so people can decide on their own is this a credible form of knowledge that I'm being told to pursue. So Kevin, what do you mean by food intelligence? Coming from a completely different background in physics where even as we learn about the fundamental laws of physics, it's always in this historical context about how we know what we know and what were the kind of key experiments along the way. And even with that sort of background, I had almost no idea about what happened to food once we ate it inside our bodies. I only got into this field by a happenstance series of events, which is probably too long to talk about this podcast. But to get people to have an appreciation from the basic science about what is going on inside our bodies when we eat. What is food made out of? As best as we can understand at this current time, how does our body deal with. Our food and with that sort of basic knowledge about how we know what we know. How to not be fooled by these various sound bites that we'll hear from social media influencers telling you that everything that you knew about nutrition is wrong. And they've been hiding this one secret from you that's been keeping you sick for so long to basically be able to see through those kinds of claims and have a bedrock of knowledge upon which to kind of evaluate those things. That's what we mean by food intelligence. It makes sense. Now, I'm assuming that food intelligence is sort of psychological and biological at the same time, isn't it? Because that there's what you're being told and how do you process that information and make wise choices. But there's also an intelligence the body has and how to deal with the food that it's receiving. And that can get fooled too by different things that are coming at it from different types of foods and stuff. We'll get to that in a minute, but it's a very interesting concept you have, and wouldn't it be great if we could all make intelligent choices? Julia, you mentioned the food environment. How would you describe the modern food environment and how does it shape the choices we make? It's almost embarrassing to have this question coming from you because so much of our understanding and thinking about this idea came from you. So, thank you for your work. I feel like you should be answering this question. But I think one of the big aha moments I had in the book research was talking to a neuroscientist, who said the problem in and of itself isn't like the brownies and the pizza and the chips. It's the ubiquity of them. It's that they're most of what's available, along with other less nutritious ultra-processed foods. They're the most accessible. They're the cheapest. They're kind of heavily marketed. They're in our face and the stuff that we really ought to be eating more of, we all know we ought to be eating more of, the fruits and vegetables, fresh or frozen. The legumes, whole grains. They're the least available. They're the hardest to come by. They're the least accessible. They're the most expensive. And so that I think kind of sums up what it means to live in the modern food environment. The deck is stacked against most of us. The least healthy options are the ones that we're inundated by. And to kind of navigate that, you need a lot of resources, wherewithal, a lot of thought, a lot of time. And I think that's kind of where we came out thinking about it. But if anyone is interested in knowing more, they need to read your book Food Fight, because I think that's a great encapsulation of where we still are basically. Well, Julie, it's nice of you to say that. You know what you reminded me one time I was on a panel and a speaker asks the audience, how many minutes do you live from a Dunkin Donuts? And people sort of thought about it and nobody was more than about five minutes from a Dunkin Donuts. And if I think about where I live in North Carolina, a typical place to live, I'm assuming in America. And boy, within about five minutes, 10 minutes from my house, there's so many fast-food places. And then if you add to that the gas stations that have foods and the drug store that has foods. Not to mention the supermarkets. It's just a remarkable environment out there. And boy, you have to have kind of iron willpower to not stop and want that food. And then once it hits your body, then all heck breaks loose. It's a crazy, crazy environment, isn't it? Kevin, talk to us, if you will, about when this food environment collides with human biology. And what happens to normal biological processes that tell us how much we should eat, when we should stop, what we should eat, and things like that. I think that that is one of the newer pieces that we're really just getting a handle on some of the science. It's been observed for long periods of time that if you change a rat's food environment like Tony Sclafani did many, many years ago. That rats aren't trying to maintain their weight. They're not trying to do anything other than eat whatever they feel like. And, he was having a hard time getting rats to fatten up on a high fat diet. And he gave them this so-called supermarket diet or cafeteria diet composed of mainly human foods. And they gained a ton of weight. And I think that pointed to the fact that it's not that these rats lacked willpower or something like that. That they weren't making these conscious choices in the same way that we often think humans are entirely under their conscious control about what we're doing when we make our food choices. And therefore, we criticize people as having weak willpower when they're not able to choose a healthier diet in the face of the food environment. I think the newer piece that we're sort of only beginning to understand is how is it that that food environment and the foods that we eat might be changing this internal symphony of signals that's coming from our guts, from the hormones in our blood, to our brains and the understanding that of food intake. While you might have control over an individual meal and how much you eat in that individual meal is under biological control. And what are the neural systems and how do they work inside our brains in communicating with our bodies and our environment as a whole to shift the sort of balance point where body weight is being regulated. To try to better understand this really intricate interconnection or interaction between our genes, which are very different between people. And thousands of different genes contributing to determining heritability of body size in a given environment and how those genes are making us more or less susceptible to these differences in the food environment. And what's the underlying biology? I'd be lying to say if that we have that worked out. I think we're really beginning to understand that, but I hope what the book can give people is an appreciation for the complexity of those internal signals and that they exist. And that food intake isn't entirely under our control. And that we're beginning to unpack the science of how those interactions work. It's incredibly interesting. I agree with you on that. I have a slide that I bet I've shown a thousand times in talks that I think Tony Sclafani gave me decades ago that shows laboratory rats standing in front of a pile of these supermarket foods. And people would say, well, of course you're going to get overweight if that's all you eat. But animals would eat a healthy diet if access to it. But what they did was they had the pellets of the healthy rat chow sitting right in that pile. Exactly. And the animals ignore that and overeat the unhealthy food. And then you have this metabolic havoc occur. So, it seems like the biology we've all inherited works pretty well if you have foods that we've inherited from the natural environment. But when things become pretty unnatural and we have all these concoctions and chemicals that comprise the modern food environment the system really breaks down, doesn't it? Yeah. And I think that a lot of people are often swayed by the idea as well. Those foods just taste better and that might be part of it. But I think that what we've come to realize, even in our human experiments where we change people's food environments... not to the same extent that Tony Sclafani did with his rats, but for a month at a time where we ask people to not be trying to gain or lose weight. And we match certain food environments for various nutrients of concern. You know, they overeat diets that are higher in these so-called ultra-processed foods and they'd spontaneously lose weight when we remove those from the diet. And they're not saying that the foods are any more or less pleasant to eat. There's this underlying sort of the liking of foods is somewhat separate from the wanting of foods as neuroscientists are beginning to understand the different neural pathways that are involved in motivation and reward as opposed to the sort of just the hedonic liking of foods. Even the simple explanation of 'oh yeah, the rats just like the food more' that doesn't seem to be fully explaining why we have these behaviors. Why it's more complicated than a lot of people make out. Let's talk about ultra-processed foods and boy, I've got two wonderful people to talk to about that topic. Julia, let's start with your opinion on this. So tell us about ultra-processed foods and how much of the modern diet do they occupy? So ultra-processed foods. Obviously there's an academic definition and there's a lot of debate about defining this category of foods, including in the US by the Health and Human Services. But the way I think about it is like, these are foods that contain ingredients that you don't use in your home kitchen. They're typically cooked. Concocted in factories. And they now make up, I think it's like 60% of the calories that are consumed in America and in other similar high-income countries. And a lot of these foods are what researchers would also call hyper palatable. They're crossing these pairs of nutrient thresholds like carbohydrate, salt, sugar, fat. These pairs that don't typically exist in nature. So, for the reasons you were just discussing they seem to be particularly alluring to people. They're again just like absolutely ubiquitous and in these more developed contexts, like in the US and in the UK in particular. They've displaced a lot of what we would think of as more traditional food ways or ways that people were eating. So that's sort of how I think about them. You know, if you go to a supermarket these days, it's pretty hard to find a part of the supermarket that doesn't have these foods. You know, whole entire aisles of processed cereals and candies and chips and soft drinks and yogurts, frozen foods, yogurts. I mean, it's just, it's all over the place. And you know, given that if the average is 60% of calories, and there are plenty of people out there who aren't eating any of that stuff at all. For the other people who are, the number is way higher. And that, of course, is of great concern. So there have been hundreds of studies now on ultra-processed foods. It was a concept born not that long ago. And there's been an explosion of science and that's all for the good, I think, on these ultra-processed foods. And perhaps of all those studies, the one discussed most is one that you did, Kevin. And because it was exquisitely controlled and it also produced pretty striking findings. Would you describe that original study you did and what you found? Sure. So, the basic idea was one of the challenges that we have in nutrition science is accurately measuring how many calories people eat. And the best way to do that is to basically bring people into a laboratory and measure. Give them a test meal and measure how many calories they eat. Most studies of that sort last for maybe a day or two. But I always suspected that people could game the system if for a day or two, it's probably not that hard to behave the way that the researcher wants, or the subject wants to deceive the researcher. We decided that what we wanted to do was bring people into the NIH Clinical Center. Live with us for a month. And in two two-week blocks, we decided that we would present them with two different food environments essentially that both provided double the number of calories that they would require to maintain their body weight. Give them very simple instructions. Eat as much or as little as you'd like. Don't be trying to change your weight. We're not going to tell you necessarily what the study's about. We're going to measure lots of different things. And they're blinded to their weight measurements and they're wearing loose fitting scrubs and things like that, so they can't tell if their clothes are getting tighter or looser. And so, what we did is in for one two-week block, we presented people with the same number of calories, the same amount of sugar and fat and carbs and fiber. And we gave them a diet that was composed of 80% of calories coming from these ultra-processed foods. And the other case, we gave them a diet that was composed of 0% of calories from ultra-processed food and 80% of the so-called minimally processed food group. And what we then did was just measured people's leftovers essentially. And I say we, it was really the chefs and the dieticians at the clinical center who are doing all the legwork on this. But what we found was pretty striking, which was that when people were exposed to this highly ultra-processed food environment, despite being matched for these various nutrients of concern, they overate calories. Eating about 500 calories per day on average, more than the same people in the minimally processed diet condition. And they gained weight and gained body fat. And, when they were in the minimally processed diet condition, they spontaneously lost weight and lost body fat without trying in either case, right? They're just eating to the same level of hunger and fullness and overall appetite. And not reporting liking the meals any more or less in one diet versus the other. Something kind of more fundamental seemed to have been going on that we didn't fully understand at the time. What was it about these ultra-processed foods? And we were clearly getting rid of many of the things that promote their intake in the real world, which is that they're convenient, they're cheap, they're easy to obtain, they're heavily marketed. None of that was at work here. It was something really about the meals themselves that we were providing to people. And our subsequent research has been trying to figure out, okay, well what were the properties of those meals that we were giving to these folks that were composed primarily of ultra-processed foods that were driving people to consume excess calories? You know, I've presented your study a lot when I give talks. It's nice hearing it coming from you rather than me. But a couple of things that interest me here. You use people as their own controls. Each person had two weeks of one diet and two weeks of another. That's a pretty powerful way of providing experimental control. Could you say just a little bit more about that? Yeah, sure. So, when you design a study, you're trying to maximize the efficiency of the study to get the answers that you want with the least number of participants while still having good control and being able to design the study that's robust enough to detect a meaningful effect if it exists. One of the things that you do when you analyze studies like that or design studies like that, you could just randomize people to two different groups. But given how noisy and how different between people the measurement of food intake is we would've required hundreds of people in each group to detect an effect like the one that we discovered using the same person acting as their own control. We would still be doing the study 10 years later as opposed to what we were able to do in this particular case, which is completed in a year or so for that first study. And so, yeah, when you kind of design a study that way it's not always the case that you get that kind of improvement in statistical power. But for a measurement like food intake, it really is necessary to kind of do these sorts of crossover type studies where each person acts as their own control. So put the 500 calorie increment in context. Using the old fashioned numbers, 3,500 calories equals a pound. That'd be about a pound a week or a lot of pounds over a year. But of course, you don't know what would happen if people were followed chronically and all that. But still 500 calories is a whopping increase, it seems to me. It sure is. And there's no way that we would expect it to stay at that constant level for many, many weeks on end. And I think that's one of the key questions going forward is how persistent is that change. And how does something that we've known about and we discuss in our books the basic physiology of how both energy expenditure changes as people gain and lose weight, as well as how does appetite change in a given environment when they gain and lose weight? And how do those two processes eventually equate at a new sort of stable body weight in this case. Either higher or lower than when people started the program of this diet manipulation. And so, it's really hard to make those kinds of extrapolations. And that's of course, the need for further research where you have longer periods of time and you, probably have an even better control over their food environment as a result. I was surprised when I first read your study that you were able to detect a difference in percent body fat in such a short study. Did that surprise you as well? Certainly the study was not powered to detect body fat changes. In other words, we didn't know even if there were real body fat changes whether or not we would have the statistical capabilities to do that. We did use a method, DXA, which is probably one of the most precise and therefore, if we had a chance to measure it, we had the ability to detect it as opposed to other methods. There are other methods that are even more precise, but much more expensive. So, we thought that we had a chance to detect differences there. Other things that we use that we also didn't think that we necessarily would have a chance to detect were things like liver fat or something like that. Those have a much less of an ability. It's something that we're exploring now with our current study. But, again, it's all exploratory at that point. So what can you tell us about your current study? We just wrapped it up, thankfully. What we were doing was basically re-engineering two new ultra-processed diets along parameters that we think are most likely the mechanisms by which ultra-processed meals drove increased energy intake in that study. One was the non-beverage energy density. In other words, how many calories per gram of food on the plate, not counting the beverages. Something that we noticed in the first study was that ultra-processed foods, because they're essentially dried out in the processing for reasons of food safety to prevent bacterial growth and increased shelf life, they end up concentrating the foods. They're disrupting the natural food matrix. They last a lot longer, but as a result, they're a more concentrated form of calories. Despite being, by design, we chose the overall macronutrients to be the same. They weren't necessarily higher fat as we often think of as higher energy density. What we did was we designed an ultra-processed diet that was low in energy density to kind of match the minimally processed diet. And then we also varied the number of individual foods that were deemed hyper palatable according to kind of what Julia said that crossed these pairs of thresholds for fat and sugar or fat and salt or carbs and salt. What we noticed in the first study was that we presented people with more individual foods on the plate that had these hyper palatable combinations. And I wrestle with the term terminology a little bit because I don't necessarily think that they're working through the normal palatability that they necessarily like these foods anymore because again, we asked people to rate the meals and they didn't report differences. But something about those combinations, regardless of what you call them, seemed to be driving that in our exploratory analysis of the first study. We designed a diet that was high in energy density, but low in hyper palatable foods, similar to the minimally processed. And then their fourth diet is with basically low in energy density and hyper palatable foods. And so, we presented some preliminary results last year and what we were able to show is that when we reduced both energy density and the number of hyper palatable foods, but still had 80% of calories from ultra-processed foods, that people more or less ate the same number of calories now as they did when they were the same people were exposed to the minimally processed diet. In fact they lost weight, to a similar extent as the minimally processed diet. And that suggests to me that we can really understand mechanisms at least when it comes to calorie intake in these foods. And that might give regulators, policy makers, the sort of information that they need in order to target which ultra-processed foods and what context are they really problematic. It might give manufacturers if they have the desire to kind of reformulate these foods to understand which ones are more or less likely to cause over consumption. So, who knows? We'll see how people respond to that and we'll see what the final results are with the entire study group that, like I said, just finished, weeks ago. I respond very positively to the idea of the study. The fact that if people assume ultra-processed foods are bad actors, then trying to find out what it is about them that's making the bad actors becomes really important. And you're exactly right, there's a lot of pressure on the food companies now. Some coming from public opinion, some coming from parts of the political world. Some from the scientific world. And my guess is that litigation is going to become a real actor here too. And the question is, what do you want the food industry to do differently? And your study can really help inform that question. So incredibly valuable research. I can't wait to see the final study, and I'm really delighted that you did that. Let's turn our attention for a minute to food marketing. Julia, where does food marketing fit in all this? Julia - What I was very surprised to find while we were researching the book was this deep, long history of calls against marketing junk food in particular to kids. I think from like the 1950s, you have pediatrician groups and other public health professionals saying, stop this. And anyone who has spent any time around small children knows that it works. We covered just like a little, it was from an advocacy group in the UK that exposed aid adolescents to something called Triple Dip Chicken. And then asked them later, pick off of this menu, I think it was like 50 items, which food you want to order. And they all chose Triple Dip chicken, which is, as the name suggests, wasn't the healthiest thing to choose on the menu. I think we know obviously that it works. Companies invest a huge amount of money in marketing. It works even in ways like these subliminal ways that you can't fully appreciate to guide our food choices. Kevin raised something really interesting was that in his studies it was the foods. So, it's a tricky one because it's the food environment, but it's also the properties of the foods themselves beyond just the marketing. Kevin, how do you think about that piece? I'm curious like. Kevin - I think that even if our first study and our second study had turned out there's no real difference between these artificial environments that we've put together where highly ultra-processed diets lead to excess calorie intake. If that doesn't happen, if it was just the same, it wouldn't rule out the fact that because these foods are so heavily marketed, because they're so ubiquitous. They're cheap and convenient. And you know, they're engineered for many people to incorporate into their day-to-day life that could still promote over consumption of calories. We just remove those aspects in our very artificial food environment. But of course, the real food environment, we're bombarded by these advertisements and the ubiquity of the food in every place that you sort of turn. And how they've displaced healthy alternatives, which is another mechanism by which they could cause harm, right? It doesn't even have to be the foods themselves that are harmful. What do they displace? Right? We only have a certain amount the marketers called stomach share, right? And so, your harm might not be necessarily the foods that you're eating, but the foods that they displaced. So even if our experimental studies about the ultra-processed meals themselves didn't show excess calorie intake, which they clearly did, there's still all these other mechanisms to explore about how they might play a part in the real world. You know, the food industry will say that they're agnostic about what foods they sell. They just respond to demand. That seems utter nonsense to me because people don't overconsume healthy foods, but they do overconsume the unhealthy ones. And you've shown that to be the case. So, it seems to me that idea that they can just switch from this portfolio of highly processed foods to more healthy foods just doesn't work out for them financially. Do you think that's right? I honestly don't have that same sort of knee jerk reaction. Or at least I perceive it as a knee jerk reaction, kind of attributing malice in some sense to the food industry. I think that they'd be equally happy if they could get you to buy a lot and have the same sort of profit margins, a lot of a group of foods that was just as just as cheap to produce and they could market. I think that you could kind of turn the levers in a way that that would be beneficial. I mean, setting aside for example, that diet soda beverages are probably from every randomized control trial that we've seen, they don't lead to the same amount of weight gain as the sugar sweetened alternatives. They're just as profitable to the beverage manufacturers. They sell just as many of them. Now they might have other deleterious consequences, but I don't think that it's necessarily the case that food manufacturers have to have these deleterious or unhealthy foods as their sole means of attaining profit. Thanks for that. So, Julia, back to you. You and Kevin point out in your book some of the biggest myths about nutrition. What would you say some of them are? I think one big, fundamental, overarching myth is this idea that the problem is in us. That this rise of diet related diseases, this explosion that we've seen is either because of a lack of willpower. Which you have some very elegant research on this that we cite in the book showing willpower did not collapse in the last 30, 40 years of this epidemic of diet related disease. But it's even broader than that. It's a slow metabolism. It's our genes. Like we put the problem on ourselves, and we don't look at the way that the environment has changed enough. And I think as individuals we don't do that. And so much of the messaging is about what you Kevin, or you Kelly, or you Julia, could be doing better. you know, do resistance training. Like that's the big thing, like if you open any social media feed, it's like, do more resistance training, eat more protein, cut out the ultra-processed foods. What about the food environment? What about the leaders that should be held accountable for helping to perpetuate these toxic food environments? I think that that's this kind of overarching, this pegging it and also the rise of personalized nutrition. This like pegging it to individual biology instead of for whatever the claim is, instead of thinking about how did environments and don't want to have as part of our lives. So that's kind of a big overarching thing that I think about. It makes sense. So, let's end on a positive note. There's a lot of reason to be concerned about the modern food environment. Do you see a helpful way forward and what might be done about this? Julia, let's stay with you. What do you think? I think so. We spent a lot of time researching history for this book. And a lot of things that seem impossible are suddenly possible when you have enough public demand and enough political will and pressure. There are so many instances and even in the history of food. We spend time with this character Harvey Wiley, who around the turn of the century, his research was one of the reasons we have something like the FDA protecting the food supply. That gives me a lot of hope. And we are in this moment where a lot of awareness is being raised about the toxic food environment and all these negative attributes of food that people are surrounded by. I think with enough organization and enough pressure, we can see change. And we can see this kind of flip in the food environment that I think we all want to see where healthier foods become more accessible, available, affordable, and the rest of it. Sounds good. Kevin, what are your thoughts? Yes, I just extend that to saying that for the first time in history, we sort of know what the population of the planet is going to be that we have to feed in the future. We're not under this sort of Malthusian threat of not being able to know where the population growth is going to go. We know it's going to be roughly 10 billion people within the next century. And we know we've got to change the way that we produce and grow food for the planet as well as for the health of people. We know we've got to make changes anyway. And we're starting from a position where per capita, we're producing more protein and calories than any other time in human history, and we're wasting more food. We actually know we're in a position of strength. We don't have to worry so acutely that we won't be able to provide enough food for everybody. It's what kind of food are we going to produce? How are we going to produce it in the way that's sustainable for both people and the planet? We have to tackle that anyway. And for the folks who had experienced the obesity epidemic or finally have drugs to help them and other kinds of interventions to help them. That absolve them from this idea that it's just a matter of weak willpower if we finally have some pharmaceutical interventions that are useful. So, I do see a path forward. Whether or not we take that is another question. Bios Dr. Kevin Hall is the section chief of Integrative Physiology Section in the Laboratory of Biological Modeling at the NIH National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases. Kevin's laboratory investigates the integrative physiology of macronutrient metabolism, body composition, energy expenditure, and control of food intake. His main goal is to better understand how the food environment affects what we eat and how what we eat affects our physiology. He performs clinical research studies as well as developing mathematical models and computer simulations to better understand physiology, integrate data, and make predictions. In recent years, he has conducted randomized clinical trials to study how diets high in ultra-processed food may cause obesity and other chronic diseases. He holds a Ph.D. from McGill University. Julia Belluz is a Paris-based journalist and a contributing opinion writer to the New York Times, she has reported extensively on medicine, nutrition, and global public health from Canada, the US, and Europe. Previously, Julia was Vox's senior health correspondent in Washington, DC, a Knight Science Journalism fellow at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology in Cambridge, and she worked as a reporter in Toronto and London. Her writing has appeared in a range of international publications, including the BMJ, the Chicago Tribune, the Economist, the Globe and Mail, Maclean's, the New York Times, ProPublica, and the Times of London. Her work has also had an impact, helping improve policies on maternal health and mental healthcare for first responders at the hospital- and state-level, as well as inspiring everything from scientific studies to an opera. Julia has been honored with numerous journalism awards, including the 2016 Balles Prize in Critical Thinking, the 2017 American Society of Nutrition Journalism Award, and three Canadian National Magazine Awards (in 2007 and 2013). In 2019, she was a National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine Communications Award finalist. She contributed chapters on public health journalism in the Tactical Guide to Science Journalism, To Save Humanity: What Matters Most for a Healthy Future, and was a commissioner for the Global Commission on Evidence to Address Societal Challenges.

Meaghan Ellenburg(Daniel 6:16-28)  Meaghan Ellenburg is Instructor of Family and Human Services at JBU.

This Day in Legal History: Nuremberg ExecutionsOn October 16, 1946, ten prominent Nazi war criminals were executed by hanging in the aftermath of the landmark Nuremberg Trials, held to prosecute key figures of the Third Reich for crimes against humanity, war crimes, and crimes against peace. The executions marked the culmination of months of legal proceedings conducted by an international military tribunal composed of judges from the Allied powers: the United States, the United Kingdom, the Soviet Union, and France. Among those hanged was Joachim von Ribbentrop, Hitler's former Foreign Minister, convicted for his role in orchestrating Nazi foreign policy and enabling the Holocaust.The trials had concluded in late September 1946, with 12 of the 22 main defendants receiving death sentences. However, Hermann Göring, one of the most high-profile defendants and head of the Luftwaffe, committed suicide by cyanide just hours before his scheduled execution. The hangings took place inside the gymnasium of the Nuremberg Palace of Justice, where the tribunal had convened, and were carried out in the early morning hours.The executions were overseen by U.S. Army personnel, and steps were taken to document them for historical record. The event was viewed by many as a pivotal moment in the establishment of international criminal law, affirming that individuals—even heads of state and high-ranking officials—could be held personally accountable for war atrocities. These proceedings laid the groundwork for future tribunals, including those for the former Yugoslavia and Rwanda.Some criticized the process as “victor's justice,” pointing to perceived inconsistencies in sentencing and legal procedures. Nevertheless, the trials represented a significant shift from the post-World War I approach, which had failed to adequately prosecute war crimes. The executions on October 16 symbolized not only the end of an era of unchecked totalitarian violence but also the beginning of a new international legal order based on accountability and the rule of law.A federal judge in California has temporarily blocked the Trump administration's latest wave of federal layoffs, calling the move likely “illegal and in excess of authority.” In a sharply worded order, U.S. District Judge Susan Illston halted terminations that began last week, siding with a coalition of federal worker unions. Illston criticized the administration's approach as “ready, fire, aim” and warned that the human cost of such abrupt cuts is unacceptable.The layoffs—over 4,100 in total—targeted several federal agencies, with the Departments of Health and Human Services and Treasury seeing the bulk of cuts. Judge Illston's order requires the administration to report all completed and planned layoffs by Friday and set a hearing for a preliminary injunction on October 28. She also rejected the Department of Justice's attempt to steer the case toward procedural issues, stating that the legal merits were too concerning to ignore.President Trump has framed the cuts as politically motivated, stating they were aimed at eliminating programs he called “egregious socialist, semi-communist.” He added that Republican-backed programs would be spared. The administration recently lifted a long-standing hiring freeze but is now requiring agencies to submit staffing plans for approval.Union plaintiffs argue that the layoffs violate the Antideficiency Act and the Administrative Procedure Act, citing the administration's use of the government shutdown as an arbitrary justification. This case, AFGE v. OMB, marks another legal confrontation over workforce reductions, following an earlier freeze issued by Judge Illston that was ultimately overturned by the Supreme Court.Trump's Shutdown-Linked Layoffs Paused by California Judge (4)The 2026 U.S. law school admissions cycle is off to an intense start, with applications up 33% compared to this time last year, according to new data from the Law School Admission Council. This surge follows last year's admissions boom and signals another highly competitive year for aspiring law students. Admissions consultant Mike Spivey noted he's never seen such a sharp early increase in over two decades of reviewing application data, predicting a likely total rise of around 20% once the cycle concludes.Several factors are driving the spike, including a tough job market for recent college graduates—whose unemployment rate now surpasses that of the broader labor force—and growing political instability. Law School Admission Council President Sudha Setty also cited concerns about the impact of AI and broader economic uncertainty as motivators for many applicants. Additionally, more people are taking the LSAT this year, up nearly 22% over 2025 levels.A recent Kaplan survey found 56% of law school admissions officers pointed to politics as a major factor behind last year's surge, with 90% expecting this cycle to be just as competitive, if not more so. Some applicants are likely reapplying after being rejected last year, or returning after delaying applications due to last year's high volume. While law schools will benefit from a deeper pool of candidates, Spivey warned the sharp increase means tougher odds for acceptance across the board.US law school applicants increase 33%, boosting competition | ReutersPresident Donald Trump's decision to fund military pay during the ongoing government shutdown is only a short-term solution, according to House Speaker Mike Johnson. On Wednesday, Johnson confirmed that 1.3 million active-duty service members, along with tens of thousands of National Guard and reservists, were paid using $6.5 billion in unused military research and development funds. However, he warned that unless Democrats act to reopen the government, troops are unlikely to receive their next paycheck on October 31.The White House has not explained its legal rationale for this funding maneuver, and it hasn't requested the required congressional approvals to shift funds between accounts. Federal law caps such transfers at $8 billion annually and only allows them if the funds are used for their legally designated purposes. Without further funding authority, it's unclear how the administration could cover future military pay. While many lawmakers support a standalone bill to guarantee troop pay, Republican leaders—including Johnson and Senate Majority Whip John Thune—are resisting that option. They argue that doing so would reduce pressure to end the shutdown overall.Some Republicans, like Sen. Lisa Murkowski, say the move has reduced urgency in Congress while leaving other federal workers unpaid. The political optics are further complicated by Trump's claim that only Democrat-backed programs are being cut, as he seeks to frame the issue as partisan. Internally, GOP leaders worry that passing targeted funding bills could open the door to broader demands for agency-by-agency funding relief, weakening their leverage in shutdown negotiations.By way of brief background, the move likely violates the Antideficiency Act (ADA), which bars federal officials from spending money before or beyond congressional appropriations. Trump reportedly ordered the Department of Defense to divert funds from the RDT&E account—meant for weapons research—to cover military payroll. That account is not legally authorized for such use, and the funds may have also exceeded their availability period.This raises two major legal issues. First, under the Appropriations Clause (Article I, § 9, cl. 7), only Congress may authorize government spending. The president cannot repurpose funds without specific legislative approval. Second, the ADA prohibits both misappropriation of purpose (spending money on unauthorized functions) and misappropriation of timing (using expired funds). If proven willful, such violations can carry criminal penalties, though prosecutions are rare.Beyond the legal breach, this act could set a dangerous precedent. If courts decline to intervene, it could signal that future presidents—regardless of party—can redirect federal funds without congressional consent. This would erode legislative power and potentially turn the presidency into a de facto appropriations authority, undermining the Constitution's separation of powers.Special thanks to Bobby Kogan, the Senior Director of Federal Budget Policy for the Center for American Progress, for his instructive Bluesky post explaining the deficiency issue in a way much clearer and more succinctly than I otherwise would have been able to.Trump's troop pay move is a ‘temporary fix,' Johnson says - Live Updates - POLITICOPost by @did:plc:drfb2pdjlnsqkfgsoellcahm — BlueskyA piece I wrote for Forbes this week looks at how Norway is showing the rest of the world how to end EV subsidies without wrecking the market. The country announced in its latest budget that it will phase out its long-standing value-added tax (VAT) exemption for electric vehicles—partially in 2026, and fully by 2027. This might seem like a policy retreat, but the timing is deliberate: EVs now make up 95–98% of new car sales in Norway. The market has matured, and the subsidy is no longer essential.I argue that this is what smart policy looks like—temporary support that steps aside when it's no longer needed. The U.S., by contrast, killed its federal EV tax credit abruptly and politically, without phasing it out or adapting it for current market conditions. In doing so, it treated the credit as a political symbol rather than a market tool. Norway, on the other hand, used the exemption strategically, aligning it with broader policy goals and allowing it to sunset once those goals were met.The piece highlights how the U.S. often fears both removing and maintaining subsidies, caught in a cycle where incentives become political footballs. Norway's approach offers a model for how to responsibly end subsidies: gradually, rationally, and only once the market no longer needs them. This isn't anti-EV or anti-climate policy—it's a sign that the original policy worked.Norway Shows How To End EV Subsidies Without Killing The Market This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.minimumcomp.com/subscribe

Starring the wife of the current United States Secretary of Health and Human Services.   This week, Nando DJ and Diggins race out of the house and crash into a bunch of things on their way out of the driveways to watch the Hutchest movie of 2006, RV. They nitpick the ball, the brakes, and of course the soda.   Recommendations:   DJ - The Great British Baking Show (series), Is It Cake? Halloween (series) Diggins - Humanist Vampire Seeking Consenting Suicidal Person (movie) Nando - Batman: The Audio Adventures (audio series)   Plugs Mostly Nitpicking on Bluesky The Nando v Movies Discord Roses and Rejections Diggins' Substack - A Little Perspective All of Nando's Links   Mostly Nitpicking theme by Nick Porcaro Logo by Michelle Chapman  

News Political Assassination: While the query mentions a political assassination, no specific details are available in the provided search results. Airlines and Oversized Passengers: Southwest Airlines will require oversized passengers occupying adjacent seats to pay for two seats, beginning in January 2026. Refunds for the second seat are possible under specific conditions (flight departs with an empty seat, both seats purchased in the same fare class). Cracker Barrel Backtracks on Rebrand: Cracker Barrel reversed its controversial rebrand and logo change and ended its relationship with the design firm responsible, according to the Toledo Blade and Investopedia. The company also announced leadership and organizational structure changes to reinforce its focus on guest experience. Wisconsin Man Fakes Death, Sentenced: Ryan Borgwardt, who faked his death in a kayaking accident and fled the country, was sentenced to 89 days in jail after pleading no contest to a misdemeanor charge of obstruction. He was also ordered to pay $30,000 in search costs. Conjoined Twins Update: Abby and Brittany Hensel, conjoined twins, were recently seen in public with a baby. However, Abby Hensel's husband stated that the TikTok account posting about a baby is not owned by his wife, and the twins did not post about having a child. Man Jumps Ship to Avoid Debt: A cruise ship passenger, Jey Gonzalez-Diaz, jumped overboard to avoid declaring money and paying off over $16,000 in gambling debt to Royal Caribbean. He was rescued and charged with a federal crime. Tylenol and Autism Rumors: In late 2023, a federal judge dismissed Tylenol (acetaminophen) lawsuits alleging a link to autism spectrum disorder (ASD) and attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) due to the exclusion of plaintiffs' expert witnesses. However, in September 2025, the White House and Health and Human Services issued new guidance suggesting a potential association between prenatal acetaminophen use and increased risks of ASD and ADHD. Researchers have found no firm evidence of a causal link between in utero acetaminophen exposure and neurodevelopmental disorders. Molly Qerim Leaves First Take: Molly Qerim announced her departure from ESPN's First Take after 10 years as host. Sources suggest it was her decision to explore other opportunities.    Entertainment/Music Dame Dash and Cam'ron: Cam'ron accused Dame Dash of lying about his role as "Chairman of REVOLT." Cam'ron stated that no one at REVOLT was aware of this role. Dame Dash rejected Cam'ron's offer to executive produce his shows because of ego. Dame Dash threatened a $100 million RICO and defamation lawsuit. Pooh Shiesty Released Early: Pooh Shiesty was released early from federal prison on October 6, 2025, and transferred to a halfway house, months before his original release date. Bad Bunny and the Super Bowl: Bad Bunny is confirmed as the Super Bowl LX halftime show performer. Carlos Santana supported Bad Bunny and debunked rumors that he criticized the selection. Cardi B Releases New Album: Cardi B's second album, "Am I the Drama?", was released on September 19, 2025. Young Dolph Murder Trial: Hernandez Govan, accused of orchestrating Young Dolph's murder, was acquitted on all charges in August 2025. The jury foreman explained the verdict in an interview. Young Thug Jail Calls Leak: Audio and transcripts of Young Thug's jail calls were leaked, generating media attention and discussions about his relationships and other artists. Drake texted Young Thug after the leak, expressing support. Tootie Raww Arrested: Tootie Raww was arrested in September 2025 on charges of possession of a sawed-off shotgun and obstruction of law enforcement officers. Drake's Lawsuit Dismissed: Drake's defamation lawsuit against Universal Music Group regarding Kendrick Lamar's song "Not Like Us" was dismissed by a federal judge. The court ruled that claims tied to the lyrics were protected as opinion. Adrien Broner Removed from Show: Adrien Broner was removed from Cam'ron's show "It Is What It Is" after making inappropriate comments.                                 

Donna Shalala was the longest-serving Secretary of Health and Human Services in American history. Secretary Shalala has also served as the President of the University of Miami, the Chancellor of the University of Wisconsin, Madison, the President of Hunter College, and a member of Congress. Secretary Shalala joins Adam to share her journey and her best lessons and advice on leading people and organizations and building successful relationships, networks, and careers.

In this episode of ‘Stories from Real Life,' host Melvin E. Edwards engages with Dr. Brad Duren, a history professor, to explore the intricate relationship between American politics, religious revivalism, conspiracy theories, and celebrity culture. They discuss how historical religious movements have shaped political landscapes, the influence of modern political rhetoric, and the role of community in shaping political identities among younger generations. The conversation also delves into the impact of conspiracy theories on American culture, the blurring lines between entertainment and politics, and the implications of these trends for the future of democracy. Dr. Duren emphasizes the need for a religious enlightenment that merges humility with enthusiasm, urging listeners to recognize the importance of history in understanding contemporary issues.Great Awakenings The ApprenticeThe Divine ConspiracyBrad L. Duren, Ph.D. serves as the Dean of Liberal Arts and Public Service at Tulsa Community College, and provides leadership support for the Social Sciences, Humanities, History & Political Science, Criminal Justice, Paralegal, Human Services, and Child Development & Education disciplines. Get full access to Melvin E. Edwards at storiesfromreallife.substack.com/subscribe

The Trump administration pushed forward Friday with plans to fire federal employees amid the government shutdown, directing reductions-in-force at the Departments of Health and Human Services, Education, and Housing and Urban Development, among other agencies. Prior to and during the current shutdown, the White House repeatedly threatened to lay off additional federal workers in a bid to further its efforts to shrink the size of the government. The Trump administration maintains Democrats are to blame for the shutdown, though Democrats contend that a spending bill from Republicans — who control all levers of power — wouldn't adequately fund health care. Russ Vought, the director of the Office of Management and Budget, posted on X early Friday afternoon that the “RIFs have begun,” without offering additional details. An OMB spokesperson told FedScoop the RIFs began and are “substantial.” In a preview of his discussions with Vought last week, President Donald Trump said in a post to his social media platform that they would target “Democrat Agencies,” calling them “a political SCAM.” According to a court filing from the Trump administration late Friday, at least 4,100 federal workers across eight federal agencies may have been sent RIF notices, with the bulk of the staff reductions at HHS, with 1,100 to 1,200 workers impacted, and the Department of Treasury, with 1,446 workers impacted. Deploying artificial intelligence requires taking on the right amount of risk to achieve a desired end result, a National Institute of Standards and Technology official who worked on its risk management framework for the technology said on a panel last week. While federal agencies, and particularly IT functions, are generally risk averse, risks can't entirely be avoided with AI, Martin Stanley, an AI and cybersecurity researcher at the Commerce Department standards agency, said during a FedInsider panel on “Intelligent Government” last week. Stanley said: “You have to manage risks, number one,” adding that the benefits from the technology are compelling enough that “you have to go looking to achieve those.” Stanley's comments came in response to a question about how the federal government compares to other sectors that have been doing risk management for longer, such as financial services. On that point specifically, he said the NIST AI Risk Management Framework “shares a lot of DNA” with Federal Reserve guidance on algorithmic models in financial services. He said NIST attempted to leverage those approaches and the same plain, simple language. “We talk about risks, we talk about likelihoods, and we talk about impacts, both positive and negative, so that you can build this trade space where you are taking on the right amount of risk to achieve a benefit,” Stanley said. The Daily Scoop Podcast is available every Monday-Friday afternoon. If you want to hear more of the latest from Washington, subscribe to The Daily Scoop Podcast  on Apple Podcasts, Soundcloud, Spotify and YouTube.

A newly issued report from the Cultural Research Center at Arizona Christian University reveals striking contradictions and confusion in how Americans view sin, its causes, and its consequences, explains Dr. George Barna to Alex Newman on The Sentinel Report. While four out of five U.S. adults say they believe in the existence of sin, far fewer believe all people sin—and even fewer admit that they, personally, are sinners. The study concludes that only one out of seven adults (14%) holds a consistently biblical view of sin. Additionally, on this episode, Oklahoma Senator Shane Jett and Representative Gabe Woolley report that children are literally being kidnapped by the Department of Human Services because parents are seeking alternative methods of care for illnesses. Finally, the director of the Government Accountability Institute, Seamus Bruner, joins Newman to discuss how Antifa is a highly funded criminal organization and what President Trump must do to combat them.

autism, vaccines, Health Advanced Research Projects Agency (HARPA), Bernard Rimland, US Navy, the problems with the notion vaccines cause autism, H. Hugh Fudenberg, Bob Wright, Robert F. Kennedy Jr. (RFK), RFK's Department of Health and Human Services, mRNA vaccines, the push to eliminate mRNA research, Scientology, RFK's links to Scientology, Scientologists and MAHAMusic by: Keith Allen Dennishttps://keithallendennis.bandcamp.com/ Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

83,000 Americans die needlessly every year due to health inequity and systemic racism in healthcare. Dr. George Rust has spent 40 years fighting health disparities in America's most underserved communities, from migrant farmworker clinics in rural Florida to leading public health initiatives during the COVID-19 pandemic.In this powerful conversation, Dr. Rust reveals the structural inequities, racial health gaps, and preventable suffering he's witnessed throughout his career in medicine and public health. He shares hard-won lessons about earning trust in marginalized communities, navigating cultural competency challenges, and building coalitions for systemic change in American healthcare.THE REAL COST OF HEALTH INEQUITY: Research shows that eliminating the Black-white gap in health outcomes would save 83,000 lives annually. In Atlanta alone, closing premature death rates between Black and white populations would restore 43,000 person-years of life every year to Black communities. These aren't just statistics—they represent grandmother-years, wisdom-years, and family-years lost to needless suffering caused by barriers to healthcare access, discrimination in medicine, and social determinants of health.KEY TOPICS IN THIS EPISODE:Why health disparities persist in American healthcare and how systemic racism drives preventable deathsThe concept of "trust adjacency" and how healthcare providers earn trust in communities of colorWhat 40 years serving underserved populations taught one doctor about cultural humility and respect in medicineHow COVID-19 exposed America's public health vulnerabilities and political interference in scienceThe difference between "me all vs. we all" – individual autonomy versus community responsibility in public healthReal stories of needless suffering: from the $500 hand surgery barrier to cervical cancer from lack of pap smearsLessons from Morehouse School of Medicine, Dr. David Satcher, and Dr. Louis Sullivan on health justiceWhy respect matters more than you think in clinical settings and the "Lou Sullivan name tag" storyThe Tallahassee measles case and what happens when ideology trumps evidence-based medicineHow to avoid physician burnout while fighting for social justice and health equityBuilding coalitions and community partnerships for sustainable systemic changeABOUT DR. GEORGE RUST: Dr. Rust is a public health physician and professor at Florida State University with over 40 years of experience in community health, health policy, and medical education. His career spans Cook County Hospital in Chicago, the Farmworker Health Association in rural Florida, and 25 years at Morehouse School of Medicine, where he worked alongside public health legends Dr. David Satcher (former U.S. Surgeon General) and Dr. Louis Sullivan (founding president of Morehouse School of Medicine and former Secretary of Health and Human Services).His new book, "Healing in a Changing America: Doctoring a Nation of Needless Suffering" (Johns Hopkins University Press), examines how America's healthcare system creates preventable suffering through structural inequities, racial discrimination, and barriers to healthcare access. The book offers a roadmap for achieving health justice and eliminating health disparities across race, class, and geography.WHY THIS MATTERS NOW: America is undergoing demographic transformation into a multicultural, pluralistic democracy, yet health inequities continue to widen. With political polarization affecting public health policy, attacks on diversity initiatives in medical education, and ongoing debates about vaccine mandates, quarantine protocols, and government intervention in healthcare, this conversation offers critical insights for healthcare professionals, policy makers, community organizers, and anyone committed to social justice.Dr. Rust shares practical strategies for cross-cultural healthcare delivery, building trust with patients from different backgrounds, working within broken systems while advocating for reform, and maintaining resilience as a health equity advocate. His perspective combines clinical experience, public health expertise, academic leadership, and lived experience navigating racism in medicine as a white ally working in predominantly Black and Latino communities.QUOTABLE MOMENTS: "You don't come into communities carrying trust with you. You have to earn it." "83,000 lives could be saved annually just by eliminating the Black-white health gap." "It's what Fitzhugh Mullen called tin cup medicine: 'Now please sir, may I have some healthcare?'" "Would you rather deal with having somebody not go to work for two weeks, or would you rather be explaining to the public why you let a measles outbreak happen?"CONNECT WITH DR. RUST: Email: george.rust@med.fsu.edu Book: "Healing in a Changing America" available on Amazon and Johns Hopkins University PressABOUT THE HEALTHY PROJECT: The Healthy Project Podcast explores the intersection of health, equity, and justice through conversations with leaders transforming healthcare and public health. Host Corey Dion Lewis brings you stories of systemic change, health advocacy, and the fight for health justice in America.Subscribe for weekly episodes on health equity, racial justice in healthcare, public health policy, community health, and social determinants of health.Support The Healthy ProjectNEW! THP+ Premium Newsletter Get exclusive behind-the-scenes access, early episode releases, merch shop access, and more!$5/month or $50/yearSubscribe at: healthyproject.coFree Newsletter: Stay updated on new episodes and health equity resources at healthyproject.co ★ Support this podcast ★

A newly issued report from the Cultural Research Center at Arizona Christian University reveals striking contradictions and confusion in how Americans view sin, its causes, and its consequences, explains Dr. George Barna to Alex Newman on The Sentinel Report. While four out of five U.S. adults say they believe in the existence of sin, far fewer believe all people sin—and even fewer admit that they, personally, are sinners. The study concludes that only one out of seven adults (14%) holds a consistently biblical view of sin. Additionally, on this episode, Oklahoma Senator Shane Jett and Representative Gabe Woolley report that children are literally being kidnapped by the Department of Human Services because parents are seeking alternative methods of care for illnesses. Finally, the director of the Government Accountability Institute, Seamus Bruner, joins Newman to discuss how Antifa is a highly funded criminal organization and what President Trump must do to combat them.

The latest episode of the Town of Brattleboro's podcast covers a regular Selectboard meeting held on Sept. 24, 2025, as well as a (brief!) meeting held on Oct. 1. We then preview what's ahead on Oct. 16.  "Town Matters," the Town of Brattleboro's podcast, summarizes Selectboard meetings so you can quickly catch up on local government while you go about your day. Show notes: Sept. 24 Meeting Oct. 1 Meeting Oct. 16 Meeting The Human Services Review Committee is seeking applications. Sign up for paving updates from VTrans. View the latest Rec & Parks brochure for info about BrattleBOO. A burn ban is still in effect in Brattleboro.

Welcome solo and group practice owners! We are Liath Dalton and Evan Dumas, your co-hosts of Group Practice Tech. In our latest episode, we have an important update for therapists regarding the reproductive health Final Rule.  We discuss: The Final Rule requirements that would have impacted therapists Why the Final Rule isn't applicable now Being aware of any state laws that are applicable regarding reproductive health information Intentionality and care around sensitive info within PHI Our CE training on Law and Ethics of Clinical Documentation in a Post-Roe World Listen here: https://personcenteredtech.com/group/podcast/ For more, visit our website. PCT Resources Relevant on-demand, legal-ethical CE training: Law & Ethics of Clinical Documentation for a post Roe world Addresses the practical applications of the US Supreme Court's ruling in Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization, with particular focus on the impacts this decision has on client confidentiality and documentation of clinical services Group Practice Care Premium weekly (live & recorded) direct support & consultation service, Group Practice Office Hours -- including monthly session with therapist attorney Eric Ström, JD PhD LMHC Resources & References HHS OCR Fact Sheet – HIPAA Privacy Rule to Support Reproductive Health Care Privacy (Final Rule Overview) JD SUPRA Article: Federal Court Strikes Down HIPAA Reproductive Health Privacy Rule Lifting Compliance Requirements for Regulated Entities Court Case – Purl v. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, No. 2:24-cv-228-Z (N.D. Tex. June 18, 2025) (decision vacating most of the Final Rule) Legal Analysis – Holland & Knight: HIPAA's Reproductive Health Rule is Vacated Nationally Law Firm Compliance Guidance – Ropes & Gray: U.S. District Court Ruling Vacates HIPAA Final Rule on Reproductive Health Privacy

"We've just made it so complex that the average consumer will never understand it." That's what Chris Jones said on this episode of Plain Talk, referring to the way Americans access and pay for health care. Jones is the former head of the North Dakota Department of Health and Human Services, having served in that role under Gov. Doug Burgum, and he's just finishing up a stint in President Donald Trump's administration where he's advised Secretary of Health Robert F. Kennedy and Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services administrator Mehmet Oz. He argues that the maze of employer-provided benefits, government programs, premium subsidies, insurance companies, health care companies, and pharmacy companies that Americans must navigate when they're sick or injured just isn't working. "The system is broken," he says, and argues that the root problem for all of this is the cost of care. "It's the price, not the financing mechanisms." What can be done to bring down prices? Transparency is one thing. Americans often have no idea what their care will cost them until they get a bill in the mail, and thanks to the fact that most Americans see their coverage by a third party (an employer-provided insurance policy, or a government program) they have little incentive to find out. Jones also weighed in on the tug of war between Republicans and Democrats over health care during the ongoing government shutdown. He said that claims from Democrats that "nursing homes are going to close, benefits are being cut for kids and individuals with disabilities" culdn't be "further from the truth." He also supported new work requirements for Medicaid recipients scheduled to begin in 2029. These rules require enrollees between 19 and 64 to work, volunteer, or participate in a qualifying activity for at least 80 hours per month. Jones pointed out that we already have work requirements in place for programs like food stamps and welfare. "What I can't understand, morally, is why we think it's okay to work 20 hours a week for food and basic assistance that you need every single day, but to have you work the same amount of time for something you may never use, and that being cruel and unusual, I just can't reconcile in my brain," he said. Also on this episode, co-host Chad Oban and I discussed Superintendent Kirsten Baesler's appointment to a position in the Trump administration and Gov. Kelly Armstrong's announced bridge loan program for furloughed workers. If you want to participate in Plain Talk, just give us a call or text at 701-587-3141. It's super easy — leave your message, tell us your name and where you're from, and we might feature it on an upcoming episode. To subscribe to Plain Talk, search for the show wherever you get your podcasts or use one of the links below. Apple Podcasts | Spotify | YouTube | Pocket Casts | Episode Archive  

"We've just made it so complex that the average consumer will never understand it." That's what Chris Jones said on this episode of Plain Talk, referring to the way Americans access and pay for health care. Jones is the former head of the North Dakota Department of Health and Human Services, having served in that role under Gov. Doug Burgum, and he's just finishing up a stint in President Donald Trump's administration where he's advised Secretary of Health Robert F. Kennedy and Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services administrator Mehmet Oz. He argues that the maze of employer-provided benefits, government programs, premium subsidies, insurance companies, health care companies, and pharmacy companies that Americans must navigate when they're sick or injured just isn't working. "The system is broken," he says, and argues that the root problem for all of this is the cost of care. "It's the price, not the financing mechanisms." What can be done to bring down prices? Transparency is one thing. Americans often have no idea what their care will cost them until they get a bill in the mail, and thanks to the fact that most Americans see their coverage by a third party (an employer-provided insurance policy, or a government program) they have little incentive to find out. Jones also weighed in on the tug of war between Republicans and Democrats over health care during the ongoing government shutdown. He said that claims from Democrats that "nursing homes are going to close, benefits are being cut for kids and individuals with disabilities" culdn't be "further from the truth." He also supported new work requirements for Medicaid recipients scheduled to begin in 2029. These rules require enrollees between 19 and 64 to work, volunteer, or participate in a qualifying activity for at least 80 hours per month. Jones pointed out that we already have work requirements in place for programs like food stamps and welfare. "What I can't understand, morally, is why we think it's okay to work 20 hours a week for food and basic assistance that you need every single day, but to have you work the same amount of time for something you may never use, and that being cruel and unusual, I just can't reconcile in my brain," he said. Also on this episode, co-host Chad Oban and I discussed Superintendent Kirsten Baesler's appointment to a position in the Trump administration and Gov. Kelly Armstrong's announced bridge loan program for furloughed workers. If you want to participate in Plain Talk, just give us a call or text at 701-587-3141. It's super easy — leave your message, tell us your name and where you're from, and we might feature it on an upcoming episode. To subscribe to Plain Talk, search for the show wherever you get your podcasts or use one of the links below. Apple Podcasts | Spotify | YouTube | Pocket Casts | Episode Archive  

337:  Leading for the Long Run: Building a Sustainable Nonprofit (Janelle Miller Moravek)SUMMARYSpecial thanks to TowneBank for bringing these conversations to life, and for their commitmentto strengthening nonprofit organizations. Learn more about how they can help you at TowneBank.com/NonprofitBanking.Nonprofit leadership can feel like a marathon of competing priorities, unexpected fires, and constant pressure to do more with less - yet it doesn't have to mean sacrificing balance or long-term impact. In episode 337 of Your Path to Nonprofit Leadership, lifelong nonprofit leader Jannelle Miller Moravek shares practical ways to lead with resilience: set boundaries (“it'll still be there tomorrow”), use the Eisenhower Matrix to decide what gets done, delegated, delayed, or dropped, and calendar project time with a buffer for “fires.” She shares why development literacy matters for every ED, how to hire people smarter than you, and why team “vibe” and curiosity beat credentials alone. Plus, a refreshingly doable take on succession planning and building a sustainable 40-hour culture for the long run.ABOUT JANELLEJanelle Miller Moravek is a nonprofit leader & mental health advocate. She has led Youth & Family Counseling as Executive Director since 2009, driving its growth and impact across Lake County, Illinois. With a deep commitment to increasing access to mental health services, she oversees strategy, programming, and operations while fostering strong partnerships throughout the community. Janelle plays a key leadership role in the region, serving on the board of the Lake County Alliance for Human Services and co-chairing the Lake County Behavioral Health Action Team. Her prior experience includes development roles at Carmel Catholic High School and Barat College. She holds a BA in French Studies from Wesleyan University.EPISODE TOPICS & RESOURCESReady for your next leadership opportunity? Visit our partners at Armstrong McGuireThe Talent Development Platform by Heather Carpentar & Tara QuallsWant to chat leadership 24/7?  Go to delphi.ai/pattonmcdowellHave you gotten Patton's book Your Path to Nonprofit Leadership: Seven Keys to Advancing Your Career in the Philanthropic Sector – Now available on Audible

The federal government is offering $2,500 to certain unaccompanied migrant children who agree to self-deport and return to their home countries, according to a Department of Health and Human Services memo obtained by NBC News.See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Today's top stories:Department of Human Services selects group to conduct external review of welfare services following the death of Genesis Mata Man arrested during standoff on Eissler Street to appear in court today Resolution passed by Kern High School District Board of Trustees in opposition of trans athletes For more local news, visit KGET.com. Stream local news for free on KGET+. Visit KGET.com/plus for more information. 

On episode 528 of The Nurse Keith Show nursing and healthcare career podcast, in recognition of World Mental Health Day, Keith interviews Kristen Gilmore, the Program Manager for Nurse Well-Being at Thomas Jefferson University Hospital in Philadelphia. In the course of their conversation, Keith discusses with Kristen her experience as a leader whose sole responsibility is to foster an environment and culture where the mental health of nurses is truly a top priority. The program that Kristen oversees is funded by a generous endowment supported by a $7 million grant made possible through the stewardship of Jefferson's Board of Trustees. This program could serve as a blueprint for healthcare institutions looking for an example of how to move beyond platitudes and lip service towards meaningful interventions with nurses' best interests in mind. Kristen is a registered nurse at Thomas Jefferson University Hospital and serves as the inaugural Program Manager for Nurse Well-Being, supporting the Jefferson Bucks, Frankford, Einstein Montgomery, and Torresdale campuses. Prior to this role, she held multiple nursing leadership positions and provided direct care in emergency medicine, where she developed a deep commitment to clinician well-being. A graduate of Holy Family University and Walden University, Kristen has consistently championed the well-being of both her colleagues and the nursing profession as a whole. She currently serves as President of the Philadelphia Chapter of the Emergency Nurses Association (ENA) and chairs the ENA's National Wellness Committee. A Certified SMART (Stress Management and Resiliency Training) Practitioner, Kristen delivers evidence-based well-being education across the Jefferson Health System. Her speaking engagements include presentations for the Board of Certification for Emergency Nursing, the Emergency Nurses Association, the Southeastern Pennsylvania Chapter of AACN, the Pennsylvania State Nurses Association and the Maine Department of Health and Human Services. Kristen also co-authored a recent article in the Journal of Emergency Nursing examining the impact of gratitude in the workplace.  Kristen has also featured her well-being work in healthcare on multiple podcasts.  Connect with Kristen Gilmore and Thomas Jefferson University Hospital: Kristen.Gilmore@Jefferson.edu LinkedIn Thomas Jefferson University Hospital ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ Contact Nurse Keith about holistic career coaching to elevate your nursing and healthcare career at ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠NurseKeith.com⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠. Keith also offers services as a motivational and keynote speaker and freelance nurse writer. You can always find Keith on⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ LinkedIn⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠. Are you looking for a novel way to empower your career and move forward in life? Keith's wife, Shada McKenzie, is a gifted astrologer, reader of the tarot, and teacher and mentor who combines ancient and modern techniques to provide valuable insights into your motivations, aspirations, and life trajectory, and she offers listeners of The Nurse Keith Show a 10% discount on their first consultation. Contact Shada at ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠TheCircelandtheDot.com ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠or shada@thecircleandthedot.com.

Michigan State Senator Michael Webber (R-9th District) joins The Steve Gruber Show to break down the newly passed state budget, what he supports, what he doesn't, and where Michigan needs stronger fiscal responsibility. Webber also calls out the Michigan Department of Health and Human Services, after a recent state audit exposed serious failures to protect psychiatric patient rights. He explains what the audit revealed, why accountability matters, and how Lansing must fix a system that's putting vulnerable patients at risk.

Here are 3 big things you need to know—   One — Secretary of State Marco Rubio says speed is of the essence for a deal to end the war in Gaza.  Appearing on ABC's "This Week", Rubio said this is not something that can continue to drag out.  His comments come as President Trump is sending special envoys to the Middle East to try to seal his hostage release deal.  Both Israel and Hamas have indicated support for the proposal, but with conditions that still need to be negotiated.    Two ---  A federal judge is stopping the Trump administration from sending members of the  National Guard to the streets of Portland, Oregon.  U.S. District Judge Karin Immergut granted the motion for a temporary restraining order filed by the state of California on Sunday night.  The motion stopped the deployment of up to 300 members of the California National Guard to Portland. No word on how that might affect plans to send the National Guard to Chicago. And number three ---   The new Michigan state budget cuts 18-hundred full-time jobs, but Governor Gretchen Whitmer says no layoffs will happen.  Most of the job cuts are from Michigan State Police, the Michigan Department of Corrections, and Michigan Department of Health and Human Services. The openings likely will come from attrition and eliminating current unfilled roles.

As long predicted, much of the federal government shut down Oct. 1 after Congress failed to pass required spending bills, with Democrats demanding Republicans renew the expiring Affordable Care Act subsidies in exchange for votes. While a shutdown does not affect Medicare and Medicaid, it could eventually hinder activities from every corner of the Department of Health and Human Services. Meanwhile, as Democrats and Republicans point fingers, HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. pursues policies and personnel undermining vaccines. Lauren Weber of The Washington Post, Shefali Luthra of The 19th, and Rachel Cohrs Zhang of Bloomberg News join KFF Health News' Julie Rovner to discuss the news. Also this week, Rovner interviews KFF Health News' Cara Anthony, who wrote the latest “Bill of the Month” feature, about an out-of-network eye surgery that left one kindergartner's family with a big bill. Plus, for “extra credit,” the panelists suggest health policy stories they read this week that they think you should read, too: Julie Rovner: KFF Health News' “Big Loopholes in Hospital Charity Care Programs Mean Patients Still Get Stuck With the Tab,” by Michelle Andrews. Shefali Luthra: The Washington Post's “Trump's USAID Pause Stranded Lifesaving Drugs. Children Died Waiting,” by Meg Kelly, Joyce Sohyun Lee, Rael Ombuor, Sarah Blaskey, Andrew Ba Tran, Artur Galocha, Eric Lau, and Katharine Houreld. Lauren Weber: Time Magazine's “Trump Is Breaking Americans' Trust in Doctors,” by Dr. Craig Spencer. Rachel Cohrs Zhang: ProPublica's “Georgia's Medicaid Work Requirement Program Spent Twice as Much on Administrative Costs as on Health Care, GAO Says,” by Margaret Coker, The Current. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

This week in the Breakroom, Jeff Davis and Amy Kelbick join Erin Fuller to discuss what we can expect from Congress and the Department of Health and Human Services during the government shutdown, and how specific healthcare programs will be impacted.

Rep. Jay DeBoyer, R-Clay Township and Chair of the House Oversight Committee, joins The Steve Gruber Show to break down Michigan's budget concerns. He says the Department of Health and Human Services has failed in its most basic responsibilities, leaving taxpayers frustrated and vulnerable. What went wrong, and what accountability looks like moving forward.

During confirmation hearings to become secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services, Robert F. Kennedy Jr. warned that “highly chemical-intensive processed foods” are “poisoning the American people.” A striking report from the federal government has since found that Americans on average get about half their calories from ultra-processed foods, which have been linked in studies to increased rates of obesity and chronic disease. A central part of the Make America Healthy Again movement's food agenda is going after some common ingredients in packaged foods: seed oils, corn syrup and food dyes. But what kind of dent will these efforts make in America's health? Today, host Elahe Izadi brings in nutrition columnist Anahad O'Connor and national health reporter Rachel Roubein to discuss MAHA's popular food policies, what the science says about the threat of these ingredients and some simple steps we can all take to improve our diets. Read More: Coke confirms cane sugar change. RFK Jr. calls it a MAHA win. Is it?What science says about artificial food dyes amid RFK Jr.'s push to ban themWhich oil do you cook with? The answer can impact your health.Why additives are so common in America's foodWhich breakfast is highest in sugar? Test your knowledge with our quiz.We analyzed dozens of ultra-processed foods. Here are the healthiest options.Today's show was produced by Elana Gordon. It was edited by Peter Bresnan and mixed by Sam Bair. Thanks also to Emily Codik and Fenit Nirappil.Subscribe to The Washington Post here.

The strongest organizations aren't just scaling services; they're scaling leadership. In this episode, Stacy DiStefano, CEO and founder of Consulting For Human Services, discusses the unique challenges and opportunities facing nonprofit behavioral health organizations. She explains how her team supports providers with strategic planning, growth strategies, technology adoption, and mergers & acquisitions (M&A) to ensure sustainability, while highlighting why boutique consultancies often deliver more value than large firms through lived experience and community ties. Stacy also explores the real issues keeping leaders up at night, from immigration policies impacting workforce stability to uncertainty in federal priorities and the accelerating wave of nonprofit consolidations, while outlining common pitfalls in M&A such as ego, resistance, and board misalignment. Looking ahead, she stresses the need for CEOs to educate boards, prepare the next generation of leaders, integrate technology across organizations, and embrace disruption as an opportunity rather than a threat. Tune in and learn how nonprofit leaders can future-proof their organizations through resilience, growth, and mission-driven strategy! Resources: Connect with and follow Stacy DiStefano on LinkedIn. Follow Consulting For Human Services on LinkedIn and explore their website.

As the federal government races to adopt AI, many agencies are looking to buy and build the same exact solutions. Recognizing this, the General Services Administration earlier this year launched USAi, a platform that offers agencies access to leading commercial AI models that they can deploy in a streamlined manner, eliminating redundancy across government and leading to greater efficiencies at scale. Zach Whitman, chief data scientist and chief AI officer for the GSA, recently joined me for a discussion at the Agentic AI Government Summit and Jamfest in Washington, D.C., to highlight the USAi effort, how it's progressing, the challenges GSA faces and what's next. The Department of Health and Human Services has tapped DOGE affiliate Zachary Terrell to be its chief technology officer, sources told FedScoop. Terrell's CTO title was confirmed by three officials, who were granted anonymity to be more candid. Taking on the role of CTO comes after his involvement in Department of Government Efficiency work at both HHS and the National Science Foundation, including the cancellation of grants at the science agency. One of those sources told FedScoop that Terrell has been in the technology chief role since the beginning of this month and is still at the NSF as well. While his leadership role is new, Terrell has previously been involved in work at HHS, including as a member of the department's DOGE team, according to a recent legal filing by the government. Per that document, Terrell was listed as one of the 10 team members given access to at least one sensitive system as part of the DOGE work. Specifically, Terrell was one of five team members who weren't directly employed by the U.S. DOGE Service — the White House home for the group. Congress is poised to make yet another run at legislation to reform agency software purchasing practices, with the reintroduction in the House last week of the Strengthening Agency Management and Oversight of Software Assets Act. The SAMOSA Act, which passed the House last December, would require federal agencies to comprehensively assess their software licensing practices, a move aimed at curbing duplicative tech, streamlining future purchases and reducing IT costs. Rep. Nancy Mace, R-S.C., chair of the House Oversight Subcommittee on Cybersecurity, Information Technology, and Government Innovation, said in a press release: “The GAO has found the federal government spends more than $100 billion annually on information technology and cybersecurity, including software licenses. Far too often, taxpayer dollars are wasted on these systems and licenses agencies fail to use.” The SAMOSA Act, Mace goes on to say, “requires agencies to account for existing software assets and consolidate purchases: reducing redundancy, increasing accountability, and saving potentially billions for American taxpayers.” Also in this episode: Salesforce Global Digital Transformation Executive Nadia Hansen joins SNG host Wyatt Kash in a sponsored podcast discussion on how Agentic AI is reshaping the way government teams work and why agencies need top-level sponsorship, transparent governance and workforce training to realize its potential. This segment was by sponsored by Salesforce. The Daily Scoop Podcast is available every Monday-Friday afternoon. If you want to hear more of the latest from Washington, subscribe to The Daily Scoop Podcast  on Apple Podcasts, Soundcloud, Spotify and YouTube.

Over the last two weeks, federal prosecutors in Minnesota have charged nine people with defrauding two different Medicaid programs, and they say this is just the beginning. Last week, federal prosecutors charged a woman for defrauding a state autism treatment program out of $14 million. The week prior, eight people were charged with defrauding the state's housing stabilization services. Now the State Department of Human Services is suspending another disability program over fraud allegations. No one has been charged. This is all on top of more than six dozen people charged so far in the feeding our future child nutrition scheme. Acting U.S. Attorney for Minnesota Joe Thompson is the prosecutor in charge of all these cases. He sat down with Minnesota Now host Nina Moini for a wide-ranging conversation about fraud in Minnesota.

 Trump picked RFK Jr. to take over the Department of Health and Human Services, and chaos has ensued. So far, RFK Jr. is ignoring the advice of experts and bringing along his cronies to push vaccine skepticism. It could have a devastating impact on the health of Americans for years to come. We're joined by Former CDC Director Dr. Tom Frieden, who currently heads global health organization Resolve to Save Lives, and MSNBC senior enterprise reporter Brandy Zadrozny, who has covered RFK Jr. for over a decade. Together we discuss the dangers that RFK Jr. poses to Americans' health and how the “MAHA” movement is NOT making America healthy again. We also talk through Trump and RFK Jr.'s latest announcement declaring Tylenol a contributing factor in the rise of autism, despite numerous studies saying otherwise. READ Dr. Frieden's new book, “The Formula for Better Health”: https://www.penguinrandomhouse.com/books/798043/the-formula-for-better-health-by-tom-frieden-md-mph/ READ Brandy Zadrozny's work for MSNBC: https://www.msnbc.com/author/brandy-zadrozny-ncpn858391 For information on our newest sponsor, Mint Mobile: www.mintmobile.com/franken 

After President Donald Trump announced that the Department of Health and Human Services was recommending women abstain from taking Tylenol during pregnancy, some women with “Trump derangement syndrome” began taking the drug in videos shared to social media.    “There is mounting evidence finding a connection between acetaminophen use during pregnancy and autism — and that's why the Administration is courageously issuing this new health guidance,” White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said following the president's announcement.    Now, some pregnant women are ending up in the hospital after overdosing on Tylenol while, in defiance of Trump, aiming to prove that the drug is safe to take during pregnancy.    On this week's edition of “Problematic Women,” we discuss the Trump administration's “autism announcement" and what the Tylenol brand itslef has said about taking the drug while pregnant.    Plus, we dig into ABC's decision to bring Jimmy Kimmel back to the airwaves following his misleading comments over Charlie Kirk's assassination.    And Sage Steele, former ESPN anchor, sits down with Crystal Bonham for an exclusive interview to discuss the future of Turning Point USA and the courage of Erika Kirk.  Enjoy the show!  Keep Up With The Daily Signal   Sign up for our email newsletters:⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ https://www.dailysignal.com/email⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠     Subscribe to our other shows:    The Tony Kinnett Cast: ⁠https://megaphone.link/THEDAILYSIGNAL2284199939⁠ The Signal Sitdown: ⁠https://megaphone.link/THEDAILYSIGNAL2026390376⁠   Problematic Women:⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠https://megaphone.link/THEDAILYSIGNAL7765680741⁠   Victor Davis Hanson: ⁠https://megaphone.link/THEDAILYSIGNAL9809784327⁠     Follow The Daily Signal:    X:⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠https://x.com/intent/user?screen_name=DailySignal⁠ Instagram:⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ https://www.instagram.com/thedailysignal/⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠  Facebook:⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ https://www.facebook.com/TheDailySignalNews/⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠  Truth Social:⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ https://truthsocial.com/@DailySignal⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠  YouTube:⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠https://www.youtube.com/dailysignal?sub_confirmation=1⁠    Subscribe on your favorite podcast platform and never miss an episode. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

After President Donald Trump announced that the Department of Health and Human Services was recommending women abstain from taking Tylenol during pregnancy, some women with “Trump derangement syndrome” began taking the drug in videos shared to social media.    “There is mounting evidence finding a connection between acetaminophen use during pregnancy and autism — and that's why the Administration is courageously issuing this new health guidance,” White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said following the president's announcement.    Now, some pregnant women are ending up in the hospital after overdosing on Tylenol while, in defiance of Trump, aiming to prove that the drug is safe to take during pregnancy.    On this week's edition of “Problematic Women,” we discuss the Trump administration's “autism announcement" and what the Tylenol brand itslef has said about taking the drug while pregnant.    Plus, we dig into ABC's decision to bring Jimmy Kimmel back to the airwaves following his misleading comments over Charlie Kirk's assassination.    And Sage Steele, former ESPN anchor, sits down with Crystal Bonham for an exclusive interview to discuss the future of Turning Point USA and the courage of Erika Kirk.  Enjoy the show!  Follow us on Instagram for EXCLUSIVE bonus content and the chance to be featured in our episodes: https://www.instagram.com/problematicwomen/   Connect with our hosts on socials!   Elise McCue X: https://x.com/intent/user?screen_name=EliseMcCue Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/elisemccueofficial/   Virginia Allen: X: https://x.com/intent/user?screen_name=Virginia_Allen5 Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/virginiaallenofficial/   Crystal Bonham: X: https://x.com/intent/user?screen_name=crystalkatetx   Check out Top News in 10, hosted by The Daily Signal's Tony Kinnett: https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLjMHBev3NsoUpc2Pzfk0n89cXWBqQltHY Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

In the past few weeks, we've done several episodes on obesity, GLP-1 drugs, and nutrition science. What we haven't talked about as much is the politics of food. And today's guests say: If you really want to understand why Americans are so unhealthy, you have to see that the problem is not just our willpower, and it's not just our food itself. It's our food policies. Kevin Hall was a former top nutrition researcher at the NIH who retired after accusing RFK Jr. and the Department of Health and Human Services of censoring a report that questioned their description of ultra-processed foods. Julia Belluz is a longtime nutrition and health journalist. Together, they've written a new book, 'Food Intelligence: The Science of How Food Both Nourishes and Harms Us.' If you have questions, observations, or ideas for future episodes, email us at PlainEnglish@Spotify.com. Host: Derek Thompson Guests: Julia Belluz and Kevin Hall Producer: Devon Baroldi Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

The alleged link between vaccines and autism is back in the news this week, being regularly speculated on by both President Trump and Health and Human Services secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr.  The claim has been repeatedly disproven: there is no evidence that vaccines and autism are related. But the myth is powerful. In this episode: the roots of the modern anti-vaccine movement, and of the fears that still fuel it – from a botched polio vaccine, to the discredited autism study, to today. This episode originally published in February 2025. Guests:Paul Offit, director of the Vaccine Education Center at the Children's Hospital of Philadelphia, and a professor of pediatrics at the University of Pennsylvania School of MedicineElena Conis, historian of medicine and public health and a professor in journalism and history at the University of California, BerkeleyArthur Allen, senior correspondent for nonprofit KFF Health News and author of Vaccine: The Controversial Story of Medicine's Greatest LifesaverTo access bonus episodes and listen to Throughline sponsor-free, subscribe to Throughline+ via Apple Podcasts or at plus.npr.org/throughline.Learn more about sponsor message choices: podcastchoices.com/adchoicesNPR Privacy Policy

Editorial Note: This episode was recorded in December 2024, after the nomination of Robert F Kennedy Jr as Secretary of Health and Human Services had been announced but prior to his confirmation.  Some comments by the podcast hosts and our guest will reflect this timing.Elephants rarely get cancer, ants quarantine when sick, and altruistic pigs have a higher pain tolerance. In this episode, we discuss insights from the animal world that shed light on human health and wellness, as well as the power of data driven narratives in effective public health education. Our guest is Dr. David Agus, founding CEO of the Ellison Medical Institute and professor of medicine and engineering at the University of Southern California. As a CBS news contributor and author of three New York Times best selling books on health, Dr. Agus emphasizes the need for experts who are willing to explain rather than tell. Having experienced the politicization of public health during the pandemic, he highlights the importance of data transparency and the urgency for more physician leaders. With technological advances making data collection and analysis ever more accessible, Dr. Agus shares a vision for the future of medicine, where patients bring their own health data to the clinic and physicians act as educators guided by the values of their patients.In this episode, you'll hear about: 2:30 - Dr. Agus's journey to medicine and how he found his way to focusing on preventative health and public education 6:50 - Navigating the politicized nature of public health as a public health educator 14:17 - Dr. Agus's viewpoint on the controversial nominations of RFK Jr. and Dr. Oz 19:51 - How the education of doctor needs to change to adapt to our newly data driven world 24:20 - The current state of nutrition science and how people can make the best choices with the current data available on the topic 32:12 - The potential benefits of making big data in electronic medical records available to physicians32:48 - The inspiration behind Dr. Agus's new book, The Book of Animal Secrets, and what the animal kingdom can teach us as humans about living a more fulfilling and healthy life 52:11 - A vision for empowering patients with their personal medical data in the age of AI 54:31 - Dr. Agus's advice to clinicians on supporting patients with their preventative healthVisit our website www.TheDoctorsArt.com where you can find transcripts of all episodes.If you enjoyed this episode, please subscribe, rate, and review our show, available for free on Spotify, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts. If you know of a doctor, patient, or anyone working in health care who would love to explore meaning in medicine with us on the show, feel free to leave a suggestion in the comments or send an email to info@thedoctorsart.com.Copyright The Doctor's Art Podcast 2025

Brooke Gladstone speaks with Paul Offit, the director of the Vaccine Education Center and a physician in the Division of Infectious Diseases at Children's Hospital of Philadelphia, about how the Secretary of Health and Human Services, Robert F. Kennedy Jr., purged the CDC's vaccine advisory committee members, the controversial figures Kennedy replaced them with, and what impact this will have on the future of vaccines and immunology in the US.  On the Media is supported by listeners like you. Support OTM by donating today (https://pledge.wnyc.org/support/otm). Follow our show on Instagram, Twitter and Facebook @onthemedia, and share your thoughts with us by emailing onthemedia@wnyc.org.

John welcomes world-renowned epidemiologist Dr. Michael Osterholm to discuss the threats to America's public health system under Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. Osterholm catalogues the damage Donald Trump's Secretary of Health & Human Services has inflicted in just seven months in office; the misstatements and misinformation he put forward in his recent appearance before the Senate; and his especially dangerous and scientifically baseless views regarding vaccines. Osterholm also discusses his new book, “The Big One: How We Must Prepare for Future Deadly Pandemics”—arguing that America is doing worse than nothing to ready itself for the all but certain eventuality of an outbreak far more deadly than Covid. To learn more about listener data and our privacy practices visit: https://www.audacyinc.com/privacy-policy Learn more about your ad choices. Visit https://podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Steve reacts to a survey from NBC News showing an alarming trend among Zoomers and says it's a civilizational neutron bomb. Then, Dr. Ryan Cole joins the program to share his thoughts on the progress MAHA is making through Health Secretary RFK Jr. at the Department of Health and Human Services. In Hour Two, the team decides whether a meme Steve shared goes too far. Pop Culture Tuesday explores whether "The Conjuring" franchise may be on its last legs. TODAY'S SPONSORS: TRUST & WILL: Protect what matters most in minutes at https://trustandwill.com/?utm_source=arm&utm_medium=podcast&utm_campaign=Q32023&utm_content=deace and get 10% off plus free shipping PREBORN: https://give.preborn.com/preborn/media-partner?sc=IABSD0123RA BIRCH GOLD: Text STEVE to 989898 REAL ESTATE AGENTS I TRUST: https://realestateagentsitrust.com/ Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices