Podcasts about Hygiene

Warum Sauberkeit einst als gefährlich galt – die Geschichte der Hygiene.... Mach's dir bequem und kuschel dich ein! Dieser Podcast wird durch Werbung finanziert. Infos und Angebote unserer Werbepartner: https://linktr.ee/EinschlafenMitPodcast Hier geht's zum Wikipedia-Artikel. Der Artikel wurde redaktionell überarbeitet: https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hygiene CC BY-SA 4.0

Dr. Will Bulsiewicz is a board-certified gastroenterologist, gut health expert, and New York Times bestselling author of Fiber Fueled. With a strong background in microbiome research, he advocates for plant-based nutrition as a foundation for optimal digestive and overall health. Dr. Bulsiewicz combines cutting-edge science with practical advice to help people transform their health through diet and lifestyle. He is a sought-after speaker and educator, frequently featured in media and on wellness platforms worldwide.In our conversation we discuss:(00:00) – Rise in global digestive issues since 1999(03:28) – Defining gut health and the gut microbiome(07:56) – Common misconceptions about gut health(15:33) – Food sensitivity and gut strength connection(18:03) – How poor gut health appears beyond digestion(25:56) – Physical activity's role in bowel movements(31:10) – Consequences of regularly holding in poop(34:46) – Timing of bowel movements and circadian rhythm(38:34) – Genetics vs. lifestyle in shaping gut health(45:29) – Insights from the Hadza tribe's microbiome(51:41) – AI and microbiome adaptation across seasons(56:24) – Superfoods and harmful foods for gut health(1:02:02) – Effectiveness of food vs. supplements(1:10:50) – How to evaluate supplement quality(1:14:57) – Everyday factors harming gut microbiome(1:15:29) – Hygiene habits and microbiome damage(1:24:38) – Key steps to rebuild the gut microbiome(1:26:02) – Daily habits with biggest microbiome impactLearn more about Dr. Will Bulsiewicz Website: https://theplantfedgut.com/Instagram:  @theguthealthmd  Watch full episodes on: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://www.youtube.com/@seankim⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Connect on IG: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://instagram.com/heyseankim

Kara Vavrosky, RDHEP, had a great chat with hygienist and researcher Dr. Kim Milleman, during which they discussed the adjunctive use of mouthrinse. As the owner and operator of Salus Research, specializing in the independent evaluation of oral healthcare products, she has authored or co-authored 75 peer-reviewed publications. She has also given over 200 scientific presentations at American and International dental conferences worldwide. During her 25-year career, she has conducted over 450 human clinical trials in China, the United States, and Guatemala.Dr. Milleman also conducted a clinical trial, where she and her team assessed the efficacy of adding LISTERINE® to a brushing and flossing routine. Listen to this episode learn more!A big thank you to LISTERINE® for sponsoring this video and for being such a champion of clinical research.Learn more about the science of LISTERINE® and sign up for LISTERINE® Pro Partners to get free samples at https://kenvuepro.com/en-us/listerine/Need CE? Start earning CE credits today at ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://rdh.tv/ce⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Get daily dental hygiene articles at ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://www.todaysrdh.com⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ Follow Today's RDH on Facebook: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://www.facebook.com/TodaysRDH/⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Follow Kara RDH on Facebook: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://www.facebook.com/DentalHygieneKaraRDH/⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Follow Kara RDH on Instagram: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://www.instagram.com/kara_rdh/

In dieser Nize2Know SHK ABC Folge erfährst Du, warum das Eckventil mehr ist als nur ein kleines Ersatzteil – es ist ein zentrales Bauteil für Wartung, Sicherheit und Hygiene in der Sanitärinstallation. Du lernst, worauf Du bei Auswahl, Wartung und Austausch achten solltest – inklusive Tipps zu selbstdichtenden Varianten und Rückflussverhinderern bei Doppelspindel-Eckventilen. Hör jetzt rein und entdecke, warum auch das unscheinbare Eckventil echte SHK-Relevanz hat!Wie freuen uns auf Feedback an info@nize2know.de. Besuche auch unsere Website auf ⁠nize2know.de⁠.

Inhalt Wenn Mikroplastik in Kosmetika nicht enthalten sein darf: Gilt dann ein Hinweis mit „frei von“ als Werbung mit Selbstverständlichkeit? Und bei welchen Claims kommt es auf Feinheiten an? Was gibt es Neues zur REACH-Verordnung? Ihr Experte Dr. Andreas Reinhart Rechtsanwalt Kontaktdaten Dr. Andreas Reinhart REINHART Rechtsanwälte Partnerschaft mbB Gabelsbergerstraße 9 / III 80333 München Tel.: + 49 89 41 11 282 00 Fax: + 49 89 41 11 282 22 E-Mail: info@reinhart.legal    Weitere Informationen zum Thema dieser Folge Informationen zur Online-Seminar-Serie „Update Gesetzgebung & Rechtsprechung“. Für weitere Informationen zur Online-Serie gehen Sie bitte im Behr's-Shop auf die Seite www.behrs.de/7305 . Oder senden Sie eine E-Mail an akademie@behrs.de . Wir freuen uns immer über ein Feedback. Schreiben Sie uns Ihre Meinung an podcast@behrs.de .   Links  •    Kostenfreie Informationen zu Hygiene und Recht  •    BEHR'S…SHOP   •    BEHR'S…AKADEMIE  •    BEHR'S…ONLINE •    QM4FOOD   •    HACCP-Portal   Hat Ihnen diese Folge gefallen? Dann freuen wir uns, wenn Sie unseren Podcast abonnieren. Hinterlassen Sie auch gern eine Bewertung, ein Feedback auf iTunes und teilen Sie diesen mit Freunden und Bekannten.  Hinterlassen Sie uns hier Ihre Bewertung, denn Ihre Meinung zählt und hilft uns, den Podcast noch besser auf Ihre Bedürfnisse zuzuschneiden.    

intimate Hygiene म्हणजे नक्की काय? अंतर्भागाची काळजी घेताना आपण कोणत्या चुका करतो?लैंगिक संबंधानंतर दोघांनी कोणती स्वच्छता पाळायला हवी? वयाच्या विविध टप्प्यावर स्त्रियांनी कोणती काळजी घ्यावी?मासिक पाळी दरम्यान कोणती काळजी घेणं गरजेचं आहे? स्त्री पुरुष दोघांसाठी intimate Hygiene का आवश्यक आहे? अंडरगारमेंट्स कसे निवडावे? कपड्यांची निवड intimate hygiene वर कसा परिणाम करते? मार्केटमध्ये मिळणाऱ्या intimate washes आणि deodorants खरंच सुरक्षित आहेत का? या विषयावर आपण डॉ. पल्लवी अहिरे शेळके (MD, DNB, DDV (Gold), Founder SkinEthics Clinic) आणि डॉ.गोरख मंद्रुपकर (Gynecologist & Fertility Expert) यांच्यासोबत खुसपुस केली आहे पूर्ण एपिसोड नक्की बघा.What exactly is intimate hygiene? How can poor intimate hygiene impact our health? What common mistakes do we make in maintaining intimate care? What hygiene practices should both partners follow after sexual intercourse? How should women care for their intimate health at different stages of life? What precautions are essential during menstruation? Why is intimate hygiene important for both men and women? How should undergarments be chosen, and how does the type of clothing we wear affect intimate hygiene? Are the intimate washes and deodorants available in the market truly safe to use? In this insightful episode of Khuspus, we engage in an open and informative conversation with Dr. Pallavi Ahire Shelke (MD, DNB, DDV – Gold Medalist, Founder of SkinEthics Clinic) and Dr. Gorakh Mandrupkar (Gynecologist & Fertility Expert). Together, we explore the often-ignored but essential aspects of intimate hygiene that are crucial for maintaining overall health and well-being. Don't miss the full episode—this is a conversation that truly mattersआणि मित्रांनो आपलं Merch घेण्यासाठी लगेच click करा! Amuktamuk.swiftindi.comDisclaimer: व्हिडिओमध्ये किंवा आमच्या कोणत्याही चॅनेलवर पॅनलिस्ट/अतिथी/होस्टद्वारे सांगण्यात आलेली कोणतीही माहिती केवळ general information साठी आहे. पॉडकास्ट दरम्यान किंवा त्यासंबंधात व्यक्त केलेली कोणतीही मते निर्माते/कंपनी/चॅनल किंवा त्यांच्या कोणत्याही कर्मचाऱ्यांची मते/अभिव्यक्ती/विचार दर्शवत नाहीत.अतिथींनी केलेली विधाने सद्भावनेने आणि चांगल्या हेतूने केलेली आहेत ती विश्वास ठेवण्याजोगी आहेत किंवा ती सत्य आणि वस्तुस्थितीनुसार सत्य मानण्याचे कारण आहे. चॅनलने सादर केलेला सध्याचा व्हिडिओ केवळ माहिती आणि मनोरंजनाच्या उद्देशाने आहे आणि चॅनल त्याची अचूकता आणि वैधता यासाठी कोणतीही जबाबदारी घेत नाही.अतिथींनी किंवा पॉडकास्ट दरम्यान व्यक्त केलेली कोणतीही माहिती किंवा विचार व्यक्ती/कास्ट/समुदाय/वंश/धर्म यांच्या भावना दुखावण्याचा किंवा कोणत्याही संस्था/राजकीय पक्ष/राजकारणी/नेत्याचा, जिवंत किंवा मृत यांचा अपमान करण्याचा हेतू नाही.. Guests: Dr. Gorakh Mandrupkar (Gynecologist & Fertility Expert),Dr. Pallavi Ahire Shelke (MD, DNB, DDV – Gold Medalist, Founder of SkinEthics Clinic) Host: Omkar Jadhav.Creative Producer: Shardul Kadam.Editor:.Rameshwar Garkal.Edit Assistant: Rohit Landge.Content Manager: Sohan Mane.Social Media Manager: Sonali Gokhale.Legal Advisor: Savani Vaze.Business Development Executive: Sai Kher.Intern: Mrunal Arve.About The Host Omkar Jadhav.Co-founder – Amuk Tamuk Podcast NetworkPodcast Host | Writer | Director | Actor | YouTube & Podcast ConsultantWith 8+ years in digital content, former Content & Programming Head at BhaDiPa & Vishay Khol.Directed 100+ sketches, 3 web series & non-fiction shows including Aai & Me, Jhoom, 9 to 5, Oddvata.Creative Producer – BErojgaar | Asst. Director – The Kerala StoryHost of Khuspus – a podcast on taboo and uncomfortable topics.Visiting Faculty – Ranade Institute, Pune University.Connect with us: Twitter: https://twitter.com/amuk_tamukInstagram: https://www.instagram.com/amuktamuk/Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/amuktamukpodcastsSpotify: Khuspus #AmukTamuk #marathipodcasts

Let's be real, ballet class can get sweaty, smelly, and a little messy — especially when you're juggling adult life and a dance bag full of gear!

In dieser Folge ist Jonas Borkhoff aka openyoureye tattoo zu Gast – ein junger Tätowierer aus Köln, der nicht nur mit freihändigen Blackwork-Tattoos auffällt, sondern auch mit einem Lebensweg abseits des Gewöhnlichen. Mit 27 Jahren blickt Jonas bereits auf eine 2000 Kilometer lange Fahrradreise nach Irland zurück, die ihn in nur 21 Tagen durch Pannen, Begegnungen und Vertrauen geführt hat.Seb spricht mit ihm über den Umzug von Dortmund nach Köln, seine Anfänge im Tattoostudio und darüber, wie er seinen ganz eigenen künstlerischen Stil entwickelt hat. Jonas erzählt von seiner Zeit in Zirkuswägen und Jurten, von alternativen Lebenskonzepten, spirituellen Impulsen und der Rolle von Intuition beim Tätowieren. Es geht um Technik, um Material, um Hygiene – aber auch um Manifestation, Gedankenmuster und persönliche Entwicklung.Dabei bleibt das Gespräch trotz aller Tiefe leicht, lebendig und inspirierend. Jonas gibt ehrliche Einblicke, ermutigt zum Ausprobieren und zeigt, wie viel Freiheit in Kunst und Leben stecken kann – wenn man sich traut.Jonas findet ihr hier auf Instagram und wenn ihr Bock auf das komplette, 2-stündige Gespräch habt, zieht euch unser ⁠TFTN+ Abo⁠ oder besorgt euch die Folge in ⁠unserem Shop⁠!⁠⁠⁠[ WERBUNG ]Bei unseren Werbepartnern könnt ihr richtig sparen – darunter bei Neonsfeer, Murostar, Killer Ink, Cheyenne Tattoo Equipment, CoalBlack oder Caos Nero! Alle Infos auf ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠www.tftn-podcast.com⁠⁠⁠⁠.

Es gibt einen Reisetipp, einen Geheimtipp, Podcasttipps, einen Tipp zur geistigen Hygiene ... und viele Tipps mehr.

Die Corona-Maßnahmen basierten auf verschiedenen Annahmen bezüglich der Verbreitungswege und -weisen eines Erregers namens SARS-Cov2. Dazu zählen die früh postulierte “asymptomatische Übertragung“ oder die Theorie der Verbreitung des Virus mithilfe von Aerosolen. Praktisch bedeuteten diese Erklärungen, dass bei diesem Infekt auch gesunde Menschen eine potenzielle Ansteckungsgefahr darstellen und dass die Übertragung nicht wie bei anderen Atemwegserregern über Tröpfchen, sondern über kleinste Luftpartikel stattfindet. Ein weiterer wichtiger Bestandteil des Pandemie-Managements war die – der bisherigen Evidenz widersprechende – Behauptung, wonach das Tragen von Masken in der Öffentlichkeit einen Eigen- oder sogar Fremdschutz leistet. In meinem Gespräch mit der Fachärztin für Mikrobiologie, Virologie und Infektionsepidemiologie sowie für Hygiene und Umweltmedizin, Prof. Dr. Ines Kappstein, geht es um das größtenteils nicht vorhandene wissenschaftliche Fundament all dieser Annahmen, die Grundlage für die Corona-Maßnahmen waren, welche jahrelang Millionen von Menschen betrafen. Ines Kappstein, die sich seit Jahrzehnten mit der Übertragung von Erregern beschäftigt und diesbezüglich Krankenhäuser berät, veröffentlichte im Mai 2020 einen viel beachteten Fachartikel, der die plötzlich vom Robert-Koch-Institut aufgestellte Behauptung einer Wirksamkeit des Masketragens in der Öffentlichkeit evaluierte. Der aussagekräftige Titel dieses Artikels lautete „Mund-Nasen-Schutz in der Öffentlichkeit: Keine Hinweise für eine Wirksamkeit“. In der Folge dieser Veröffentlichung erlebte Kappstein Aspekte von Cancel Culture, Verleumdung und sogar Kriminalisierung – Dinge, die in den Corona-Jahren viele Wissenschaftler mit kritischer Meinung erdulden mussten. Beratungsverträge mit Krankenhäusern wurden ihr plötzlich aufgrund ihrer vermeintlichen politischen Untragbarkeit gekündigt, sie wurde angefeindet und es wurde sogar ihr Haus von der Polizei durchsucht. Kappstein war nämlich eine von drei Gutachtern in dem historischen „Weimarer-Urteil“, bei dem Richter Christian Dettmar die Maskenpflicht für zwei Kinder aufhob und diese insgesamt für verfassungswidrig erklärte.(Beschluss) Genauso wie Dettmar (der mittlerweile in letzter Instanz eine Haftstrafe auf Bewährung wegen Rechtsbeugung erhalten hat), bekam auch sie Tausende Zuschriften voller Dankbarkeit und Wertschätzung, weil sie im Einklang mit der Faktenlage die Sinnhaftigkeit des Masketragens in der Öffentlichkeit in Frage stellte. Mit der Veröffentlichung der RKI-Protokolle vor einem Jahr zeigte sich dann ironischerweise, dass die Experten im RKI ähnlich dachten wie Kappstein. Auf meine Frage, ob es jemals eine gesundheitliche Notlage gab, welche die Pandemiepolitik notwendig machte, antwortet Ines Kappstein im Gespräch, dass sie anhand der Daten des RKI keinen Hinweis auf irgendeine besondere Gesundheitsgefahr durch einen Atemwegsvirus erkennen kann. Artikel, Video und Podcast: https://blog.bastian-barucker.de/aerosoloe-angst-und-masken-kappstein/ Produktionskosten: ca. 1600€ Weitere Produktionen ermöglichen: https://blog.bastian-barucker.de/unterstuetzung/ Das Buch von Frau Kappstein: https://www.thomaskubo.de/produkt/kappstein-aerosole-angst-und-masken/ Artikel von Frau Kappstein: Buchauszug: Aufarbeitung der Coronazeit, aber wie? von Prof. Kappstein: https://blog.bastian-barucker.de/aufarb

I imagine you girls have seen or at least heard of Get Ready With Me videos–maybe even created one yourself. Reflecting on my teen routines from the 90s and early 2000s, if I had made Get Ready With Me videos, now knowing what I've learned over the years, I would change a lot of things. In hopes that you will learn from my mistakes, here are some of my Get Ready With Me Redos..   .   .A full transcript of this episode is available in the 10 for Teens + Tweens Ep. 132 show notes on EmpowerfulGirls.com.

'n Nuwe studie het bevind dat die ernstige Europese hittegolf van 23 Junie tot 2 Julie vanjaar na raming 2 300 sterftes in 12 stede veroorsaak het. Dit is volgens die studie deur Imperial College London en die London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine. Van die sterftes word sowat tweederdes toegeskryf aan aardverwarming, met 88 persent van die slagoffers ouer as 65. 'n Omgewingsepidemioloog, Pierre Masselot, het aan The Independent gesê die wêreld moet ophou om fossielbrandstowwe te verbrand:

In this episode, I'm joined by the brilliant and bold Katrina Sanders, RDH, BSDH, M.Ed, RF, to talk about the power of airway awareness from the hygiene chair—even when you're not a myofunctional therapist.Katrina shares how hygienists can recognize early signs of airway dysfunction, confidently start the conversation with patients, and become a powerful part of the collaborative care team without stepping outside their scope.We explore:•What airway screening looks like in real-time clinical practice•How to refer out when myo or sleep support is needed•How to overcome pushback from providers or patients•Why every hygienist should be the first line of defense in identifying airway dysfunctionIf you've been feeling the pull toward airway health—but aren't sure where you fit in—this conversation will leave you feeling empowered, informed, and inspired to take action right from the op.

Die lebenslange Monogamie ist vom Aussterben bedroht, soviel ist sicher. Aber wie heißt das jetzt nochmal? Serielle Monogamie? Polygamie? Polyamorie? Beziehungsanarchie? Offene Beziehung? Wilde Ehe? Scheinmonogamie mit Fremdgang? Wie ist euer Beziehungsstatus? Es ist kompliziert, wusste schon Facebook – ebenfalls vom Aussterben bedroht – darum haben wir uns gedacht, wir quatschen mal von Pärchen zu Pärchen, aber natürlich auch in unserer Rolle als Tantralehrende, Paar- & Beziehungscoaches, über die Praxis des Wilden Lebens, die Welt der Wilden Ehe oder was immer Paar gerade lebt und erforscht. Wir sprechen über Erfahrungen, Momente von Licht und Schatten, große Gefühle, kleine Alltagsdinge, Wünsche, Ängste, Konsequenzen… Es gibt viel zu reden! Esther und Martin haben sich bei Wild Life Tantra gefunden und üben seither die Liebe miteinander, aber nicht nur zu zweit. Wir nehmen das zum Anlass, mit ihnen über den Zoo der Beziehungsmodelle zu sprechen. Übrigens: Die Pärchengespräche sollen eine neue Serie werden im Wild Life Podcast, darum, liebe Pärchen, meldet euch, wenn ihr dabei sein wollt! Weiterführende Links Weitere Podcastfolgen zum Thema Folge 85 – Eifersucht – Dämon oder Arschengel? Folge 82 – Wege ins integrale Bewusstsein – Spiral Dynamics (Modelle #3) Folge 76 – Kuscheln oder Sex? Folge 62 – Modelle, Realitäten und das große Geheimnis (Modelle #1) Folge 39 – Talkrunde zu STIs & Hygiene in sexpositiven Räumen und beim Dating Folge 30 – Freie Liebe – Talkrunde auf der FreiRaumpARTy Folge 16 – Wahrsprechen in Berührung und das Seitenmodell Folge 13 – Wie Beziehungen gelingen können Unser Buch – Die Buddha-Beziehung Manifest zur Beziehungsanarchie von Andie Nordgren Buch: Jessica Fern – Polysecure: Bindung, Trauma und konsensuelle Nicht-Monogamie  Song “Liebe zu Dritt” von Stereo Total Wir wünschen viel Mitfreude! Esther, Martin, Tandana & chono

Recorded on 10 July 2025 for ICMDA Webinars.Howard Lyons chairs a webinar with Prof Annelies Wilder-SmithThe COVID-19 pandemic taught us that global health is interconnected, and delayed action costs lives. Strong public health systems, early response, and equitable access to vaccines are critical. The rapid development of mRNA vaccines showed the power of well-funded, coordinated science.However, science must remain apolitical - when politicized, it erodes public trust and fuels misinformation. Clear communication, preparedness, and protecting vulnerable populations are essential. The pandemic revealed the fragility of health systems and the urgent need for resilience. As Scripture reminds us, pestilences are part of a broken world (Luke 21:11) - COVID-19 was not the first and will not be the last.Dr. Annelies Wilder-Smith has devoted her career to emerging infectious diseases, particularly those impacting low- and middle-income countries. Her path was shaped during two decades in Asia, where she was at the forefront of the SARS outbreak, and investigated the H5N1, dengue and Zika virus outbreaks. During the COVID-19 pandemic, she served as an external advisor to the World Health Organization, where she developed COVID-19 vaccine policies for the global use.Annelies is Honorary Professor of Emerging Infectious Diseases at the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, Past President of the International Society of Travel Medicine, and Editor-in-Chief of the Journal of Travel Medicine. Her academic career resulted in 380 publications and many research grants. She leads the Lancet Commission on Dengue and was Principal Investigator of EU-funded research consortia.Her awards include the Myron Levine Vaccinology Prize and the CDC Honor Group Award. Annelies is also the author of Travel Medicine: Tales Behind the Science and Grasping Heaven, a biography of Dr. Tami Fisk. She lives in Switzerland with her husband, a professor of neurology; both their children are physicians in training.⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠To listen live to future ICMDA webinars visit⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://icmda.net/resources/webinars/⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠

Jatin Patel is the Head of Operations at FGS Ingredients Ltd. He has over two decades of extensive experience in the food industry and has been a cornerstone of FGS Ingredients for the past 11 years. A qualified ACCA Accountant, Jatin combines his strong financial acumen with an in-depth understanding of food industry operations. He holds a Level 3 Food Safety Certification and has completed Advanced HACCP training. In this episode of Food Safety Matters, we speak with Jatin Patel [20:54] about: How FGS Ingredients discovered the source of the peanut contamination that caused a recall of some of its mustard-based products How FGS Ingredients initiated and carried out the recall, and lessons learned from the process Changes that FGS Ingredients has made to its allergen controls, food safety program, and supply chain as a result of the recall The broader implications for food safety standards, especially around allergen control, related to FGS Ingredients' recall experience How FGS Ingredients' learnings and risk mitigation efforts can help other companies be better prepared to maintain food safety along their supply chains. News and Resources HHS Budget Request Beats Familiar Drum [2:24] USDA Extends H5N1 Testing in Dairy Cattle; EU Releases Guidance on Avian Flu Prevention [8:20]Pennsylvania Bill Aims to Protect Restaurant Patrons with Food Allergies [14:12] Trump Nominates Mindy Brashears to Second Term as USDA's Under Secretary for Food Safety [19:35] Sponsored by: Hygiena: Innovative Diagnostics Solutions for Hygiene and Food Safety Allergen Diagnostics and Data Management | Hygiena We Want to Hear from You! Please send us your questions and suggestions to podcast@food-safety.com

More nice guys from reddit: https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLTz_vyR-zjcBl2jBUBGlVxRuLtmZdC6D7In this episode of r/niceguys, we cover some walls of text. Simps of this caliber make me want to leave the planet. It's hard to stomach, but I'll be there to help see you through it. We'll do this nice guy reddit post together friends. But there is no reprieve from the cringe, so make sure you buckle yourself in securely.YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/reddxyTwitch: https://www.twitch.tv/daytondoesDiscord: https://discord.gg/Sju7YckUWuPayPal: https://www.paypal.me/daytondoesPatreon: http://patreon.com/daytondoes

Episode 149.2: Shooter on the Loose, Gauge Holes, Andor, Volcano Talk, 3rd World Hygiene, Daruma, and Elijiah Craig BP C924

00:00 - 06:42 - Introduction & Sponsors & Polaris (week behind)06:42 - 08:06 - Los Banditos drama 08:06 - 11:45 - James Smith & TRT 11:45 - 15:01 - Liver King15:01 - 22:30 - What to do when you are bored of BJJ & Wrestling 22:30 - 24:01 - Los Banditos & ARMA24:01 - 25:05 - Hygiene 25:05 - 26:35 - Maintaining top position26:35 - 26:49 - Ringworm 26:49 - 30:21 - UFC BJJ & Tacketts, closing notes Sponsors:Combat Sports Hygiene: https://sportshygiene.com/?srsltid=AfmBOoq1UCCi5ZpYQs3knfm9lmjRmutUolPTl89KzsBWvMGuyRU4T7kL Use Code RUNESCAPE at checkout Progress: https://www.progressjj-europe.com Use code RUNESCAPE at checkout for discount on any productsLess Impressed More Involved: https://outlierdb.com/ - use code RUNESCAPE for 50% off your first monthWhere to find Greg: https://www.instagram.com/gdsouders/ How to work with us:Charles Strength Training Programs GET 7 DAY FREE MAT STRONG PROGRAM: https://mailchi.mp/charlesallanprice/mat-strong-landing-page BJJ Workouts Instructional: https://bjjfanatics.com/collections/new-releases/products/building-workouts-for-bjj-by-charles-allan-price 1:1 Coaching Inquiries: https://7kdbbkmkmsl.typeform.com/to/nSZHpCOL Eoghan's InstructionalsEoghans Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/eoghanoflanagansubmissiongrappling?fbclid=PAZXh0bgNhZW0CMTEAAaeVwoFHqyoZbzOnBQj1A_HdJuseIdZ5JeBDv2WviMJErMprNx8nBaRtazKB8A_aem_hDebDKTGIEpirScyGQEG0w Leg Lock Instructional: https://bjjfanatics.com/products/leglocks-the-uk-variant-by-eoghan-oflanagan Half Butterfly Instructional: https://bjjfanatics.com/products/down-right-sloppy-half-butterfly-by-eoghan-oflanagan Countering the outside passer: https://bjjfanatics.com/products/sloppy-seconds-countering-the-outside-passer-by-eoghan-o-flanagan Los Banditos Gym: https://losbanditos.club/ Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

In dieser sommerlich-erotischen Folge von Ladylike – Der Podcast über S**, Liebe & Erotik wird es klitschnass – zumindest theoretisch! Yvonne und Nicole sprechen über einen Hörerwunsch: S** im Schwimmbad – ein heißes Thema mit kaltem Beigeschmack. Die beiden Moderatorinnen nehmen euch mit auf eine Reise durch Hallenbäder voller Chlorgeruch und Flipflop-Ekel, über überfüllte Freibäder mit Pommes-Duft bis hin zu abgelegenen Badeseen mit romantischen Luftmatratzenmomenten. Nicole kann sich bei der Vorstellung an S** im öffentlichen Schwimmbad kaum halten vor Grauen – zu viele Haare, zu viel Fußpilz, zu viele fremde Körperflüssigkeiten. Für Yvonne dagegen ist der Gedanke an eine zärtliche Bootsfahrt oder ein versteckter Ort im Grünen durchaus reizvoll – wenn auch nur unter bestimmten Bedingungen. Die beiden diskutieren lustvoll und humorvoll über Hygiene, Öffentlichkeit, Fantasien und die Frage: Wie viel Erotik verträgt ein Schwimmbad wirklich? Und ganz wichtig – wo fängt es an, grenzüberschreitend zu werden?Hört rein in die neue Folge und erfahrt, warum Chlorgeruch der Lust im Weg stehen kann...Habt Ihr selbst erotische Erfahrungen, eine Frage oder Story, über die Yvonne & Nicole im Ladylike-Podcast sprechen sollen? Dann schreibt uns gern an @ladylike.show auf Instagram oder kontaktiert uns über unsere Internetseite ladylike.showHört in die Folgen bei RTL+, iTunes oder Spotify rein und schreibt uns gerne eine Bewertung. Außerdem könnt ihr unseren Podcast unterstützen, indem ihr die neuen Folgen auf Euren Kanälen pusht und Euren Freunden davon erzählt.Erotik, S**, Liebe, Freundschaft und die besten Geschichten aus der Ladylike-Community gibt es auch im Buch zum Podcast „Da kann ja jede kommen“! Hier geht's zum Buch: bit.ly/ladylike-buchUnsere allgemeinen Datenschutzrichtlinien finden Sie unter https://art19.com/privacy. Die Datenschutzrichtlinien für Kalifornien sind unter https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info abrufbar.

How to use your Faith and Attitude of Gratitude.Adaptive.TT ME.WELL Mind-SPA Mind.SET as your daily #1 Health Mental Sof.BEing Self-Care Hygiene.For this episode we're diving into something that sounds fluffy but is backed by science: Gratitude and how it should be your #1. Mental Health as a state of Being Self-Care Hygiene. Yep, I'm talking about noticing the good—even when life feels like it's been cooked in a microwave for too long. Put another way "How Gratitude + ME.WELL Mind-SPA Adaptive.TT Mind.SETs are the 2 daily Self-Care hygiene routine that can nurture and master the WHO's definition of Your Daily Day-Long Mental Health as a STATE Of Being And Well-Being.Ralph Soulman, our resident mental health warrior, once thought gratitude was a load of woo-woo nonsense. But let me tell you—gratitude changed his life. And it can change yours too. Buckle up, because we're about to explore the magic of gratitude with humor, heart, and a touch of Ralph's everyday chaos.

In the UK alone, around one in four adults are experiencing chronic pain. And nearly a quarter of the population live with some form of disability. Yet despite these numbers, pain and disability are still too often talked about in hushed tones, misunderstood, or entirely overlooked in public life. How do we talk about pain that doesn't go away? How do people live in bodies that society isn't built for? And how can we shift the narrative from individual burden to collective responsibility? Professor Tom Shakespeare helps us answer these questions in this episode of the We Society. His work challenges the assumptions we make about ability, autonomy, and what it means to live a fulfilling life.   As Professor of Disability Research in the medical faculty at the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, Tom is a leading sociologist, bioethicist and one of the UK's most influential voices in disability studies.   Join acclaimed journalist and Academy president Will Hutton, as he invites guests from the world of social science to explore the stories behind the news and hear their solutions to society's most pressing problems. Don't want to miss an episode? Follow the show on your favourite podcast platform and you can email us on wesociety@acss.org.uk and tell us who we should be speaking to.  The We Society podcast is brought to you by the Academy of Social Sciences in association with the Nuffield Foundation and the Leverhulme Trust.  Producer: Emily Uchida Finch Assistant Producer: Emily Gilbert A Whistledown Production 

Clean carpets play a crucial role in maintaining healthy, safe, and productive learning environments. Find out how specialised professional carpet cleaning services by Rinse Carpet Cleaning (07432-219-924) help optimise London's school interiors, and get 30% off for regular cleanings. Learn more at https://www.rinsecleaning.co.uk/commercial/educational-institutions-carpet-cleaning Rinse Carpet Cleaning City: Gerrards Cross Address: 79 Howards Wood Drive Website: https://www.rinsecleaning.co.uk/ Phone: +44 7432 219924 Email: info@rinsecleaning.co.uk

I'm back with the luminous Cru von Holtzendorff-Fehling, a gifted soul reader, healer, and one of the most tuned-in beings I know. Cru has an extraordinary ability to read the energy systems and soul blueprints of others, and her deep understanding of the human energy field is matched only by the warmth and humility she brings to her work.In this intimate and vulnerable conversation, we explore the transformative power of 5-MeO-DMT–also known as bufo, how our energetic anatomy works, and how trauma, conditioning, and egoic patterns disrupt it; plus, shadow work, integrating darkness, and how accepting every part of ourselves is the path to wholeness.If you've ever felt stuck in old patterns, overwhelmed by sensitivity, or curious about the deeper layers of energetic healing, this episode is a masterclass in becoming who you really are. Learn more about the Path of the Healer Training Course at cru-essence.com/pathofthehealer.DISCLAIMER: This podcast is for educational purposes only and not intended for diagnosing or treating illnesses. The hosts disclaim responsibility for any adverse effects from using the information presented. Consult your healthcare provider before using referenced products. This podcast may include paid endorsements.THIS SHOW IS BROUGHT TO YOU BY:CALROY | Visit calroy.com/luke to get 25% off and free shipping, plus a free bag of their microbiome gum.QUANTUM UPGRADE | Get a 15-day free trial with code LUKE15 at lukestorey.com/quantumupgrade.SUNLIGHTEN | Save up to $600 when you go to lukestorey.com/sunlighten and use code LUKESTOREY in the pricing form.NUCALM | Go to nucalm.com and use code LUKE for 15% off!MORE ABOUT THIS EPISODE:(00:00:00) Microdosing the Divine: Soothing the Ego into Surrender(00:29:01) Befriending the Ego & Cleansing the Subtle Body(00:52:26) Sensitivity as a Superpower & Fine-Tuning the Energy Body(01:09:00) Cleansing the Astral Body & Mushroom Medicine for All Beings(01:21:17) Radical Acceptance: Love, Pain, & the End of Resistance(01:31:02) Entities, Projections, & the True Power of Integration(01:47:41) Beyond Vision Boards: True Manifestation & the Path of Unconditioning(01:59:31) The End of the Karma Loop & Mastering the Self(02:28:31) Path of the Healer: Training, Transmission, & Soul MasteryResources:• Website: cru-essence.com• Instagram: instagram.com/cruessence• Shop all our merch designs at lukestoreymerch.com• Check out Gilded By Luke Storey: gildedbylukestorey.com• Join me on Telegram: t.me/lukestorey

Elektromobilität in Indien - Der Subkontinent stellt um; Erdbeobachtung aus dem All - Wie sie immer genauer wird; Rekordtemperaturen im Mittelmeer - Was sind die Folgen?; Verantwortlich für die Handlungen anderer - Wie komme ich da raus?; Hautpflege - Ist weniger mehr?; Klima 2045 - In welcher Welt werden wir leben?; Moderation: Johannes Döbbelt. Von WDR 5.

Inhalt Schon über 2.500 Meldungen im RASFF in 2025, viele aktualisierte Rechtsvorschriften. Hierzu erhalten Sie heute einen kurzen Überblick.   Weitere Informationen zum Thema dieser Folge Informationen zur Online-Seminar-Serie „Update Gesetzgebung & Rechtsprechung“. Für weitere Informationen zur Online-Serie gehen Sie bitte im Behr's-Shop auf die Seite www.behrs.de/7305 Wir freuen uns immer über ein Feedback. Schreiben Sie uns Ihre Meinung an podcast@behrs.de .   Links  •    Kostenfreie Informationen zu Hygiene und Recht  •    BEHR'S…SHOP   •    BEHR'S…AKADEMIE  •    BEHR'S…ONLINE •    QM4FOOD   •    HACCP-Portal   Hat Ihnen diese Folge gefallen? Dann freuen wir uns, wenn Sie unseren Podcast abonnieren. Hinterlassen Sie auch gern eine Bewertung, ein Feedback auf iTunes und teilen Sie diesen mit Freunden und Bekannten.  Hinterlassen Sie uns hier Ihre Bewertung, denn Ihre Meinung zählt und hilft uns, den Podcast noch besser auf Ihre Bedürfnisse zuzuschneiden.      

I am over it. I am so incredibly over hearing how the hygiene department in any dental office is a loss leader. In this episode, I, in typical Andrew fashion, rail against the notion that hygienists have little value for a dental practice. If you are a hygienist listening to this episode you will get some useful tips on scheduling practices. If you are dental practice owner, you will get some useful tips on how to leverage your highly qualified clinicians to the fullest to make you some $$!  Resources: If you have specific questions about how to make your hygiene department more valuable, shoot me an email andrew@ataleoftwohygienists.com 

I am over it. I am so incredibly over hearing how the hygiene department in any dental office is a loss leader. In this episode, I, in typical Andrew fashion, rail against the notion that hygienists have little value for a dental practice. If you are a hygienist listening to this episode you will get some useful tips on scheduling practices. If you are dental practice owner, you will get some useful tips on how to leverage your highly qualified clinicians to the fullest to make you some $$!  Resources: If you have specific questions about how to make your hygiene department more valuable, shoot me an email andrew@ataleoftwohygienists.com 

Have you ever wondered how France became the world's perfume capital? In “The Story of Perfume: A Journey Through France's Luxurious Past,” host Annie Sargent and guest Elyse Rivin from Toulouse Guided Walks take you on a fragrant journey through French history. They explore how perfume evolved from smoky rituals and religious ceremonies to the luxury bottles we see today. You will learn how Grasse became the heart of perfume making and why Chanel No. 5, Shalimar, and Poison became iconic scents tied to France. Listen to the episode ad-free to travel back in time through the scents of France! Annie and Elyse share stories about Catherine de' Medici bringing her personal perfumer to France, the smelly days at Versailles when perfume was used to cover the lack of bathing, and how Napoleon loved Eau de Cologne so much he used it daily. Discover how the French revolution impacted perfume makers, how the Guerlain family shaped perfume history, and how synthetic fragrances changed the industry. If you are planning a trip to France, Annie and Elyse suggest several places you can visit to enjoy this history in real life. This episode is perfect for travelers interested in French culture, perfume lovers, and anyone curious about the unique stories that shaped France. Subscribe to the Join Us in France Travel Podcast to get weekly episodes that bring France to life with history, culture, and practical travel tips for your next adventure. Listen to this episode to add a touch of scent and story to your France travel plans and discover why perfume remains one of the country's most luxurious traditions. Table of Contents for this Episode [00:00:15] Introduction and Topic Overview [00:00:31] Today on the podcast [00:01:03] Podcast supporters [00:01:59] No Magazine segment [00:02:33] Annie and Elyse about the History of Perfume in France [00:03:01] Perfume as a French Identity [00:04:15] Understanding Different Types of Perfume [00:07:38] Historical Significance of Perfume [00:08:46] The Fragonard Perfume Store near the Opera House in Paris [00:09:30] Finding Your Perfume [00:13:27] The word Perfume [00:13:30] Origin of the word “perfume” [00:14:44] Perfume in Religious and Cultural Practices [00:16:27] Perfume in Ancient Civilizations [00:20:24] The Renaissance Influence on French Perfume [00:21:58] Catherine de' Medici and the Rise of French Perfume [00:25:59] Grasse: The Perfume Capital [00:29:19] Impact of the Plague on Hygiene and Perfume [00:31:16] The Unwashed Aristocracy [00:32:41] Perfume to Mask the Stench [00:34:52] The Spread of Perfume Culture [00:37:30] The Birth of Eau de Cologne [00:42:45] Perfume Revolution in the 1700s [00:44:33] Napoleon and the Return of Perfume [00:46:45] The Rise of Guerlain and Synthetic Perfumes [00:48:00] The Introduction of Synthetic Fragrances [00:50:24] Perfume in 20th Century [00:52:15] Coco Chanel and Chanel No5 [00:53:34] Christian Dior and the Perfume for the “New Women” [00:54:18] The Golden Age of French Perfume [00:56:17] Conclusion and Final Thoughts More episodes about French culture

In this episode, we are joined by Bhanu Prasad, an Impact Innovation Coach at Digital Impact Square (DISQ), an open social innovation center located in Nashik, Maharashtra. DISQ encourages the use of digital technologies to address significant social challenges in sectors such as Health, Hygiene, Housing, Transportation, Food, Agriculture, Energy, Water, Environment, Financial and Personal Security, Citizen Empowerment, Transparency, Education, and Skills Development across India. Founded on the collaborative principles inspired by the MIT Media Lab's Camera Culture research group, DISQ represents a unique platform where local communities, domain experts, the government, and industry partners converge to address these challenges. Through initiatives like the Kumbhathon, DISQ played a pivotal role in improving the experience at the Simhastha Kumbh Mela, one of the largest gatherings of human beings in the world. This effort not only enhanced visitor experiences but also demonstrated how technology-driven solutions can solve large-scale problems in real-time. Join us as Bhanu Prasad shares insights into DISQ's mission, the impact of digital innovations on social issues, and the incredible journey of leveraging technology for public good.✨ ABOUT ME ✨ Hello, my name is Vidyangi (Vida) Patil. I am a mindset coach, author, and speaker. Five years ago when I started understanding success hacks for individuals, startups, and larger organizations little did I know I would end up working with mentors hail from Silicon Valley at Stanford University, MIT Media Lab, Singularity University, and incubators and accelerators. All the way from guiding AI/ML startup founders in winning pitch competitions, and bagging investor appointments to helping youth entrepreneurs and women land their dream job or promotion, I plan to spill the beans of wisdom to launch you higher wherever you are in your life. I have successfully coached communities in social impact initiatives during COVID. Every week you will see new videos from me on career, personal growth, and technology trends to onboard your rocket ship to success!

“To navigate proof, we must reach into a thicket of errors and biases. We must confront monsters and embrace uncertainty, balancing — and rebalancing —our beliefs. We must seek out every useful fragment of data, gather every relevant tool, searching wider and climbing further. Finding the good foundations among the bad. Dodging dogma and falsehoods. Questioning. Measuring. Triangulating. Convincing. Then perhaps, just perhaps, we'll reach the truth in time.”—Adam KucharskiMy conversation with Professor Kucharski on what constitutes certainty and proof in science (and other domains), with emphasis on many of the learnings from Covid. Given the politicization of science and A.I.'s deepfakes and power for blurring of truth, it's hard to think of a topic more important right now.Audio file (Ground Truths can also be downloaded on Apple Podcasts and Spotify)Eric Topol (00:06):Hello, it's Eric Topol from Ground Truths and I am really delighted to welcome Adam Kucharski, who is the author of a new book, Proof: The Art and Science of Certainty. He's a distinguished mathematician, by the way, the first mathematician we've had on Ground Truths and a person who I had the real privilege of getting to know a bit through the Covid pandemic. So welcome, Adam.Adam Kucharski (00:28):Thanks for having me.Eric Topol (00:30):Yeah, I mean, I think just to let everybody know, you're a Professor at London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine and also noteworthy you won the Adams Prize, which is one of the most impressive recognitions in the field of mathematics. This is the book, it's a winner, Proof and there's so much to talk about. So Adam, maybe what I'd start off is the quote in the book that captivates in the beginning, “life is full of situations that can reveal remarkably large gaps in our understanding of what is true and why it's true. This is a book about those gaps.” So what was the motivation when you undertook this very big endeavor?Adam Kucharski (01:17):I think a lot of it comes to the work I do at my day job where we have to deal with a lot of evidence under pressure, particularly if you work in outbreaks or emerging health concerns. And often it really pushes the limits, our methodology and how we converge on what's true subject to potential revision in the future. I think particularly having a background in math's, I think you kind of grow up with this idea that you can get to these concrete, almost immovable truths and then even just looking through the history, realizing that often isn't the case, that there's these kind of very human dynamics that play out around them. And it's something I think that everyone in science can reflect on that sometimes what convinces us doesn't convince other people, and particularly when you have that kind of urgency of time pressure, working out how to navigate that.Eric Topol (02:05):Yeah. Well, I mean I think these times of course have really gotten us to appreciate, particularly during Covid, the importance of understanding uncertainty. And I think one of the ways that we can dispel what people assume they know is the famous Monty Hall, which you get into a bit in the book. So I think everybody here is familiar with that show, Let's Make a Deal and maybe you can just take us through what happens with one of the doors are unveiled and how that changes the mathematics.Adam Kucharski (02:50):Yeah, sure. So I think it is a problem that's been around for a while and it's based on this game show. So you've got three doors that are closed. Behind two of the doors there is a goat and behind one of the doors is a luxury car. So obviously, you want to win the car. The host asks you to pick a door, so you point to one, maybe door number two, then the host who knows what's behind the doors opens another door to reveal a goat and then ask you, do you want to change your mind? Do you want to switch doors? And a lot of the, I think intuition people have, and certainly when I first came across this problem many years ago is well, you've got two doors left, right? You've picked one, there's another one, it's 50-50. And even some quite well-respected mathematicians.Adam Kucharski (03:27):People like Paul Erdős who was really published more papers than almost anyone else, that was their initial gut reaction. But if you work through all of the combinations, if you pick this door and then the host does this, and you switch or not switch and work through all of those options. You actually double your chances if you switch versus sticking with the door. So something that's counterintuitive, but I think one of the things that really struck me and even over the years trying to explain it is convincing myself of the answer, which was when I first came across it as a teenager, I did quite quickly is very different to convincing someone else. And even actually Paul Erdős, one of his colleagues showed him what I call proof by exhaustion. So go through every combination and that didn't really convince him. So then he started to simulate and said, well, let's do a computer simulation of the game a hundred thousand times. And again, switching was this optimal strategy, but Erdős wasn't really convinced because I accept that this is the case, but I'm not really satisfied with it. And I think that encapsulates for a lot of people, their experience of proof and evidence. It's a fact and you have to take it as given, but there's actually quite a big bridge often to really understanding why it's true and feeling convinced by it.Eric Topol (04:41):Yeah, I think it's a fabulous example because I think everyone would naturally assume it's 50-50 and it isn't. And I think that gets us to the topic at hand. What I love, there's many things I love about this book. One is that you don't just get into science and medicine, but you cut across all the domains, law, mathematics, AI. So it's a very comprehensive sweep of everything about proof and truth, and it couldn't come at a better time as we'll get into. Maybe just starting off with math, the term I love mathematical monsters. Can you tell us a little bit more about that?Adam Kucharski (05:25):Yeah, this was a fascinating situation that emerged in the late 19th century where a lot of math's, certainly in Europe had been derived from geometry because a lot of the ancient Greek influence on how we shaped things and then Newton and his work on rates of change and calculus, it was really the natural world that provided a lot of inspiration, these kind of tangible objects, tangible movements. And as mathematicians started to build out the theory around rates of change and how we tackle these kinds of situations, they sometimes took that intuition a bit too seriously. And there was some theorems that they said were intuitively obvious, some of these French mathematicians. And so, one for example is this idea of you how things change smoothly over time and how you do those calculations. But what happened was some mathematicians came along and showed that when you have things that can be infinitely small, that intuition didn't necessarily hold in the same way.Adam Kucharski (06:26):And they came up with these examples that broke a lot of these theorems and a lot of the establishments at the time called these things monsters. They called them these aberrations against common sense and this idea that if Newton had known about them, he never would've done all of his discovery because they're just nuisances and we just need to get rid of them. And there's this real tension at the core of mathematics in the late 1800s where some people just wanted to disregard this and say, look, it works for most of the time, that's good enough. And then others really weren't happy with this quite vague logic. They wanted to put it on much sturdier ground. And what was remarkable actually is if you trace this then into the 20th century, a lot of these monsters and these particularly in some cases functions which could almost move constantly, this constant motion rather than our intuitive concept of movement as something that's smooth, if you drop an apple, it accelerates at a very smooth rate, would become foundational in our understanding of things like probability, Einstein's work on atomic theory. A lot of these concepts where geometry breaks down would be really important in relativity. So actually, these things that we thought were monsters actually were all around us all the time, and science couldn't advance without them. So I think it's just this remarkable example of this tension within a field that supposedly concrete and the things that were going to be shunned actually turn out to be quite important.Eric Topol (07:53):It's great how you convey how nature isn't so neat and tidy and things like Brownian motion, understanding that, I mean, just so many things that I think fit into that general category. In the legal, we won't get into too much because that's not so much the audience of Ground Truths, but the classic things about innocent and until proven guilty and proof beyond reasonable doubt, I mean these are obviously really important parts of that overall sense of proof and truth. We're going to get into one thing I'm fascinated about related to that subsequently and then in science. So before we get into the different types of proof, obviously the pandemic is still fresh in our minds and we're an endemic with Covid now, and there are so many things we got wrong along the way of uncertainty and didn't convey that science isn't always evolving search for what is the truth. There's plenty no shortage of uncertainty at any moment. So can you recap some of the, you did so much work during the pandemic and obviously some of it's in the book. What were some of the major things that you took out of proof and truth from the pandemic?Adam Kucharski (09:14):I think it was almost this story of two hearts because on the one hand, science was the thing that got us where we are today. The reason that so much normality could resume and so much risk was reduced was development of vaccines and the understanding of treatments and the understanding of variants as they came to their characteristics. So it was kind of this amazing opportunity to see this happen faster than it ever happened in history. And I think ever in science, it certainly shifted a lot of my thinking about what's possible and even how we should think about these kinds of problems. But also on the other hand, I think where people might have been more familiar with seeing science progress a bit more slowly and reach consensus around some of these health issues, having that emerge very rapidly can present challenges even we found with some of the work we did on Alpha and then the Delta variants, and it was the early quantification of these.Adam Kucharski (10:08):So really the big question is, is this thing more transmissible? Because at the time countries were thinking about control measures, thinking about relaxing things, and you've got this just enormous social economic health decision-making based around essentially is it a lot more spreadable or is it not? And you only had these fragments of evidence. So I think for me, that was really an illustration of the sharp end. And I think what we ended up doing with some of those was rather than arguing over a precise number, something like Delta, instead we kind of looked at, well, what's the range that matters? So in the sense of arguing over whether it's 40% or 50% or 30% more transmissible is perhaps less important than being, it's substantially more transmissible and it's going to start going up. Is it going to go up extremely fast or just very fast?Adam Kucharski (10:59):That's still a very useful conclusion. I think what often created some of the more challenges, I think the things that on reflection people looking back pick up on are where there was probably overstated certainty. We saw that around some of the airborne spread, for example, stated as a fact by in some cases some organizations, I think in some situations as well, governments had a constraint and presented it as scientific. So the UK, for example, would say testing isn't useful. And what was happening at the time was there wasn't enough tests. So it was more a case of they can't test at that volume. But I think blowing between what the science was saying and what the decision-making, and I think also one thing we found in the UK was we made a lot of the epidemiological evidence available. I think that was really, I think something that was important.Adam Kucharski (11:51):I found it a lot easier to communicate if talking to the media to be able to say, look, this is the paper that's out, this is what it means, this is the evidence. I always found it quite uncomfortable having to communicate things where you knew there were reports behind the scenes, but you couldn't actually articulate. But I think what that did is it created this impression that particularly epidemiology was driving the decision-making a lot more than it perhaps was in reality because so much of that was being made public and a lot more of the evidence around education or economics was being done behind the scenes. I think that created this kind of asymmetry in public perception about how that was feeding in. And so, I think there was always that, and it happens, it is really hard as well as a scientist when you've got journalists asking you how to run the country to work out those steps of am I describing the evidence behind what we're seeing? Am I describing the evidence about different interventions or am I proposing to some extent my value system on what we do? And I think all of that in very intense times can be very easy to get blurred together in public communication. I think we saw a few examples of that where things were being the follow the science on policy type angle where actually once you get into what you're prioritizing within a society, quite rightly, you've got other things beyond just the epidemiology driving that.Eric Topol (13:09):Yeah, I mean that term that you just use follow the science is such an important term because it tells us about the dynamic aspect. It isn't just a snapshot, it's constantly being revised. But during the pandemic we had things like the six-foot rule that was never supported by data, but yet still today, if I walk around my hospital and there's still the footprints of the six-foot rule and not paying attention to the fact that this was airborne and took years before some of these things were accepted. The flatten the curve stuff with lockdowns, which I never was supportive of that, but perhaps at the worst point, the idea that hospitals would get overrun was an issue, but it got carried away with school shutdowns for prolonged periods and in some parts of the world, especially very stringent lockdowns. But anyway, we learned a lot.Eric Topol (14:10):But perhaps one of the greatest lessons is that people's expectations about science is that it's absolute and somehow you have this truth that's not there. I mean, it's getting revised. It's kind of on the job training, it's on this case on the pandemic revision. But very interesting. And that gets us to, I think the next topic, which I think is a fundamental part of the book distributed throughout the book, which is the different types of proof in biomedicine and of course across all these domains. And so, you take us through things like randomized trials, p-values, 95 percent confidence intervals, counterfactuals, causation and correlation, peer review, the works, which is great because a lot of people have misconceptions of these things. So for example, randomized trials, which is the temple of the randomized trials, they're not as great as a lot of people think, yes, they can help us establish cause and effect, but they're skewed because of the people who come into the trial. So they may not at all be a representative sample. What are your thoughts about over deference to randomized trials?Adam Kucharski (15:31):Yeah, I think that the story of how we rank evidence in medicines a fascinating one. I mean even just how long it took for people to think about these elements of randomization. Fundamentally, what we're trying to do when we have evidence here in medicine or science is prevent ourselves from confusing randomness for a signal. I mean, that's fundamentally, we don't want to mistake something, we think it's going on and it's not. And the challenge, particularly with any intervention is you only get to see one version of reality. You can't give someone a drug, follow them, rewind history, not give them the drug and then follow them again. So one of the things that essentially randomization allows us to do is, if you have two groups, one that's been randomized, one that hasn't on average, the difference in outcomes between those groups is going to be down to the treatment effect.Adam Kucharski (16:20):So it doesn't necessarily mean in reality that'd be the case, but on average that's the expectation that you'd have. And it's kind of interesting actually that the first modern randomized control trial (RCT) in medicine in 1947, this is for TB and streptomycin. The randomization element actually, it wasn't so much statistical as behavioral, that if you have people coming to hospital, you could to some extent just say, we'll just alternate. We're not going to randomize. We're just going to first patient we'll say is a control, second patient a treatment. But what they found in a lot of previous studies was doctors have bias. Maybe that patient looks a little bit ill or that one maybe is on borderline for eligibility. And often you got these quite striking imbalances when you allowed it for human judgment. So it was really about shielding against those behavioral elements. But I think there's a few situations, it's a really powerful tool for a lot of these questions, but as you mentioned, one is this issue of you have the population you study on and then perhaps in reality how that translates elsewhere.Adam Kucharski (17:17):And we see, I mean things like flu vaccines are a good example, which are very dependent on immunity and evolution and what goes on in different populations. Sometimes you've had a result on a vaccine in one place and then the effectiveness doesn't translate in the same way to somewhere else. I think the other really important thing to bear in mind is, as I said, it's the averaging that you're getting an average effect between two different groups. And I think we see certainly a lot of development around things like personalized medicine where actually you're much more interested in the outcome for the individual. And so, what a trial can give you evidence is on average across a group, this is the effect that I can expect this intervention to have. But we've now seen more of the emergence things like N=1 studies where you can actually over the same individual, particularly for chronic conditions, look at those kind of interventions.Adam Kucharski (18:05):And also there's just these extreme examples where you're ethically not going to run a trial, there's never been a trial of whether it's a good idea to have intensive care units in hospitals or there's a lot of these kind of historical treatments which are just so overwhelmingly effective that we're not going to run trial. So almost this hierarchy over time, you can see it getting shifted because actually you do have these situations where other forms of evidence can get you either closer to what you need or just more feasibly an answer where it's just not ethical or practical to do an RCT.Eric Topol (18:37):And that brings us to the natural experiments I just wrote about recently, the one with shingles, which there's two big natural experiments to suggest that shingles vaccine might reduce the risk of Alzheimer's, an added benefit beyond the shingles that was not anticipated. Your thoughts about natural experiments, because here you're getting a much different type of population assessment, again, not at the individual level, but not necessarily restricted by some potentially skewed enrollment criteria.Adam Kucharski (19:14):I think this is as emerged as a really valuable tool. It's kind of interesting, in the book you're talking to economists like Josh Angrist, that a lot of these ideas emerge in epidemiology, but I think were really then taken up by economists, particularly as they wanted to add more credibility to a lot of these policy questions. And ultimately, it comes down to this issue that for a lot of problems, we can't necessarily intervene and randomize, but there might be a situation that's done it to some extent for us, so the classic example is the Vietnam draft where it was kind of random birthdays with drawn out of lottery. And so, there's been a lot of studies subsequently about the effect of serving in the military on different subsequent lifetime outcomes because broadly those people have been randomized. It was for a different reason. But you've got that element of randomization driving that.Adam Kucharski (20:02):And so again, with some of the recent shingles data and other studies, you might have a situation for example, where there's been an intervention that's somewhat arbitrary in terms of time. It's a cutoff on a birth date, for example. And under certain assumptions you could think, well, actually there's no real reason for the person on this day and this day to be fundamentally different. I mean, perhaps there might be effects of cohorts if it's school years or this sort of thing. But generally, this isn't the same as having people who are very, very different ages and very different characteristics. It's just nature, or in this case, just a policy intervention for a different reason has given you that randomization, which allows you or pseudo randomization, which allows you to then look at something about the effect of an intervention that you wouldn't as reliably if you were just digging into the data of yes, no who's received a vaccine.Eric Topol (20:52):Yeah, no, I think it's really valuable. And now I think increasingly given priority, if you can find these natural experiments and they're not always so abundant to use to extrapolate from, but when they are, they're phenomenal. The causation correlation is so big. The issue there, I mean Judea Pearl's, the Book of Why, and you give so many great examples throughout the book in Proof. I wonder if you could comment that on that a bit more because this is where associations are confused somehow or other with a direct effect. And we unfortunately make these jumps all too frequently. Perhaps it's the most common problem that's occurring in the way we interpret medical research data.Adam Kucharski (21:52):Yeah, I think it's an issue that I think a lot of people get drilled into in their training just because a correlation between things doesn't mean that that thing causes this thing. But it really struck me as I talked to people, researching the book, in practice in research, there's actually a bit more to it in how it's played out. So first of all, if there's a correlation between things, it doesn't tell you much generally that's useful for intervention. If two things are correlated, it doesn't mean that changing that thing's going to have an effect on that thing. There might be something that's influencing both of them. If you have more ice cream sales, it will lead to more heat stroke cases. It doesn't mean that changing ice cream sales is going to have that effect, but it does allow you to make predictions potentially because if you can identify consistent patterns, you can say, okay, if this thing going up, I'm going to make a prediction that this thing's going up.Adam Kucharski (22:37):So one thing I found quite striking, actually talking to research in different fields is how many fields choose to focus on prediction because it kind of avoids having to deal with this cause and effect problem. And even in fields like psychology, it was kind of interesting that there's a lot of focus on predicting things like relationship outcomes, but actually for people, you don't want a prediction about your relationship. You want to know, well, how can I do something about it? You don't just want someone to sell you your relationship's going to go downhill. So there's almost part of the challenge is people just got stuck on prediction because it's an easier field of work, whereas actually some of those problems will involve intervention. I think the other thing that really stood out for me is in epidemiology and a lot of other fields, rightly, people are very cautious to not get that mixed up.Adam Kucharski (23:24):They don't want to mix up correlations or associations with causation, but you've kind of got this weird situation where a lot of papers go out of their way to not use causal language and say it's an association, it's just an association. It's just an association. You can't say anything about causality. And then the end of the paper, they'll say, well, we should think about introducing more of this thing or restricting this thing. So really the whole paper and its purpose is framed around a causal intervention, but it's extremely careful throughout the paper to not frame it as a causal claim. So I think we almost by skirting that too much, we actually avoid the problems that people sometimes care about. And I think a lot of the nice work that's been going on in causal inference is trying to get people to confront this more head on rather than say, okay, you can just stay in this prediction world and that's fine. And then just later maybe make a policy suggestion off the back of it.Eric Topol (24:20):Yeah, I think this is cause and effect is a very alluring concept to support proof as you so nicely go through in the book. But of course, one of the things that we use to help us is the biological mechanism. So here you have, let's say for example, you're trying to get a new drug approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), and the request is, well, we want two trials, randomized trials, independent. We want to have p-values that are significant, and we want to know the biological mechanism ideally with the dose response of the drug. But there are many drugs as you review that have no biological mechanism established. And even when the tobacco problems were mounting, the actual mechanism of how tobacco use caused cancer wasn't known. So how important is the biological mechanism, especially now that we're well into the AI world where explainability is demanded. And so, we don't know the mechanism, but we also don't know the mechanism and lots of things in medicine too, like anesthetics and even things as simple as aspirin, how it works and many others. So how do we deal with this quest for the biological mechanism?Adam Kucharski (25:42):I think that's a really good point. It shows almost a lot of the transition I think we're going through currently. I think particularly for things like smoking cancer where it's very hard to run a trial. You can't make people randomly take up smoking. Having those additional pieces of evidence, whether it's an analogy with a similar carcinogen, whether it's a biological mechanism, can help almost give you more supports for that argument that there's a cause and effect going on. But I think what I found quite striking, and I realized actually that it's something that had kind of bothered me a bit and I'd be interested to hear whether it bothers you, but with the emergence of AI, it's almost a bit of the loss of scientific satisfaction. I think you grow up with learning about how the world works and why this is doing what it's doing.Adam Kucharski (26:26):And I talked for example of some of the people involved with AlphaFold and some of the subsequent work in installing those predictions about structures. And they'd almost made peace with it, which I found interesting because I think they started off being a bit uncomfortable with like, yeah, you've got these remarkable AI models making these predictions, but we don't understand still biologically what's happening here. But I think they're just settled in saying, well, biology is really complex on some of these problems, and if we can have a tool that can give us this extremely valuable information, maybe that's okay. And it was just interesting that they'd really kind of gone through that kind process, which I think a lot of people are still grappling with and that almost that discomfort of using AI and what's going to convince you that that's a useful reliable prediction whether it's something like predicting protein folding or getting in a self-driving car. What's the evidence you need to convince you that's reliable?Eric Topol (27:26):Yeah, no, I'm so glad you brought that up because when Demis Hassabis and John Jumper won the Nobel Prize, the point I made was maybe there should be an asterisk with AI because they don't know how it works. I mean, they had all the rich data from the protein data bank, and they got the transformer model to do it for 200 million protein structure prediction, but they still to this day don't fully understand how the model really was working. So it reinforces what you're just saying. And of course, it cuts across so many types of AI. It's just that we tend to hold different standards in medicine not realizing that there's lots of lack of explainability for routine medical treatments today. Now one of the things that I found fascinating in your book, because there's different levels of proof, different types of proof, but solid logical systems.Eric Topol (28:26):And on page 60 of the book, especially pertinent to the US right now, there is a bit about Kurt Gödel and what he did there was he basically, there was a question about dictatorship in the US could it ever occur? And Gödel says, “oh, yes, I can prove it.” And he's using the constitution itself to prove it, which I found fascinating because of course we're seeing that emerge right now. Can you give us a little bit more about this, because this is fascinating about the Fifth Amendment, and I mean I never thought that the Constitution would allow for a dictatorship to emerge.Adam Kucharski (29:23):And this was a fascinating story, Kurt Gödel who is one of the greatest logical minds of the 20th century and did a lot of work, particularly in the early 20th century around system of rules, particularly things like mathematics and whether they can ever be really fully satisfying. So particularly in mathematics, he showed that there were this problem that is very hard to have a set of rules for something like arithmetic that was both complete and covered every situation, but also had no contradictions. And I think a lot of countries, if you go back, things like Napoleonic code and these attempts to almost write down every possible legal situation that could be imaginable, always just ascended into either they needed amendments or they had contradictions. I think Gödel's work really summed it up, and there's a story, this is in the late forties when he had his citizenship interview and Einstein and Oskar Morgenstern went along as witnesses for him.Adam Kucharski (30:17):And it's always told as kind of a lighthearted story as this logical mind, this academic just saying something silly in front of the judge. And actually, to my own admission, I've in the past given talks and mentioned it in this slightly kind of lighthearted way, but for the book I got talking to a few people who'd taken it more seriously. I realized actually he's this extremely logically focused mind at the time, and maybe there should have been something more to it. And people who have kind of dug more into possibilities was saying, well, what could he have spotted that bothered him? And a lot of his work that he did about consistency in mass was around particularly self-referential statements. So if I say this sentence is false, it's self-referential and if it is false, then it's true, but if it's true, then it's false and you get this kind of weird self-referential contradictions.Adam Kucharski (31:13):And so, one of the theories about Gödel was that in the Constitution, it wasn't that there was a kind of rule for someone can become a dictator, but rather people can use the mechanisms within the Constitution to make it easier to make further amendments. And he kind of downward cycle of amendment that he had seen happening in Europe and the run up to the war, and again, because this is never fully documented exactly what he thought, but it's one of the theories that it wouldn't just be outright that it would just be this cycle process of weakening and weakening and weakening and making it easier to add. And actually, when I wrote that, it was all the earlier bits of the book that I drafted, I did sort of debate whether including it I thought, is this actually just a bit in the weeds of American history? And here we are. Yeah, it's remarkable.Eric Topol (32:00):Yeah, yeah. No, I mean I found, it struck me when I was reading this because here back in 1947, there was somebody predicting that this could happen based on some, if you want to call it loopholes if you will, or the ability to change things, even though you would've thought otherwise that there wasn't any possible capability for that to happen. Now, one of the things I thought was a bit contradictory is two parts here. One is from Angus Deaton, he wrote, “Gold standard thinking is magical thinking.” And then the other is what you basically are concluding in many respects. “To navigate proof, we must reach into a thicket of errors and biases. We must confront monsters and embrace uncertainty, balancing — and rebalancing —our beliefs. We must seek out every useful fragment of data, gather every relevant tool, searching wider and climbing further. Finding the good foundations among the bad. Dodging dogma and falsehoods. Questioning. Measuring. Triangulating. Convincing. Then perhaps, just perhaps, we'll reach the truth in time.” So here you have on the one hand your search for the truth, proof, which I think that little paragraph says it all. In many respects, it sums up somewhat to the work that you review here and on the other you have this Nobel laureate saying, you don't have to go to extremes here. The enemy of good is perfect, perhaps. I mean, how do you reconcile this sense that you shouldn't go so far? Don't search for absolute perfection of proof.Adam Kucharski (33:58):Yeah, I think that encapsulates a lot of what the book is about, is that search for certainty and how far do you have to go. I think one of the things, there's a lot of interesting discussion, some fascinating papers around at what point do you use these studies? What are their flaws? But I think one of the things that does stand out is across fields, across science, medicine, even if you going to cover law, AI, having these kind of cookie cutter, this is the definitive way of doing it. And if you just follow this simple rule, if you do your p-value, you'll get there and you'll be fine. And I think that's where a lot of the danger is. And I think that's what we've seen over time. Certain science people chasing certain targets and all the behaviors that come around that or in certain situations disregarding valuable evidence because you've got this kind of gold standard and nothing else will do.Adam Kucharski (34:56):And I think particularly in a crisis, it's very dangerous to have that because you might have a low level of evidence that demands a certain action and you almost bias yourself towards inaction if you have these kind of very simple thresholds. So I think for me, across all of these stories and across the whole book, I mean William Gosset who did a lot of pioneering work on statistical experiments at Guinness in the early 20th century, he had this nice question he sort of framed is, how much do we lose? And if we're thinking about the problems, there's always more studies we can do, there's always more confidence we can have, but whether it's a patient we want to treat or crisis we need to deal with, we need to work out actually getting that level of proof that's really appropriate for where we are currently.Eric Topol (35:49):I think exceptionally important that there's this kind of spectrum or continuum in following science and search for truth and that distinction, I think really nails it. Now, one of the things that's unique in the book is you don't just go through all the different types of how you would get to proof, but you also talk about how the evidence is acted on. And for example, you quote, “they spent a lot of time misinforming themselves.” This is the whole idea of taking data and torturing it or using it, dredging it however way you want to support either conspiracy theories or alternative facts. Basically, manipulating sometimes even emasculating what evidence and data we have. And one of the sentences, or I guess this is from Sir Francis Bacon, “truth is a daughter of time”, but the added part is not authority. So here we have our president here that repeats things that are wrong, fabricated or wrong, and he keeps repeating to the point that people believe it's true. But on the other hand, you could say truth is a daughter of time because you like to not accept any truth immediately. You like to see it get replicated and further supported, backed up. So in that one sentence, truth is a daughter of time not authority, there's the whole ball of wax here. Can you take us through that? Because I just think that people don't understand that truth being tested over time, but also manipulated by its repetition. This is a part of the big problem that we live in right now.Adam Kucharski (37:51):And I think it's something that writing the book and actually just reflecting on it subsequently has made me think about a lot in just how people approach these kinds of problems. I think that there's an idea that conspiracy theorists are just lazy and have maybe just fallen for a random thing, but talking to people, you really think about these things a lot more in the field. And actually, the more I've ended up engaging with people who believe things that are just outright unevidenced around vaccines, around health issues, they often have this mountain of papers and data to hand and a lot of it, often they will be peer reviewed papers. It won't necessarily be supporting the point that they think it's supports.Adam Kucharski (38:35):But it's not something that you can just say everything you're saying is false, that there's actually often a lot of things that have been put together and it's just that leap to that conclusion. I think you also see a lot of scientific language borrowed. So I gave a talker early this year and it got posted on YouTube. It had conspiracy theories it, and there was a lot of conspiracy theory supporters who piled in the comments and one of the points they made is skepticism is good. It's the kind of law society, take no one's word for it, you need this. We are the ones that are kind of doing science and people who just assume that science is settled are in the wrong. And again, you also mentioned that repetition. There's this phenomenon, it's the illusory truth problem that if you repeatedly tell someone someone's something's false, it'll increase their belief in it even if it's something quite outrageous.Adam Kucharski (39:27):And that mimics that scientific repetition because people kind of say, okay, well if I've heard it again and again, it's almost like if you tweak these as mini experiments, I'm just accumulating evidence that this thing is true. So it made me think a lot about how you've got essentially a lot of mimicry of the scientific method, amount of data and how you present it and this kind of skepticism being good, but I think a lot of it comes down to as well as just looking at theological flaws, but also ability to be wrong in not actually seeking out things that confirm. I think all of us, it's something that I've certainly tried to do a lot working on emergencies, and one of the scientific advisory groups that I worked on almost it became a catchphrase whenever someone presented something, they finished by saying, tell me why I'm wrong.Adam Kucharski (40:14):And if you've got a variant that's more transmissible, I don't want to be right about that really. And it is something that is quite hard to do and I found it is particularly for something that's quite high pressure, trying to get a policymaker or someone to write even just non-publicly by themselves, write down what you think's going to happen or write down what would convince you that you are wrong about something. I think particularly on contentious issues where someone's got perhaps a lot of public persona wrapped up in something that's really hard to do, but I think it's those kind of elements that distinguish between getting sucked into a conspiracy theory and really seeking out evidence that supports it and trying to just get your theory stronger and stronger and actually seeking out things that might overturn your belief about the world. And it's often those things that we don't want overturned. I think those are the views that we all have politically or in other ways, and that's often where the problems lie.Eric Topol (41:11):Yeah, I think this is perhaps one of, if not the most essential part here is that to try to deal with the different views. We have biases as you emphasized throughout, but if you can use these different types of proof to have a sound discussion, conversation, refutation whereby you don't summarily dismiss another view which may be skewed and maybe spurious or just absolutely wrong, maybe fabricated whatever, but did you can engage and say, here's why these are my proof points, or this is why there's some extent of certainty you can have regarding this view of the data. I think this is so fundamental because unfortunately as we saw during the pandemic, the strident minority, which were the anti-science, anti-vaxxers, they were summarily dismissed as being kooks and adopting conspiracy theories without the right engagement and the right debates. And I think this might've helped along the way, no less the fact that a lot of scientists didn't really want to engage in the first place and adopt this methodical proof that you've advocated in the book so many different ways to support a hypothesis or an assertion. Now, we've covered a lot here, Adam. Have I missed some central parts of the book and the effort because it's really quite extraordinary. I know it's your third book, but it's certainly a standout and it certainly it's a standout not just for your books, but books on this topic.Adam Kucharski (43:13):Thanks. And it's much appreciated. It was not an easy book to write. I think at times, I kind of wondered if I should have taken on the topic and I think a core thing, your last point speaks to that. I think a core thing is that gap often between what convinces us and what convinces someone else. I think it's often very tempting as a scientist to say the evidence is clear or the science has proved this. But even on something like the vaccines, you do get the loud minority who perhaps think they're putting microchips in people and outlandish views, but you actually get a lot more people who might just have some skepticism of pharmaceutical companies or they might have, my wife was pregnant actually at the time during Covid and we waited up because there wasn't much data on pregnancy and the vaccine. And I think it's just finding what is convincing. Is it having more studies from other countries? Is it understanding more about the biology? Is it understanding how you evaluate some of those safety signals? And I think that's just really important to not just think what convinces us and it's going to be obvious to other people, but actually think where are they coming from? Because ultimately having proof isn't that good unless it leads to the action that can make lives better.Eric Topol (44:24):Yeah. Well, look, you've inculcated my mind with this book, Adam, called Proof. Anytime I think of the word proof, I'm going to be thinking about you. So thank you. Thanks for taking the time to have a conversation about your book, your work, and I know we're going to count on you for the astute mathematics and analysis of outbreaks in the future, which we will see unfortunately. We are seeing now, in fact already in this country with measles and whatnot. So thank you and we'll continue to follow your great work.**************************************Thanks for listening, watching or reading this Ground Truths podcast/post.If you found this interesting please share it!That makes the work involved in putting these together especially worthwhile.I'm also appreciative for your subscribing to Ground Truths. All content —its newsletters, analyses, and podcasts—is free, open-access. I'm fortunate to get help from my producer Jessica Nguyen and Sinjun Balabanoff for audio/video tech support to pull these podcasts together for Scripps Research.Paid subscriptions are voluntary and all proceeds from them go to support Scripps Research. They do allow for posting comments and questions, which I do my best to respond to. Please don't hesitate to post comments and give me feedback. Many thanks to those who have contributed—they have greatly helped fund our summer internship programs for the past two years.A bit of an update on SUPER AGERSMy book has been selected as a Next Big Idea Club winner for Season 26 by Adam Grant, Malcolm Gladwell, Susan Cain, and Daniel Pink. This club has spotlighted the most groundbreaking nonfiction books for over a decade. As a winning title, my book will be shipped to thousands of thoughtful readers like you, featured alongside a reading guide, a "Book Bite," Next Big Idea Podcast episode as well as a live virtual Q&A with me in the club's vibrant online community. If you're interested in joining the club, here's a promo code SEASON26 for 20% off at the website. SUPER AGERS reached #3 for all books on Amazon this week. This was in part related to the segment on the book on the TODAY SHOW which you can see here. Also at Amazon there is a remarkable sale on the hardcover book for $10.l0 at the moment for up to 4 copies. Not sure how long it will last or what prompted it.The journalist Paul von Zielbauer has a Substack “Aging With Strength” and did an extensive interview with me on the biology of aging and how we can prevent the major age-related diseases. Here's the link. Get full access to Ground Truths at erictopol.substack.com/subscribe

There is a shift happening in the complex world of proof. Simulation and probabilistic approaches are increasingly accepted as ‘good enough' in areas traditionally dominated by exact proofs. Persuasion depends on the degree of certainty needed.Adam Kucharski is a professor at the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, and also the author of three books, Proof: The Art and Science of Certainty, The Rules of Contagion: Why Things Spread--And Why They Stop, and The Perfect Bet: How Science and Math Are Taking the Luck Out of Gambling.Greg and Adam discuss the versatile concept of 'proof', examining how it applies differently across mathematics, law, medicine, and practical decision-making. Adam discusses the challenges of proving concepts under uncertainty, particularly during the COVID-19 pandemic, and the role of intuition versus formal modeling in various fields. They also explore the crossover of epidemiological principles into finance, marketing, cybersecurity, and online content dynamics, illustrating the universal relevance of contagion theories. The episode highlights how simulation and probabilistic approaches are increasingly accepted in areas traditionally dominated by exact proofs.*unSILOed Podcast is produced by University FM.*Episode Quotes:The gap between science and policy09:25: One of the challenges we had in COVID is this dimension of a problem where all directions had a lot of enormous downsides, and countries were having to make that under pressure. And even one of the things that I think I did not really appreciate at the time was, even later in the year, when a lot of these questions about the severity, a lot of these questions about transmission, had really been resolved because we had much better data. We still had a lot of this tension demanding, "Oh, we cannot be sure about something," or "You know, we need much, much higher evidence." And I think that is the gap between where kind of science lies and where policy lies.It's not the content, it's the contagion37:59: I think a lot of people think about the content, but obviously it is not just, "It is something goes viral." It is not just about the content. It is not about what you have written; it is about the network through which it is spreading. It is about the susceptibility of that network. It is about the medium you use. Do you have it that lingers somewhere? Is it just something you stick on the feed and it kind of vanishes? So, there is a direct analogy there with the different elements and how they trade off in ultimately what you see in terms of spread.What human networks can't teach us about machines46:35: One thing that is really interesting about computer systems is the variation in contacts you see in the network is enormous. You basically get some hubs that are just connected to a huge number of computers, and some are connected to very few at all. So that makes the transmission much burster.It is not like—so humans have some variation in their contacts—but most people have about 10 contacts a day, in terms of conversations or people they exchange words with. Some more, some less, but you do not have people generally have like 10,000 contacts in a day, whereas in computers you can have that. So it makes the potential for some things to actually persist at quite low levels for quite a long time because it will kind of hit this application and then simmer along, and then hit another one and simmer along.Show Links:Recommended Resources:EuclidGeorge E. P. BoxWilliam Sealy GossetP-valueRonald RossJonah PerettiDuncan J. WattsAmazon Web ServicesMonty HallGuest Profile:AdamKucharski.ioFaculty Profile at London School of Hygiene & Tropical MedicineSocial Profile on BlueSkyGuest Work:Amazon Author PageProof: The Art and Science of CertaintyThe Rules of Contagion: Why Things Spread--And Why They StopThe Perfect Bet: How Science and Math Are Taking the Luck Out of GamblingSubstack NewsletterGoogle Scholar PageTED Talks

Today we're talking with health and nutrition expert Dr. Stuart Gillespie, author of a new book entitled Food Fight: from Plunder and Profit to People and Planet. Using decades of research and insight gathered from around the world, Dr. Gillespie wants to reimagine our global food system and plot a way forward to a sustainable, equitable, and healthy food future - one where our food system isn't making us sick. Certainly not the case now. Over the course of his career, Dr. Gillespie has worked with the UN Standing Committee on Nutrition in Geneva with UNICEF in India and with the International Food Policy Research Institute, known as IFPRI, where he's led initiatives tackling the double burden of malnutrition and agriculture and health research. He holds a PhD in human nutrition from the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine. Interview Summary So, you've really had a global view of the agriculture system, and this is captured in your book. And to give some context to our listeners, in your book, you describe the history of the global food system, how it's evolved into this system, sort of warped, if you will, into a mechanism that creates harm and it destroys more than it produces. That's a pretty bold statement. That it destroys more than it produces, given how much the agriculture around the world does produce. Tell us a bit more if you would. Yes, that statement actually emerged from recent work by the Food Systems Economic Commission. And they costed out the damage or the downstream harms generated by the global food system at around $15 trillion per year, which is 12% of GDP. And that manifests in various ways. Health harms or chronic disease. It also manifests in terms of climate crisis and risks and environmental harms, but also. Poverty of food system workers at the front line, if you like. And it's largely because we have a system that's anachronistic. It's a system that was built in a different time, in a different century for a different purpose. It was really started to come together after the second World War. To mass produce cheap calories to prevent famine, but also through the Green Revolution, as that was picking up with the overproduction of staples to use that strategically through food aid to buffer the West to certain extent from the spread of communism. And over time and over the last 50 years of neoliberal policies we've got a situation where food is less and less viewed as a human right, or a basic need. It's seen as a commodity and the system has become increasingly financialized. And there's a lot of evidence captured by a handful of transnationals, different ones at different points in the system from production to consumption. But in each case, they wield huge amounts of power. And that manifests in various ways. We have, I think a system that's anachronistic The point about it, and the problem we have, is that it's a system revolves around maximizing profit and the most profitable foods and products of those, which are actually the least healthy for us as individuals. And it's not a system that's designed to nourish us. It's a system designed to maximize profit. And we don't have a system that really aims to produce whole foods for people. We have a system that produces raw ingredients for industrial formulations to end up as ultra processed foods. We have a system that produces cattle feed and, and biofuels, and some whole foods. But it, you know, that it's so skewed now, and we see the evidence all around us that it manifests in all sorts of different ways. One in three people on the planet in some way malnourished. We have around 12 million adult deaths a year due to diet related chronic disease. And I followed that from colonial times that, that evolution and the way it operates and the way it moves across the world. And what is especially frightening, I think, is the speed at which this so-called nutrition transition or dietary transition is happening in lower income or middle income countries. We saw this happening over in the US and we saw it happening in the UK where I am. And then in Latin America, and then more Southeast Asia, then South Asia. Now, very much so in Sub-Saharan Africa where there is no regulation really, apart from perhaps South Africa. So that's long answer to your intro question. Let's dive into a couple of things that you brought up. First, the Green Revolution. So that's a term that many of our listeners will know and they'll understand what the Green Revolution is, but not everybody. Would you explain what that was and how it's had these effects throughout the food systems around the world? Yes, I mean around the, let's see, about 1950s, Norman Borlag, who was a crop breeder and his colleagues in Mexico discovered through crop breeding trials, a high yielding dwarf variety. But over time and working with different partners, including well in India as well, with the Swaminathan Foundation. And Swaminathan, for example, managed to perfect these new strains. High yielding varieties that doubled yields for a given acreage of land in terms of staples. And over time, this started to work with rice, with wheat, maize and corn. Very dependent on fertilizers, very dependent on pesticides, herbicides, which we now realize had significant downstream effects in terms of environmental harms. But also, diminishing returns in as much as, you know, that went through its trajectory in terms of maximizing productivity. So, all the Malthusian predictions of population growth out running our ability to feed the planet were shown to not to be true. But it also generated inequity that the richest farmers got very rich, very quickly, the poorer farmers got slightly richer, but that there was this large gap. So, inequity was never really properly dealt with through the Green Revolution in its early days. And that overproduction and the various institutions that were set in place, the manner in which governments backed off any form of regulation for overproduction. They continued to subsidize over production with these very large subsidies upstream, meant that we are in the situation we are now with regard to different products are being used to deal with that excess over production. So, that idea of using petroleum-based inputs to create the foods in the first place. And the large production of single crops has a lot to do with that Green Revolution that goes way back to the 1950s. It's interesting to see what it's become today. It's sort of that original vision multiplied by a billion. And boy, it really does continue to have impacts. You know, it probably was the forerunner to genetically modified foods as well, which I'd like to ask you about in a little bit. But before I do that, you said that much of the world's food supply is governed by a pretty small number of players. So who are these players? If you look at the downstream retail side, you have Nestle, PepsiCo, Coca-Cola, General Mills, Unilever. Collectively around 70% of retail is governed by those companies. If you look upstream in terms of agricultural and agribusiness, you have Cargill, ADM, Louis Dreyfus, and Bunge. These change to a certain extent. What doesn't change very much are the numbers involved that are very, very small and that the size of these corporations is so large that they have immense power. And, so those are the companies that we could talk about what that power looks like and why it's problematic. But the other side of it's here where I am in the UK, we have a similar thing playing out with regard to store bought. Food or products, supermarkets that control 80% as Tesco in the UK, Asta, Sainsbury's, and Morrisons just control. You have Walmart, you have others, and that gives them immense power to drive down the costs that they will pay to producers and also potentially increase the cost that they charge as prices of the products that are sold in these supermarkets. So that profit markup, profit margins are in increased in their favor. They can also move around their tax liabilities around the world because they're transnational. And that's just the economic market and financial side on top of that. And as you know, there's a whole raft of political ways in which they use this power to infiltrate policy, influence policy through what I've called in Chapter 13, the Dark Arts of Policy Interference. Your previous speaker, Murray Carpenter, talked about that with regard to Coca-Cola and that was a very, yeah, great example. But there are many others. In many ways these companies have been brilliant at adapting to the regulatory landscape, to the financial incentives, to the way the agriculture system has become warped. I mean, in some ways they've done the warping, but in a lot of ways, they're adapting to the conditions that allow warping to occur. And because they've invested so heavily, like in manufacturing plants to make high fructose corn syrup or to make biofuels or things like that. It'd be pretty hard for them to undo things, and that's why they lobby so strongly in favor of keeping the status quo. Let me ask you about the issue of power because you write about this in a very compelling way. And you talk about power imbalances in the food system. What does that look like in your mind, and why is it such a big part of the problem? Well, yes. And power manifests in different ways. It operates sometimes covertly, sometimes overtly. It manifests at different levels from, you know, grassroots level, right up to national and international in terms of international trade. But what I've described is the way markets are captured or hyper concentrated. That power that comes with these companies operating almost like a cartel, can be used to affect political or to dampen down, block governments from regulating them through what I call a five deadly Ds: dispute or dispute or doubt, distort, distract, disguise, and dodge. And you've written very well Kelly, with I think Kenneth Warner about the links between big food and big tobacco and the playbook and the realization on the part of Big Tobacco back in the '50s, I think, that they couldn't compete with the emerging evidence of the harms of smoking. They had to secure the science. And that involved effectively buying research or paying for researchers to generate a raft of study shown that smoking wasn't a big deal or problem. And also, public relations committees, et cetera, et cetera. And we see the same happening with big food. Conflicts of interest is a big deal. It needs to be avoided. It can't be managed. And I think a lot of people think it is just a question of disclosure. Disclosure is never enough of conflict of interest, almost never enough. We have, in the UK, we have nine regulatory bodies. Every one of them has been significantly infiltrated by big food, including the most recent one, which has just been designated to help develop a national food stretch in the UK. We've had a new government here and we thought things were changing, beginning to wonder now because big food is on that board or on that committee. And it shouldn't be, you know. It shouldn't be anywhere near the policy table anyway. That's so it's one side is conflict of interest. Distraction: I talk about corporate social responsibility initiatives and the way that they're designed to distract. On the one hand, if you think of a person on a left hand is doing these wonderful small-scale projects, which are high visibility and they're doing good. In and off themselves they're doing good. But they're small scale. Whereas the right hand is a core business, which is generating harm at a much larger scale. And the left hand is designed to distract you from the right hand. So that distraction, those sort of corporate CSR initiatives are a big part of the problem. And then 'Disguise' is, as you know, with the various trade associations and front groups, which acted almost like Trojan horses, in many ways. Because the big food companies are paying up as members of these committees, but they don't get on the program of these international conferences. But the front groups do and the front groups act on in their interests. So that's former disguise or camouflage. The World Business Council on Sustainable Development is in the last few years, has been very active in the space. And they have Philip Morris on there as members, McDonald's and Nestle, Coke, everybody, you know. And they deliberately actually say It's all fine. That we have an open door, which I, I just can't. I don't buy it. And there are others. So, you know, I think these can be really problematic. The other thing I should mention about power and as what we've learned more about, if you go even upstream from the big food companies, and you look at the hedge funds and the asset management firms like Vanguard, state Capital, BlackRock, and the way they've been buying up shares of big food companies and blocking any moves in annual general meetings to increase or improve the healthiness of portfolios. Because they're so powerful in terms of the number of shares they hold to maximize profit for pension funds. So, we started to see the pressure that is being put on big food upstream by the nature of the system, that being financialized, even beyond the companies themselves, you know? You were mentioning that these companies, either directly themselves or through their front organizations or the trade association block important things that might be done in agriculture. Can you think of an example of that? Yes, well actually I did, with some colleagues here in the UK, the Food Foundation, an investigation into corporate lobbying during the previous conservative government. And basically, in the five years after the pandemic, we logged around 1,400 meetings between government ministers and big food. Then we looked at the public interest NGOs and the number of meetings they had over that same period, and it was 35, so it was a 40-fold difference. Oh goodness. Which I was actually surprised because I thought they didn't have to do much because the Tory government was never going to really regulate them anyway. And you look in the register, there is meant to be transparency. There are rules about disclosure of what these lobbying meetings were meant to be for, with whom, for what purpose, what outcome. That's just simply not followed. You get these crazy things being written into the those logs like, 'oh, we had a meeting to discuss business, and that's it.' And we know that at least what happened in the UK, which I'm more familiar with. We had a situation where constantly any small piecemeal attempt to regulate, for example, having a watershed at 9:00 PM so that kids could not see junk food advertised on their screens before 9:00 PM. That simple regulation was delayed, delayed. So, delay is actually another D you know. It is part of it. And that's an example of that. That's a really good example. And you've reminded me of an example where Marian Nestle and I wrote an op-ed piece in the New York Times, many years ago, on an effort by the WHO, the World Health Organization to establish a quite reasonable guideline for how much added sugar people should have in their diet. And the sugar industry stepped in in the biggest way possible. And there was a congressional caucus on sugar or something like that in our US Congress and the sugar industry and the other players in the food industry started interacting with them. They put big pressure on the highest levels of the US government to pressure the WHO away from this really quite moderate reasonable sugar standard. And the US ultimately threatened the World Health Organization with taking away its funding just on one thing - sugar. Now, thankfully the WHO didn't back down and ultimately came out with some pretty good guidelines on sugar that have been even stronger over the years. But it was pretty disgraceful. That's in the book that, that story is in the book. I think it was 2004 with the strategy on diet, physical activity. And Tommy Thompson was a health secretary and there were all sorts of shenanigans and stories around that. Yes, that is a very powerful example. It was a crazy power play and disgraceful how our government acted and how the companies acted and all the sort of deceitful ways they did things. And of course, that's happened a million times. And you gave the example of all the discussions in the UK between the food industry and the government people. So, let's get on to something more positive. What can be done? You can see these massive corporate influences, revolving doors in government, a lot of things that would argue for keeping the status quo. So how in the world do you turn things around? Yeah, good question. I really believe, I've talked about a lot of people. I've looked a lot of the evidence. I really believe that we need a systemic sort of structural change and understanding that's not going to happen overnight. But ultimately, I think there's a role for a government, citizens civil society, media, academics, food industry, obviously. And again, it's different between the UK and US and elsewhere in terms of the ability and the potential for change. But governments have to step in and govern. They have to set the guardrails and the parameters. And I talk in the book about four key INs. So, the first one is institutions in which, for example, there's a power to procure healthy food for schools, for hospitals, clinics that is being underutilized. And there's some great stories of individuals. One woman from Kenya who did this on her own and managed to get the government to back it and to scale it up, which is an incredible story. That's institutions. The second IN is incentives, and that's whereby sugar taxes, or even potentially junk food taxes as they have in Columbia now. And reforming the upstream subsidies on production is basically downregulating the harmful side, if you like, of the food system, but also using the potential tax dividend from that side to upregulate benefits via subsidies for low-income families. Rebalancing the system. That's the incentive side. The other side is information, and that involves labeling, maybe following the examples from Latin America with regard to black octagons in Chile and Mexico and Brazil. And dietary guidelines not being conflicted, in terms of conflicts of interest. And actually, that's the fourth IN: interests. So ridding government advisory bodies, guideline committees, of conflicts of interests. Cleaning up lobbying. Great examples in a way that can be done are from Canada and Ireland that we found. That's government. Citizens, and civil society, they can be involved in various ways exposing, opposing malpractice if you like, or harmful action on the part of industry or whoever else, or the non-action on the part of the government. Informing, advocating, building social movements. Lots I think can be learned through activist group in other domains or in other disciplines like HIV, climate. I think we need to make those connections much more. Media. I mean, the other thought is that the media have great, I mean in this country at least, you know, politicians tend to follow the media, or they're frightened of the media. And if the media turned and started doing deep dive stories of corporate shenanigans and you know, stuff that is under the radar, that would make a difference, I think. And then ultimately, I think then our industry starts to respond to different signals or should do or would do. So that in innovation is not just purely technological aimed at maximizing profit. It may be actually social. We need social innovation as well. There's a handful of things. But ultimately, I actually don't think the food system is broken because it is doing the wrong thing for the wrong reason. I think we need to change the system, and I'll say that will take time. It needs a real transformation. One, one last thing to say about that word transformation. Where in meetings I've been in over the last 10 years, so many people invoke food system transformation when they're not really talking about it. They're just talking about tweaking the margins or small, piecemeal ad hoc changes or interventions when we need to kind of press all the buttons or pull all the levers to get the kind of change that we need. And again, as I say, it was going to take some time, but we have to start moving that direction. Do you think there's reason to be hopeful and are there success stories you can point to, to make us feel a little bit better? Yeah, and I like that word, hope. I've just been reading a lot of essays from, actually, Rebecca Solnit has been writing a lot about hope as a warrior emotion. Radical hope, which it's different to optimism. Optimism went, oh, you know, things probably will be okay, but hope you make it. It's like a springboard for action. So I, yes, I'm hopeful and I think there are plenty of examples. Actually, a lot of examples from Latin America of things changing, and I think that's because they've been hit so fast, so hard. And I write in the book about what's happened in the US and UK it's happened over a period of, I don't know, 50, 60 years. But what's happened and is happening in Latin America has happened in just like 15 years. You know, it's so rapid that they've had to respond fast or get their act together quickly. And that's an interesting breed of activist scholars. You know, I think there's an interesting group, and again, if we connect across national boundaries across the world, we can learn a lot from that. There are great success stories coming out Chile from the past that we've seen what's happening in Mexico. Mexico was in a terrible situation after Vicente Fox came in, in the early 2000s when he brought all his Coca-Cola pals in, you know, the classic revolving door. And Mexico's obesity and diabetes went off to scale very quickly. But they're the first country with the sugar tax in 2014. And you see the pressure that was used to build the momentum behind that. Chile, Guido Girardi and the Black Octagon labels with other interventions. Rarely is it just one thing. It has to be a comprehensive across the board as far as possible. So, in Brazil, I think we will see things happening more in, in Thailand and Southeast Asia. We see things beginning to happen in India, South Africa. The obesity in Ghana, for example, changed so rapidly. There are some good people working in Ghana. So, you know, I think a good part of this is actually documenting those kind of stories as, and when they happen and publicizing them, you know. The way you portrayed the concept of hope, I think is a really good one. And when I asked you for some examples of success, what I was expecting you, you might say, well, there was this program and this part of a one country in Africa where they did something. But you're talking about entire countries making changes like Chile and Brazil and Mexico. That makes me very hopeful about the future when you get governments casting aside the influence of industry. At least long enough to enact some of these things that are definitely not in the best interest of industry, these traditional food companies. And that's all, I think, a very positive sign about big scale change. And hopefully what happens in these countries will become contagious in other countries will adopt them and then, you know, eventually they'll find their way to countries like yours and mine. Yes, I agree. That's how I see it. I used to do a lot of work on single, small interventions and do their work do they not work in this small environment. The problem we have is large scale, so we have to be large scale as well. BIO Dr. Stuart Gillespie has been fighting to transform our broken food system for the past 40 years. Stuart is a Non-Resident Senior Fellow in Nutrition, Diets and Health at theInternational Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI). He has been at the helm of the IFPRI's Regional Network on AIDs, Livelihoods and Food Security, has led the flagship Agriculture for Nutrition and Health research program, was director of the Transform Nutrition program, and founded the Stories of Change initiative, amongst a host of other interventions into public food policy. His work – the ‘food fight' he has been waging – has driven change across all frontiers, from the grassroots (mothers in markets, village revolutionaries) to the political (corporate behemoths, governance). He holds a PhD in Human Nutrition from the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine. 

Außerdem: Schwitzen im Sommer - Was tun, damit ich nicht übel rieche? (08:44) // Mehr spannende Themen wissenschaftlich eingeordnet findet Ihr hier: www.quarks.de // Habt Ihr Feedback, Anregungen oder Fragen, die wir wissenschaftlich einordnen sollen? Dann meldet Euch über Whatsapp oder Signal unter 0162 344 86 48 oder per Mail: quarksdaily@wdr.de. Von Yvonne Strüwing.

Bakterien, die gegen Antibiotika resistent sind, sind auch in Tierspitälern ein wachsendes Problem. Die Übertragung von Keimen und Bakterien kann durch verschiedene Faktoren, wie mangelnde Hygiene, Kontakt mit infizierten Tieren oder Personal, erfolgen. Multiresistente Keime können bei Tieren schwerwiegende Infektionen verursachen und die Behandlung erschweren. Um die Übertragung von multiresistenten Keimen zu verhindern, werden in Tierspitälern spezielle Hygienemassnahmen und Isoliermassnahmen durchgeführt. Im Tierspital Zürich wurde dazu extra eine neue Expertenstelle für die Infektionspräventation geschaffen.

learn essential vocabulary useful for hygiene

In this episode of the Leadership Insights I Wish I Had Known at the Start series, Julia speaks with Falak Madhani, a health systems leader working in Pakistan, where she leads research and programmes focused on primary care, mental health, and suicide prevention in low-resource settings. Falak shares two hard-earned insights she wishes she'd known earlier. The first: stepping back as a leader too soon, even with the best intentions, can leave your team without the support and skill set only you can offer. Her second insight explores the complexity of leading with a deep sense of social justice. Falak speaks about the emotional cost of navigating injustice, whether it's systemic inequality, condescension in global health settings, or being overlooked despite expertise. She explains how leaders must balance their moral clarity with strategic patience choosing which fights to pick, and when. Listen to this episode to explore what it means to lead when you're tired, tested, and deeply committed to change. About the Guest: Falak Madhani is a health systems leader who works on the development and evaluation of healthcare approaches geared towards equity and social justice. Falak is passionate about enabling – through working closely with communities, patients, and healthcare providers – the creation of home-grown solutions that can make holistic primary care equitably available in low-resource settings. Falak's research portfolio is focused on primary care, mental healthcare and suicide prevention in Northern Pakistan. She holds an MSc Public Health in Developing Countries (now called the Public Health for Development program) from the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine and a liberal arts degree from Bennington College, in Vermont, USA. Falak is also trained in humanistic integrative therapy. As a part of the AKU Brain and Mind Institute, Falak leads the establishment of a Living Labs framework in Northern Pakistan for brain and mind research and programme development. She is concurrently Head of Research at Aga Khan Health Service, Pakistan.

People often give up too soon, but true success requires persistence. Don't let your inner critic hold you back from achieving your goals. Unlock the power of energetic hygiene and affirmations to heal and transform your life! In this video, discover the concept of safe spaces and how to create them to promote emotional and spiritual well-being. Learn how to harness the energy of affirmations to release negativity and attract positivity. Get ready to elevate your vibration and manifest your desires. This video is perfect for those looking for a holistic approach to healing and personal growth.Join me as as speak with special guest Coach Radah Dalal https://www.radhadalal.com in an insightful conversation.- - - - -Chapters: Affirmations, Energetic Hygiene, and Creating Safe Spaces to Heal0:00 – Intro2:50 – Energetic Hygine Defined6:25 – Why is the Practice of Energetic Hygine Important7:07 – The Importance of Actions & Behaviors in Enegry Exhange11:50 – Energetic Hygine as an Act of Self-Care14:28 – Affirmations Defined & The Importance Words We Use23:43 – Thoughts and Energy Alignment31:26 – How to Set the Tone to Set Yourself Up for Success36:50 – Affirmation as a Tool to Manage Automatic Thoughts40:00 – Neroplacity 44:01 – Creating Safe Spaces to Heal46:40 – Benefits of Support Groups51:14 – You Have a Choice - You Can Choose57:00 – Taking Radical ResponsibilitySUBSCRIBE: https://www.youtube.com/@coachnatebattle?sub_confirmation=1FOLLOW me here:Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/nate.battle/TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@thecoachnateBluesky: https://bsky.app/profile/natebattle.comFacebook: https://www.facebook.com/BattleCoaching/Website: https://natebattle.com/For information about PERSONAL COACHING coaching, visit:https://natebattle.com/pathway-to-healing-program/COACHING: https://natebattle.com/ Talk/Chat:  https://web.lokiapp.live/Nate.Battle/YTrlBUY my book here:https://www.amazon.com/Battle-Endurance-Someone-Never-Everything/dp/1932707042#mentalhealth #holistichealth #spiritualgrowth #energetichealing #meditation #positivethinking #energyhealing #personaldevelopment #affirmations #mentalwellness #innerpeace #safespaces #stressrelief #healing #wellbeing #mindfulness #selfcare #wellness #letgolivenowwin 

In episode 13 of this season we are joined by the Food Foundation's Rebecca Tobi, and Plant-Based Health Professionals UK's founder, Dr Shireen Kassam to discuss the latest Food Foundation report 'Meat Facts'.  Rebecca is a Registered Nutritionist (RNutr), has a masters in Nutrition for Global Health from the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, and is the Food Foundation's Senior Business and Investor Engagement manager.Rebecca's in-depth knowledge of the report, combined with Shireen's expertise on the health implications of eating red, processed, and other meats, ensure this is a really rich discussion. The UK may continue to ignore the health warnings that are associated with meat consumption but hopefully anyone who is listening to this episode will take action to curb their own consumption for individual and planetary health.Find the full report  here: https://foodfoundation.org.uk/publication/meat-factsThe latest UK National Diet and Nutrition Survey:https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/national-diet-and-nutrition-survey-2019-to-2023/national-diet-and-nutrition-survey-2019-to-2023-reportThe excellent Food Foundation Podcast, Pod Bites: https://foodfoundation.org.uk/podcasts

In this episode of The Dairy Podcast Show, Dr. Kassidy Buse, Dairy Technical Service Specialist at Lallemand Animal Nutrition, explores the ROI of clean feed and why on-farm hygiene plays a critical role in dairy herd health and performance. She breaks down the hidden costs of spoilage, microbial load, and poor feed management across the entire feeding process. Learn practical strategies to protect herd efficiency and improve your bottom line. Listen now on all major platforms!"The real definition of clean feed is a feed that has spoilage, wild yeast, bacteria, and mycotoxins held and managed to a minimal level."Meet the guest: Dr. Kassidy Buse earned her M.S. and Ph.D. in Ruminant Nutrition from the University of Nebraska-Lincoln. Her research explores forage utilization and feed preference, with a special focus on low-lignin alfalfa and its effect on digestibility and intake. As a Dairy Technical Service Specialist with Lallemand Animal Nutrition, she brings science-based insight to practical dairy feed management.Liked this one? Don't stop now — Here's what we think you'll love!What you'll learn:(00:00) Highlight(01:09) Introduction(01:52) Understanding clean feed(07:23) ROI of clean feed(08:45) Feed management practices(13:26) Feed testing tools(20:54) Adjusting feeding strategies(23:39) Final three questionsThe Dairy Podcast Show is trusted and supported by innovative companies like:* Lallemand* Priority IAC* Evonik* Adisseo- AGRI-TRAC- Protekta- Natural Biologics- SmaXtec- Berg + Schmidt- dsm-firmenich- Scoular- ICC- AHV

Krason, Victoria www.deutschlandfunkkultur.de, Fazit

On this episode, Chris and Koi call some friends to talk about the things males need to do hygiene wise when they're dating!

If you've ever wondered how to turn your hygiene department into a true engine of growth—this episode is for you. Because the truth is, many practices underestimate the power of hygiene. But when done right, your hygiene team can elevate patient care, boost profitability, and transform your entire practice culture. To dive into this, I'm joined by Tiffany Wuebben—an accomplished hygienist, author, and founder of The Hygienepreneur. Tiffany's 30+ years in the field, paired with a background in luxury hospitality, gives her a unique perspective on what drives success behind the scenes. In this episode, we talk about: Why your hygiene department should have its own mission statement How empowering your team can relieve owner stress and boost performance What "assisted hygiene" really means—and why most people get it wrong Creating hospitality-based care that patients rave about Practical ways to build a unified, thriving practice culture Whether you're managing a solo hygienist or a team of 11, this conversation will give you the tools to lead with purpose and inspire excellence at every level. — Key Takeaways 00:50 Introduction to the Raving Patients Podcast 04:26 Transforming Hygiene Departments for Success 11:58 Empowering Leadership in Dental Practices 16:00 The Role of Assisted Hygiene 20:25 Elevating Patient Experience through Hospitality 26:35 Building a Unified Practice Culture 32:13 Lightning Round Q&A with Tiffany Wuebben — Connect with Tiffany Wuebben Want to elevate your hygiene department and empower your team to drive practice growth? Tiffany is here to help.

Carey Jaros joined GOJO in 2014 as a board member, later taking on executive roles as Chief Strategy Officer—where she oversaw Marketing, Product Management, and Innovation—and as Chief Operating Officer, before becoming President and CEO in January 2020.Our conversation today covers Carey's call to lead—shaped by a lifelong passion for solving problems and telling stories—her reflections on leadership and decision-making, GOJO's extraordinary legacy, and its ongoing commitment to innovation. We discuss GOJO's origins, founded by Goldie and Jerry Lippman in 1946 to address the real human problem of safely cleaning workers' hands in Akron's rubber factories. Carey shares how GOJO has evolved from those roots into a global leader in hygiene, skincare, and well-being, driven by an unwavering commitment to safety, efficacy, and sustainability.We also delve into the critical moments Carey faced stepping into her role at the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, the bold strategic investments GOJO made during this unprecedented time, and how the company balances legacy with innovation. Carey offers insights into the importance of culture, rigorous debate, and continuous learning as cornerstones of her leadership approach.As an operator, investor, and board member, Carey has worked with more than 50 organizations throughout her career. Prior to GOJO, she was President of Walnut Ridge Strategic Management Company and served as a Vice President at Dealer Tire, a large privately held tire distributor based in Cleveland. She spent the first 12 years of her career as a management consultant at Bain & Company.Today, Carey is a Board Director of Grocery Outlet, a publicly traded NASDAQ corporation, and an Advisory Board Member of Aunt Flow, a venture-backed menstrual products startup. She also serves on the Boards of The Cleveland Foundation, University Hospitals, and Laurel School.Carey is a fantastic storyteller, and this conversation is filled with insightful anecdotes and practical wisdom on business and entrepreneurship—so please enjoy!00:00:00 - Reflecting on Career Paths  00:06:51 - Journey to GOJO Industries  00:11:27 - Transitioning to Leadership  00:16:36 - Understanding GOJO's Origins  00:24:48 - Balancing Legacy and Innovation  00:28:27 - Leading Through the Pandemic  00:30:32 - Navigating Unprecedented Challenges  00:32:49 - Strategic Leadership in Crisis  00:35:27 - Investing for the Future  00:37:49 - The Power of Brand Promise  00:40:01 - Defining Success Through Purpose  00:42:55 - Personal Reflections on Success  00:45:15 - The Importance of Health and Wellbeing  00:47:11 - Common Sense in Hygiene Practices  00:49:05 - Legacy and Impact of GOJO  00:51:45 - Community and Identity in Northeast Ohio  00:55:22 - Fostering Productive Debate  00:58:50 - Hidden Gem-----LINKS:https://www.gojo.com/https://www.linkedin.com/in/careyjaros/-----SPONSOR:Roundstone InsuranceRoundstone Insurance is proud to sponsor Lay of The Land. Founder and CEO, Michael Schroeder, has committed full-year support for the podcast, recognizing its alignment with the company's passion for entrepreneurship, innovation, and community leadership.Headquartered in Rocky River, Ohio, Roundstone was founded in 2005 with a vision to deliver better healthcare outcomes at a more affordable cost. To bring that vision to life, the company pioneered the group medical captive model — a self-funded health insurance solution that provides small and mid-sized businesses with greater control and significant savings.Over the past two decades, Roundstone has grown rapidly, creating nearly 200 jobs in Northeast Ohio. The company works closely with employers and benefits advisors to navigate the complexities of commercial health insurance and build custom plans that prioritize employee well-being over shareholder returns. By focusing on aligned incentives and better health outcomes, Roundstone is helping businesses save thousands in Per Employee Per Year healthcare costs.Roundstone Insurance — Built for entrepreneurs. Backed by innovation. Committed to Cleveland.-----Stay up to date by signing up for Lay of The Land's weekly newsletter — sign up here.Past guests include Justin Bibb (Mayor of Cleveland), Pat Conway (Great Lakes Brewing), Steve Potash (OverDrive), Umberto P. Fedeli (The Fedeli Group), Lila Mills (Signal Cleveland), Stewart Kohl (The Riverside Company), Mitch Kroll (Findaway — Acquired by Spotify), and over 200 other Cleveland Entrepreneurs.Connect with Jeffrey Stern on LinkedIn — https://www.linkedin.com/in/jeffreypstern/Follow Lay of The Land on X @podlayofthelandhttps://www.jeffreys.page/

This week on the Lancaster Farming Industrial Hemp Podcast, we're talking about wipes. And diapers. And makeup pads. And all the other throwaway hygiene products we barely think about — but use every day. Most of these single-use items are made from plastic. Why? Because plastic is cheap, consistent, and engineered to run smoothly on fast-moving machines. But that convenience comes at a cost: landfill waste, microplastic pollution and a total disconnect from the land. But what if we could change that? What if the raw material for these essential products didn't come from oil — but from agriculture? From the hemp fields, even? This week, we talk to Jason Finnis from Bast Fiber Technologies, a company working to make that shift real — using hemp fiber to replace plastic in nonwoven hygiene products. Our guest is Jason Finnis, co-founder and Chief Innovation Officer at Bast Fiber Technologies, a clean-tech fiber company with operations in North Carolina and Germany. Jason's been working to bring hemp fiber into hygiene and personal care products for more than 30 years — not as a novelty, but as a high-performance alternative to synthetic materials. We talk about: • The massive and often invisible role of nonwovens in our daily lives • The hidden microplastics in wipes, pads and tampons — and why it matters • Why hemp fiber is a smart material for hygiene: absorbent, soft and compostable • What BFT looks for in hemp fiber: long, clean and consistent • The importance of regional supply chains and local farm partnerships • How consumer pressure, brand demand and European policy are aligning to create real momentum Jason shares his journey from selling hemp out of a VW bus in the '90s to helping build a future where everyday products are cleaner, greener and made from plants, not petroleum. Learn More: Bast Fiber Technologies https://www.bastfibertech.com Global Hemp Fiber Summit – July 10–11 at NC State University https://hempinitiatives.com/fiber-summit Thanks to our sponsor: HEMI – The Hemp Education and Marketing Initiative Learn more at HempInitiatives.org Produced by Eric Hurlock and Justin Berger

Dr. Wendy is covering Workplace Rudeness, A Simple Step to Mental Health, and what is Digital Hygiene? It's all on KFIAM-640!

In this episode, Jeff Blumberg shares a proven 9-step system to quickly fill same-day hygiene openings—without the chaos—and keep your schedule productive.   DDS Success (coupon code RX269) - https://ddssuccess.com/  Handout - https://www.mgeonline.com/episode-196-downloads-form-page/

The sisters are pulling back the curtain this week

Profile This, TV Time with Ted and Headlines!