Podcasts about ipr

Iowa has been awarded a $209 million federal grant to expand and improve health care across the state — the first installment of what officials say could total $1 billion over the next five years. The funding is part of the federal Rural Health Transformation Program and is aimed at strengthening access to care, equipment and workforce development in rural communities. Leaders from Iowa's critical access hospitals talk about what this funding could mean on the ground and why they say it falls far short of what rural providers are bracing for. We also discuss workforce shortages, the challenge of recruiting specialists like OB-GYNs, and the “hub and spoke” model Gov. Kim Reynolds has promoted to reshape rural health care delivery. Later, host Charity Nebbe announces Talk of Iowa's 2026 Book Club selections with IPR talk show producer, Caitlin Troutman.

The Iowa Legislature gavels in for the 2026 session next week. On today's episode we take a closer look at the processes and people at the statehouse, starting with IPR reporters Katarina Sostaric and Isabella Luu to share their insights on reporting from the capitol. Then we talk about what's changed about the legislature over the decades with former state lawmaker Andy McKean and how Iowans can effectively get involved during the session with lobbyist Dustin Miller. Also, we talk with journalist and host of 'Iowa Press' on Iowa PBS O. Kay Henderson about Gov. Kim Reynolds' tenure and what's to come for her final year in office.

This is a special audio time-jump episode. It's an immersive journey ten years into the future to explore how public relations has managed three of the biggest challenges: the rapid rise of AI, the disappearing entry-level job, and the ongoing gender gap in leadership.Doug and Farzana volunteer for a guided “time crossing” to see how the next generation of PR leaders navigated a decade of disruption. What they find isn't just smarter tech, it's smarter systems, layered cities, holographic hosts, and workplaces where AI and humans collaborate with clarity and conscience.This isn't an episode about how will we fix it, it's about how they already did… and what we can start implementing right now.Welcome to 2036 Listen For5:01 How has technology reshaped the world of PR?6:56 What does it feel like to communicate in a city designed to respond?9:57 How does personalized media target people in real time?10:36 What are holographic briefs and how do they change communication?16:31 Are women finally stepping into more leadership roles?17:44 How did society move beyond the culture war over being ‘woke'?12:59 What's changed most in how we communicate at work?14:55 What does it take to guide AI with real nuance?18:18 How is emotional labor being measured, and addressed, in the future?19:02 What are the future rules of ethical communication with AI? DougSubstack | Website | LinkedInFarzanaSubstack | Website | LinkedIn Are you a brand with a podcast that needs support? Book a meeting with Doug Downs to talk about it.Apply to be a guest on the podcastConnect with usLinkedIn | X | Instagram | You Tube | Facebook | Threads | Bluesky | PinterestRequest a transcript of this episodeSupport the show

An interview with Lee Rood of the Des Moines Register about the state's agreements with the Department of Homeland Security that took effect this January, and with IPR's Rachel Cramer on new restrictions on SNAP food purchases, and more.

What happens when protests shake a regime built on control, not consent? We look at Iran's largest wave of unrest since 2022. Fueled by economic collapse and skyrocketing inflation, the protests are no longer just about hardship, they've become openly anti-government, spreading even into rural areas. We break down Iran's unprecedented tone shift in crisis comms, explore the influential role of the Iranian diaspora, and consider how narratives are being shaped despite media restrictions. And we pivot to examine Donald Trump's striking effort to brand U.S. institutions with his name, followed by a look into 2026 with helpful resources for PR pros preparing for global risks. Listen For:47 What's really fueling Iran's latest wave of protests?4:28 How does Iran's diaspora influence global perception?5:39 Can Trump gain political advantage from Iran's instability?6:14 Why is Trump rebranding national institutions with his name?12:46 What tools can help PR pros prepare for global risks in 2026?The Week Unspun is a weekly livestream every Friday at 10am ET/3pm BT. Check it out on our YouTube Channel or via this LinkedIn channelFolgate AdvisorsCurzon Public Relations WebsiteStories and Strategies WebsiteRequest a transcript of this livestream  Support the show

IPR's journalists rehash their most consequential moments of the last year — from raucous town halls to the arrest of Des Moines schools' superintendent. Assistant news director Grant Gerlock and reporters Katarina Sostaric, Natalie Krebs, James Kelley and Rachel Cramer bring us back through the biggest stories of 2025 and share what they'll be watching in the year to come.

Public relations shapes what people believe, how communities respond, and which ideas earn trust. It influences elections, corporate crises, government decisions, reputations, and public sentiment. Yet unlike medicine, law, or engineering, anyone can call themselves a PR professional. No license. No minimum standard. No consequences when things go wrong. What happens when a profession with this much power has almost no guardrails?Some say that freedom is essential for open societies. Others say it leaves the public exposed. What happens if we build those guardrails too strong? In this episode we walk the line of tension between protection and freedom.Listen For4:28 What problem is PR regulation really trying to solve?9:47 Does regulation protect the public, or just PR pros?12:38 Could PR regulation threaten free speech?14:23 Is there a middle ground on PR regulation?18:37 Can licensing and ethics training reshape PR?Rate this podcast with just one click Follow Farzana on SubstackFollow Doug on SubstackCurzon Substack Stories and Strategies WebsiteCurzon Public Relations WebsiteAre you a brand with a podcast that needs support? Book a meeting with Doug Downs to talk about it.Apply to be a guest on the podcastConnect with usLinkedIn | X | Instagram | You Tube | Facebook | Threads | Bluesky | PinterestRequest a transcript of this episodeSupport the show

This is not just one podcast. It's a feed with two.First is Stories and Strategies with Curzon Public Relations. A weekly show hosted by Doug Downs and Farzana Baduel. Every Tuesday, we tackle the real work of public relations. The strategy behind the stories. The decisions behind the headlines. No fluff. No profiles. Just the issues shaping modern communications.Also in this feed is The Week UnSpun. A live, weekly look at global news through a public relations lens. Hosted by Doug Downs, Farzana Baduel, and David Gallagher of Folgate Advisors. Streaming every Friday at 10 a.m. Eastern, 3 p.m. UK time. With the audio released later the same day.Two shows. One feed. Follow now, and stay ahead of the story.Support the show

What do you say when there's nothing to say?Most workplaces think they handle grief through policy, a few days of bereavement leave, a checklist, and a quiet expectation that people will return “ready” to work. But grief doesn't follow policy. It walks back into the office with someone long before they're prepared, reshaping their focus, their energy, their confidence and their sense of safety. And while HR manages the paperwork, it's the hallway conversations, the team dynamics, the awkward silences and the well-meaning but painful clichés that shape a grieving person's real experience. That isn't an HR problem. That's a communications problem.And yet almost no one prepares for it. Teams don't know what to say. Leaders fear saying the wrong thing. Colleagues avoid eye contact because they're anxious, not uncaring. In this episode, grief expert Cindy Lang shows why communication is the most powerful support any workplace can offer, and how simple, compassionate language can make the difference between someone feeling invisible and someone feeling understood.  Listen For4:11 Why Is Grief First a Communications Issue, Not Just HR's Job?6:45 What Is the “Three-C Model” for Grief-Informed Communication?8:05 How Does Grief Physically and Emotionally Impact a Person at Work?14:51 What Small Act of Kindness Made the Biggest Impact After Loss?19:29 Answer to Last Episode's Question from Marc WhittGuest: Cindy LangWebsite | Facebook | Instagram  Rate this podcast with just one click Follow Farzana on SubstackFollow Doug on SubstackCurzon Substack Stories and Strategies WebsiteCurzon Public Relations WebsiteAre you a brand with a podcast that needs support? Book a meeting with Doug Downs to talk about it.Apply to be a guest on the podcastConnect with usLinkedIn | X | Instagram | You Tube | Facebook | Threads | Bluesky | PinterestRequest a transcript of this episodeSupport the show

What happens when a top political strategist forgets the rules of media engagement?  This episode of The Week UnSpun strikes a nerve for PR professionals as Doug unpacks Susie Wiles' widely criticized Vanity Fair interviews, where a lack of structure, message control, and audience awareness turned rare access into a strategic failure. It's a masterclass in what not to do when the stakes are sky-high.  Then, the conversation pivots to a claim that's rippling through the industry in the UK. Sir Martin Sorrell declared on BBC Radio that PR no longer exists, prompting fierce pushback from Farzana. The team's defense of the industry is both impassioned and insightful, raising a critical question for anyone in communications. Is PR losing ground, or is it finally stepping into its own power?Listen For1:23 What went wrong in Susie Wiles' interviews?4:10 What are the 8 media mistakes she made?6:51 Is PR really dead, as Martin Sorrell claims?10:34 Why can't PR pros explain what they do?12:09 Is PR losing ground or evolving fast?The Week Unspun is a weekly livestream every Friday at 10am ET/3pm BT. Check it out on our YouTube Channel or via this LinkedIn channelFolgate AdvisorsCurzon Public Relations WebsiteStories and Strategies WebsiteRequest a transcript  Support the show

Recent changes at USPTO are increasingly shaping the context in which Congress considers potential patent legislation.In the latest episode of Clause 8, the focus turns to how the USPTO's evolving approach to post-grant proceedings at the PTAB is shaping the broader patent policy debate—and influencing what Congress may (or may not) do next.The episode features David Jones, Executive Director of the High Tech Inventors Alliance (HTIA) and a longtime Clause 8 favorite, alongside Jeffrey Hantson, a former patent litigator and senior Senate Judiciary Committee staffer who most recently served as Deputy General Counsel to Sen. Dick Durbin after advising Sen. Mazie Hirono on IP issues. Dave and Jeff first crossed paths during the pre-pandemic Section 101 roundtables, and the episode captures their fun, wonky back-and-forth dynamic.A central theme is whether the USPTO's recent moves on IPR institution—including its Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM)—create an opening for Congress to strike a bargain, or instead make legislative compromise harder. Dave and Jeff explore how the introduction of settled expectations, Director John Squires reclaiming institution authority, and broader institution trends are reshaping the conversation around proposals such as the PREVAIL Act.Jeff frames the core tension in familiar terms for staffers and stakeholders: at some point, should the USPTO be done reassessing a patent's validity? Dave, for his part, is skeptical that legislation is the answer when the agency is (in his view) drifting from what was envisioned when Congress created the PTAB under the America Invents Act (AIA).The conversation also explores why PREVAIL advanced further than PERA in the last Congress, why PTAB reform is often easier to grasp on Capitol Hill than Section 101 eligibility, and why Sen. Thom Tillis' likability—and impending retirement—may matter more than most people realize.Set against a backdrop of shifting IP leadership on Capitol Hill and mixed administrative signals on patents, the episode offers a candid look at where patent policy may be headed—and what it would take to change course.

On this special bonus episode in honor of Jane Austen's 250th birthday, 'Talk of Iowa' host Charity Nebbe and producer Dani Gehr settle a debate they've been having for years: Which adaptation of 'Pride and Prejudice' is best? Nebbe makes her case for the longer and more by the book 1995 BBC miniseries, while Gehr advocates for the iconic moments in the more modern 2005 film with Keira Knightley and Matthew Macfadyen. You can see the two debate in Regency-era outfits on IPR's Instagram, Facebook and TikTok accounts.

Nonprofits often describe themselves with a strange sense of pride: “We're the best kept secret.” But in an era where funding is shrinking, donor expectations are shifting, and public trust must be earned every single day, staying a secret is no longer a virtue. It's a liability. So why do so many NGOs still hide behind humility, overwhelm, or the hope that their good work will somehow speak for itself?It's same problem everywhere. Leaders who underestimate the power of strategic communication. Teams overwhelmed by tactical delivery. Fundraisers separated from PR staff. And organizations with extraordinary missions that remain invisible. In this episode, how nonprofits can step out of the shadows, communicate their value with confidence, and build the visibility they need to survive and serve.Listen For5:11 Why doesn't good work speak for itself anymore?10:12 How can NGOs attract top talent without top salaries?18:52 What are the first PR steps for nonprofits to grow visibility?21:04 Answer to Last Week's Question from Cindy LangGuest: Marc WhittWebsite | Email | LinkedIn | XRate this podcast with just one click Follow Farzana on SubstackFollow Doug on SubstackCurzon Substack Stories and Strategies WebsiteCurzon Public Relations WebsiteAre you a brand with a podcast that needs support? Book a meeting with Doug Downs to talk about it.Apply to be a guest on the podcastConnect with usLinkedIn | X | Instagram | You Tube | Facebook | Threads | Bluesky | PinterestRequest a transcript of this episodeSupport the show

During The Assembly Show last fall, we sat down with Anthony Leo, president of IPR Robotics, to talk about new product development in the automation sector. Leo explains how he transforms a napkin sketch into a usable product that people want. We discuss the development of StackTrax, IPR's new, modular seventh-axis system designed to extend robot reach and flexibility on the factory floor. Leo discusses why StackTrax was created, what gaps it fills in the marketplace, and how IPR's approach differs from other seventh-axis providers.Sponsored By:

Who's Really Writing the Stories That Shape Our World?This week, we dive into the high-stakes power play unfolding in Hollywood as Netflix and Paramount battle to take over Warner Bros. What looks like a blockbuster business deal is, in fact, a global struggle over who gets to shape the stories that define how we think, feel, and remember.Farzana explores the soft power implications of the deal, asking what happens when control of cultural narratives shifts to private or even foreign-backed hands. Doug examines the potential impact on creators, especially if Netflix, known for tight content licensing, wins control of vast historical archives. David brings in insider chatter from Hollywood, where some fear the deal could spell the end of cinema as we know it.Also in this episode, we unpack why the UK is launching a legal PR offensive to keep English law as the gold standard for global deals and how Singapore is emerging as a serious contender.Plus, is the US hurting its tourism brand with new visa requirements demanding access to social media history? And what can Australia's ban on under-16s using social media teach us about digital policy and parental reality? Listen For3:53 How would this merger reshape global storytelling and soft power?6:58 Why is the UK promoting English law as a global standard?10:12 What makes Singapore law a serious competitor to English law?15:39 Will new US visa rules scare away global travelers and harm tourism?The Week Unspun is a weekly livestream every Friday at 10am ET/3pm BT. Check it out on our YouTube Channel or via this LinkedIn channel Folgate AdvisorsCurzon Public Relations WebsiteStories and Strategies WebsiteRequest a transcript of this livestreamSupport the show

In every corner of the world the public mood is shifting, sometimes quietly and sometimes all at once. Climate anxiety, pandemic fears, economic pressure, geopolitical tension and a surge in concern about data security have all reshaped what people expect from companies. For organizations trying to build trust across borders the rules keep changing. What mattered in 2019 did not matter in 2021. What mattered last year may not matter next year. And unless communicators understand these shifts they will miss the signals that determine whether a message lands or falls flat.That is why this conversation with Steve Shepperson-Smith is so valuable. Drawing from Vodafone's 75,000+ annual reputation data points and RepTrak's million-strong global dataset, Stephen shares compelling insights on the critical 60/40 split between capability and character, and why the latter matters more than ever in polarized, politicized times.Listen For4:37 What does global data say about what drives reputation today?6:52 Have public views on social and environmental issues shifted?8:41 Are ESG and DEI labels now hurting more than helping?10:57 Why is data security now a top consumer concern?16:38 How can brands stay local in a divided global landscape?20:40 Answer to Last Episode's Question from Andy WestGuest: Steve Shepperson-Smith, VodaphoneLinkedInRate this podcast with just one click Follow Farzana on SubstackFollow Doug on SubstackCurzon Substack Stories and Strategies WebsiteCurzon Public Relations WebsiteAre you a brand with a podcast that needs support? Book a meeting with Doug Downs to talk about it.Apply to be a guest on the podcastConnect with usLinkedIn | X | Instagram | You Tube | Facebook | Threads | Bluesky | PinterestRequest a transcript of this episodeSupport the show

The ensemble celebrates its tenth annual "Winter Songs and Carols" concert this month. Members Michael Beery, Sam Clark, Laura Hood, Lauren Murphy and Jeanmarie Riccobono visited IPR's Studio A to give a preview of the music on this weekend's concerts. They also spoke about the departure of Manitou Winds founder and artistic director Jason McKinney earlier this year and how they as an ensemble remain committed to their goals for the future.

Join us for a timely webinar examining the United States Patent and Trademark Office’s Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) titled “Revision to Rules of Practice Before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board,” which proposes significant changes to how inter partes review (IPR) petitions are instituted. This session will present arguments from both sides while covering how the proposed rules aim to curb serial and duplicative challenges, shift institution discretion, and bolster patent­holder certainty, while also covering concerns about limiting access to review and adverse impacts on operating companies. With the official public comment deadline extended to December 2, 2025, this webinar aims to provide informative insight before the comment window closes. Don’t miss this chance to hear competing views on one of the most consequential patent-policy debates of the year. Featuring: Hon. Andrei Iancu, Partner, Sullivan & Cromwell LLPDavid Jones, Executive Director, High Tech Inventors AllianceJoseph Matal, Principal, Clear IP, LLCBrian O'Shaughnessy, Partner, Dinsmore & Shohl LLP(Moderator) Robert Rando, Partner, Patrick Doerr

Most agencies can tell you how their clients are doing but ask how they are doing and the room gets quiet. The truth is that even the best run firms skip their own checkups. Margins thin out, teams burn out, and culture drifts while the spotlight stays fixed on the next pitch. But what if agencies treated their operations the way a doctor treats a patient, tracking vital signs, diagnosing problems early, and prescribing real solutions before things spiral.From hidden symptoms to running a full-scale agency fitness test, in this episode we look at what separates a healthy firm from one that just looks good on paper.  Listen For3:56 What vital signs show if your agency is healthy or just surviving?5:25 Are agency leaders really surprised by their own problems?8:57 Is AI a threat or a tool for agencies to grow?12:25 What four pillars make an agency profitable and strong?18:15 What aha moment helped an agency turn things around?20:03 Answer to Last Episode's Question from Lionel ZetterGuest: Andy West, West of CenterWebsite | Email | LinkedIn | X | Substack Rate this podcast with just one click Follow Farzana on SubstackFollow Doug on SubstackCurzon Substack Stories and Strategies WebsiteCurzon Public Relations WebsiteAre you a brand with a podcast that needs support? Book a meeting with Doug Downs to talk about it.Apply to be a guest on the podcastConnect with usLinkedIn | X | Instagram | You Tube | Facebook | Threads | Bluesky | PinterestRequest a transcript of this episodeSupport the show

This week, we look into the murky ethics of media leaks and their growing role in shaping political, corporate, and cultural narratives. From leaked peace plans that spark international diplomacy to budget details released minutes before parliamentary debate, we dissect whether leaks are ethical whistleblowing or manipulative PR tactics. Farzana argues that leaks often reveal broken internal cultures, while Doug, from a journalistic perspective, explores how leaks are used to test narratives and steer public perception. Also in this episode, David wonders if written reports are becoming relics in a world obsessed with video and visual storytelling.  And we ask: Can AI help restore strategic thinking in PR? And should public relations finally be regulated like other professions?  Watch/Listen For1:45 How will AI reshape PR, tactically or strategically?5:36 Should PR be regulated like law or finance?9:28 Are media leaks ethical, or just PR strategy?14:33 Can visual storytelling replace traditional comms?22:04 Are algorithms killing media access for everyone?The Week Unspun is a weekly livestream every Friday at 10am ET/3pm BT. Check it out on our YouTube Channel or via this LinkedIn channelFolgate AdvisorsCurzon Public Relations WebsiteStories and Strategies WebsiteRequest a transcript of this livestream Support the show

Let's be honest – the occlusion after Aligner cases can be a little ‘off' (even after fixed appliances!) How do you know if your patient's occlusion after aligner treatment is acceptable or risky? What practical guidelines can general dentists follow to manage occlusion when orthodontic results aren't textbook-perfect? Jaz and Dr. Jesper Hatt explore the most common challenges dentists face, from ClinCheck errors and digital setup pitfalls to balancing aesthetics with functional occlusion. They also discuss key strategies to help you evaluate, guide, and optimize occlusion in your patients, because understanding what is acceptable and what needs intervention can make all the difference in long-term treatment stability and patient satisfaction. https://youtu.be/e74lUbyTCaA Watch PDP250 on YouTube Protrusive Dental Pearl: Harmony and Occlusal Compatibility Always ensure restorative anatomy suits the patient's natural occlusal scheme and age-related wear. If opposing teeth are flat and amalgam-filled, polished cuspal anatomy will be incompatible — flatten as needed to conform. Need to Read it? Check out the Full Episode Transcript below! Key Takeaways Common mistakes in ClinCheck planning often stem from occlusion issues. Effective communication and documentation are crucial in clinical support. Occlusion must be set correctly to ensure successful treatment outcomes. Understanding the patient’s profile is essential for effective orthodontics. Collaboration between GPs and orthodontists can enhance patient care. Retention of orthodontic results is a lifelong commitment. Aesthetic goals must align with functional occlusion in treatment planning. Informed consent is critical when discussing potential surgical interventions. The tongue plays a crucial role in orthodontic outcomes. Spacing cases should often be approached as restorative cases. Aligners can achieve precise spacing more effectively than fixed appliances. Enamel adjustments may be necessary for optimal occlusion post-treatment. Retention strategies must be tailored to individual patient needs. Case assessment is vital for determining treatment complexity. Highlights of this episode: 00:00 Teaser 00:59 Intro 02:53  Pearl – Harmony and Occlusal Compatibility 05:57 Dr. Jesper Hatt Introduction 07:34 Clinical Support Systems 10:18 Occlusion and Aligner Therapy 20:41 Bite Recording Considerations 25:32 Collaborative Approach in Orthodontics 30:31 Occlusal Goals vs. Aesthetic Goals 31:42 Midroll 35:03 Occlusal Goals vs. Aesthetic Goals 35:25 Challenges with Spacing Cases 42:19 Occlusion Checkpoints After Aligners 50:17 Considerations for Retention 54:55 Case Assessment and Treatment Planning 58:14 Key Lessons and Final Thoughts 01:00:19 Interconnectedness of Body and Teeth 01:02:48 Resources for Dentists and Case Support 01:04:40 Outro Free Aligner Case Support!Send your patient's case number and get a full assessment in 24 hours—easy, moderate, complex, or referral. Plus, access our 52-point planning protocol and 2-min photo course. No uploads, no cost. [Get Free Access Now] Learn more at alignerservice.com If you enjoyed this episode, don't miss: Do's and Don'ts of Aligners [STRAIGHTPRIL] – PDP071 #PDPMainEpisodes #OcclusionTMDandSplints #OrthoRestorative This episode is eligible for 1 CE credit via the quiz on Protrusive Guidance. This episode meets GDC Outcomes A and C. AGD Subject Code: 370 ORTHODONTICS (Functional orthodontic therapy) Aim: To provide general dentists with practical guidance for managing occlusion in aligner therapy, from bite capture to retention, including common pitfalls, functional considerations, and case selection. Dentists will be able to – Identify common errors in digital bite capture and occlusion setup. Understand the impact of anterior inclination and mandibular movement patterns on occlusal stability. Plan retention strategies appropriate for aligner and restorative cases. Click below for full episode transcript: Teaser: The one thing that we always check initially is the occlusion set correct by the aligner company. Because if the occlusion is not set correctly, everything else just doesn't matter because the teeth will move, but into a wrong position because the occlusion is off from the beginning. I don't know about you, but if half the orthodontists are afraid of controlling the root movements in extraction cases, as a GP, I would be terrified. Teaser:I don’t care if you just move from premolar to premolar or all the teeth. Orthodontics is orthodontics, so you will affect all the teeth during the treatment. The question’s just how much. Imagine going to a football stadium. The orthodontist will be able to find the football stadium.  If it’s a reasonable orthodontist, he’ll be able to find the section you’re going to sit in, and if he’s really, really, really good, he will be able to find the row that you’re going to sit in, but the exact spot where you are going to sit… he will never, ever be able to find that with orthodontics. Jaz’s Introduction: Hello, Protruserati. I’m Jaz Gulati. Welcome back to your favorite dental podcast. I’m joined today by our guest, Dr. Jesper Hatt. All this dentist does is help other dentists with their treatment plans for aligners. From speaking to him, I gather that he’s no longer practicing clinically and is full-time clinical support for colleagues for their aligner cases. So there’s a lot we can learn from someone who day in day out has to do so much treatment planning and speaking to GDPs about their cases, how they’re tracking, how they’re not tracking, complications, and then years of seeing again, okay, how well did that first set of aligners actually perform? What is predictable and what isn’t? And as well as asking what are the most common errors we make on our ClinChecks or treatment plan softwares. I really wanted to probe in further. I really want to ask him about clinical guidelines for occlusion after ortho. Sometimes we treat a case and whilst the aesthetics of that aligner case is beautiful, the occlusion is sometimes not as good. So let’s talk about what that actually means. What is a not-good occlusion? What is a good occlusion? And just to offer some guidelines for practitioners to follow because guess what? No orthodontist in the world is gonna ever get the occlusion correct through ortho. Therefore, we as GPs are never gonna get a perfect textbook occlusion, but we need to understand what is acceptable and what is a good guideline to follow. That’s exactly what we’ll present to you in this episode today. Dental PearlNow, this is a CE slash CPD eligible episode and as our main PDP episode, I’ll give you a Protrusive Dental Pearl. Today’s pearl is very much relevant to the theme of orthodontics and occlusion we’re discussing today, and it’s probably a pearl I’ve given to you already in the past somewhere down the line, but it’s so important and so key. I really want to just emphasize on it again. In fact, a colleague messaged me recently and it reminded me of this concept I’m about to explain. She sent me an image of a resin bonded bridge she did, which had failed. It was a lower incisor, and just a few days after bonding, it failed. And so this dentist is feeling a bit embarrassed and wanted my advice. Now, by the way, guys, if you message me for advice on Instagram, on Facebook, or something like that, it’s very hit and miss. Like my priorities in life are family, health, and everything that happens on Protrusive Guidance. Our network. If you message me outside that network, I may not see it. The team might, but I may not see it. It’s the only way that I can really maintain control and calm in my life. The reason for saying this, I don’t want anyone to be offended. I’m not ignoring anyone. It’s just the volume of messages I get year on year, they’re astronomical. And I don’t mind if you nudge me. If you messaged me something weeks or months ago and I haven’t replied, I probably haven’t seen it. Please do nudge me. And the best place to catch me on is Protrusive Guidance. If you DM me on Protrusive Guidance, home of the nicest and geekiest dentists in the world, that’s the only platform I will log in daily. That’s our baby, our community. Anyway, so I caught this Facebook message and it was up to me to help this colleague. And one observation I made is that the lower teeth were all worn. The upper teeth were really worn, but this resin bonded bridge pontic, it just looked like a perfect tooth. The patient was something like 77 or 80. So it really made me think that, okay, why are we putting something that looks like a 25-year-old’s tooth in a 77-year-old? But even forgetting age and stuff, you have to look at the adjacent teeth in the arch. Is your restoration harmonious with the other teeth in the arch, and of course is the restoration harmonious with what’s opposing it? Because it’s just not compatible. So part one of this pearl is make sure any restoration you do, whether it’s direct or indirect, is harmonious with the patient’s arch and with the opposing teeth and with their occlusal scheme. Because otherwise, if you get rubber dam on and you give your 75-year-old patient beautiful composite resin, it’s got all that cuspal fissure pattern and anatomy, and you take that rubber dam off and you notice that all the other teeth are flat and the opposing teeth are flat amalgams, guess what? You’re gonna be making your composite flat, whether you like it or not. You created a restoration that’s proud, right? That’s why you did not conform to the patient’s own arch or existing anatomical scheme. So the part B of this is the thing that I get very excited to talk about, right? So sometimes you have a worn dentition, but then you have one tooth that’s not worn at all. It’s like that in-standing lateral incisor, right? Think of an upper lateral incisor that’s a bit in-standing, and you see some wear on all the incisors, but that lateral incisor does not have any wear in it because it was never in the firing line. It was never in function. It was never in parafunction. Now, if you give this patient aligners or fixed appliances, you’re doing ortho and you’re now going to align this lateral incisor. So it’s now gonna eventually get into occlusion and it will be in the functional and parafunctional pathways of this patient. Do you really think you can just leave that incisor be? No. It’s not gonna be compatible with the adjacent teeth. It’s not going to be compatible with the opposing tooth and the occlusal scheme. So guess what? You have to get your bur out or your Sof-Lex disc out, and you have to bake in some years into that tooth. Or you have to build up all the other teeth if appropriate for that patient. You’ve just gotta think about it. And I hope that makes sense so you can stay out of trouble. You’re not gonna get chipping and you can consent your patient appropriately for enamel adjustment, which is something that we do talk about in this episode. I think you’re in for an absolute cracker. I hope you enjoy. I’ll catch you in the outro. Main Episode: Doctor Jesper Hatt, thank you so much for coming to Protrusive Dental Podcast. We met in Scandinavia, in Copenhagen. You delivered this wonderful lecture and it was so nice to connect with you then and to finally have you on the show. Tell us, how are you, where in the world are you, and tell us about yourself. [Jesper] Well, thank you for the invitation, first of all. Well, I’m a dentist. I used to practice in Denmark since I originally come from Denmark. My mother’s from Germany, and now I live in Switzerland and have stopped practicing dentistry since 2018. Now I only do consulting work and I help doctors around the world with making their aligner business successful. [Jaz] And this is like probably clinical advice, but also like strategic advice and positioning and that kinda stuff. Probably the whole shebang, right? [Jesper] Yeah. I mean, I have a team around me, so my wife’s a dentist as well, and I would say she’s the expert in Europe on clear aligners. She’s been working for, first of all, our practice. She’s a dentist too. She worked with me in the practice. We practiced together for 10 years. Then she became a clinical advisor for Allion Tech with responsibility for clinical support of Scandinavia. She was headhunted to ClearCorrect, worked in Basel while I was doing more and more consulting stuff in Denmark. So she was traveling back and forth, and I considered this to be a little bit challenging for our family. So I asked her, well, why don’t we just relocate to Switzerland since ClearCorrect is located there? And sure we did. And after two years she told me, I think clinical support, it’s okay. And I like to train the teams, but I’d really like to do more than that because she found out that doctors, they were able to book a spot sometime in the future, let’s say two weeks out in the future at a time that suited the doctors… no, not the doctors, ClearCorrect. Or Invisalign or whatever clear aligner company you use. So as a doctor, you’re able to block the spot and at that time you can have your 30 minutes one-on-one online with a clinical expert. And she said it’s always between the patients or administrative stuff. So they’re not really focused on their ClearCorrect or clear aligner patient. And so they forget half of what I tell them. I can see it in the setups they do. They end up having to call me again. It doesn’t work like that. I would like to help them. [Jaz] It’s a clunky pathway of mentorship. [Jesper] Yes. And so she wanted to change the way clinical support was built up. So we do it differently. We do it only in writing so people can remember what we are telling them. They can always go back in the note and see what’s been going on, what was the advice we gave them, and we offer this co-creation support where we take over most of the treatment planning of the ClearCorrect or Clear Aligner or Spark or Invisalign or Angel Aligner treatment planning. So we do all the digital planning for the doctor, deliver what we think would be right for the patient based on the feedback we initially got from the doctor. And then the doctor can come back and say, well, I’d like a little more space for some crowns in the front, or I would like the canines to be in a better position in order to achieve immediate post disclusion. And so we can go into this discussion back and forth and adjust the digital setup in a way that is more realistic and predictable and do it all for the doctors. So they, on an average, they spend four to six hours less chair time when they use that kind of service compared to if they do everything themselves. And on top of that, you can put your planning time. She was responsible for that and it works quite well. I still remember when we initially got on all these online calls and we would see fireworks in the background and confetti coming down from the top and all of that. [Jaz] Exactly. So excuse that little bit, but okay. So essentially what you’re doing is, for an aligner user myself, for example, you’re doing the ClinChecks, you are helping, supporting with the ClinChecks, the planning. And I’ve got a lot of questions about that. The first question I’ll start with, which is off the script, but there’s probably a hundred different mistakes that could happen in a ClinCheck, right? But what is the most repeatable, predictable, common mistake that you’ll see when a new user sends a case to you to help them with their planning? What’s the most common mistake that you will see in a setup? [Jesper] Two things, actually. The one thing that we always check initially is the occlusion set correct by the aligner company. Because if the occlusion is not set correctly, everything else just doesn’t matter because the teeth will move but into a wrong position because the occlusion is off from the beginning. And so we always check that as the first part. How does this— [Jaz] So let’s talk about that ’cause that might be confusing for a younger colleague because they’re like, hey, hang on a minute. I scanned the bite left and right. What do you mean the occlusion is wrong? Because surely that gets carried through into what I see on the ClinCheck. So what do you think is the mechanism for this to happen? [Jesper] Two different reasons. I’m from a time when I graduated in 2003, so that was before digital dentistry. So when I went to the Pankey Institute and learned everything about functional occlusion and all of that stuff, I also found out that most of my patients, when I put silicone impression material between the teeth and asked the patients to bite together, they would always protrude a little bit unless I instructed them to bite hard on the posterior teeth. And when we got the scanners, when we put a scanner into the cheek and pull the cheek, most patients, when we asked them to bite together to do the intraoral scan of the bite, they also protruded a little bit, not much, but enough to set the bite wrong. So that is the one challenge when the technicians of the aligner companies put the models together. The other challenge is that some of the aligner companies, they let the technicians set the models. We always, as the first thing when we see a case, we always look at the photos, the clinical photos. And that’s why the clinical photos have to be of great quality. So we look at the clinical photos of the patient— [Jaz] And also in those clinical photos, Jesper, you have to coach them correctly to bite. You have to notice if they’re biting wrong even in the photos ’cause then it just duplicates the error. And that’s why good photography and actually being able to coach the patient is so imperative. [Jesper] Yes, that’s correct. But we compare the two and usually if we see a difference, we ask the doctor, is what we see in the photo correct, or is what we see on the digital models correct? And because we don’t like differences. So that would be the first step to look for. And what’s the second? The second thing is that when you look at the setup, the anterior teeth are usually—I’m trying to show you—the anterior teeth are very, very steep. Typically with aligners it’s a lot easier to tip the crowns. So when you have a class II patient, deviation one, where the anteriors are in a forward position, proclined, and you have a lot of space between the anteriors of the maxilla and the mandible, then the easiest thing on a digital setup is to just retrocline the anteriors of the upper to make them fit the lowers, which you could then procline a little bit, but usually you have very steep relationships between the two and this— [Jaz] So you’re more likely to restrict the envelope of function, functional interference anteriorly. You are obviously reducing the overjet, but you may end up reducing like a wall contact rather than an elegant, more open gate. [Jesper] Yes. And there’s another dimension to this because when we work with orthodontics, one of the most important things to look for is actually the profile of the patient. Because let’s say I’m trying to illustrate this now, so I hope you get a 90— [Jaz] So describe it for our audio listeners as well. So we’re looking at a profile view of Jesper. [Jesper] Yes. So I’m turning the side to the camera. I hope you can see my profile here. So let’s say I had flared anterior maxillary teeth and I wanted to retrocline them. It would have an effect on my upper lip, so the lip would fall backwards if I just retrocline everything. And every millimeter we move the anteriors in the maxilla in a posterior direction, we will have a potential lip drop of three millimeters. In addition, if we don’t get the nasolabial angulation correct, we risk the lower face will simply disappear in the face of the patient. So soft tissue plays a role here, so we cannot just retrocline the teeth. It looks great on the computer screen, but when it comes to reality, we’ll have a functional challenge. We’ll have a soft tissue support challenge, and in addition we’ll have long-term retention challenges as well. Because when you have a steep inclination, the anterior teeth in the mandible, they don’t have any kind of support. They will not be stopped by anything in the maxillary teeth, which you would if you had the right inclination between the teeth, which would be about 120 degrees. So why do aligner companies always set the teeth straight up and down in the anterior part? We wondered about this for years. We don’t have a strict answer. We don’t know exactly why it’s like this, but I have a hunch. I think there are two things to it. First of all, the easiest thing to do with aligners is to move the crown, so we can just tip the teeth. You take them back, you make a lot of IPR, and then you just tip them so they’re retroclined. Secondly, all aligner companies, they come from the United States. And in the United States there is a higher representation of class III patients. Now why is that important? All our patients can be put into two different categories in regards to how they move their mandible. They are the crocodiles that only open and close, like move up and down, and then we have the cows. And then we have the cows that move the mandible around, or the camels. I mean, every camel, if you’ve seen a camel chew, it’s just moving from side to side. [Jaz] Horses as well. Horses as well. [Jesper] They kind of do that. [Jaz] But I’m glad you didn’t say rats ’cause it’s more elegant to be a crocodile than a rat. [Jesper] Exactly. And I usually say we only tell the crocodiles. So why is this a challenge and why isn’t it a challenge with class III patients? Well, all real class III patients act like crocodiles, so they don’t move them side to side. From a functional perspective, it’s really not a problem having steep anterior inclination or steep relationships as long as you have a stable stop where the anteriors—so the anteriors will not elongate and create the red effect. So they just elongate until they hit the palate. If you can make a stop in the anterior part of the occlusion, then you’ll have some kind of stability with the class III patients. But with class II patients, we see a lot more cows. So they move the mandible from side to side and anterior and back and forth and all… they have the mandible going all kinds of places. And when they do that, we need some kind of anterior guidance to guide the mandible. I usually say the upper jaw creates the framework in which the mandible will move. So if the framework is too small, we fight the muscles. And whenever we fight the muscles, we lose because muscles always win. It doesn’t matter if it’s teeth, if it’s bone, if it’s joints, they all lose if they fight the muscles— [Jaz] As Peter Dawson would say, in the war between teeth and muscles or any system and muscles, the muscles always win. Absolutely. And the other analogy you remind me of is the maxilla being like a garage or “garage” from UK, like a garage. And the mandible being like the car, and if you’re really constrained, you’re gonna crash in and you’re gonna… everything will be in tatters. So that’s another great way to think about it. Okay. That’s very, very helpful. I’m gonna—’cause there’s so much I wanna cover. And I think you’ve really summed up nicely. But one thing just to finish on this aspect of that common mistake being that the upper anteriors are retroclined, really what you’re trying to say is we need to be looking at other modalities, other movements. So I’m thinking you’re saying extraction, if it’s suitable for the face, or distalisation. Are you thinking like that rather than the easier thing for the aligners, which is the retrocline. Am I going about it the right way? [Jesper] Depends on the patient. [Jaz] Of course. [Jesper] Rule of thumb: if you’re a GP, don’t ever touch extraction cases. Rule of thumb. Why? Because it is extremely challenging to move teeth parallel. So you will most—especially with aligners—I mean, I talk with a very respected orthodontist once and I asked him, well, what do you think about GPs treating extraction cases where they extract, you know, two premolars in the maxilla? And he said, well, I don’t know how to answer this. Let me just explain to you: half of my orthodontist colleagues, they are afraid of extraction cases. And I asked them why. Because it’s so hard to control the root movement. Now, I don’t know about you— [Jaz] With aligners. We’re specifically talking about aligners here, right? [Jesper] With all kinds of orthodontic appliances. [Jaz] Thank you. [Jesper] So now, I don’t know about you, but if half the orthodontists are afraid of controlling the root movements in extraction cases, as a GP, I would be terrified. And I am a GP. So I usually say, yeah, sometimes you will have so much crowding and so little space in the mandible, so there’s an incisor that is almost popped out by itself. In those cases, yes. Then you can do an extraction case. But when we’re talking about premolars that are going to be extracted, or if you want to close the space in the posterior part by translating a tooth into that open space, don’t. It’s just the easiest way to end up in a disaster because the only thing you’ll see is just teeth that tip into that space, and you’ll have a really hard time controlling the root movements, getting them corrected again. [Jaz] Well, thank you for offering that guideline. I think that’s very sage advice for those GPs doing aligners, to stay in your lane and just be… the best thing about being a GP, Jesper, is you get to cherry pick, right? There’s so many bad things about being a GP. Like you literally have to be kinda like a micro-specialist in everything in a way. And so sometimes it’s good to be like, you know what, I’ll keep this and I’ll send this out. And being selective and case selection is the crux of everything. So I’m really glad you mentioned that. I mean, we talked and touched already on so much occlusion. The next question I’m gonna ask you then is, like you said, a common error is the bite and how the bite appears on the ClinCheck or whichever software a dentist is using. Now, related to bite, vast majority of orthodontic cases are treated in the patient’s existing habitual occlusion, their maximum intercuspal position. Early on in my aligner journey, I had a patient who had an anterior crossbite. And because of that anterior crossbite, their jaw deviated. It was a displaced—the lower jaw displaced. And then I learned from that, that actually for that instance, perhaps I should not have used an MIP scan. I should have used more like centric relation or first point of contact scan before the displacement of the jaw happens. So that was like always in my mind. Sometimes we can and should be using an alternative TMJ position or a bite reference other than MIP. Firstly, what do you think about that kind of scenario and are there any other scenarios which you would suggest that we should not be using the patient’s habitual occlusion for their bite scan for planning orthodontics? [Jesper] Well, I mentioned that I was trained at the Pankey Institute, and when you start out right after—I mean, I spent 400 hours over there. Initially, I thought I was a little bit brainwashed by that because I thought every single patient should be in centric relation. Now, after having put more than 600 patients on the bite appliance first before I did anything, I started to see some patterns. And so today, I would say it’s not all patients that I would get into centric relation before I start treating the teeth. But when we talk about aligner therapy and orthodontic treatment, I think it’s beneficial if you can see the signs for those patients where you would say, hmm, something in the occlusion here could be a little bit risky. So let’s say there are wear facets on the molars. That will always trigger a red flag in my head. Let’s say there are crossbites or bite positions that kind of lock in the teeth. We talked about class III patients before, and I said if it’s a real skeletal-deviation class III patient, it’s a crocodile. But sometimes patients are not real class III skeletal deviation patients. They’re simply being forced into a class III due to the occlusion. That’s where the teeth fit together. So once you put aligners between the teeth and plastic covers the surfaces, suddenly the patients are able to move the jaws more freely and then they start to seat into centric. That may be okay. Usually it is okay. The challenge is consequences. So when you’re a GP and you suddenly see a patient moving to centric relation and you find out, whoa, on a horizontal level there’s a four- to six-millimeter difference between the initial starting point and where we are now, and maybe we create an eight-millimeter open bite in the anterior as well because they simply seat that much. And I mean, we have seen it. So is this a disaster? Well, it depends. If you have informed the patient well enough initially and said, well, you might have a lower jaw that moves into a different position when we start out, and if this new position is really, really off compared to where you are right now, you might end up needing maxillofacial surgery, then the patient’s prepared. But if they’re not prepared and you suddenly have to tell them, you know, I think we might need maxillofacial surgery… I can come up with a lot of patients in my head that would say, hey doctor, that was not part of my plan. And they will be really disappointed. And at that point there’s no turning back, so you can’t reverse. So I think if you are unsure, then you are sure. Then you should use some kind of deprogramming device or figure out where is centric relation on this patient. If there isn’t that much of a difference between maximum intercuspation and centric— [Jesper] Relation, I don’t care. Because once you start moving the teeth, I don’t care if you just move from premolar to premolar or all the teeth. Orthodontics is orthodontics, so you will affect all the teeth during the treatment. The question’s just how much. And sometimes it’s just by putting plastic between the teeth that you will see a change, not in the tooth position, but in the mandibular position. And I just think it’s nicer to know a little bit where this is going before you start. And the more you see of this—I mean, as I mentioned, after 600 bite appliances in the mouths of my patients, I started to see patterns. And sometimes in the end, after 20 years of practicing, I started to say, let’s just start, see where this ends. But I would always inform the patients: if it goes totally out of control, we might end up needing surgery, and there’s no way to avoid it if that happens. And if the patients were okay with that, we’d just start out. Because I mean, is it bad? No. I just start the orthodontic treatment and I set the teeth as they should be in the right framework. Sometimes the upper and the lower jaw don’t fit together. Well, send them to the surgeon and they will move either the upper or the lower jaw into the right position, and then we have it. No harm is done because we have done the initial work that the orthodontist would do. But I will say when I had these surgical patients—let’s say we just started out with aligners and we figured, I can’t control this enough. I need a surgeon to look at this—then I would send them off to an orthodontist, and the orthodontist and the surgeon would take over. Because then—I mean, surgical patients and kids—that’s the second group of patients besides the extraction cases that I would not treat as a GP. ‘Cause we simply don’t know enough about how to affect growth on kids. And when it comes to surgery, there’s so much that is… so much knowledge that we need to know and the collaboration with the surgeons that we’re not trained to handle. So I think that should be handled by the orthodontists as well. [Jaz] I think collaborative cases like that are definitely specialist in nature, and I think that’s a really good point. I think the point there was informed consent. The mistake is you don’t warn the patient or you do not do the correct screening. So again, I always encourage my guests—so Jesper, you included—that we may disagree, and that’s okay. That’s the beauty of dentistry. So something that I look for is: if the patient has a stable and repeatable maximum intercuspal position, things lock very well, and there’s a minimal slide—like I use my leaf gauge and the CR-CP is like a small number of leaves and the jaw hardly moves a little bit—then there’s no point of uncoupling them, removing that nice posterior coupling that they have just to chase this elusive joint position. Then you have to do so many more teeth. But when we have a breakdown in the system, which you kind of said, if there’s wear as one aspect, or we think that, okay, this patient’s occlusion is not really working for them, then we have an opportunity to do full-mouth rehabilitation in enamel. Because that’s what orthodontics is. And so that’s a point to consider. So I would encourage our GP colleagues to look at the case, look at the patient in front of you, and decide: is this a stable, repeatable occlusion that you would like to use as a baseline, or is there something wrong? Then consider referring out or considering—if you’re more advanced in occlusion studies—using an alternative position, not the patient’s own bite as a reference. So anything you wanna add to that or disagree with in that monologue I just said there? [Jesper] No, I think there’s one thing I’d like the listeners to consider. I see a lot of fighting between orthodontists and GPs, and I think it should be a collaboration instead. There’s a lot of orthodontists that are afraid of GPs taking over more and more aligner treatments, and they see a huge increase in the amount of cases that go wrong. Well, there’s a huge increase of patients being treated, so there will be more patients, just statistically, that will get into problems. Now, if the orthodontist is smart—in my opinion, that’s my opinion—they reach out to all their referring doctors and they tell them, look, come in. I will teach you which cases you can start with and which you should refer. Let’s start there. Start your aligner treatments. Start out, try stuff. I will be there to help you if you run into problems. So whenever you see a challenge, whenever there’s a problem, send the patient over to me and I’ll take over. But I will be there to help you if anything goes wrong. Now, the reason this is really, really a great business advice for the orthodontists is because once you teach the GPs around you to look for deviations from the normal, which would be the indication for orthodontics, the doctors start to diagnose and see a lot more patients needing orthodontics and prescribe it to the patients, or at least propose it to the patients. Which would initially not do much more than just increase the amount of aligner treatments. But over time, I tell you, all the orthodontists doing this, they are drowning in work. So I mean, they will literally be overflown by patients being referred by all the doctors, because suddenly all the other doctors around them start to diagnose orthodontically. They see the patients which they haven’t seen before. So I think this is—from a business perspective—a really, really great thing for the orthodontists to have a collaboration with this. And it’ll also help the GPs to feel more secure when they start treating their patients. And in the end, that will lead to more patients getting the right treatment they deserve. And I think that is the core. That is what’s so important for us to remember. That’s what we’re here for. I mean, yes, it’s nice to make money. We have to live. It’s nice with a great business, but what all dentists I know of are really striving for is to treat their patients to the best of their ability. And this helps them to do that. [Jaz] Ultimate benefactor of this collaborative approach is the patient. And I love that you said that. I think I want all orthodontists to listen to that soundbite and take it on board and be willing to help. Most of them I know are lovely orthodontists and they’re helping to teach their GPs and help them and in return they get lots of referrals. And I think that’s the best way to go. Let’s talk a little bit about occlusal goals we look for at the end of orthodontics. This is an interesting topic. I’m gonna start by saying that just two days ago I got a DM from one of the Protruserati, his name is Keith Curry—shout out to him on Instagram—and he just sent me a little message: “Jaz, do you sometimes find that when you’re doing alignment as a GP that it’s conflicting the orthodontic, the occlusal goal you’re trying to get?” And I knew what I was getting to. It’s that scenario whereby you have the kind of class II division 2, right? But they have anterior guidance. Now you align everything, okay, and now you completely lost anterior guidance. And so the way I told him is that, you know what, yes, this is happening all the time. Are we potentially at war between an aesthetic smile and a functional occlusion? And sometimes there’s a compromise. Sometimes you can have both. But that—to achieve both—needs either a specialist set of eyes or lots of auxiliary techniques or a lot more time than what GPs usually give for their cases. So first let’s touch on that. Do you also agree that sometimes there is a war between what will be aesthetic and what will be a nice functional occlusion? And then we’ll actually talk about, okay, what are some of the guidelines that we look for at the end of completing an aligner case? [Jesper] Great question and great observation. I would say I don’t think there’s a conflict because what I’ve learned is form follows function. So if you get the function right, aesthetics will always be great. Almost always. I mean, we have those crazy-shaped faces sometimes, but… so form follows function. The challenge here is that in adult patients, we cannot manipulate growth. So a skeletal deviation is a skeletal deviation, which means if we have a class II patient, it’s most likely that that patient has a skeletal deviation. I rarely see a dental deviation. It happens, but it’s really, really rare. So that means that in principle, all our class II and chronic class III patients are surgical patients. However, does that mean that we should treat all our class II and class III patients surgically? No, I don’t think so. But we have to consider that they are all compromise cases. So we need to figure a compromise. So initially, when I started out with my occlusal knowledge, I have to admit, I didn’t do the orthodontic treatment planning. I did it with Heller, and she would give me feedback and tell me, I think this is doable and this is probably a little bit challenging. If we do this instead, we can keep the teeth within the bony frame. We can keep them in a good occlusion. Then I would say, well, you have a flat curve of Spee. I’d like to have a little bit of curve. It’s called a curve of Spee and not the orthodontic flat curve of Spee. And then we would have a discussion back and forth about that. Then initially I would always want anterior coupling where the anterior teeth would touch each other. I have actually changed that concept in my mind and accepted the orthodontic way of thinking because most orthodontists will leave a little space in the anterior. So when you end the orthodontic treatment, you almost always have a little bit of space between the anterior teeth so they don’t touch each other. Why? Because no matter what, no matter how you retain the patient after treatment, there will still be some sort of relapse. And we don’t know where it’ll come or how, but it will come. Because the teeth will always be positioned in a balance between the push from the tongue and from the cheeks and the muscles surrounding the teeth. And that’s a dynamic that changes over the years. So I don’t see retention as a one- or two-year thing. It’s a lifelong thing. And the surrounding tissues will change the pressure and thereby the balance between the tongue and the cheeks and where the teeth would naturally settle into position. Now, that said, as I mentioned initially, if we fight the muscles, we’ll lose. So let’s say we have an anterior open bite. That will always create a tongue habit where the patient positions the tongue in the anterior teeth when they swallow because if they don’t, food and drink will just be splashed out between the teeth. They can’t swallow. It will just be pushed out of the mouth. [Jaz] So is that not like a secondary thing? Like that tongue habit is secondary to the AOB? So in those cases, if you correct the anterior open bite, theoretically should that tongue posture not self-correct? [Jesper] Well, we would like to think so, but it’s not always the case. And there’s several reasons to it. Because why are the teeth in the position? Is it because of the tongue or because of the tooth position? Now, spacing cases is one of those cases where you can really illustrate it really well. It looks really easy to treat these patients. If we take away all the soft tissue considerations on the profile photo, I mean, you can just retract the teeth and you close all the spaces—super easy. Tipping movements. It’s super easy orthodontically to move quickly. Very easy as well. However, you restrict the tongue and now we have a retention problem. So there are three things that can happen. You can bond a retainer on the lingual side or the palatal side of the teeth, upper, lower—just bond everything together—and after three months, you will have a diastema distal to the bonded retainer because the tongue simply pushes all the teeth in an anterior direction. [Jaz] I’ve also seen—and you’ve probably seen this as well—the patient’s tongue being so strong in these exact scenarios where the multiple spacing has been closed, which probably should have been a restorative plan rather than orthodontic plan, and the retainer wire snaps in half. [Jesper] Yes, from the tongue. [Jaz] That always fascinated me. [Jesper] Well, you’ll see debonding all the time, even though you sandblast and you follow all the bonding protocol. And debonding, breaking wires, diastemas in places where you think, how is that even possible? Or—and this is the worst part—or you induce sleep apnea on these patients because you simply restrict the space for the tongue. So they start snoring, and then they have a total different set of health issues afterwards. So spacing—I mean, this just illustrates the power of the tongue and why we should always be careful with spacing cases. I mean, spacing cases, in my opinion, are always to be considered ortho-restorative cases. Or you can consider, do you want to leave some space distal to the canines? Because there you can create an optical illusion with composites. Or do you want to distribute space equally between the teeth and place veneers or crowns or whatever. And this is one of those cases where I’d say aligners are just fabulous compared to fixed appliances. Because if you go to an orthodontist only using fixed appliances and you tell that orthodontist, please redistribute space in the anterior part of the maxilla and I want exactly 1.2 millimeters between every single tooth in the anterior segment, six years later he’s still not reached that goal because it just moves back and forth. Put aligners on: three months later, you have exactly—and I mean exactly—1.2 millimeters of space between each and every single tooth. When it comes to intrusion and extrusion, I would probably consider using fixed appliances rather than aligners if it’s more than three millimeters. So every orthodontic system—and aligners are just an orthodontic system—each system has its pros and cons, and we just have to consider which system is right for this patient that I have in my chair. But back to the tongue issue. What should we do? I mean, yes, there are two different schools. So if you have, let’s say, a tongue habit that needs to be treated, there are those that say we need to get rid of the tongue habit before we start to correct the teeth. And then there are those that say that doesn’t really work because there’s no room for the tongue. So we need to create room for the tongue first and then train the patient to stop the habit. Both schools and both philosophies are being followed out there. I have my preferred philosophy, but I will let the listener start to think about what they believe and follow their philosophy. Because there is nothing here that is right or wrong. And that is— [Jaz] I think the right answer, Jesper, is probably speak to that local orthodontist who’s gonna be helping you out and whatever they recommend—their religion—follow that one. Because then at least you have something to defend yourself. Like okay, I followed the way you said. Let’s fix it together now. [Jesper] That’s a great one. Yeah, exactly. [Jaz] Okay, well just touching up on the occlusion then, sometimes we do get left with like suboptimal occlusions. But to be able to define a suboptimal occlusion… let’s wrap this occlusion element up. When we are completing an orthodontic case—let’s talk aligners specifically—when the aligners come off and the fixed retainers come on, for example, and the patient’s now in retention, what are some of the occlusal checkpoints or guidelines that you advise checking for to make sure that, okay, now we have a reasonably okay occlusion and let things settle from here? For example, it would be, for me, a failure if the patient finishes their aligners and they’re only holding articulating paper on one side and not the other side. That’s for me a failure. Or if they’ve got a posterior open bite bilaterally. Okay, then we need to go refinement. We need to get things sorted. But then where do you draw the line? How extreme do you need to be? Do you need every single tooth in shim-stock foil contact? Because then we are getting really beyond that. We have to give the adaptation some wiggle room to happen. So I would love to know from your learning at Pankey, from your experience, what would you recommend is a good way for a GP to follow about, okay, it may not be perfect and you’ll probably never get perfect. And one of the orthodontists that taught me said he’s never, ever done a case that’s finished with a perfect occlusion ever. And he said that to me. [Jesper] So—and that’s exactly the point with orthodontics. I learned that imagine going to a football stadium. The orthodontist will be able to find the football stadium. If it’s a reasonable orthodontist, he’ll be able to find the section you’re going to sit in. And if he’s really, really, really good, he will be able to find the row that you’re going to sit in. But the exact spot where you are going to sit, he will never, ever be able to find that with orthodontics. And this is where settling comes in and a little bit of enamel adjustments. [Jaz] I’m so glad you said that. I’m so glad you mentioned enamel adjustment. That’s a very dirty word, but I agree with that. And here’s what I teach on my occlusion courses: what we do with aligners essentially is we’re tampering with the lock. Let’s say the upper jaw is the lock. It’s the still one. We’re tampering with the key, which is the lower jaw—the one that moves—we tamper with the key and the lock, and we expect them both to fit together at the end without having to shave the key and to modify the lock. So for years I was doing aligners without enamel adjustment ’cause my eyes were not open. My mind was not open to this. And as I learned, and now I use digital measuring of occlusion stuff and I seldom can finish a case to get a decent—for my criteria, which is higher than it used to be, and my own stat—is part of my own growth that’s happened over time is that I just think it’s an important skill that GPs are not taught and they should be. It’s all about finishing that case. And I think, I agree with you that some adjustment goes a long way. We’re not massacring enamel. It’s little tweaks to get that. [Jesper] Exactly. I like the sound there because sometimes you hear that “ahh,” it doesn’t really sound right, but “tsst,” that’s better. [Jaz] That’s the one. You know, it reminds me of that lecture you did in Copenhagen. You did this cool thing—which I’ve never seen anyone do before. You sat with one leg over the other and you said, okay guys, bite together. Everyone bit together. And then you swapped the legs so the other leg was over the other and bite together. And then you said, okay, whose occlusion felt different? And about a third of the audience put their hand up, I think. Tell us about that for a second. [Jesper] Well, just promise me we go back to the final part because there are some things we should consider. [Jaz] Let’s save this as a secret thing at the end for incentive for everyone to listen to the end—how the leg position changes your occlusion. Let’s talk about the more important thing. I digressed. [Jesper] Let’s talk about the occlusal goals because I think it’s important. I mean, if you do enamel adjustments in the end—so when we finish the treatment, when we come to the last aligner in the treatment plan—I think we should start by breaking things down to the simplest way possible. Start by asking the patient: are you satisfied with the way the teeth look? Yes or no? If she’s satisfied, great. How do you feel about the occlusion? “Well, it fits okay.” Great. Now the patient is happy. There’s nothing she wants to—or he wants to—change. Then you look at the occlusion. Now, it is important to remember that what we see on the computer screen, on the aligner planning tools, will never, ever correspond 100% to what we see in the mouth of the patient. And there are several reasons for that. But one of the things that we have found to be really interesting is that if you take that last step and you say, okay, the occlusion doesn’t fit exactly as on the screen, but it’s kind of there… if you use that last step and you don’t do a re-scan for a retainer, but you use the last step of the aligner treatment as your reference for your aligner retainer… We sometimes see that over six months, if the patient wears that aligner 22 hours a day for another three to six months, the teeth will settle more and more into the aligner and create an occlusion that looks more and more like what you see on the screen. Which to me just tells me that the biology doesn’t necessarily follow the plan everywhere in the tempo that we set throughout the aligner plan. But over time, at the last step, if it’s just minor adjustments, the teeth will actually move into that position if we use the last stage as a reference for the retainer. Now, if we do a scan at that point and use that as a reference for creating an aligner retainer, then we just keep the teeth in that position. Now, if the teeth are a little bit more off— [Jaz] I’m just gonna recap that, Jesper, ’cause I understood what you said there, but I want you to just make sure I fully understood it. When we request, for example, Align, the Vivera retainer, it gives you an option: “I will submit a new scan” or “use the last step.” And actually I seldom use that, but now I realize you’re right. It makes sense. But then on the one hand, if the occlusion is—if the aesthetics are good and the patient’s occlusion feels good, what is your own judgment to decide whether we’re still going to allow for some more settling and occlusal changes to happen over a year using the Vivera retainers based on the ClinCheck last-aligner profile, rather than, okay, let’s just retain to this position? What is making you do the extra work, extra monitoring? [Jesper] To me, it’s not extra monitoring. It’s just basic. I mean, it’s just part of my protocol. I follow the patients. And honestly, to me, it’s just time-saving to just use the last step in the aligner. Because I mean, if the plan is right and if the teeth have been tracking well, they should be in that position. Why do I then need to re-scan for Vivera retainers or for other kinds of retainers? Now, if the occlusion is a little bit more off—and in a minute you’ll probably ask me when do I see which is which, and I can’t really tell you; it’s about experience—but that’s the beauty of this. If I see there’s a little bit more deviation and I like some teeth, the occlusion isn’t really good on one side compared to the other side, I would rather have a bonded retainer from first premolar to first premolar in the mandible, combined with a Hawley or Begg or something like that retainer for the upper. And you can order them with an acrylic plate covering some of the anterior teeth so they keep that position, but that allows the teeth to settle. And over three months you should see some kind of improvement. If you don’t see enough improvement and let’s say you still have a tendency for a kind of an open bite on one side, you can always add some cross elastics, put some buttons on the upper, on the lower, instruct the patient to use these, and then in three months you will have the occlusion you want. Now, once that is established—you have that kind of occlusion—you need to keep the teeth there for at least six months before you do some kind of equilibration or enamel adjustment. Because if you do the enamel adjustment right after you have reached your final destination for the teeth, the teeth will still settle and move. So you do the equilibration, two weeks later everything looks off again. You do the equilibration, two weeks later things have changed again. So I prefer to wait six months before I do the final equilibration. Now, in this equation what we’ve been talking about here, it goes from very simple to more and more complex. And then we have to consider, well, did I expand the mandible posterior segment? If so, I can’t just use a bonded retainer on the lower and I need to add something to keep the teeth out there in combination with whatever I want in the upper. Do I want to keep the Begg retainer or the Hawley, or do I want to change to something differently? So these kinds of considerations have to be there from the beginning of the treatment because, I mean, it costs additional money to order a Begg retainer compared to just an aligner. [Jaz] A Begg retainer is the same as Hawley? [Jesper] Well, no. It has a little different design. [Jaz] Oh, a Begg as in B-E-G-G? [Jesper] Yes. [Jaz] Yeah, got it. Got it. Okay. [Jesper] And then in Denmark we use the Jensen retainer, which is a Danish invention, which goes from canine to canine or from first premolar to first premolar but with a different type of wire which keeps the teeth more in place compared to a round wire. So there are different variations. The most important part here is it allows the posterior teeth to settle so they can move, which they can’t in an aligner to the same degree at least. Now, this is all really nice in teeth that only need to be moved into the right position, but most of our patients are adult patients, or they should at least be adult patients. Most of my patients were more than 30 years old. So if you have a patient with anterior crowding and you move the teeth into the right position where the teeth should be, the teeth are in the right position, but they still look ugly because they have been worn anteriorly by the position they were in when they were crooked. So when we position them, we still need to do some restorative work. Then what? We still need to retain those teeth. The patient wants to be finished now as fast as possible, so we can’t wait the six months to make the final touches. So we have to figure out: what do we do? And then we have to think of some kind of retention strategy to keep the teeth in place during that restorative procedure. And I mean, at the end of an aligner treatment or any orthodontic treatment, two days is enough to have relapse in some patients. Some patients it’s not a problem. The teeth are just there to stay in the same position for three months, and then they start to move a little bit around. But other patients—I mean, you just have to look away and then go back to the teeth and they’re in a different position. You can’t know what kind of patient you have in your chair right now. So you have to consider the way you plan your restorative procedure in regards to how you retain the teeth during that phase. So if you want to do anterior composites or veneers, do it all at once. Put in a bonded retainer, scan, and get your aligner retainer as fast as possible. Or use a Begg or a Hawley or something like that that’s a little bit more flexible. If you want to do crowns, then we have a whole different challenge and then we have to consider how do we then retain the teeth. [Jaz] Okay. Well I think that was lovely. I think that gives us some thoughts and ideas of planning sequence of retention, which is the ultimate thing to consider when it comes to occlusion. Okay, yeah, you get the occlusion, but how do you retain it? But in many cases, as the patient’s wearing aligners, the occlusion is embedding in and is fine. And you take off the aligners, the patient’s happy with how it looks. They bite together. It feels good. You are happy that yes, both sides of the mouth are biting together. Now, it might not be that every single contact is shim-hold, but you got, let’s say, within 20 microns, 40 microns, okay? Then some bedding happens. In that kind of scenario, would you be happy to say, okay, I’m gonna scan your teeth as they are because I’m happy with the occlusion, the occlusal goals are good, and they’re near enough the ClinCheck, and go for the retainers to that position? Or is your default preference as a clinician to go for the Vivera or equivalent based on the last aligner, on the ClinCheck projection? [Jesper] I would still go for the last aligner because I think the planning I’ve done is probably a little bit more precise than what I see clinically. However, I still expect that I will have to do a little bit of enamel reshaping at the end after six months, but that’s okay. I mean, the changes are so small, so you can still use the last aligner or the Vivera retainer that you already have ordered. So it’s not that much of a problem. [Jaz] Which goes back to your previous point: if it’s a big deviation, then you’ve gotta look at the alternative ways, whether you’re gonna go for refinement or you’re gonna allow some occlusal settling with a Hawley and a lower fixed-retainer combination, or the elastics like you said. Okay. Just so we’re coming to the end of the podcast—and I really enjoyed our time—I would like to delve deep into just a final thing, which is a little checklist, a helpful checklist for case assessment that you have for GDPs. [Jesper] Yeah, thank you. First of all, one of the big challenges in a GP practice is being able to take a full series of clinical photos in two minutes without assistance. I think most dentists struggle with that, but that is a foundational prerequisite to any aligner treatment. Once you have the photos, I would sit down with the photos and I would consider six different steps. One: is this a patient that I could treat restoratively only? Because that would be the simplest for me to do. Next, moving up in complexity: would be, do I need periodontal crown lengthening? Or next step would be: do I need to change the vertical dimension, or is there something about centric relation that I should consider? Moving up a little bit on the complexity: are there missing teeth? Do I need to replace teeth with implants? Next step would be orthodontics. So this is step five. The next most complex case we can treat is actually an aligner case—orthodontics in general. And the last part would be: are the teeth actually in the right position in the face of the patient, or do I need surgery to correct the jaw position? So these six steps, I think they’re helpful to follow to just think, how can I break this case down into more easy, digestible bits and pieces to figure out what kind of patient I have in front of me? Now, if you consider it to be an orthodontic case or ortho-restorative case, here comes the challenge: case selection. How do you figure out is this an easy, moderate, complex, or referral case? And here’s the trick: do 500 to 1000 treatment plans or treatments with clear aligners. And then you know. But until then, you really don’t. This is where you should rely on someone you can trust who can help you do the initial case selection. Because you can have two identical patients—one is easy and one is super complex—but they look the same. So it’s really nice if you have done less than 500 cases to have someone who can help you with the case selection. And I don’t say this to sell anything, because we don’t charge for that. Because it’s so essential that we don’t do something that is wrong or gives us a lot of challenges and headaches in the practice. I mean, the practice runs really fast and lean-oriented, so we need to make things digestible, easy to work with. And I think that’s really important. [Jaz] It goes full circle to what we said before about having that referral network, staying in your lane, knowing when to refer out, cherry-picking—it all goes back full circle with that. And not even orthodontics, but restorative dentistry—case selection is just imperative in everything we do. [Jesper] Yes. And there is—we always get the question when we do courses and we do consulting—can’t you just show me a couple of cases that are easy to start with? And it works with implants, kind of. But with orthodontics where we move—I mean, we affect all the teeth—it’s just not possible. I know the aligner companies want to show you some where you say, you can only just do these kinds of cases and they are really easy. The fact is they’re not. But they want to sell their aligners. [Jaz] I get it. They are until they’re not. It’s like that famous thing, right? Everyone’s got a plan until they get punched in the face. So yeah, it can seemingly be easy, but then a complication happens and it’s really about understanding what complications to expect, screening for them, and how you handle that. But thanks so much. Tell us—yeah, go on, sorry. [Jesper] There are three things I’d like to end on here. So, first of all, we’ve been talking together for about an hour about a topic that, if you want to take postgraduate education, it takes three years to become an orthodontist. And there is a reason it takes three to four years. However, I want to encourage the listener to think about this: Mercedes has never, ever excused last year’s model. Meaning that they always strive for perfection. So if we go into the practice and we do the very best we can every single day, there is no way we can go back and excuse what we

Trust isn't built in boardrooms or over Zoom. It's built in the quiet moments. A conversation that lingers, a promise kept, a drink shared between people who still believe words matter. In this episode, we explore how the foundations of influence have shifted from handshakes to hyperlinks, and what that means for anyone trying to shape opinion or policy in a world that's forgotten how to connect.You'll hear stories from inside the world of public affairs, where relationships once forged in the late hours of party conferences now play out on screens and social feeds. We unpack why the human side of persuasion still decides who gets heard, who gets trusted, and who gets left behind. Because in the end, every message, every movement, and every bit of influence still comes down to people.Listen For6:42 Can you build real relationships online?9:13 Is polarization killing cross-party lobbying?12:52 Are autocrats on the rise?15:00 How is public affairs different from stakeholder work?16:05 Answer to Last Episode's Question from Guest Nick UsborneGuest: Lionel ZetterWebsite | X | LinkedIn Lionel's new book The Lobbyist Rate this podcast with just one click Follow Farzana on SubstackFollow Doug on SubstackCurzon Substack Stories and Strategies WebsiteCurzon Public Relations WebsiteAre you a brand with a podcast that needs support? Book a meeting with Doug Downs to talk about it.Apply to be a guest on the podcastConnect with usLinkedIn | X | Instagram | You Tube | Facebook | Threads | Bluesky | PinterestRequest a transcript of this episode Support the show

Pianists, friends and Interlochen Arts Academy students Helen Nguyen and Kieran Alston brought music of Felix Mendelssohn, John Corigliano and George Gershwin to IPR's Studio A.

What happens when PR meets scandal, tech chaos, and gender bias? This episode of The Week UnSpun is a whirlwind of explosive headlines. The trio of David Gallagher, Doug Downs, and guest host Miranda Mitchell look into the renewed Epstein files controversy and its potential to dominate headlines well into 2025. They unravel Cloudflare's swift crisis response and debate the alleged gender bias in LinkedIn's algorithm. Add a healthy dose of Cracker Barrel branding blunders and viral live-TV moments, and you've got a jam-packed show.Listen For2:03 What's coming with the Epstein files and who could be impacted?6:57 How could media coverage of the Epstein case harm innocent people?10:46 How did Cloudflare's apology turn disaster into a win?13:27 Does LinkedIn's algorithm favor male voices?18:47 Is AI helping or hurting your brand voice? Watch For2:10 What will the release of the Epstein files reveal, and who gets hurt?6:00 Should we worry about innocent people in raw investigative data dumps?13:21 Is LinkedIn's algorithm biased against women, and how do we know?20:02 Will AI kill or save PR agencies in the era of LLMs and brand drift?26:09 Did Cracker Barrel's rebrand backfire, and what's the PR lesson?Guest Host Miranda Mitchell, PretailWebsite | LinkedIn | ContactThe Week Unspun is a weekly livestream every Friday at 10am ET/3pm BT. Check it out on our YouTube Channel or via this LinkedIn channelWe publish the audio from these livestreams to the Stories and Strategies podcast feed every Friday until Sunday evening when it's no longer available.Folgate AdvisorsCurzon Public Relations WebsiteStories and Strategies WebsiteRequest a transcript of this livestreamSupport the show

What if Tehachapi once had a path to true water independence? In this episode of Follow the Water, we uncover the story of the IPR project—a long-planned, state-approved solution that promised stability and sustainability for Tehachapi's water.  Former Development Services Director Jay Schlosser walks us through how the project worked, why it mattered, and how political gridlock and shifting decisions ultimately stopped it in its tracks. Narrated by Key Budge, Community Engagement Director. Written, produced, and edited by Mya Acosta, Community Engagement Specialist. Featuring interviews and insights from Jay Schlosser, Executive Director of the Kern Council of Governments

AI can imitate your voice, your words, even your face, but it can't steal your story. What happens when companies hand their storytelling to machines that don't understand who they are? As businesses race to automate, they risk losing the very thing that makes them distinct: the human truth that built their brand.Listen For3:15 How are story, narrative, and voice different?7:00 What is brand drift and how does AI cause it?10:04 Why do people distrust AI-generated content?11:33 How does story protect brand identity?14:54 How can you fight disinformation about your brand?15:25 Answer to Last Episode's Question from Guest Jessica HopeGuest: Nick UsborneWebsite | Email | LinkedIn | Instagram | Link to Nick's CoursesFollow Farzana on SubstackFollow Doug on SubstackCurzon SubstackStories and Strategies WebsiteCurzon Public Relations WebsiteAre you a brand with a podcast that needs support? Book a meeting with Doug Downs to talk about it.Apply to be a guest on the podcastConnect with usLinkedIn | X | Instagram | You Tube | Facebook | Threads | Bluesky | PinterestRequest a transcript of this episodeSupport the show

Is the BBC losing its grip on journalistic credibility? Or is it being pushed?  This episode of The Week Unspun unpacks a chaotic week in media and politics with sharp insight from PR veterans Farzana Baduel, David Gallagher, Doug Downs, and special guest Adrian Monck. The BBC's controversial editing of a Donald Trump speech for Panorama sparks a fierce debate on ethics, institutional accountability, and media governance. From internal BBC politics to the broader implications for press freedom, the team dissects why this incident led to resignations at the highest levels.  The conversation then pivots to the political circus of the U.S. government shutdown and the erosion of trust in public institutions, before exploring the branding brilliance behind Dubai's appeal to wealthy expatriates fleeing taxation and uncertainty in the UK.  Audio Chapters4:06 Should One Edit lead to Top BBC resignations?13:49 Are Governments Held to the Same PR Standards as Corporations?17:45 Why are UK Tech Billionaires Fleeing to Dubai?20:58 Is the UAE Winning the Global Nation Branding Game?  Video Chapters2:02 What did the BBC really edit out of Trump's speech, and why does it matter?4:06 Should one error lead to top BBC resignations?13:49 Are governments held to the same PR standards as corporations?17:45 Why are UK tech billionaires fleeing to Dubai?20:58 Is the UAE winning the global nation branding game?Guest: Adrian MonckWikipedia | Website The Week Unspun is a weekly livestream every Friday at Noon ET/5pm BT. Check it out on our YouTube Channel or via this LinkedIn channel We publish the audio from these livestreams to the Stories and Strategies podcast feed every Friday until Sunday evening when it's no longer available. Folgate AdvisorsCurzon Public Relations WebsiteStories and Strategies WebsiteRequest a transcript of this livestreamSupport the show

In public relations, success often depends on one quiet skill: knowing how to adapt. The best communicators read the room, sense the temperature, and adjust their tone without losing their message. In this episode, we explore what it really means to be a PR chameleon – someone who can blend into the cultural landscape enough to connect, yet still stand out enough to be remembered. Jessica Hope, founder of Wimbart, has built one of Africa's most respected tech PR agencies by mastering that balance. From WhatsApp-based storytelling to navigating privilege, identity, and power across 54 distinct markets, Jessica reveals how empathy, adaptability, and emotional intelligence have become the true currencies of influence in global communications. Listen For4:36 How Do You Break the “One Africa” Myth in PR?7:40 What Is Emotional Intelligence in African Business?9:22 How Do Comms Channels Differ in Africa?12:06 Should Brands Adjust Their Values in Africa?16:26 What's Africa's Media Landscape Really Like?18:30 Answer to Last Episode's Question from Jo JamiesonGuest: Jessica Hope, WimbartWebsite | Contact Page | Email | LinkedIn | X | InstagramChimamanda Ngozi Adichie Ted Talk Farzana mentionedhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D9Ihs241zeg  Rate this podcast with just one click Follow Farzana on SubstackFollow Doug on SubstackCurzon SubstackStories and Strategies WebsiteCurzon Public Relations WebsiteAre you a brand with a podcast that needs support? Book a meeting with Doug Downs to talk about it.Apply to be a guest on the podcastConnect with usLinkedIn | X | Instagram | You Tube | Facebook | Threads | Bluesky | PinterestRequest a transcript of this episodeSupport the show

In this audience-driven “mailroom” episode of The Week Spun, the conversation opens with a provocative idea from the PRovoke Summit: AI is now being discussed in full-time equivalent (FTE) terms, signaling a shift in how agencies and organizations think about synthetic labor. Guest host Kim Sample, President of the PR Council, joins Doug Downs and David Gallagher to explore what this means for the future of work in PR.From there, the trio digs into listener-submitted questions on everything from Apple's conspicuous silence in the podcasting space, to why PR professionals struggle with personal branding, how fairness is driving consumer outrage, gender representation in politics, and the surprising TikTok-fueled backlash to a Halloween ad campaign from Hatch Sleep.Audio Episode Chapters 1:51 What is a “synthetic FTE” and how is AI reshaping PR teams 4:29 Are brands finally taking owned content like blogs and podcasts seriously 8:11 Does Apple still care about podcasts or is their silence a statement 13:05 Why do PR pros struggle with confidence and self promotion 21:03 Does visibility for women in politics actually equal shared power Video Episode Chapters1:54 What is a “Synthetic FTE” and How Will AI Change PR Teams? 5:16 Are Brands Finally Getting Serious About Owned Media and Podcasts? 10:51 Does Apple Still Care About Podcast? Or Are They Quietly Quitting? 13:15 Why Do PR Pros Struggle With Their Own Personal Branding? 26:14 Does Representation Equal Power in Politic? Or Just PR Optics? Guest Kim Sample, PR CouncilWebsite | Email | LinkedInThe Week Unspun is a weekly livestream every Friday at 10am ET/3pm BT. Check it out on our YouTube Channel or via this LinkedIn channelWe publish the audio from these livestreams to the Stories and Strategies podcast feed every Friday until Sunday evening when it's no longer available.Folgate AdvisorsCurzon Public Relations WebsiteStories and Strategies WebsiteRequest a transcript of this livestreamSupport the show

Afraid of posting on LinkedIn? You're not alone, and it's not about time or talent, it's about confidence.In this episode we look at why communicators, especially women, struggle to show up confidently on LinkedIn. Fear, not time or skill, is the biggest barrier to visibility. PR professionals who are used to writing for others often stumble when the byline is their own. From how to post authentically without oversharing, to navigating gendered expectations in professional visibility, to practical LinkedIn content strategies (yes, including algorithm hacks!), we've got smart, tactical advice for anyone looking to show up and stand out online. Whether you're battling imposter syndrome or just wondering what to post next, this conversation is your confidence booster and content guide in one.Listen For4:25 Why don't communicators post on LinkedIn?6:44 How do you stay authentic without oversharing?9:40 Why is visibility harder for women online?13:25 What's a simple LinkedIn strategy?16:07 Can you beat the LinkedIn algorithm?17:59 Answer to Last Episode's Question from Tina McCorkindaleGuest: Jo JamiesonEmail | X | LinkedIn | Website Rate this podcast with just one click Follow Farzana on SubstackFollow Doug on SubstackCurzon Substack Stories and Strategies WebsiteCurzon Public Relations WebsiteApply to be a guest on the podcastConnect with usLinkedIn | X | Instagram | You Tube | Facebook | Threads | Bluesky | PinterestRequest a transcript of this episodeSupport the show

The Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB), created under the America Invents Act (AIA) of 2011, has long been a source of debate. The Supreme Court has reviewed several of its procedures, and Congress has introduced PTAB reform bills in every session since 2017.A core PTAB function is deciding Inter Partes Review (IPR) petitions that challenge patent validity. Under new PTO leadership, IPR institution rates have sharply declined, prompting complaints from companies like SAP America and Motorola, which claim they were unfairly harmed by the shift and that the PTO has not provided adequate legal justification. PTO Director John Squires has defended the new direction, announcing he will personally decide all preliminary IPR institutions—a task previously handled by three-judge panels. The PTO has also proposed rules requiring petitioners to waive future prior art challenges to qualify for IPR institution.This webinar will examine the SAP and Motorola petitions, Director Squires’s policy memo, and their implications for PTAB reform, the AIA framework, and the constitutional foundations of U.S. patent law.Featuring: Arthur Gollwitzer, Partner, Jackson Walker LLPJamie Simpson, Chief Policy Officer and Counsel, The Council for Innovation PromotionRobert Taylor, Founder and Owner, RPT Legal Strategies PC[Moderator] Philip Nelson, Partner, Knobbe Martens

What do a billionaire climate pivot, AI-fueled layoffs, and a scandalous Italian election have in common? They all got the PR treatment in this episode.  Farzana Baduel, David Gallagher, and Doug Downs peel back the media layers behind some of the week's most buzzworthy stories, from Bill Gates' controversial “climate realism” memo and its impact on corporate sustainability narratives, to Amazon's AI-framed mass layoffs and what that messaging means for employer branding.  They also take a wildly entertaining detour into Italian politics where ex-lovers are facing off at the polls, with leaked documents and social media drama in full swing.  Add in royal baseball cap faux-pas and you've got a sharp, witty, and deeply PR-savvy breakdown of the week's biggest headlines. Listen For:58 Is Bill Gates backtracking? Or just reframing climate change?7:54 How is Amazon using AI to spin layoffs as progress?13:43 How does branding tie into an Italian political scandal?16:05 What if your opponent knows all your political secrets?19:26 Did Prince Harry's hat choice betray Canada?The Week Unspun is a weekly livestream every Friday at 10am ET/3pm BT. Check it out on our YouTube Channel or via this LinkedIn channelWe publish the audio from these livestreams to the Stories and Strategies podcast feed every Friday until Sunday evening when it's no longer available.Folgate AdvisorsCurzon Public Relations WebsiteStories and Strategies WebsiteRequest a transcript of this livestreamSupport the show

IPR's James Kelley shares his investigation into Flock surveillance cameras. Then, legal scholar Megan Graham on the legal limits of surveillance.

We live in a moment where artificial intelligence can write our emails, plan our meetings, even give us life advice. But here's the problem: these systems are often too agreeable for our own good. They're less like truth tellers and more like digital echo chambers. They nod along, validate our choices, and tell us exactly what we want to hear. To use an outdated term… GenAI is too often like a Yes Man.In this episode we're looking at the rise of sycophancy in generative AI, the tendency of machines to flatter us instead of challenging us. What does this mean for employees, for leaders, and especially for communicators who rely on AI as a tool? And how do we make sure our AI mirrors are giving us clarity, not just compliments? Listen For3:49 Is ChatGPT too nice for our own good?6:55 Can AI flattery mislead leaders?8:52 Do AIs just tell you what you want to hear?14:36 Is generative AI breaking social unity?20:45 Answer to Last Episode's Question from Mark Lowe Guest: Tina McCorkindale, PhDWebsite | LinkedIn | Google Scholar ProfileLink to Tina's LinkedIn article on The Danger of Sycophancy in GenAICheck out the IPR Video Series In a Car with IPR Rate this podcast with just one click Stories and Strategies WebsiteCurzon Public Relations WebsiteAre you a brand with a podcast that needs support? Book a meeting with Doug Downs to talk about it.Apply to be a guest on the podcastConnect with usLinkedIn | X | Instagram | You Tube | Facebook | Threads | Bluesky | PinterestRequest a transcript of this episodeSupport the show

In Episode 332, die zugleich die letzte Episode der 1. Staffel von Irgenwas mit ESG ist, beleuchtet mit Professor Leonhard Hübner von der Universität Augsburg zusammen mit Marc und Professorin Anne Mittwoch die Entstehung, Systematik und Zukunft des Lieferkettenrechts. Warum liegen dessen Wurzeln im völkerrechtlichen Soft Law? Warum zwangen Governance Gaps in Produktionsländern den Gesetzgeber zum Handeln? Wie verpflichtet das Lieferkettensorgfaltspflichtengesetz (LkSG) zu Risikoanalysen, Prävention und Abhilfe? Was ändert sich, wenn künftig die europäische CSDDD greift und eventuell eine Haftungspflicht einführt? Wird das IPR zur entscheidenden Weichenstellung für Geschädigte aus dem Ausland und schaffen Eingriffsnormen den Durchgriff auf deutsches Recht? Inwiefern beeinflusst Nachhaltigkeitswerbung den Mangelbegriff des Kaufrechts und könnte eine faire Jeans plötzlich mangelhaft sein, obwohl sie tadellos sitzt? Für Experten: Wie verknüpfen sich hier öffentlich-rechtliche Aufsicht, gesellschaftsrechtliche Schwellenwerte und klassische BGB-Dogmatik in Klausuren und Praxis? Antworten auf diese und viele weitere Fragen erhaltet Ihr in dieser Folge von IMR. Viel Spaß!

Can a cyclist-turned (accused) communist New York mayoral candidate teach the PR world a thing or two about emotional storytelling?  This week we unpack the “Mamdani effect” how Zohran Mamdani is rewriting the rules of political communications with cultural fluency, TikTok charm, and unforgettable soundbites.  Other topics, what are the comms implications of the Omnicom-IPG mega-merger, and what is the likely impact on agency identities, client retention, and the war for talent? From Alberta, Canada… a Teacher's Stike and the Government is paying parents. Is that to help them manage or is it a PR bribe? Are there ethical implications here? Listen For:34 What makes Mamdani a standout communicator?3:10 Can Mamdani's social strategy work outside NYC?10:00 What's the real impact of the Omnicom-IPG merger?14:55 Is Alberta's $30/day tactic good PR or spin?18:49 Are PR communities key in turbulent times? The Week Unspun is a weekly livestream every Friday at 10am ET/3pm BT. Check it out on our YouTube Channel or via this LinkedIn channelWe publish the audio from these livestreams to the Stories and Strategies podcast feed every Friday until Sunday evening when it's no longer available.Folgate AdvisorsCurzon Public Relations WebsiteStories and Strategies WebsiteRequest a transcript of this livestream Support the show

From Carnegie Hall to the Metropolitan Opera, renowned baritone Gordon Hawkins has shared the operatic stage with Mirella Freni, Placido Domingo, and Grace Bumbry. His roles over his career have included title roles in "Rigoletto" and "Porgy and Bess," as well as Alberich in the "Ring" cycle, Baron Scarpia in "Tosca" and Marcello in "La boheme." He currently serves on the faculty at Arizona State University. He visited IPR's Studio A, where he reflected on his distinguished career and recorded Samuel Barber's "Sure on this shining night" with collaborative pianist Casey Robards.

Is attention the new currency? Politicians, brands, influencers, even your neighbor's viral TikTok are all competing for the same scarce resource: your focus. But attention is slippery. It can make you a household name overnight and it can vanish just as quickly. In an age where algorithms decide what we see and artificial intelligence rewrites how we discover information, the fight for attention has never been more intense.What happens when public relations and communications agencies find themselves at the same crossroads media once faced? How do you win attention when the competition is everything else in the feed? How do you turn fleeting visibility into lasting credibility? And how do you build narratives that not only go viral but endure?Listen For5:14 What is attention as a commodity in PR?8:48 How has the attention economy changed branding?11:22 What can PR learn from politics?14:05 Are we paying too much for lost attention?17:51 Are attention spans shorter or content louder?18:53 Answer to Last Episode's Question from Richard BagnallGuest: Mark Lowe, Third CityWebsite | Email | X | Instagram | YouTubeRate this podcast with just one click Stories and Strategies WebsiteCurzon Public Relations WebsiteApply to be a guest on the podcastConnect with usLinkedIn | X | Instagram | You Tube | Facebook | Threads | Bluesky | PinterestRequest a transcript of this episodeSupport the show

The call for better measurement in public relations is not new. For decades, leaders in the field have warned that counting impressions, likes, and advertising value equivalents is not enough. Yet here we are, still leaning on the same empty numbers while the C-suite is asking for proof of outcomes that matter.  The urgency has been with us for years, but too often the industry has not listened to its own advice.  We aren't listening to ourselves! Now, as budgets are cut and communications teams risk being sidelined, the pressure to finally get measurement right has never been greater. Richard Bagnall is recognized as one of the world's foremost experts in PR measurement, past chair of AMEC, and co-creator of the Integrated Evaluation Framework. He has worked with global organizations from NATO to the World Bank and continues to remind practitioners that vanity metrics will not protect their budgets or their jobs.  Listen For4:48 Why does PR measurement matter now?7:27 What are outputs, outtakes, and outcomes?11:41 How do you measure with no budget?14:05 What is “crawl, walk, run”?18:40 Jonathan Mast's answer to last episode's question?Guest: Richard BagnallX | LinkedIn   Rate this podcast with just one click Stories and Strategies WebsiteCurzon Public Relations WebsiteApply to be a guest on the podcastConnect with usLinkedIn | X | Instagram | You Tube | Facebook | Threads | Bluesky | PinterestRequest a transcript of this episodeSupport the show

Violinist Blaise Sytsma-Reed, the 2025 winner of the Great Lakes Chamber Orchestra's annual Young Artist Competition, will be performing with the orchestra this weekend. She is a senior at Charlevoix High School and studies with David Reimer in the Dorothy Gerber Strings Program. Blaise visited IPR's Studio A to play her winning piece, the first movement of Lalo's Symphonie Espagnole, with collaborative pianist Ya-Ju Chuang. She spoke about how she balances music, sports, academics and life. She also talked about her eclectic musical tastes.

Search is changing faster than most PR professionals realize. For years, SEO was about keywords and backlinks. Now, with AI-driven tools like ChatGPT, Gemini, and Perplexity shaping how people find information, the game is shifting to AEO (Answer Engine Optimization).Instead of tricking algorithms, brands need to prove expertise, authority, and trustworthiness at every turn. To stay discoverable, we need to craft smarter prompts, produce content that actually engages, and choose the right AI tools for visibility. AI is rewriting the rules of credibility and your PR efforts might get left behind. Listen For5:32 What's the difference between SEO, AEO, and GEO?8:32 Is Google losing its dominance in the search space to tools like ChatGPT?11:24 Can AI-generated thought leadership be trusted?13:28How should PR professionals train AI tools to deliver better content results?18:19 Answer to Last Episode's Question from Susana MendozaGuest: Jonathan MastWebsite | Email | X | Facebook Rate this podcast with just one click Stories and Strategies WebsiteCurzon Public Relations WebsiteAre you a brand with a podcast that needs support? Book a meeting with Doug Downs to talk about it.Apply to be a guest on the podcastConnect with usLinkedIn | X | Instagram | You Tube | Facebook | Threads | Bluesky | PinterestRequest a transcript of this episodeSupport the show

Health insurance expert Pete Damiano shares what is at stake for healthcare as it is wrapped up in a Congressional impasse. Also, IPR's Isabella Luu gives the latest on the Ian Roberts case.

Getting Hispanic communications wrong is not just a slip. It can cost brands credibility, trust, and millions in wasted campaigns. Too often, companies think a simple translation is enough, only to find their carefully crafted message falls flat or even offends the very audience they are trying to reach. With more than 65 million Hispanics in the United States, representing one of the fastest growing and most influential communities, PR professionals cannot afford cultural blind spots.In this episode Susana Mendoza, who helps brands authentically connect with Hispanic audiences, shares where campaigns most often go wrong, how to segment messaging without stereotypes, and why understanding generational and cultural nuances is critical to success. From Univision and Telemundo to influencers and radio, Susana lays out the media landscape and offers practical insights for PR teams navigating sensitive issues such as immigration, healthcare, and public safety.Listen For4:38 Translation Traps & Cultural Missteps 8:27 The Power of Spanish-Language Radio 11:17 Can ChatGPT Really Translate Culture? 15:38 Build Trust Before the Campaign Starts 17:21 Answer to Last Episode's Question from Jackson Wightman Guest: Susana MendozaLinkedIn Rate this podcast with just one click Stories and Strategies WebsiteCurzon Public Relations WebsiteApply to be a guest on the podcastConnect with usLinkedIn | X | Instagram | You Tube | Facebook | Threads | Bluesky | PinterestRequest a transcript of this episodeSupport the show

What do Tylenol, Jimmy Kimmel, and Disney all have in common? They're all caught in the crosshairs of public opinion this week. On this episode hosts David Gallagher and Doug Downs are joined by B2B PR powerhouse Michelle Garrett to dissect a week of PR minefields. From President Trump's dangerous misinformation about Tylenol and pregnancy, to the backlash and brand gymnastics following Jimmy Kimmel's controversial monologue.  The trio also touches on the shifting global perception of American brands and how companies can (and must) navigate reputational risk in polarized times.  Listen For5:42 What did President Trump say about Tylenol? And how should PR teams respond to misinformation?14:52 Why did Jimmy Kimmel get pulled off the air, and what does it say about Disney's PR strategy?26:33 How can political polarization affect brand trust and corporate reputation?Special Guest Michelle GarrettWebsite | Email | X | LinkedInThe Week Unspun is a weekly livestream every Friday at 10am ET/3pm BT. Check it out on our YouTube Channel or via this LinkedIn channelWe publish the audio from these livestreams to the Stories and Strategies podcast feed every Friday until Sunday evening when it's no longer available. Folgate AdvisorsCurzon Public Relations WebsiteStories and Strategies WebsiteRequest a transcript of this livestream Support the show

What happens when your newsfeed becomes a battlefield?In the US and UK, political leaders trade accusations, social media thrives on outrage, and communities are left simmering in distrust. What used to be disagreements over policy now look more like open hostility, with violence creeping closer to the center of public life. Attacks on lawmakers, threats to schools, and the killing of high-profile figures are no longer shocking outliers but part of a troubling pattern.This episode asks a difficult but urgent question: how much of this violence is rooted in the way we communicate? Words frame identities, assign blame, and sometimes push people toward radical action. Sticks and stones may break bones… but in today's world, it's the words that are drawing blood. Listen For3:17 Identity-Based Polarization6:22 How Algorithms Divide Us10:20 The Rush to Blame14:49 Messaging That Can Prevent Violence19:33 Teaching Kids to Resist Radicalization and DisinformationGuest: Amy PateEmail | Website | X Rate this podcast with just one click Stories and Strategies WebsiteCurzon Public Relations WebsiteApply to be a guest on the podcastConnect with usLinkedIn | X | Instagram | You Tube | Facebook | Threads | Bluesky | PinterestRequest a transcript of this episodeSupport the show

Google Search still holds about 90% of global search volume as of mid‑2025, but change is underway as more users begin turning to AI. AI search is rewriting the rules of discovery, and PR needs to adapt. With ChatGPT, Gemini, and Perplexity each scraping different corners of the web, the old focus on big-name publications is no longer enough. The most influential sources may now be niche review sites, specialized forums, or content hubs you have never pitched. Knowing what each Large Language Model (LLM) values and how to optimize for it, is becoming a core PR skill.In this episode, we explore how Answer Engine Optimization (AEO) is reshaping PR. From the rise of “dual websites” for humans and bots to the ethical tensions between LLMs and media outlets, we discuss how PR teams can rethink targeting, adapt content, and position clients for visibility in an AI‑first world. Listen For5:49 Dual Websites: One for Humans, One for Machines8:39 LLMs as New Media Channels11:38 What AI Tools Scrape (and Why It Matters)14:45 Can Bots Get Past Paywalls? The Legal and Ethical Minefield17:01 Answer to Last Episode's Question From Heather Blundell Guest: Jackson Wightman, Founder Proper PropagandaWebsite | Email | LinkedIn  Rate this podcast with just one click Stories and Strategies WebsiteCurzon Public Relations WebsiteAre you a brand with a podcast that needs support? Book a meeting with Doug Downs to talk about it.Apply to be a guest on the podcastConnect with usLinkedIn | X | Instagram | You Tube | Facebook | Threads | Bluesky | PinterestRequest a transcript of this episodeSupport the show

Every Friday we scan the PR Mega Chat and pick the stories that actually shaped the week. What happens when narrative control collides with tragedy, misinformation, and an unfiltered digital age?In the second episode of The Week Unspun, hosts Farzana Baduel, David Gallagher, and Doug Downs dive into the breaking news of political commentator Charlie Kirk's shocking shooting and the volatile aftermath, both online and off. From exploring how disinformation spreads faster than facts to how leadership (or lack thereof) shapes national reaction, the trio offer PR-savvy analysis of crisis communication, media ethics, and the real-world consequences of social media. They also explore surprising connections between gender inclusion, menopause in the workplace, and how ageism and AI are reshaping the public relations industry.  Listen For4:07 The Vacuum of Information and Divisive Reactions7:58 Unfiltered Violence: Children, Social Media, and Emotional Fallout18:53 Menopause in PR: The Silent Career Killer?24:33 The Great Unbundling of PR Talent30:15 Are Reputations Still Vulnerable in the Teflon Age?The Week Unspun is a weekly livestream every Friday at 10am ET/3pm BT. Check it out on our YouTube Channel or via this LinkedIn channelWe publish the audio from these livestreams to the Stories and Strategies podcast feed every Friday until Sunday evening when it's no longer available. Folgate AdvisorsCurzon Public Relations WebsiteStories and Strategies WebsiteRequest a transcript of this livestream Support the show

This week, we examine the first half of the '80s to ask the question - which artists had the best run during that span? Bringing us the funny sugar in this episode is our friend Jack (where our fellow '60s music nerds at?!?). That's right, Jack Rabid, publisher/writer for The Big Takeover magazine and drummer for '80s New York hardcore band Even Worse and dreamy '90s indie band Springhouse is our Third Lad this week. And we had such a fab time that this one is a two parter! Part two will be dropping in a few days, so stay tuned... Springhouse released two albums of sparkling, melancholy guitar pop for Caroline Records in the early '90s - 1991's Land Falls and 1993's Postcards From The Attic. They were the first major label signed, nationally touring U.S. "shoegaze" band, with the 'Layers' video getting MTV airplay, and sharing stages with the likes of House of Love, The Chills, Psychedelic Furs, Belly, and the Lemonheads. In 2008, the band returned for a melodic, orchestral-pop masterpiece on Independent Project Records, From Now To OK. Originally released on limited edition CD only, it has now been reissued as a deluxe edition on vinyl, CD, and digital, and presented in a beautiful package from IPR co-owner/master designer Bruce Licher. ⁠https://springhouse.bandcamp.com⁠ The Big Takeover is a bi-annual music magazine founded by Jack Rabid and Dave Stein in May 1980, originally as a fanzine for New York punkers The Stimulators. For over 45 years, Rabid and Big T contributors have been thrilling alternative music fans with in-depth interviews, coverage of lesser known artists, and a huge review section - including Jack's always entertaining "Top 40" section. ⁠https://www.bigtakeover.com⁠. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

More women are now leaving the PR industry because of perimenopause and menopause than because of childbirth. That's a staggering, often invisible, that's shift happening right at the top. It's not burnout or work-life balance pushing them out, but a phase of life that's rarely acknowledged and even more rarely supported.This episode is an unflinching conversation about the real pressures senior women face. Why is menopause still a taboo topic at work? How misunderstood are its impacts on confidence, performance, and retention? And what must organizations and agencies do to support their best talent before they quietly walk away? Listen For4:22 The Invisible Workplace Crisis7:01 The “Rush Hour” of Women's Lives10:01 Emotions, Gender, and Professionalism13:37 Finding Balance in Psychological Safety18:53 Answer to Last Episode's Question from Fred CookGuest: Heather Blundell, CEO GraylingWebsite | X | LinkedIn | EmailStories and Strategies WebsiteCurzon Public Relations WebsiteApply to be a guest on the podcastConnect with usLinkedIn | X | Instagram | You Tube | Facebook | Threads | Bluesky | PinterestRequest a transcript of this episodeSupport the show

IPR's Natalie Krebs shares how the Iowa's abortion law may be driving some physicians out of the state. Plus, unpacking the latest news on the West Nile virus, worker safety issues, regulatory failures at a pork processing facility and more.