Podcasts about Ivermectin

Enrol in the "Ultimate Gut Detoxification Course"https://soreadyforhealth.podia.com/the-ultimate-gut-detoxification-courseWebsitehttps://www.soreadyforhealth.com/Telegram Channelhttps://t.me/soreadyforhealthClubhousehttps://www.clubhouse.com/club/natural-health-medicineMore Linkshttps://linktr.ee/nabilinhoSupport the show

On this episode: The ”Poddin' Next Door" crew opens with remembering the toxic king Kevin Samuels, slappers, and basically, pro-life vs. pro-choice. Thanks for the support.

COVID: A very special episode of Jim and Them as one of the boys FINALLY got COVID.Amber Heard Vs. Johnny Depp: Amber Heard is so brazen and confident that SHE IS DOING COKE IN COURT!Drew Barrymore: Drew Barrymore has to apologize for being just like everyone else that is paying attention to the Depp/Heard trial.JOB!, LAUNDROMAT!, KAFKAESQUE!, BREAKING BAD!, SPECIAL EPISODE!, FINALLY HAPPENED!, YOUR BOY GOT COVID!, COUGHIN!, SNIFFLES!, REAL ONES!, ZOOM SHOW!, COVID IS OVER?!, POKEFLU!, ANTIBODIES!, PATREON!, MOON KNIGHT!, LAS VEGAS STRIP!, HERBS AND RYE!, SIDES!, SICK!, COUGH!, BIO-WEAPON!, METALLIC TASTE!, FLU!, TASTE AND SMELL!, SCRATCHY THROAT!, STUFFY NOSE!, LYME DISEASE!, THE BOY WHO TURNED EVERYTHING TO CHOCOLATE!, BOOK!, MIDAS!, SO TIRED!, ALWAYS TIRED!, VAXX SHOT COVID!, WALGREENS!, CLINICAL TRIALS!, MEDICATION!, IVERMECTIN!, OPIATE!, FETANYL!, MASKS!, JUDGMENT!, PUBLIC!, DR STRANGE!, GROCERY STORE!, CDC GUIDELINES!, EXPERIMENTAL SHOT!, BREAKING BAD!, BETTER CALL SAUL!, REWATCH!, BINGE!, WHAT'S BETTER!, AMBER HEARD!, JOHNNY DEPP!, COKE!, COURT!, PUBLIC!, TISSUE!, TELEVISED!, HUBRIS!, PMS!, FAT PIG!, KAREN!, PUT ON!, JEALOUSY!, CONTROLLING!, AQUAMAN!, PASSED OUT!, VIBING!, ERIN!, MAGIC MIKE XXL!, KEVIN NASH!, BIG SEXY!, 5AM!, PAUL BETTANY!, JAMES FRANCO!, MEETING!, SPECIES!, COFFEE!, ISAAC!, PENTHOUSE!, MANSIONS!, DRUG DEALER!, ACLU!, DIVORCE!, 7 MILLION!, OP-ED!, DREW BARRYMORE!, ANTHONY ANDERSON!, APOLOGY!, CANCELLED!, PERSONAL LIVES!, BLACK-ISH!, FRESH OFF THE BOAT!, KIM'S CONVENIENCE!You can find the videos from this episode at our Discord RIGHT HERE!

--On the Show: --Georgia Republican Gubernatorial candidate Kandiss Taylor releases one of the most bizarre and disturbing campaign ads in history --Supposedly bankrupt conspiracy theorist Alex Jones is now bragging about two $1 million donations and a bank account with $5 million in it --Caller doesn't suspect a Roe vs. Wade overturn would lead to changes on other social issues --Caller wonders if the pro-choice movement should have a color or symbol --Caller thinks Republicans may have a difficult time fundraising with Roe vs. Wade likely getting overturned --Caller believes Democrats are failing in response to the leaked Supreme Court ruling on abortion --Caller talks about inflation and the CPI data --Caller is a former The_Donald moderator who thinks Ivermectin works to treat COVID --Caller talks about right wingers believing the leak of the SCOTUS abortion ruling is the real issue --Caller from Russia talks about the Putin regime and the Russian invasion of Ukraine --David responds to viewer emails and social media messages --On the Bonus Show: Democrats seek to codify Roe vs. Wade, Sarah Palin claims voter fraud in election that hasn't happened yet, Greg Abbott weighs challenging right to public education, and much more...

Dave Chappelle attacked on stage, Gary Graff joins us re: Eminem in Rock & Roll Hall of Fame, Ray J breaks silence on the Kim K tape, Amber Heard takes the stand, drunkest human possibly ever on Cops, mouth explosions on the phone, and Lyla attempts to take the show offline.People are discovering the new Farrah Abraham video; then they are immediately filled with regret.Dave Chappelle was attacked on stage by an inspiring "musician". Tons of famous people were at the show and no one stopped the attack.Metro Detroit homes are skyrocketing in price.Alabama Manhunt Update: Drew predicts Casey White is going to break up with Vicky White.Family of the victims of the Oxford school shooting want a permanent memorial. Some people are saying a memorial would trigger the students.Lyla derails the show by wrapping herself in every cable possible under our tables.Music News: Trudi kills Harry Belafonte. Gary Graff joins the show to analyze the new inductees to the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame. The Black Crowes performed Papa Was a Rolling Stone on Jimmy Kimmel. Spinal Tap lost another drummer. Pearl Jam kicks off another tour.The fuzz shut down Detroit's weed vending machine.John Gibson and Kevin Gunn ripped off Wayne County Roads Division and finally got busted.$431,000,000 of overpaid unemployment benefits goes *POOF*.Ray J confirms the Kim K Superstar sex tape was 100% orchestrated by the Kardashians.Malcom MacDonald grew a brand-new penis on his arm.Trudi confirms that the Met Gala is stupid.Justin Bieber still crying on his 'journey'. Buy his new clothes here!Kevin Hart is a tequila magnate now.Johnny Depp vs Amber Heard: Amber Turd takes the stand. Some hot chick "farted" on the stand.Britney Spears must have ended her social media hiatus as she's popping off left and right on Instagram again. She is dumb.Nantucket voted to make all their beaches topless.COPS: The drunkest driver possibly ever, Tony Dones is located and other criminals strain to explain themselves.Roe v. Wade: The left is angry about abortions. The right is angry about the SCOTUS leak. VICE has their own Ivermectin-like recommendation as they want people to take horse ulcer medicine for simple 'do-it-yourself' abortions. Joe Biden declares the MAGA crowd the most extreme political organization in American history.Despite having the worst ratings in television history, Bomani Jones gets renewed for a second season at HBO.Dustin Diamond is PULLING AWAY from Drew with Twitter followers.Enjoy a replay of when Drew & Mike came across the 'Mouth Explosion Woman'.Social media is dumb, but we're on Facebook, Instagram and Twitter (Drew and Mike Show, Marc Fellhauer, Trudi Daniels and BranDon).

[05.04.22]

Follow-up:  Susan Collins weighs in    @1:16 Politics: SCOTUS leak    @7:18 Rape is an opportunity    @25:58 Example of problems caused by patriarch rulings  GOP behind coup    @36:43 Don't forget the Primaries     Who is Madison Cawthorn    @41:23 Meanwhile, Raskin is talking to deprogrammers    @45:41 Religious Nonsense: Former Pakistani Prime Minister charged with blasphemy    @46:51 Jainism - not so great     @48:01 Clowns for Christ     @50:19 Democrats killing babies! (No, they're not)    @52:13 Youth Pastor ‘betrothed' to 14 year old    @55:18 Coronavirus:     OH - Drs required to promote Ivermectin?     @58:43 Shanghai easing restrictions    @1:00:38 Mutations not slowing down     @1:02:50 Final Stories: Politicians in SPAAACE!    @1:04:12 Blow up the moon!

Another day in the United States of Serfs and Lords. Hannity texts prove Fox News is fascist propaganda. Retired Judge Breaks Down MAGA Blueprint To Steal Election- 2020 Was ‘A Dry Run' Republicons loathe democracy at home and abroad. Covidiot wants Ivermectin for his father's cancer. Elon Musk is just one of many threats to American democracy. Madison Cawthorn - self-loathing closet-case? We discuss the madness ____________________ Check out Shaping Progress here: linktr.ee/shapingprogress JOIN Shaping Progress: www.joinshapingprogress.org/today Subscribe to Mark's Shaping Progress show: www.youtube.com/watch?v=xfP4yRO4CNM FYINation's Thomas Reynolds calls in to talk about Republicans doing another NAZI imitation and blaming COVID on immigrants. fyination.com _____ Join Rokfin to access exclusive tarabuster content as well as Ron Placone, Lee Camp, and more! https://rokfin.com/tarabuster

If your doomscrolling over the past few years has led you to any of the so-called “dissident doctors” who are calling for more clarity and less catastrophizing when it comes public messaging around COVID, you might be familiar with Dr. Lucy McBride. When the pandemic lockdowns began, Dr. McBride, a practicing internist in Washington, D.C., began sending her patients email blasts explaining what was known (and unknown) about the virus and what they could (and couldn't) do to try to stay safe. Those emails evolved into a popular newsletter that has put Dr. McBride centerstage in the call for a more reasonable, evidence-based approach to COVID measures. This week, Dr. McBride talks with Meghan about what the latest data says about COVID safety and why she thinks the public has lost perspective on what constitutes normal risk. She explains why the drug Ivermectin has been politicized and therefore weaponized, why the CDC has scared parents into seeing kids as germ vectors, and, above all, why it's urgent that we prioritize mental health and stop fantasizing about “zero COVID.” She also talks about her new podcast, Beyond The Prescription, which debuts this week.   Guest Bio:  Dr. Lucy McBride is a practicing internist in Washington, DC and the author of the popular COVID 19 newsletter, which you can find at lucymcbride.com. She attended Princeton University and Harvard Medical School and trained in Internal Medicine at the Johns Hopkins Hospital. Her new podcast Beyond The Prescription debuts this week.

In this second episode of The Science, David Gornoski sits down with Dr. Peter McCullough, cardiologist and one of the most highly cited professors concerning the early treatment of COVID. Will there be a deadlier variant than the Omicron variant of COVID? How can people prepare themselves for future variants? What steps can the vaccine-injured take to mitigate the damages? Is there a possibility that children might suffer long-term symptoms from COVID? Can we hold labs like the one at Wuhan accountable? Follow Dr. McCullough on Twitter here. Check out Public Health News here. Visit A Neighbor's Choice website here.

Another day in the United States of Serfs and Lords. Hannity texts prove Fox News is fascist propaganda. Retired Judge Breaks Down MAGA Blueprint To Steal Election- 2020 Was ‘A Dry Run' Republicons loathe democracy at home and abroad. Covidiot wants Ivermectin for his father's cancer. Elon Musk is just one of many threats to American democracy. Madison Cawthorn - self-loathing closet-case? We discuss the madness _________ Keep sane in these "interesting times" - check out Mark Ciociola's "A Radical You." https://aradicalyou.com/ _________ Frustrated enough about government policy to want to do something about it? Join "Shaping Progress," the organization founded by Tarabuster's millennial corresponded Mark Middlestaedt. Check out Shaping Progress here: https://linktr.ee/shapingprogress Subscribe to Mark's Shaping Progress show: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xfP4yRO4CNM _________ Join Rokfin to access exclusive tarabuster content as well as Ron Placone, Lee Camp, and more! https://rokfin.com/tarabuster BECOME A "TARABUSTER" PATRON: www.patreon.com/taradevlin Join the Tarabuster community on Discord too!! https://discord.gg/PRYDBx8 Buy some Resistance Merch and help support our progressive work! http://tarabustermerch.com/ Donate to Tarabuster: https://www.paypal.com/paypalme/taradacktyl We discuss the madness. __________

Dr. Champion breaks down the latest clinical trial study report concerning Ivermectin in context of SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19. Spoiler Alert: The report is not what it seems! Listen to the end to hear the SPECIAL OFFER on Dave's books. Dave's book can be ordered at https://drreality.news

Can one take Paxlovid along with Ivermectin and/or hydroxychloroquine for early treatment, or should a person make a choice? My 17-year-old son is hell-bent on joining the armed forces. I am seeking a medical exemption. I need actual data to support my decision. Where can I find this data? I am a 75 yr. old woman in good health and tested positive today for covid...

Can one take Paxlovid along with Ivermectin and/or hydroxychloroquine for early treatment, or should a person make a choice? My 17-year-old son is hell-bent on joining the armed forces. I am seeking a medical exemption. I need actual data to support my decision. Where can I find this data? I am a 75 yr. old woman in good health and tested positive today for covid...

My new book LOSERTHINK, available now on Amazon https://tinyurl.com/rqmjc2a Find my "extra" content on Locals: https://ScottAdams.Locals.com Content: Russia cuts off gas to Poland, Bulgaria Ukraine war musing Amber Heard musing Elon Musk and Twitter Governor DeSantis vs CNN New York State AG vs President Trump ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ If you would like to enjoy this same content plus bonus content from Scott Adams, including micro-lessons on lots of useful topics to build your talent stack, please see scottadams.locals.com for full access to that secret treasure. --- Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/scott-adams00/support

The RSB Show 4-26-22 - Dr. Christina Rahm, International Science Nutrition Society, Dr. Janci Lindsay, Vaccine injury, Ivermectin v. Remdesivir

In this episode, Biden and his accountant now face new IRS whistleblower complaints. The blame Putin strategy not catching fire like they need it to. Biden2024 !?!

Ivermectin Won't CURE COVID or StupidityThe Tony Michaels PodcastClinical studies show that Ivermectin is not an effective treatment against COVID. Arizona GOP candidate for Governor Kari Lake still thinks so. Apparently horse dewormer doesn't help with stupidity either!Elon Musk reaches a deal to buy social media giant Twitter for $44 Billion.More than 2,000 text message to Mark Meadows, then Trump's Chief of Staff, about the 2020 election, The Big Lie, and Jan 6th Insurrection at the Capitol.The Tony Michaels Podcast Clipshttps://youtube.com/playlist?list=PLD6m5RGGgwZCF4xfSBXv3K271KEYwn_5QThe Tony Michaels Podcast FULL EPISODEShttps://youtube.com/playlist?list=PLD6m5RGGgwZC2DqZRmyinLgoQsr4ZykTzSubscribe to The Tony Michaels Podcast: https://pod.link/1561049560Follow The Tony Michael Podcast on Twitter @TonyMichaelsPodBroadcasted live on Twitch -- Watch live at https://www.twitch.tv/thetonymichaelsApple Podcastshttps://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/lets-talk-the-tony-michaels-podcast/id1561049560Spotifyhttps://open.spotify.com/show/49rDYbKyzlwrIjX6SiRX1g?si=V2NMlU3zQgeeG9rEw_20fw&dl_branch=1Twitchtwitch.tv/thetonymichaelsFUCK'EM Hatshats.thetonymichaels.comFollow Tony on Social Media@thetonymichaelsFollow Gabe on Social Media@iamgabesanchezProud Partner of MeidasTouch Media NetworkSupport the show (https://paypal.me/thetonymichaels)

On this episode: The ”Poddin' Next Door" crew opens with the usual banter and slappers for your head tops, Elon D-Riding, Willow writing Tupac, and other topics. Thanks for the support. Listen on most Digital Streaming Platforms. Apple, Amazon, Spotify, Google…… Follow + Subscribe: Instagram - @poddinnextdoor YouTube - Poddin' Next Door

"If we all speak up, there will be change!" Attorney Jay Sanchez Attorney Jay Sanchez serves as General Counsel to the FormerFedsGroup Freedom Foundation, where his work is dedicated to the fight against COVID - 19 vaccine mandates and the fight for early treatment. In this episode he and Dr. Ardis discuss the use of Ivermectin for COVID - 19, the plan to help those injured due to hospital protocols like Remdesivir and others, whistleblowers, and doctors who have been punished or feel alone and need support. You can learn more about Attorney Jay Sanchez at www.formerfedsgroup.org and www.ethosthemovie.com.

"If we all speak up, there will be change!" Attorney Jay Sanchez Attorney Jay Sanchez serves as General Counsel to the FormerFedsGroup Freedom Foundation, where his work is dedicated to the fight against COVID - 19 vaccine mandates and the fight for early treatment. In this episode he and Dr. Ardis discuss the use of Ivermectin for COVID - 19, the plan to help those injured due to hospital protocols like Remdesivir and others, whistleblowers, and doctors who have been punished or feel alone and need support. You can learn more about Attorney Jay Sanchez at www.formerfedsgroup.org and www.ethosthemovie.com.

"If we all speak up, there will be change!" Attorney Jay Sanchez Attorney Jay Sanchez serves as General Counsel to the FormerFedsGroup Freedom Foundation, where his work is dedicated to the fight against COVID - 19 vaccine mandates and the fight for early treatment. In this episode he and Dr. Ardis discuss the use of Ivermectin for COVID - 19, the plan to help those injured due to hospital protocols like Remdesivir and others, whistleblowers, and doctors who have been punished or feel alone and need support. You can learn more about Attorney Jay Sanchez at www.formerfedsgroup.org and www.ethosthemovie.com.

Armed with good science that shows the drug is ineffective and dangerous people are still using it and often skipping their vaccines that are proven safe and effective. Go figure.

On this Hacks & Wonks midweek show, Crystal has a robust conversation with Damon Petrich about his research at the School of Criminal Justice at the University of Cincinnati. As lead author of the seminal work “Custodial Sanctions and Reoffending: A Meta-Analytic Review,” Damon performed an extensive analysis of 116 research studies looking at the effect of incarceration on reoffending. The review's finding that the oft-used policy of imprisonment does not reduce the likelihood of recidivism sparks a discussion about how the United States ended up as the world leader in mass incarceration and the disconnect between conventional assumptions about what prisons provide versus reality. Noting that the carceral system does a poor job of rehabilitation - while eating up budgets across the country and exacting significant societal costs - Damon and Crystal talk about how to design and evaluate programs that do work to deliver greater public safety for everyone. As always, a full text transcript of the show is available below and at officialhacksandwonks.com. Find the host, Crystal, on Twitter at @finchfrii and reach Damon for more information about his research at petricdm@ucmail.uc.edu   Resources  “Custodial Sanctions and Reoffending: A Meta-Analytic Review” by Damon M. Petrich, Travis C. Pratt, Cheryl Lero Johnson, and Francis T. Cullen for Crime and Justice: https://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/10.1086/715100   Scott Hechinger Twitter thread: https://twitter.com/ScottHech/status/1447596444886523911   “Mass Incarceration: The Whole Pie 2022” by Wendy Sawyer and Peter Wagner from the Prison Policy Initiative: https://www.prisonpolicy.org/reports/pie2022.html   “Risk-need-responsivity model for offender assessment and rehabilitation” by James Bonta and D. A. Andrews for Public Safety Canada: https://www.publicsafety.gc.ca/cnt/rsrcs/pblctns/rsk-nd-rspnsvty/index-en.aspx   “Let's Take a Hard Look at Who Is in Jail and Why We Put Them There” by Alea Carr for the ACLU-WA blog: https://www.aclu-wa.org/blog/let-s-take-hard-look-who-jail-and-why-we-put-them-there   Book - “Great American City: Chicago and the Enduring Neighborhood Effect” by Robert J. Sampson: https://press.uchicago.edu/ucp/books/book/chicago/G/bo5514383.html   Byrne Criminal Justice Innovation Program - “Police Legitimacy and Legal Cynicism: Why They Matter and How to Measure in Your Community”: https://www.lisc.org/media/filer_public/05/0b/050ba3aa-044f-4676-bc1e-6e2b6c48412c/091317_bcji_resources_police_legitimacy_fundamentals.pdf   “Polls Show People Favor Rehabilitation over Incarceration” by Matt Clarke for Prison Legal News: https://www.prisonlegalnews.org/news/2018/nov/6/polls-show-people-favor-rehabilitation-over-incarceration/   Transcript [00:00:00] Crystal Fincher: Welcome to Hacks & Wonks. I'm Crystal Fincher, and I'm a political consultant and your host. On this show, we talk with policy wonks and political hacks to gather insight into local politics and policy in Washington state through the lens of those doing the work with behind-the-scenes perspectives on what's happening, why it's happening, and what you can do about it. Full transcripts and resources referenced in the show are always available at officialhacksandwonks.com and in our episode notes. Well, I am excited to welcome Damon Petrich, who's a doctoral associate in the School of Criminal Justice at University of Cincinnati and incoming assistant professor at Loyola University Chicago. He was the lead author of a recent article, "Custodial Sanctions and Reoffending: A Meta-Analytic Review," along with Travis Pratt, Cheryl Lero Johnson, Francis T. Cullen. Damon's research focuses on the effectiveness of corrections and rehabilitation programs, desistance from crime, and the impact of community violence on youth development. Thank you so much for joining us, Damon. [00:01:13] Damon Petrich: Thank you very much for having me on, Crystal. I'm excited to talk a little bit about my work and the implications of that and all that, so thanks again. [00:01:20] Crystal Fincher: I'm very excited to talk about this and it's extremely timely - has been for a while. We have conversations almost every day in the public sphere having to do with public safety - this is such a major component of it. And so I'm hoping as we have this conversation, it'll help us to better assess what the costs and benefits are of custodial sanctions and incarceration, and alternatives to that - to have a conversation that kind of orients us more towards public safety. Sometimes we're so concerned with metrics around police and how many they are, and what the length of a sentence should be. And sometimes we focus on things that take us off of the overall goal of keeping us all safer and reducing the likelihood that each of us are victimized and to hopefully prevent people from becoming victims of crime. And just to have accurate conversations about how we invest our public resources - what we're actually getting from them, and then how to evaluate as we go along - what we should be tracking and measuring and incentivizing. As so many people talk about taking data-driven approaches and create all these dashboards - that we're really doing it from an informed perspective. So just to start out - what actually were you studying and what were you seeking to find out? [00:02:47] Damon Petrich: Yeah, so the main purpose of our meta-analysis, which I can explain exactly what that is later on if you have questions, but the main purpose was to understand what happens when you take one group of offenders and you sentence them to something custodial like prison or jail, and then you sentence another group of similar offenders to something non-custodial like probation. How do those two groups differ in terms of whether they reoffend? So does prison actually deter recidivism, or does it make people more likely to commit crime afterwards? So that's sort of what we were looking at and so we considered all of the available research on that, in this review. [00:03:29] Crystal Fincher: Got it. So right now we have gone down the path of mass incarceration - that is the default punishment that we, as society, have looked to for crime. Hey - sentence them and many times it's, Hey, they're going to jail. Sometimes they get out of jail and they have supervision that continues, but jail is really focused, where we focus a lot of our effort and where we put people and hope that that'll straighten them out and they come out and everything is fine. How did we get here and where are we in terms of how we're approaching incarceration in our society, in our country? [00:04:11] Damon Petrich: Yeah, so there is a lot of public uproar around a lot of issues, like race issues, and there was crime spikes and concerns over social welfare - and there's all this confluence of issues in the '60s and early '70s. And we decided to - as a country, not everyone, but politicians decided that we should tackle the crime problem by A) incarcerating more people, and then B) once they get there, keep them there for longer. So we enacted things like mandatory minimum sentences, where the judge really has no discretion over what happens - the person gets automatically a sentence of incarceration if they've committed a certain type of crime. You had habitual offender laws where if you're - like California's three strikes policy - where if you have two prior felonies and you get a third, no matter what it is, you're going to jail for life. Michigan had the "650 Lifer Law," where if you get caught with 650 grams of heroin or cocaine, you're automatically going to prison for life. And then we got rid of parole and stuff like that in a lot of states. So all these things lead to more people going to jail and then for longer, and those laws came to be in the '70s and '80s. And over that time, our incarceration rate ballooned up by about 700%, so by the early 2000s, we were at over 2 million people incarcerated and another 7-8 million people on probation or parole. So it's a pretty big expansion - the United States has 5% of the world's population and a quarter, or 25%, of the prisoners, so it's a little ridiculous. The crime rate here isn't nearly as high, or nearly high enough to justify that huge disparity. So yeah, it's a whole confluence of factors led us to be the world leader in incarceration. [00:06:14] Crystal Fincher: And what attitudes or what justifications are the people who have the power to enact these policies and continue these policies - how are they justifying them? [00:06:25] Damon Petrich: So there's a few reasons why you might want to incarcerate somebody. One is just because you want to punish them or get revenge on them, so that's more of a moral reason. But the main focus of politicians were twofold - one was incapacitation, so that one means that because you're keeping somebody locked up in a cage, obviously they can't be out in the community committing crimes. So the thought is that you're going to reduce crime that way. The research on that is a little squishy even now, and I can talk a little bit more about that later if you want. But the other reason, and the one that we focused on in our review, was that prison deters people from going back to crime after they get out. So the idea there is that prison sucks - you go in there, you're cut off from your job, from your family, from your friends, or from just having hobbies or things to do. And you're not going to want to go back, so when you get out of prison - you think real hard, and you think how much prison sucks, and you decide not to go back to crime. That's the thinking behind that deterrence hypothesis anyway. So those two - incapacitation and deterrence - were the main drivers of those increase in laws and stuff during the '70s, '80s, and '90s, but there really wasn't any evidence for either of them - in the '70s and '80s in particular. So most of the research evaluating whether prison actually does deter recidivism has popped up over the last 25 years or so. [00:08:05] Crystal Fincher: And as you took a look at it - all of the studies that have popped up over the past 25 years had varying degrees of rigor and scientific validity. But as that body of research grew, people began to get a better idea of whether incarceration actually does reduce someone's likelihood of reoffending. How big was that body of work, in terms of studies, and what were you able to look at? [00:08:40] Damon Petrich: So in our particular review, we looked at 116 studies, which is a pretty sizable number. Most people - when you read through an article and a literature review might have 10 studies or something that they just narratively go through, but we looked at 116. And then within those 116 studies, there were 981 statistical models. So 901 different comparisons - or 981 different comparisons - of what happens to custodial versus non-custodial groups. So we looked at a pretty big chunk of literature. [00:09:20] Crystal Fincher: And in that, in the reliance of - that's a really big number - and I think, people now are maybe more familiar, just from a layperson's perspective, of just how big that number is. As we've seen throughout this pandemic that we're in the middle of, studies come out - people are looking at one study, and wow - study number two comes out and we're feeling really good about it. And man, we get to five studies and people are like, okay, we know what's going on. To get beyond a hundred is just a real comprehensive body of study and analysis. What were you able to determine from that? [00:10:05] Damon Petrich: So I should probably explain upfront what a meta-analysis is and why it's useful. So like you were just saying - like in the COVID pandemic, for example - one study will come out and it'll say, oh, Ivermectin reduces symptomatic COVID cases by X percent. And then the next study will come out and say, Ivermectin makes people way worse. So any individual study can be kind of misleading. A good analogy for what a meta-analysis does would be to look at baseball, for example. So let's say you're interested in some rookie player that's just come out, he's just joined Major League Baseball and you go to his - you want to know how good this player actually is? You've never seen him play, you've only heard rumors. So you go out to his first game, he gets up to bat four times and he gets no hits. So you walk away from that game thinking, wow, this player is terrible, the team wasted all their money recruiting and paying this guy's salary. But that could have just been an off game for many reasons - it's his debut game so maybe there's just first-game nerves, maybe the weather was bad, maybe he was having personal problems in his life, or he had a little bit of an injury. So there's a number of reasons why looking at his performance from that one game is not going to be representative of who he is as a player. Ideally, you'd want to look at all the games over a season where he might go up to bat 250 times. And over those 250 times, he gets 80 hits, which is a pretty good batting average - it's over .300. So with that amount of data, you could come to a more solid conclusion of whether he's actually a good player or not. And with that amount of data, you could also look at what we call moderating characteristics. So you could look at, for example, whether he plays better when it's an away game or in a home game, whether it's early or late season - you could look at all these sorts of things. So this is essentially what we're doing with research as well, in a meta-analysis. So if you look at studies on incarceration - one might show increases in recidivism after people go to prison, the next might show decreases, and the next might show that probationers and prisoners reoffend at about the same rates. So just like in the baseball analogy, in a meta-analysis, we're looking at all of the available research. We're combining it together and determining A) what the sort of overall or average effect of incarceration is, and then B) whether these moderating characteristics actually matter. So in other words, is the effect of incarceration pretty much the same for males as it is for females, or for juveniles as adults, or when the research design is really good versus when it's not so great. So that's basically what we did in this meta-analysis is again - looked at 116 studies and from those 981 statistical estimates. [00:13:13] Crystal Fincher: Very helpful. Totally makes sense with the baseball analogy, and I especially appreciate breaking down with all the statistical models and not just kind of thumbs up, thumbs down - the binary - it either increases or reduces the likelihood of recidivism. But under what conditions are - might it be more likely, less likely that someone does? What are some of those influencing effects on what happens? And so you were just talking about the justification that people used going into this, and now that we have data coming out - does it turn out that people go into prison or are incarcerated in jail, they think - wow, this is horrible. Some in society are like the more uncomfortable we make it in jail, the better we want to make sure it's a place that they never would want to come back to - that it's so scary and such a bad experience that they are just scared straight for the rest of their lives. Does it actually turn out to be that way? Do they take a rational look at - this was my experience, I don't want to go back again, therefore I will not do any of the things that I did going in. [00:14:28] Damon Petrich: I would not say that's the conclusion - no. So again, based on the 116 studies that we looked at, which is again a lot, people who are sentenced to incarceration - so jail, prison - they commit crime, they reoffend at about the same rates as if you'd sentence those same people to probation. So in other words, they're not being deterred by being sent to prison. These effects are the same for both males and females. So in other words, prison doesn't reduce reoffending for one group versus the other. It's the same whether we look at adults versus juveniles, it's the same regardless of what type of recidivism we're interested in - rearrests or convictions. It's pretty much the same across the board. There's some slight variations in research designs, but even within those, prison either has no effect or it slightly increases recidivism. We don't find any conditions under which prison is reducing reoffending or deterring these people from going back to those lives. [00:15:35] Crystal Fincher: So from a societal perspective, a lot of people kind of make the assumption that, Hey, we arrest and we incarcerate someone - whew, our streets are safer. They get out, and now they can choose to reintegrate themselves into society hopefully - they do and we're all safer because of it. But it looks like impressions that some people may have that, Hey, we're letting someone off easy. And suggestions - there's so much media coverage around this - and suggestions that because we're letting people off easy, that we're making it easier for them to reoffend, or they don't feel sufficiently punished enough and so that becomes an incentive to reoffend. Does that seem like it tracks with what the studies have shown? [00:16:33] Damon Petrich: Not really - so there's some studies that actually ask prisoners and offenders whether they'd prefer going to prison or probation. And a lot of them will say, oh, I'd rather do a year in prison than spend two or three years on probation. So it's not like they view probation as just being super easy. And they're not saying this because they received time off their sentence for being in the study or anything like that. Probation's not easy either - and you have to also think that while these people are on probation, they're able to stay in close touch with their family, they're able to maintain connections with work or find work, they're able to participate in the community, they can pay taxes - that I know a lot of people who are pro-prison love. So there's all sorts of reasons why - beyond just them reoffending at the same rates as if they'd gone to prison - there's a lot of reasons why we might want to keep these people in the community. And it's not like we're saying, let everybody out of prison - so the nature of this research - you want to compare apples to apples. So in this research, comparing prisoners to probationers - these have to be people who are getting - they could either legitimately get a sentence of jail or probation, or prison or probation. So these are going to be first-time offenders, people who are relatively low-level - they've committed low-level crimes and all that. So we're not saying - there's not going to be a situation where a murderer just gets probation - that sort of thing. So I know that might be a concern of some people - they think that's a natural argument of this analysis, but it's really not. [00:18:24] Crystal Fincher: Well, and to your point, we're really talking - if we're looking at all of the crime that gets people sentenced to prison time, a very small percentage of that is murder. A very small percentage of it is on that kind of scale - you can wind up in jail or prison for a wide variety of offenses - many of them, people perceive as relatively minor or that people might be surprised can land you in prison. Or if someone has committed a number of minor offenses, that can stack up - to your point in other situations - and increase the length of detention or the severity of the consequences. As we're looking through this and the conversation of, okay, so, we sentence them, we let them out - it's not looking like there's a difference between jail or community supervisions, things like probation - what is it about jail that is harmful or that is not helpful? What is it about the structure of our current system that doesn't improve recidivism outcomes for people? [00:19:42] Damon Petrich: Probably the main one is the rehabilitation is not the greatest. So just as an example, substance abuse is a very strong predictor whether people are going to reoffend, unsurprisingly. About 50% of prisoners at the state and federal level in The States meet the DSM [Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders] criteria for having a substance use abuse disorder - so they meet the clinical criteria for substance abuse disorder. So half of them, and then more than that just use substances, but they don't meet the criteria for a disorder. But of that 50% who has a substance abuse disorder, only about 20% of those actually receives treatment for it while they're incarcerated. So, you're not dealing with a root cause of reoffending while they're in prison - so you're not deterring them, but you're also not rehabilitating them - so you're really not doing anything. And then in the rare cases where these people are provided with rehabilitation or reentry programming, it's often not based on any sort of evidence-based model of how you actually change people. So there's a lot of psychological and criminology theory and research on how you actually elicit behavioral change, and these programs really aren't in line with any of that. And I could give examples if you wanted, but - [00:21:17] Crystal Fincher: Sure. I think that's helpful, 'cause I think a lot of people do assume, and sometimes it's been controversial - wow, look at how much they're coddling these prisoners - they have these educational programs, and they get all this drug treatment for free, and if they don't come out fixed then it's their own fault because they have access to all of these treatment resources in prison. Is that the case? [00:21:43] Damon Petrich: No, I wouldn't say so - first of all, they don't have access, a lot of them, to any programs. And then, like I said, the programs that they do get really aren't that effective. So the big one that everybody loves to argue for is providing former inmates with jobs. If you look at any federal funding for program development, like the Second Chance Act or the First Step Act - I think that was one under Trump - and then under Bush, there was a Serious [and] Violent Offenders Reentry Initiative - pretty much all of these federal bills will be heavily focused on just providing offenders with jobs. And almost all of the evaluations of these programs show that they don't reduce reoffending. And it's not really that hard - again, if you go back to the literature on behavioral change and, criminology literature - it's not really that hard to understand why just providing a job isn't going to reduce or lead somebody away from a life of crime. A lot of