Podcasts about johns hopkins center

On Food Talk with Dani Nierenberg, Dani speaks with Amesh Adalja, a Senior Scholar at the Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security and an Adjunct Assistant Professor at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health. They discuss the outbreak of avian flu on poultry and dairy cattle farms, the federal funding cuts that are weakening government agencies' ability to track and prevent the spread of the virus, and why the lack of proactivity is cause for concern. While you're listening, subscribe, rate, and review the show; it would mean the world to us to have your feedback. You can listen to “Food Talk with Dani Nierenberg” wherever you consume your podcasts.

Dr. Jim McDonald, commissioner of the New York State Department of Health, discusses the State's Heat Risk and Illness Dashboard and how it can reduce heat related injury; Dr. Tara Kirk Sell, senior scholar at the Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security and an associate professor in the Department of Environmental Health and Engineering at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, previews public health communications topics that will be covered in ASTHO's INSPIRE Readiness webinar today, Thursday, June 12 at 2 p.m. ET; the Texas Department of State Health Services is leading an initiative to strengthen collaboration between public health and academic health departments; and ASTHO member Dr. Ralph Alvarado, commissioner of the Tennessee Department of Health, was a panelist at the Age-Friendly Ecosystem Summit, where he discussed the importance of effective public health messaging.  New York State Department of Health Heat Risk and Illness Dashboard News Release: New York State Department of Health Launches Interactive Heat Risk and Illness Dashboard ASTHO Webinar: INSPIRE: Readiness - Tackling Public Health Communication Conundrums: Rumors and Public Trust  ASTHO Blog: Public Health and Academic Leaders Unite Through Texas Consortium Trust for America's Health and John A. Harford Foundation: The Age-Friendly Ecosystem Summit  

June 10, 2025 ~ June is Gun Violence Awareness Month. Dr. Katherine Hoops, pediatric critical care physician and director of clinical programs and practice at the Johns Hopkins Center for Gun Violence Solutions, joins Marie to discuss this.

Alexander Pantelyat, MD, FAAN is an associate professor of Neurology at the Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine. He is the founder and director of the Johns Hopkins Atypical Parkinsonism Center, and the co-Founder and Director of the Johns Hopkins Center for Music and Medicine. Dr. Pantelyat's research is focused on the diagnosis and treatment of atypical parkinsonian disorders, such as dementia with Lewy bodies, progressive supranuclear palsy, corticobasal syndrome/degeneration and multiple system atrophy; cognitive aspects of movement disorders; and music-based rehabilitation of neurodegenerative diseaseshttps://www.seniorcareauthorit...

About this episode: A new report from the Safeguarding Health in Conflict Coalition documents incidents of violence against health care facilities and workers in conflict zones around the world. In this episode: why it's important to track these trends, how incidents are reported and investigated, and a look at the 2024 report with examples from various conflict zones around the world including Sudan, Ukraine, and Gaza. Note: These podcasts are a conversation between the participants, and do not represent the position of Johns Hopkins University. Guests: Joe Amon is the director of the Johns Hopkins Center for Public Health and Human Rights. Host: Dr. Josh Sharfstein is vice dean for public health practice and community engagement at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, a faculty member in health policy, a pediatrician, and former secretary of Maryland's Health Department. Show links and related content: Safeguarding Health in Conflict Coalition, 2024 Report Allegations of War Crimes by Leaders of Hamas and Israeli Officials Before the International Criminal Court—Public Health On Call (June 2024) Human Rights and Health Care in the Middle East Crisis—Public Health On Call (December 2023) Transcript information: Looking for episode transcripts? Open our podcast on the Apple Podcasts app (desktop or mobile) or the Spotify mobile app to access an auto-generated transcript of any episode. Closed captioning is also available for every episode on our YouTube channel. Contact us: Have a question about something you heard? Looking for a transcript? Want to suggest a topic or guest? Contact us via email or visit our website. Follow us: @‌PublicHealthPod on Bluesky @‌JohnsHopkinsSPH on Instagram @‌JohnsHopkinsSPH on Facebook @‌PublicHealthOnCall on YouTube Here's our RSS feed Note: These podcasts are a conversation between the participants, and do not represent the position of Johns Hopkins University.

About this episode: June is Gun Violence Awareness Month with a focus on safe storage, a key factor in preventing gun-related injuries and deaths. In this episode: a look at how safe storage saves lives, evidence-based tools and tips for lawmakers, gun owners, parents, pediatricians, and more; and how to normalize conversations about safe storage in everyday life. Guests: Dr. Katherine Hoops, is a pediatrician and the director of Clinical Practice at the Johns Hopkins Center for Gun Violence Solutions. Cass Crifasi is the co-executive director at the Johns Hopkins Center for Gun Violence Solutions. Host: Lindsay Smith Rogers, MA, is the producer of the Public Health On Call podcast, an editor for Expert Insights, and the director of content strategy for the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health. Show links and related content: Gun Violence Awareness Month Campaign—The Center For Gun Violence Solutions Safe & Secure Gun Storage Prevents Injuries (PDF) How To Talk To Other Parents About Guns In The Home (PDF) Safe and Secure Gun Storage Solutions—The Center For Gun Violence Solutions What The Conviction of a Parent of a High School Shooter Could Mean—Public Health On Call (March 2024) Transcript information: Looking for episode transcripts? Open our podcast on the Apple Podcasts app (desktop or mobile) or the Spotify mobile app to access an auto-generated transcript of any episode. Closed captioning is also available for every episode on our YouTube channel. Contact us: Have a question about something you heard? Looking for a transcript? Want to suggest a topic or guest? Contact us via email or visit our website. Follow us: @‌PublicHealthPod on Bluesky @‌JohnsHopkinsSPH on Instagram @‌JohnsHopkinsSPH on Facebook @‌PublicHealthOnCall on YouTube Here's our RSS feed Note: These podcasts are a conversation between the participants, and do not represent the position of Johns Hopkins University.

On May 20th, after years of negotiation, World Health Organization member states adopted the Pandemic Agreement — the first international treaty focused on pandemic prevention, preparedness, and response. Developed in response to the shortcomings revealed during the COVID-19 pandemic, the agreement emphasizes equitable access to vaccines, diagnostics, and treatments, and promotes international cooperation in disease surveillance and health system strengthening. But will this brand-new agreement live up to its potential? And what role might the United States' decision to remain on the sidelines — and not become a party to the agreement — play in how it is adopted and implemented? Joining me to discuss these questions and more is Alexandra Phelan, Associate Professor at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health and Senior Scholar at the Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security. We begin by examining how the deficiencies in the global response to COVID-19 revealed the need for such a treaty in the first place, before having a longer conversation about what the agreement actually obliges of its signatories — and what factors will determine whether or not it works as intended.   This episode is produced in partnership with Lex International Fund, a philanthropic fund dedicated to strengthening international law to solve global challenges. It is part of a series that demonstrates the impact of Treaties on state behavior that we are calling "when treaties work"

Do you pay attention to information printed on food labels? From eye-catching designs companies use to entice you to buy a product to nutrition facts panels to the tiny dates printed on packages. There's a lot going on to be sure. For policymakers, they hope that refining date labels on food packaging will help reduce the amount of uneaten food ending up in landfills. Food Waste is a major contributor to greenhouse gas emissions. The Food and Drug Administration and the Food Safety and Inspection Service recently asked for public input on food date labels. So, we decided to gather some experts together to talk about this important policy tool. Roni Neff is a professor in the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health and Senior Advisor at the School's Center for a Livable Future. Her research looks at the intersection of food waste policy, climate change, and food system resilience. Brian Roe is a professor at the Ohio State University Department of Agricultural, Environmental and Developmental Economics. His work focuses on issues including agricultural marketing, information policy, behavioral economics, and product quality. Ruiqing Miao is an associate professor of agricultural economics and rural sociology at Auburn University's College of Agriculture. His research emphasizes sustainability, innovation, and decision making. Interview Summary Brian, let's begin with you and let's make sure everyone's on the same page. Can you talk to us a little bit about what date labels are and where they are on packaging. And what is industry required to include in terms of these date labels? Yes, so date labels, we see them anytime we pick up a food package. Most packages are going to have some type of date label on them. Oddly, federal law doesn't regulate these or really require these other than the exception of infant formula, which is the only federal requirement domain out there. But in the absence of federal regulation, states have kind of done their own thing. About 40 different states require date labels on at least some food products. And about 20 states prohibit or restrict the sale or donation of food past the label date. And even though states that require date labels, manufacturers can still choose the dates. There are no real regulations on them. So, recognizing that confusion over date labels can lead to unnecessary food waste, Government and industry actors have made, you know, some efforts to try to standardize date labeling language. But nothing terribly authoritative. Now, some states have introduced bills that seek to standardize date labels, with the motivation to try to get rid of and reduce food waste. California being perhaps the most recent of these. In 2024, they passed a bill that prohibits the use of any date label other than 'Best if Used By,' the phrase that goes along with foods where the date represents kind of a quality indicator. And then the phrase 'Use By,", if that date has some implications for product safety. The bill doesn't go into effect until July of '26, so we're going to see if this is going to create a domino effect across other states, across the food manufacturing center or even bubble up and be dealt with at the federal legislation level. Now, industries tried to do things before. Back in 2017, the Food Marketing Institute and the Grocers Manufacturers Association had a standardized date labeling suggestion that some firms bought into. FDA has given out some guidance about preferring 'Best if Used By' on certain food products to indicate quality. But again, we're all kind of waiting to see if there might be a federal legislation that kind of brings these state labels into check. Thanks, Brian. And it's really important to know about the policy landscape and the fact that there hasn't been a federal policy across all foods. And it's interesting to see the efforts of, say, in California. I think this begs the question; how do consumers actually process the information of date labels? This fascinated us too. A very clever person at Ohio State that I work with, Dr. Aishwarya Badiger, led a study I was part of. We enlisted consumers to come into the Consumer Evaluation Lab that we have here on campus and evaluate samples of milk. They were presented with the label of each milk. We gave them a little glass with a nose full of the milk that they could sniff. So, they're looking at the date label, they're given the sample they could smell, and then we kind of asked them, Hey, if this were in your fridge, would you keep it or toss it? But the entire time we actually had them fitted with special glasses that precisely track their eye movements so we could understand kind of which information they were looking at while they went through the whole process of evaluating and then making their decision. Consumers overwhelmingly looked at the date itself on the package and largely ignored the phrase or the words that go along with the date. In fact, for more than half of the evaluations, the consumer's eyes never went anywhere near the phrase. This is important. And actually, we'll talk about that a little bit more with some of our other guests. So, what are the implications of date label policies? So the eye tracking research really drove home to me that dates are much more salient than phrases. Although all the policies largely deal with the phrases. Dates give you actionable information. People can look at the date on the label, look at the calendar, and man, that's something they can do something about. They can act based upon that. The phrases are a little bit more ambiguous as Roni will talk about later. I think that people have a hard time interpreting what those phrases really mean. That doesn't mean we should not try to unify those phrases, but rather this is going to be a longer-term investment in educational infrastructure that until those phrases really become salient and actionable to consumers. And then become more of a critical component of the policies. But right now, policies are generally silent on dates. And dates seem to be the real action mover. Yeah. So why don't we just get rid of all of this? What would be the implications? Yes. We did this experiment too. Same kind of setup. Had people come in, they had the jug of the milk in front of them. They had a glass of milk that they could sniff. Same thing. And we had a bunch of different milks. We had some that were only like 15 days post pasteurization. Some that went out to like 40 days past pasteurization. So, the youngest or the freshest had about three days, quote unquote, left on its date label. The 40-day old milk was like two or three weeks past the date. And we did two things. We had them evaluate the milk with the dates on the jugs, and then we had ones where we took the dates and the labels off the milk. Not surprisingly, when they did not have the dates on the milk, they were much more likely to say that they would keep the milk. Even that 40-day old milk, about half of them said, yeah, I'd drink this. I'd keep this if it were in my fridge. But it wasn't a slam dunk. So, our youngest and freshest milk had an odd flavor note. You know, sometimes as the seasons change, feed sources change for cattle, you get an odd flavor note. It's not spoilage, it's just a slightly different note. And when people have the date label, they were much more willing to give that milk a second chance and say that they would keep it. But if the date label wasn't on there, they took that odd flavor note and said, I'm going to toss this milk. So, it's really kind of a nuanced thing. And if you would take those off, I think you're going to get some consumers who are going to kind of freak out without any guidance. And they might have kind of an itchy trigger finger when it comes to throwing away that milk or other products. So, it's compelling. We've seen England, the UK, do this; take dates off of certain products. But I would probably want to see a little more example of how consumers are responding to that before I fully endorse that as kind of a policy movement forward. Brian, thank you for that. And I have got to say, I was not expecting to have a conversation about the bouquet of a glass of milk. But this is really an interesting finding, and it does help us understand some other things that we're going to talk about. Roni, I want to turn our attention to you. And I know you are someone who's been involved in understanding date labels for a while. And I really appreciate it and I've said it before, but you're the reason I got into this work. I want to understand a little bit more about what are important things to understand about the misconceptions that consumers may have about food date labels? And why does it matter for policymakers? Well, I'll start with just saying that conceptions are what we know rationally. And it's not the whole picture because as Brian was alluding to a lot of our decision making is going on in our emotions. And like I can tell my son all day long the fact that that milk is okay, he's going to toss it because he doesn't trust it. There's a lot more going on than conceptions. But I want to talk about two misconceptions. The first one is that despite what Brian just said about the fact that these date labels other than infant formula aren't federally regulated, about two in five people think that they are. We just did a national consumer survey in January 2025, and this is one of the findings. And I did that along with Emily Broad Lieb from the Harvard Food Law and Policy Project and Akif Khan also from there, and then Dana Gunders from ReFED. And in addition to this idea that they're federally regulated, I'll say that these kinds of beliefs were most common among those who were 18 to 34, parents with children under age 18, and black and Hispanic consumers. Our earlier work also found that those who think that food date labels are federally regulated are more likely to discard food based on them. All this speaks to a real challenge. And, you know, it kind of makes sense, like if you see something and you trust it, that it's from the federal government. And of course, we all trust the federal government these days. If you trust it, then you're going to respond to it. So that's an implication for food policy. And then the next thing we did also is that we tested understanding of five different food date label phrases: a date with no text, and then two of those phrases accompanied by icon images. And since none of these actually have a federally recognized meaning the correct answer for all of them in terms of the meaning is like other. But we also accepted answers that were aligned with that voluntary industry standard, just to kind of see how people were perceiving it. And, across all of these labels, only an average of 53% of people answered correctly about what these labels meant. Now, consumers were pretty good at identifying 'Best if Used By' as a quality label. But the real challenge comes in with 'Use By' which under the voluntary industry standards should be a safety label. And more people thought it was a quality label than thought it was a safety label; 44% versus 49%. And so, we need to clear up these misconceptions in support of food safety, in support of food waste prevention. But in order to do that, we need to be able to tell people clearly what the labels mean. And we can't really do that if there's no standardized meaning of what they mean. So, we really need a national standard, and that is the policy implication. Thank you for that. And I know Ruiqing and I have done some work in this space and in part learning from what you all have done. I'm interested because you mentioned the 2025 survey, but of course you also mentioned the 2016 survey. Are there any big shifts or anything that you want to tell us about changes that you see from those two different surveys? We asked a number of the same or almost identical questions in those two surveys. And since that time, we've adopted a voluntary industry standard and there's been a lot of education and communication about wasted food. And yet in our survey we actually found that things were going in the wrong direction. Consumer misunderstandings of date labels increased. Those who quote always or usually discard food based on the label: in 2016, that was 37%, and this year it was 43%. And then in terms of belief that these are federally regulated: in 2016 it was 36% and now it's 44%. We're going in the wrong direction despite all these activities, and I don't know why. I think for those who are looking for future research questions, this would be a really interesting one. This is really disturbing because all of the information that's come out about date labels. I thought people would understand this. And that this is where we would be in a different place. So, this work is really important. So, how did people's response to date labels vary by food item? Did you see any differences? Because this is something that comes up often that people may be more responsive to some food products versus others? Yeah, indeed. We asked about five different foods, and we showed a bunch of different labels for each food. And the responses did vary both based on the item and based on what label was on it. And I'll start with where caution is needed. Deli meats are one example of where we really want people to pay attention to that label. And while there's no federal standard that label's the best piece of information people has, so they should use it. And we found that only 65% would throw out the deli meat before, on, or just after the 'Use By' label. And the number of people that would respond to it reduced with other labels that were used, and older adults were most likely to disregard those labels. And they may be particularly vulnerable in terms of foodborne illness. So that's when lack of caution leads to risk. On the other hand, when caution leads to waste, we looked at raw chicken, pasteurized milk, lettuce, and breakfast cereal. And for all of those there, like the label is really only telling you about quality, and consumers should use their senses to decide, and knowledge of how that was, stored to decide whether to eat it. And so, the most common out of all five foods, including the deli, the one that they responded the strongest to was raw chicken. And that chicken can be contaminated as we know, but if you cook it, you're killing those bacteria, so it's okay. And averaging across all those different date labels, we found 54% would discard these four foods based on the date. And the piece that was most striking to me was that for breakfast cereal, 43% said they were discarded based on the date. So, we've got some education to do. Yeah. In the earlier paper I did with colleagues at Cornell, we used breakfast cereal and we were surprised to see how much people willing to throw away breakfast cereal if it were passed to date. There is confirmation and we see this happen in many other products. And we'll definitely talk about some of those product differences with Ruiqing. The last question I'd like to ask you is you found that many consumers thought they knew the meanings of the various food date labels, but they were incorrect. And in some of the work that you've done in the past, you found that many people answered incorrectly even after viewing information about the labels. So even when you educated folks or gave people information, they still made incorrect choices. Why do you think this is, and what should we do about it? And some people's responses do improve when you show them the information, but it was striking in that study that seconds after having read the definition, according to the voluntary industry standard, people were giving the wrong answer. Even though they had previously said that they thought they understood it. So, to me, this suggests that they already think they know the answer and so they're not tuning in. And this speaks to a real challenge that we're going to have when we do standardize these date labels. How are we going to reach people and capture their attention. Like, if we just change the policy, that does nothing. We've got to reach people and we've got to do it in a sophisticated and well-planned way. And I think the education should also emphasize that misunderstandings are common because that might be something that would help wake people up. But beyond that, we've got to capture their attention. So, you know, dancing clowns, whatever it is that wakes people up. I have a fear of clowns, so I'm not sure if I want that as a policy recommendation. However... For the deli meats we want you to be afraid, so it's okay. Yes, I agree. I agree. One of the things that this conversation has helped us see is that there's some real concerns around whether or not people are paying attention to the label. Or there may be paying more attention to the dates. And even when people are taught or encouraged to think about the dates, there seems to be a mismatch. And Ruiqing, I want to now turn to you because one of the things in the study that we were a part of, there's some questions about differences among people. So, in the paper that we recently published on the relationship between date labels and anticipated food waste, and people's individual orientation to risk and loss, can you tell us a little bit about what some of the key findings of that paper are? Right. So, the paper is published recently in Applied Economics Perspective Policy. It's one of the official journals of Agricultural and Applied Economics Association (AAEA). Norbert is the leading author. So, this paper built on the framework of prospect theory and is based on the data from a series of experiments we conducted in Alabama and also the state of New York. We find that consumers do adjust their anticipated food waste by date labels and by how much they tolerate risk and losses. In the experiment, we particularly measured their tolerance to risk and losses. We found that the 'Use By' date labels tend to lead to more anticipated food waste than 'Best Buy'. Maybe this echo what Roni has said. So, people may tend to link 'Use By' with quality and food safety. We also found that the consumers with low tolerance to losses and are associated with higher anticipated foot waste regardless of date labels and the products. So, we can see a heterogeneity of the responses of different consumers to date labels and food items based on their tolerance to losses and risks. Thank you for that. And I think this is a really important aspect of looking at this set of studies because we see that people are different. They respond differently. And they have different ideas about how they handle losses. This idea that it can be worse to lose a hundred dollars versus to gain a hundred dollars. Or the way we understand how we'll negatively respond versus how positively we respond. Using this economic framework of prospect theory, something that is drawn from actually the psychology literature to better understand how people react to food labels while shopping. What are some key features of this approach to explaining people's behaviors and why do you think it's a good choice? Why do you think it's important to do this? One of the key features of prospect theory is it divides the possible outcomes of a risky event into two domains. One is a gain domain and one is a loss domain. So, in terms of the food consumption, probably the most likely status quo is do not eat the food items. So, the gain domain might be gaining nutrition from the food item. The loss domain might be the loss of health if the food item is bad. So, I think this framework fits particularly well to describe the consumer's trade off in their mind when they face a food item with a date label that is maybe one day or two days past the expiration date. So, one possibility is you consume this food. If it is good, you get nutrition and if it is bad, you potentially get lost health or lose one day of work or so on. So, I think this model can capture the trade off or the decision-making procedure in a consumer's mind pretty well. And experiments data support the theoretical prediction that loss aversion may affect people's food waste decisions. Thank you for that. And I think what's one of the sort of take home messages that I've learned out of this process is this heterogeneity, the fact that people are different and may respond differently to these date labels, really does put the onus upon policymakers to think critically what date labels, if we were to use them, or if we think they have an effect, which are the right ones. And so I actually want to open up the question to all of you. In your view, what next steps make sense for date labels to help address the food waste challenges that we see in this country? Let's start with you, Brian. Ooh, yeah. So, to me a compelling issue that needs to be addressed is how do we get 'Use By' to really translate to be people to be about safety? Is it a different color? I know we don't want to mess with the phrases, but do we just call this safety date and put it in red or put a clown by it if that scares you. Something along those lines to make that stand out. And then on the relevance side, I think it might be out of policy, but perhaps, industry collaboration to really push printed dates to the end of that quality horizon. So that everybody has confidence that they're not going to get undercut by somebody else having an earlier date printed for cereals or for canned goods or something like that. To have a kind of a truce among commercial interests to say, okay, typically canned beans, has this type of 180 days or 360 days. Let's push it to the end of that acceptable horizon so that we don't have unwarranted waste happening as often. Those are two ideas that I've kind of chewed on a lot and think could be positive steps forward. But I'm fascinated to hear what others think. Thank you, Brian and I really don't like the idea of putting clowns anywhere near this. I want to go to you, Roni. All right, well first, I'll a thousand percent echo everything that Brian just said. And I'll note also in terms of the 'Use By' date, the label that was most commonly associated with food safety was 'Expires On' by consumers. But that isn't part of what has been under [policy] discussion. But anyway, in addition to echoing that, I'll just say we do need a standardized policy and it has to be accompanied by a well-designed education campaign. And this policy change, it's just a no-brainer. It's not controversial. It's fairly minimal cost. And given the high food prices and the struggles that consumers are having right now, they need every tool that they can to save money and food, and this is one of them. Great. Thank you, Roni. I'll give the last word to you, Ruiqing. Yeah. I will echo what Brian and Roni said. So, a well-designed policy and public education campaign. Particularly for the education campaign. I think regardless of if there is a policy change or not, I think it is time to do a public education campaign. Norbert, we have done the research on food waste for almost nine years, right? So, I learned a little bit about the date label's meaning. But still, I cannot change my wife's opinion. When she sees sell by yesterday for the milk, she would suggest we throw it away. But I said this is not for us, this is for sellers. But she wouldn't believe so because I cannot persuade her. But maybe an education campaign from more authoritative institutional federal government can change people's mind as a researcher or like even husband cannot change. Roni - And can I just add to that, just please. I think that the economics and psychology expertise that all of you have can really contribute to that. Because I think that's a really important point that you're making. And it's not just factual, it's emotional too. And so how do we, you know, get in there and change what people do beyond their knowledge? Bios Roni Neff is a Professor at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health's Department of Environmental Health & Engineering and the Johns Hopkins Center for a Livable Future, an academic center focused on food systems and public health. Her research focuses on wasted food through the lens of equity and public health. She is a co-Director of the RECIPES national food waste research network, and she recently served on the National Academies of Science and Medicine consensus panel on consumer food waste. Brian Roe is the Van Buren Professor in the Department of Agricultural, Environmental and Development Economics at Ohio State University. Roe has worked broadly in the areas of agricultural and environmental economics focusing on issues including agricultural marketing, information policy, behavioral economics and product quality. He was recently named as a fellow of the Agricultural and Applied Economics Association and has previously served as an editor for the Association's flagship journal, the American Journal of Agricultural Economics. He currently leads the Ohio State Food Waste Collaborative, a collection of researchers, practitioners, and students working together to promote the reduction and redirection of food waste as an integral part of a healthy and sustainable food system, and co-leads the RECIPES Network, a National Science Foundation Sustainable Regional System's Research Network focused on increasing food system sustainability, resilience and equity by addressing the issue of food waste.  In addition to research on food waste, his other recent research includes a USDA funded project focused on local foods and school lunch programs and participation in an NSF-funded multidisciplinary team seeking to understand human-ecosystem feedbacks in the Western Lake Erie basin, including understanding how farms and agribusinesses respond to voluntary environmental programs and how Ohio residents respond to different options to manage Lake Erie water quality. Ruiqing Miao is an agricultural economist at Auburn University. Miao is interested in sustainability, innovation, and decision-making. His research focuses on the interaction between agricultural production and its environment, aiming to understand and quantify 1) agriculture's impact on land use, water use, water quality, and biodiversity, and 2) how agricultural production is affected by farmers' behaviors, public policies, agricultural innovation, technology adoption, and climate change.

Are you curious about the true scope and scale of nonprofit employment in America? Ever wonder how nonprofit jobs weathered the pandemic compared to for-profit jobs? In this episode, host Rusty Stahl speaks with Dr. Alan J. Abramson and Chelsea Newhouse, both of George Mason University, about the numbers behind the nonprofit workforce, and their implications for funders, policymakers, and nonprofit leaders.The conversation reveals crucial facts about nonprofit employment based on George Mason's latest report. Abramson and Newhouse discuss how nonprofits lost 580,000 workers during the early pandemic but weathered the initial downturn better than for-profits. They explore common misconceptions about nonprofit funding and highlight how the sector has struggled to fully restore its workforce.Our guests introduce their Nonprofit Works, a free, user-friendly tool that provides high-level data about how many Americans earn a living through nonprofit work, and how much money nonprofits add to the economy in annual wages. The database allows users to segment this data by sub-sector and geography, and compare it to business and government jobs. The numbers are drawn from federal Department of Labor data, but the nonprofit employment data are published extremely infrequently, and only with help from scholars at a private, nonprofit university. Alan and Chelsea argue that better, more frequent releases of nonprofit workforce data – including relevant data collected by other federal agencies – would help nonprofit workers gain the visibility and support they deserve in public policy, the media, academic research, and among private funders.You can find all the episodes of this podcast plus our blog, toolkit and other resources at ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠fundthepeople.org⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠. Bios:Alan J. Abramson is director of the Center on Nonprofits, Philanthropy, and Social Enterprise, in the Schar School of Policy and Government at George Mason University. He teaches and conducts research on the nonprofit sector and philanthropy, and has worked to save and sustain work done at Johns Hopkins University by his late colleague, Dr. Lester Solomon. For more than a decade, Dr. Abramson directed the Aspen Institute's Nonprofit Sector and Philanthropy Program. Before that he worked at the Urban Institute. Alan is the author and coauthor of numerous books and articles, and is involved with multiple academic associations related to the nonprofit sector. Dr. Abramson received his PhD in political science from Yale University.Chelsea Newhouse is a consultant on the George Mason University' Nonprofit Employment Data Project and Senior Program Manager at East-West Management Institute. Prior to joining the East-West Management Institute in 2022, Chelsea was at the the Johns Hopkins Center for Civil Society Studies, where she worked closely with late Center Director Lester Salamon on the Nonprofit Economic Data Project and the Nonprofit Works Interactive Database, the Comparative Nonprofit Sector Project, and a variety of other research projects focused on the nonprofit, philanthropic, and volunteer sector. Following Dr. Salamon's passing, she helped transfer the Nonprofit Employment Data Project to George Mason University. Chelsea has also served as a consultant with Maryland Nonprofits and the New York Council of Nonprofits.Resources:GMU Center on Nonprofits, Philanthropy, and Social EnterpriseGMU Nonprofit Employment Project websiteGMU Nonprofit Works websiteDirect link to the 2024 Nonprofit Employment ReportA link to the UN TSE Sector Handbook project, which provides guidance and background on the nonprofit satellite accountJHU Center for Civil Society StudiesStanding Up for Nonprofits, a 2024 book on nonprofit advocacy that Ben Soskis and Alan Abramson wrote. It's available for free online from Cambridge University Press

About this episode: While cigarette use has radically declined in the U.S., many still die from smoking here and around the world. World No Tobacco Day—celebrated annually on May 31 since the 1980s—has helped expose tobacco industry tactics and highlight progress in global tobacco control. This year, a look at how manufacturers are increasing efforts to hook younger users on new products like e-cigs with fun packaging, new flavors, fashionable designs, and gimmicks including video games and social media integration. Guests: Kevin Welding is an economist studying corporate influence on public health at the Institute for Global Tobacco Control. Tuo-Yen Tseng is a health policy researcher who studies social and behavioral change at the Institute for Global Tobacco Control. Host: Stephanie Desmon, MA, is a former journalist, author, and the director of public relations and communications for the Johns Hopkins Center for Communication Programs at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health. Show links and related content: World No Tobacco Day 2025 Evidence and Resources—Institute for Global Tobacco Control 25 Years of Fighting Tobacco—Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health Quit Smoking—American Lung Association The Inside Story of the 1964 Surgeon General's Report That Changed How Americans Viewed Smoking—Public Health On Call (July 2024) An Update on Efforts to Prevent Tobacco-Caused Death and Disease—Public Health On Call (February 2024) Transcript information: Looking for episode transcripts? Open our podcast on the Apple Podcasts app (desktop or mobile) or the Spotify mobile app to access an auto-generated transcript of any episode. Closed captioning is also available for every episode on our YouTube channel. Contact us: Have a question about something you heard? Looking for a transcript? Want to suggest a topic or guest? Contact us via email or visit our website. Follow us: @‌PublicHealthPod on Bluesky @‌JohnsHopkinsSPH on Instagram @‌JohnsHopkinsSPH on Facebook @‌PublicHealthOnCall on YouTube Here's our RSS feed Note: These podcasts are a conversation between the participants, and do not represent the position of Johns Hopkins University.

About this episode: This week, President Trump signed an Executive Order aimed at lowering prescription drug costs. In this episode: a look at why the U.S. spends three to four times more for drugs than many peer countries, its current approach to drug pricing policy, the directives laid out in the Executive Order, and how other countries negotiate their prices. Note: These podcasts are a conversation between the participants, and do not represent the position of Johns Hopkins University. Guest: Dr. Gerard Anderson is an expert in health policy and a professor in Health Policy and Management and International Health at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health. Host: Stephanie Desmon, MA, is a former journalist, author, and the director of public relations and communications for the Johns Hopkins Center for Communication Programs at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health. Show links and related content: Delivering Most-Favored Nation Prescription Drug Pricing to American Patients—Executive Order, The White House The Potential Impacts of Cuts to Medicaid—Public Health On Call (March 2025) What's Next For Prescription Drug Pricing?—Public Health On Call (February 2023) Transcript information: Looking for episode transcripts? Open our podcast on the Apple Podcasts app (desktop or mobile) or the Spotify mobile app to access an auto-generated transcript of any episode. Closed captioning is also available for every episode on our YouTube channel. Contact us: Have a question about something you heard? Looking for a transcript? Want to suggest a topic or guest? Contact us via email or visit our website. Follow us: @‌PublicHealthPod on Bluesky @‌JohnsHopkinsSPH on Instagram @‌JohnsHopkinsSPH on Facebook @‌PublicHealthOnCall on YouTube Here's our RSS feed

About this episode: In 2003, George W. Bush's President's Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR) was the largest commitment to a single disease in U.S. history. Renewed under every subsequent presidency since, PEPFAR has saved more than 25 million lives and prevented some 5 million perinatal infections globally. But now, policy changes that effectively end PEPFAR have the potential to completely reverse course and the world could see HIV/AIDS infections on par with a time even before effective antivirals existed. In this episode: Dr. Chris Beyrer talks about his recent Lancet essay, “On Going Backwards,” why any retreat now will make it harder to regain lost ground, and how this policy change has the potential to impact millions of lives. Guest: Dr. Chris Beyrer is the past president of the International AIDS Society and an expert in global health and human rights. Host: Stephanie Desmon, MA, is a former journalist, author, and the director of public relations and communications for the Johns Hopkins Center for Communication Programs at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health. Show links and related content: On Going Backwards—The Lancet (Perspectives) By executive order: The likely deadly consequences associated with a 90-day pause in PEPFAR funding—Journal of the International AIDS Society Transcript information: Looking for episode transcripts? Open our podcast on the Apple Podcasts app (desktop or mobile) or the Spotify mobile app to access an auto-generated transcript of any episode. Closed captioning is also available for every episode on our YouTube channel. Contact us: Have a question about something you heard? Looking for a transcript? Want to suggest a topic or guest? Contact us via email or visit our website. Follow us: @‌PublicHealthPod on Bluesky @‌JohnsHopkinsSPH on Instagram @‌JohnsHopkinsSPH on Facebook @‌PublicHealthOnCall on YouTube Here's our RSS feed Note: These podcasts are a conversation between the participants, and do not represent the position of Johns Hopkins University.

About this episode: In the early 2000s, babies in Baltimore were dying at an alarming rate. In this episode: a look at Baltimore's enormously successful health program to reduce infant mortality and close unacceptable disparities in infant death and how it has developed into a program that offers support and resources for individuals and families across the lifespan. Guests: Dr. Josh Sharfstein is the vice dean for public health practice and community engagement at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health and a former Baltimore City Health Commissioner. Rebecca Dineen is the assistant commissioner for Maternal and Child Health at the Baltimore City Health Department. Stacey Stephens is the director and clinical instructor of B'More For Healthy Babies at Promise Heights. Host: Stephanie Desmon, MA, is a former journalist, author, and the director of public relations and communications for the Johns Hopkins Center for Communication Programs at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health. Show links and related content: B'More For Healthy Babies B'More for Healthy Babies Turns 15—Johns Hopkins Center for Communication Programs The Public Health Strategy Behind Baltimore's Record-Low Infant Mortality Rate—Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health Baltimore City Youth Data Scorecard: Babies Born Healthy Indicator Details—Baltimore's Promise Babies kept dying in Baltimore. People worked together to understand why.—Maryland Matters Transcript information: Looking for episode transcripts? Open our podcast on the Apple Podcasts app (desktop or mobile) or the Spotify mobile app to access an auto-generated transcript of any episode. Closed captioning is also available for every episode on our YouTube channel. Contact us: Have a question about something you heard? Looking for a transcript? Want to suggest a topic or guest? Contact us via email or visit our website. Follow us: @‌PublicHealthPod on Bluesky @‌JohnsHopkinsSPH on Instagram @‌JohnsHopkinsSPH on Facebook @‌PublicHealthOnCall on YouTube Here's our RSS feed Note: These podcasts are a conversation between the participants, and do not represent the position of Johns Hopkins University.

About this episode: The National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) is an agency within the Department of Health and Human Services with a mission to protect the nation's workforce from occupational hazards and illnesses. Their work includes setting policy and best practices around safety standards for things like exposure to toxic chemicals, firearms in the workplace, and even protecting workers' data. NIOSH is among the many Centers that suffered personnel and funding cuts under HHS's recent restructuring. In this episode: a look at NIOSH's work and how the cuts may impact worker safety—particularly at a time when there is great interest in leveling up the manufacturing industry in the U.S. Guest: Ram Ramachandran is the director of the Johns Hopkins Education and Research Center for Occupational Safety and Health. Cass Crifasi is the director of Occupational Injury Epidemiology and Prevention Program at the Johns Hopkins Education and Research Center for Occupational Safety and Health. Host: Stephanie Desmon, MA, is a former journalist, author, and the director of public relations and communications for the Johns Hopkins Center for Communication Programs, the largest center at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health. Show links and related content: American workers deserve better than to lose their safety watchdogs—The Hill (Opinion) The CDC's critical occupational safety institute has been virtually wiped out—STAT Transcript information: Looking for episode transcripts? Open our podcast on the Apple Podcasts app (desktop or mobile) or the Spotify mobile app to access an auto-generated transcript of any episode. Closed captioning is also available for every episode on our YouTube channel. Contact us: Have a question about something you heard? Looking for a transcript? Want to suggest a topic or guest? Contact us via email or visit our website. Follow us: @‌PublicHealthPod on Bluesky @‌JohnsHopkinsSPH on Instagram @‌JohnsHopkinsSPH on Facebook @‌PublicHealthOnCall on YouTube Here's our RSS feed Note: These podcasts are a conversation between the participants, and do not represent the position of Johns Hopkins University.

About this episode: May is Lyme and Tickborne Diseases Awareness Month. In this episode: Dr. Nicole Baumgarth talks all things ticks including how climate change is increasing their territory, the diseases they spread such as Lyme and Heartland virus, disease prevention, and the latest on vaccines and treatments. Guest: Dr. Nicole Baumgarth is the director of the Johns Hopkins Lyme and Tickborne Diseases Research and Education Institute. Host: Stephanie Desmon, MA, is a former journalist, author, and the director of public relations and communications for the Johns Hopkins Center for Communication Programs, the largest center at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health. Show links and related content: Lyme Disease: Diagnosis, Prevention, and How Long COVID is Helping to Advance Awareness and Research for Chronic Lyme—Public Health On Call (June 2022) Tick Talk—Hopkins Bloomberg Public Health Magazine (2022) Healthy Ecosystems, Healthy Humans—Hopkins Bloomberg Public Health Magazine (2024) Transcript information: Looking for episode transcripts? Open our podcast on the Apple Podcasts app (desktop or mobile) or the Spotify mobile app to access an auto-generated transcript of any episode. Closed captioning is also available for every episode on our YouTube channel. Contact us: Have a question about something you heard? Looking for a transcript? Want to suggest a topic or guest? Contact us via email or visit our website. Follow us: @‌PublicHealthPod on Bluesky @‌JohnsHopkinsSPH on Instagram @‌JohnsHopkinsSPH on Facebook @‌PublicHealthOnCall on YouTube Here's our RSS feed Note: These podcasts are a conversation between the participants, and do not represent the position of Johns Hopkins University.

About this episode: Since 2021, countries have been drafting a treaty to help the world better prevent and respond to pandemics. On April 16, the WHO announced an agreement for the world's first pandemic treaty. In this episode: a look at what it took to get here, what provisions were included and excluded, and what it means that the U.S. was not at the table for negotiations and will not be a signer. Guest: Alexandra Phelan is an expert in global health law and an associate professor and senior scholar at the Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security. Host: Lindsay Smith Rogers, MA, is the producer of the Public Health On Call podcast, an editor for Expert Insights, and the director of content strategy for the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health. Show links and related content: Why We Desperately Need—and Still Don't Have—A Global Pandemic Treaty—Public Health On Call (June 2024) Center for Health Security Urges the Inclusion of Pathogen Access and Benefit Sharing (PABS) in Pandemic Agreement—The Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security Countries Agree on Treaty Aimed at Preventing Global Health Crises—The New York Times Global pandemic treaty finalized, without U.S., in ‘a victory for multilateralism'—http://Science.org Transcript information: Looking for episode transcripts? Open our podcast on the Apple Podcasts app (desktop or mobile) or the Spotify mobile app to access an auto-generated transcript of any episode. Closed captioning is also available for every episode on our YouTube channel. Contact us: Have a question about something you heard? Looking for a transcript? Want to suggest a topic or guest? Contact us via email or visit our website. Follow us: @‌PublicHealthPod on Bluesky @‌JohnsHopkinsSPH on Instagram @‌JohnsHopkinsSPH on Facebook @‌PublicHealthOnCall on YouTube Here's our RSS feed Note: These podcasts are a conversation between the participants, and do not represent the position of Johns Hopkins University.

About this episode: News about HKU5, a new bat coronavirus with the ability to spread to humans, was met with concerns in the scientific community—mostly because of how the research was done. In this episode: Johns Hopkins virologist Andy Pekosz talks about the different levels of biosecurity in laboratories where scientists study some of the world's most dangerous viruses, how these standards vary worldwide, and what that could mean for studying future viruses with pandemic potential. Guest: Dr. Andy Pekosz is a virologist at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health with appointments in Molecular Microbiology and Immunology and Environmental Health and Engineering. Host: Stephanie Desmon, MA, is a former journalist, author, and the director of public relations and communications for the Johns Hopkins Center for Communication Programs, the largest center at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health. Show links and related content: Recent Virus Research Should Raise the Alarm—The New York Times (Opinion) Chinese researchers find bat virus enters human cells via same pathway as COVID—Reuters The virus hunters who search bat caves to predict the next pandemic—CNN Health (2020) Transcript information: Looking for episode transcripts? Open our podcast on the Apple Podcasts app (desktop or mobile) or the Spotify mobile app to access an auto-generated transcript of any episode. Closed captioning is also available for every episode on our YouTube channel. Contact us: Have a question about something you heard? Looking for a transcript? Want to suggest a topic or guest? Contact us via email or visit our website. Follow us: @‌PublicHealthPod on Bluesky @‌JohnsHopkinsSPH on Instagram @‌JohnsHopkinsSPH on Facebook @‌PublicHealthOnCall on YouTube Here's our RSS feed Note: These podcasts are a conversation between the participants, and do not represent the position of Johns Hopkins University.

About this episode: Innocent Grant is a family planning advocate from Tanzania. In this episode: How Grant's experiences approaching mis- and disinformation about sexual and reproductive health at home are now helping him to frame this work as the U.S. threatens to cut a portion of its global funding of family planning. He also discusses the threats to major progress in outcomes like maternal mortality and the economic empowerment of young families—and how advocates can find common ground rooted in evidence. Guest: Innocent Grant is a family planning advocate and an MSPH student at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health. Host: Stephanie Desmon, MA, is a former journalist, author, and the director of public relations and communications for the Johns Hopkins Center for Communication Programs, the largest center at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health. Show links and related content: The International Conference on Family Planning Young & Alive Initiative Medical eligibility criteria for contraceptive use—WHO Transcript information: Looking for episode transcripts? Open our podcast on the Apple Podcasts app (desktop or mobile) or the Spotify mobile app to access an auto-generated transcript of any episode. Closed captioning is also available for every episode on our YouTube channel. Contact us: Have a question about something you heard? Looking for a transcript? Want to suggest a topic or guest? Contact us via email or visit our website. Follow us: @‌PublicHealthPod on Bluesky @‌JohnsHopkinsSPH on Instagram @‌JohnsHopkinsSPH on Facebook @‌PublicHealthOnCall on YouTube Here's our RSS feed Note: These podcasts are a conversation between the participants, and do not represent the position of Johns Hopkins University.

About this episode: For 25 years, Gavi, the Vaccine Alliance has been a global effort to purchase and distribute lifesaving vaccines to the poorest of countries and help them build up their health systems. Now, it's the latest chop in a blitz of proposed federal funding cuts to global health. In this episode: an overview of Gavi's innovative model that buys vaccines for 50% of the world's children and has prevented around 19 million deaths, and the catastrophic potential if the U.S. withdraws its financial support. Guest: Dr. Seth Berkley is the former CEO of Gavi, the Vaccine Alliance. He is a senior advisor to the Pandemic Center and an adjunct professor of the practice in epidemiology at the Brown University School of Public Health. His new book, Fair Doses, will be released next fall. Host: Stephanie Desmon, MA, is a former journalist, author, and the director of public relations and communications for the Johns Hopkins Center for Communication Programs, the largest center at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health. Show links and related content: Gavi, the Vaccine Alliance, has its billion dollar grant cut by Trump administration—NPR Goats and Soda US decision to end support for Gavi puts millions of children's lives at risk—Medecins Sans Frontieres Transcript information: Looking for episode transcripts? Open our podcast on the Apple Podcasts app (desktop or mobile) or the Spotify mobile app to access an auto-generated transcript of any episode. Closed captioning is also available for every episode on our YouTube channel. Contact us: Have a question about something you heard? Looking for a transcript? Want to suggest a topic or guest? Contact us via email or visit our website. Follow us: @‌PublicHealthPod on Bluesky @‌JohnsHopkinsSPH on Instagram @‌JohnsHopkinsSPH on Facebook @‌PublicHealthOnCall on YouTube Here's our RSS feed Note: These podcasts are a conversation between the participants, and do not represent the position of Johns Hopkins University.

About this episode: Amidst an ongoing outbreak of a deadly clade of mpox in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, the Johns Hopkins Center for Communication Programs has been part of the response team. Working with local partners, CCP has developed community outreach and strategic communications campaigns to help protect people, reduce transmission, and get the outbreak under control. When USAID funding was abruptly canceled, the program was granted a waiver to continue work. But now, as the waiver faces expiration, the program's future is uncertain which could put the DRC, Africa, and even the world at risk of an mpox epidemic. Guests: Dr. Didier Mbayi Kangudie is the Chief of Party for the Johns Hopkins Center for Communication Programs in the Democratic Republic of the Congo. He spent 11 years with USAID as a senior health advisor and has more than 25 years of experience blending clinical work, public health and global health programming. Shannon McAfee is team lead for Johns Hopkins Center for Communication Programs country programs in the Democratic Republic of Congo and Guinea, which include projects focused on integrated health, the GHSA portfolio, education, Ebola, and the COVID-19 response. She has 25 years of experience designing, leading and implementing health and development projects across 16 countries in Africa, Asia and the Caribbean. Host: Stephanie Desmon, MA, is a former journalist, author, and the director of public relations and communications for the Johns Hopkins Center for Communication Programs, the largest center at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health. Show links and related content: CCP Resumes Mpox Oubreak Prevention Work in the Democratic Republic of Congo—Johns Hopkins Center for Communication Programs African Governments Falling Short on Healthcare Funding: Slow Progress 23 Years After Landmark Abuja Declaration—Human Rights Watch Why The Mpox Crisis Spreading Across Africa is a Global Concern—Public Health On Call (August 2024) Transcript information: Looking for episode transcripts? Open our podcast on the Apple Podcasts app (desktop or mobile) or the Spotify mobile app to access an auto-generated transcript of any episode. Closed captioning is also available for every episode on our YouTube channel. Contact us: Have a question about something you heard? Looking for a transcript? Want to suggest a topic or guest? Contact us via email or visit our website. Follow us: @‌PublicHealthPod on Bluesky @‌JohnsHopkinsSPH on Instagram @‌JohnsHopkinsSPH on Facebook @‌PublicHealthOnCall on YouTube Here's our RSS feed Note: These podcasts are a conversation between the participants, and do not represent the position of Johns Hopkins University.

About this episode: Medicaid helps make health care accessible to millions of adults and children in the U.S. In this episode: a look at the potential impacts of federal budget cuts on states, hospitals, physicians, and the beneficiaries themselves. Guests: Dr. Gerard Anderson is an expert in health policy and a professor in Health Policy and Management and International Health at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health.   Dr. Jennifer Wolff is an expert in policy relating to the care of persons with complex health needs and disabilities, the Eugene and Mildred Lipitz Professor in Health Policy and Management, and director of the Roger and Flo Lipitz Center to Advance Policy in Aging and Disability. Host: Stephanie Desmon, MA, is a former journalist, author, and the director of public relations and communications for the Johns Hopkins Center for Communication Programs, the largest center at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health. Show links and related content: 2024 Election Series: What's At Stake For Health Insurance, Medicare/Medicaid, and Drug Pricing—Public Health On Call (September 2024) Ex-GOP lawmaker: Medicaid cuts politically risky—Politico Transcript information: Looking for episode transcripts? Open our podcast on the Apple Podcasts app (desktop or mobile) or the Spotify mobile app to access an auto-generated transcript of any episode. Closed captioning is also available for every episode on our YouTube channel. Contact us: Have a question about something you heard? Looking for a transcript? Want to suggest a topic or guest? Contact us via email or visit our website. Follow us: @‌PublicHealthPod on Bluesky @‌JohnsHopkinsSPH on Instagram @‌JohnsHopkinsSPH on Facebook @‌PublicHealthOnCall on YouTube Here's our RSS feed Note: These podcasts are a conversation between the participants, and do not represent the position of Johns Hopkins University.

About this episode: According to the WHO, there are an estimated 300,000 drowning deaths worldwide each year and a quarter of them are children under 5. But because the risk factors are so diverse—from backyard swimming pools to monsoons to the fishing industry—preventing drowning deaths requires viewing the problem through a public health lens and investing in a multitude of approaches, many of which turn out to be beneficial to communities beyond basic water safety. Guest: Caroline Lukaszyk is a technical officer for injury prevention at the World Health Organization. Host: Stephanie Desmon, MA, is a former journalist, author, and the director of public relations and communications for the Johns Hopkins Center for Communication Programs, the largest center at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health. Show links and related content: Troubled Waters: Are day care centers a solution to preventing child drowning deaths in Bangladesh?—Hopkins Bloomberg Public Health Preventing Drowning In Bangladesh (video)—Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health Transcript information: Looking for episode transcripts? Open our podcast on the Apple Podcasts app (desktop or mobile) or the Spotify mobile app to access an auto-generated transcript of any episode. Closed captioning is also available for every episode on our YouTube channel. Contact us: Have a question about something you heard? Looking for a transcript? Want to suggest a topic or guest? Contact us via email or visit our website. Follow us: @‌PublicHealthPod on Bluesky @‌JohnsHopkinsSPH on Instagram @‌JohnsHopkinsSPH on Facebook @‌PublicHealthOnCall on YouTube Here's our RSS feed Note: These podcasts are a conversation between the participants, and do not represent the position of Johns Hopkins University.

Hosts Kelly Roskam, Tim Carey and Kari Still explore how courts are grappling with minimum age firearm regulations in the wake of New York State Rifle & Pistol Association, Inc. v. Bruen. Alex McCourt, JD, PhD, MPH core faculty member at the Johns Hopkins Center for Gun Violence Solutions, joins the show to share public health research on firearm risks among young adults.  Special guest Professor Megan Walsh, JD, a visiting assistant clinical Professor of Law and the Director of the Gun Violence Prevention Law Clinic at the University of Minnesota Law School unpacks the shifting legal landscape in federal courts.    ###  0:00 - Introduction and legal background 4:25 - Alex McCourt discusses the public health evidence behind age-based firearms laws 15:30 - Professor Megan Walsh, JD, shares the shifting legal landscape in federal courts 43:53 - Uncertainty around the law and what comes next

About this episode: For some people with a high risk of ovarian cancer, a standard approach has been full removal of the reproductive organs. But new research points to a far less invasive procedure called a salpingectomy, or removal of the fallopian tubes, as a potential “game changer” in ovarian cancer. In this episode: understanding high grade serous carcinoma—the most common type of ovarian cancer—the lack of screening tools, and why fallopian tube removal isn't yet available to more people. Guest: Dr. Rebecca Stone is an OBGYN, a professor in the Johns Hopkins Medicine Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, and the director of The Kelly Gynecologic Oncology Service. Host: Stephanie Desmon, MA, is a former journalist, author, and the director of public relations and communications for the Johns Hopkins Center for Communication Programs, the largest center at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health. Show links and related content: A Game-Changer for Ovarian Cancer—Johns Hopkins Medicine Salpingectomy for ectopic pregnancy reduces ovarian cancer risk—JNCI Cancer Spectrum Salpingectomy for the Primary Prevention of Ovarian Cancer: A Systematic Review—NIH Transcript information: Looking for episode transcripts? Open our podcast on the Apple Podcasts app (desktop or mobile) or the Spotify mobile app to access an auto-generated transcript of any episode. Closed captioning is also available for every episode on our YouTube channel. Contact us: Have a question about something you heard? Looking for a transcript? Want to suggest a topic or guest? Contact us via email or visit our website. Follow us: @‌PublicHealthPod on Bluesky @‌JohnsHopkinsSPH on Instagram @‌JohnsHopkinsSPH on Facebook @‌PublicHealthOnCall on YouTube Here's our RSS feed

About this episode: A large-scale, multi-country autism study involving more than 175,000 individuals is hoping to find interplay between genes and the environment that may influence autism diagnosis and symptoms. But proposed NIH funding cuts could imperil the study's future. In this episode: A look at an NIH-funded study that hopes to improve the quality of life for people with autism and their caregivers, and find better tools for diagnosis and treatment. Guests: Christina Ladd-Acosta is the vice director at the Wendy Klag Center for Autism and Developmental Disabilities, and associate director for epigenomic analysis at the Environmental influences on Child Health Outcomes, Data Analysis Center (ECHO-DAC). Heather Volk is an epidemiologist and professor of mental health at the Wendy Klag Center for Autism and Developmental Disabilities. Host: Stephanie Desmon, MA, is a former journalist, author, and the director of public relations and communications for the Johns Hopkins Center for Communication Programs, the largest center at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health. Show links and related content: NIH funding makes large scale Johns Hopkins autism study possible—The Hub Discovering How Environment Affects Autism—Hopkins Bloomberg Public Health Magazine Contact us: Have a question about something you heard? Looking for a transcript? Want to suggest a topic or guest? Contact us via email or visit our website. Follow us: @‌PublicHealthPod on Bluesky @‌JohnsHopkinsSPH on Instagram @‌JohnsHopkinsSPH on Facebook @‌PublicHealthOnCall on YouTube Here's our RSS feed Note: These podcasts are a conversation between the participants, and do not represent the position of Johns Hopkins University.

About this episode: Research shows that seed oils, like sunflower and sesame, can contribute to better health. So why are wellness influencers talking about a group called “the hateful eight,” which include non-seed oils like soybean and canola? In this episode: a breakdown of what seed oils are (and aren't), misconceptions around inflammation and omega 6's, and how processed foods play into the conversation. Note: This episode mentions Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. and was recorded prior to his confirmation as Secretary of HHS. Guests: Christopher Gardner is the director of nutrition studies at the Stanford Prevention Research Center. Host: Stephanie Desmon, MA, is a former journalist, author, and the director of public relations and communications for the Johns Hopkins Center for Communication Programs, the largest center at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health. Show links and related content: Are Seed Oils Actually Bad For You?—The New York Times Contact us: Have a question about something you heard? Looking for a transcript? Want to suggest a topic or guest? Contact us via email or visit our website. Follow us: @‌PublicHealthPod on Bluesky @‌JohnsHopkinsSPH on Instagram @‌JohnsHopkinsSPH on Facebook @‌PublicHealthOnCall on YouTube Here's our RSS feed

About this episode: Neglected diseases like mycetoma, Chagas disease, and leishmaniasis impact more than a billion people worldwide every year and kill hundreds of thousands. In this episode: Why these illnesses don't get widespread attention or the resources needed for prevention, diagnosis and treatment, and how in a shifting global funding landscape, cross-sector collaboration is key to alleviating suffering. Guests: Delali Attipoe is the North America director of the Drugs for Neglected Disease initiative (DNDi). Host: Stephanie Desmon, MA, is a former journalist, author, and the director of public relations and communications for the Johns Hopkins Center for Communication Programs, the largest center at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health. Show links and related content: Chagas: The Most Neglected of Neglected Tropical Diseases—Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health Neglected Diseases and Public Health—Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health Contact us: Have a question about something you heard? Looking for a transcript? Want to suggest a topic or guest? Contact us via email or visit our website. Follow us: @‌PublicHealthPod on Bluesky @‌JohnsHopkinsSPH on Instagram @‌JohnsHopkinsSPH on Facebook @‌PublicHealthOnCall on YouTube Here's our RSS feed

Boost Your Wellness Journey:We're bringing you an exclusive bundle packed with resources from plant-based influencers, recipe creators, and wellness advocates to help you thrive! Don't miss out—grab yours now before it's gone! https://transactions.sendowl.com/stores/15779/314505Download Dr Shobha's Natural Strategies to Lower Your Blood Pressure book in the bundle.Join the Conversation:Subscribe and share this episode with anyone on their own path of health and transformation. // HOST Samantha Salmon, NBC-HWC // GUESTS Dr Shobha RayapudiDr. Shobha Rayapudi is a physician, epidemiologist and researcher. She is certified by the American Board of Lifestyle Medicine. She holds a Medical degree from Rangaraya Medical College and a certification in Plant-Based Nutrition from Cornell University. She also holds a Master of Science degree in Epidemiology from Johns Hopkins University. Working as a clinical researcher at the Johns Hopkins Center for Clinical Trials, her principal scientific interests have been on the effects of nutrition in preventing and reversing chronic diseases. She takes pride in giving her patients the choice of writing healing recipes instead of medications on the prescription pad. She helps people create the mindset and conditions to build healthy habits that they want but cannot attain on their own. She loves helping people discover the power that they have within themselves, in their own kitchen to revolutionize their health completely.The information provided in this broadcast is for educational purposes only and is not intended as medical advice. These statements have not been evaluated by the Food and Drug Administration, or the equivalent in your country. Any products/services mentioned are not intended to diagnose, treat, cure, or prevent disease. RawFoodMealPlanner.com © 2025

About this episode: The abrupt halt of USAID funded programs around the world has caused confusion and chaos, and the consequences are likely to have a long tail. In today's episode: Joe Amon, an expert in global aid and human rights, discusses some of the direct and indirect impacts of disengaging from this work. Guests: Joe Amon is the director of the Johns Hopkins Center for Public Health and Human Rights. Host: Dr. Josh Sharfstein is vice dean for public health practice and community engagement at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, a faculty member in health policy, a pediatrician, and former secretary of Maryland's Health Department. Show links and related content: Public Health is a Human Right—Public Health On Call (December, 2024) What Is USAID and Why Is It At Risk?—The Council on Foreign Relations Contact us: Have a question about something you heard? Looking for a transcript? Want to suggest a topic or guest? Contact us via email or visit our website. Follow us: @‌PublicHealthPod on Bluesky @‌JohnsHopkinsSPH on Instagram @‌JohnsHopkinsSPH on Facebook @‌PublicHealthOnCall on YouTube Here's our RSS feed

What is an extreme risk order? How many states have ERPO laws? What are the criteria for an ERPO? Do ERPO laws work? American Medical Association CXO Todd Unger is joined by two guests from Johns Hopkins University. Spencer Cantrell, JD, is an assistant scientist of health policy and management at the Johns Hopkins Center for Gun Violence Solutions. She is also the co-lead of the National ERPO Resource Center. Katherine Hoops, MD, MPH, is an associate professor of pediatric critical care medicine. She also represents critical care medicine on the AMA Firearm Injury Prevention Task Force.

About this episode: In today's episode: A discussion with Dr. Lisa Cooper, the director of the Johns Hopkins Center for Health Equity, about opposition to the terms "diversity," "equity," and "inclusion." Guests: Dr. Lisa Cooper is a public health physician, a Bloomberg Distinguished Professor at Johns Hopkins and a winner of a MacArthur genius grant for her work to understand and reduce health disparities. Host: Dr. Josh Sharfstein is vice dean for public health practice and community engagement at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, a faculty member in health policy, a pediatrician, and former secretary of Maryland's Health Department. Show links and related content: Why Are Health Disparities Everyone's Problem?—Public Health On Call (February, 2022) Higher Bar For Health Care—Johns Hopkins Magazine Contact us: Have a question about something you heard? Looking for a transcript? Want to suggest a topic or guest? Contact us via email or visit our website. Follow us: @‌PublicHealthPod on Bluesky @‌JohnsHopkinsSPH on Instagram @‌JohnsHopkinsSPH on Facebook @‌PublicHealthOnCall on YouTube Here's our RSS feed

About this episode: There's a lot of flu out there right now, but just how bad is it and by what measures is it “bad”? In today's episode: How this year's flu season stacks up against years past, some factors that could be driving such high rates and severe disease, and how bird flu is further complicating things. Also: It's not too late to get a flu shot! Guests: Dr. Erica Prochaska is a pediatric infectious disease physician at Johns Hopkins School of Medicine. Host: Stephanie Desmon, MA, is a former journalist, author, and the director of public relations and communications for the Johns Hopkins Center for Communication Programs, the largest center at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health. Show links and related content: U.S. facing worst flu season since 2009, experts say—Axios The flu has killed 16,000 people this season. These are the states with the worst outbreaks—Fast Company Contact us: Have a question about something you heard? Looking for a transcript? Want to suggest a topic or guest? Contact us via email or visit our website. Follow us: @‌PublicHealthPod on Bluesky @‌JohnsHopkinsSPH on Instagram @‌JohnsHopkinsSPH on Facebook @‌PublicHealthOnCall on YouTube Here's our RSS feed  

On Food Talk with Dani Nierenberg, Dani speaks with Tom Philpott, a Senior Research Associate at the Johns Hopkins Center for a Livable Future. They talk about the forces that have affected food and agriculture news coverage and opportunities to equip journalists with the training they need to cover this sector, what President Trump's cabinet picks may mean for the future of food policy in the U.S., and why consolidation in the food system is an attack on democracy. While you're listening, subscribe, rate, and review the show; it would mean the world to us to have your feedback. You can listen to “Food Talk with Dani Nierenberg” wherever you consume your podcasts.

About this episode: President Trump's executive order to withdraw the U.S. from the WHO could have lasting implications on the health and wellbeing of the world, and on the American people. In today's episode, the essential roles that the WHO plays both for the U.S. and around the globe, America's imperfect relationship with the institution, and the potential consequences of a U.S. exit. Guest: Dr. Judd Walson is an infectious disease physician and epidemiologist, and the chair of the department of International Health at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health. Host: Stephanie Desmon, MA, is a former journalist, author, and the director of public relations and communications for the Johns Hopkins Center for Communication Programs, the largest center at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health. Show links and related content: Reflecting on the US Withdrawal from the World Health Organization—Infection Control Today What Leaving the WHO Means For the U.S. and the World—Time Magazine Contact us: Have a question about something you heard? Looking for a transcript? Want to suggest a topic or guest? Contact us via email or visit our website. Follow us: @‌PublicHealthPod on Bluesky @‌JohnsHopkinsSPH on Instagram @‌JohnsHopkinsSPH on Facebook @‌PublicHealthOnCall on YouTube Here's our RSS feed

About this episode: In the first few days of President Trump's second term he signed a blitz of executive actions. In today's episode: a look at some of the actions and memos that take aim at key public health policies including the communications pause for health and science agencies, a pause on NIH study sections, immediate posturing on DEI initiatives, exiting the Paris Agreement and WHO, and more. Note: These podcasts are a conversation between the participants, and do not represent the position of Johns Hopkins University. Guest: Dr. Josh Sharfstein served in a number of political roles in his career including as the Secretary of the Maryland Department of Health, the Principal Deputy Commissioner of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, as Commissioner of Health for Baltimore City, and as a Congressional health policy advisor. Host: Stephanie Desmon, MA, is a former journalist, author, and the director of public relations and communications for the Johns Hopkins Center for Communication Programs, the largest center at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health. Show links and related content: Memo: Immediate Pause on Issuing Documents and Public Communications (pdf)—Department of Health & Human Services Ending Radical and Wasteful Government DEI Programs and Preferencing—White House Executive Order Putting America First In International Environmental Agreements—White House Executive Order Withdrawing the United States From the World Health Organization—White House Executive Order Federal health agencies told to halt all external communications—NPR Trump administration halts NIH grant-making process—The Hill Trump is withdrawing the U.S. from WHO. Here's what that means—Science News Statement From Dr. Richard Besser on DEI and Health—The Robert Wood Johnson Foundation Contact us: Have a question about something you heard? Looking for a transcript? Want to suggest a topic or guest? Contact us via email or visit our website. Follow us: @‌PublicHealthPod on Bluesky @‌JohnsHopkinsSPH on Instagram @‌JohnsHopkinsSPH on Facebook @‌PublicHealthOnCall on YouTube Here's our RSS feed

About this episode: Throughout history, humans have been engaged in public health work. In a new book, epidemiologist Caitlin Rivers shares lessons from past outbreaks, what's changed since COVID-19, and how, at a difficult moment for public health, she's thinking about the future and keeping a watchful eye on mpox, H5N1, and more. Guest: Caitlin Rivers is an epidemiologist at the Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security who specializes in preparedness and response for epidemics and pandemics. Host: Stephanie Desmon, MA, is a former journalist, author, and the director of public relations and communications for the Johns Hopkins Center for Communication Programs, the largest center at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health. Show links and related content: Dr. Caitlin Rivers' New Book ‘Crisis Averted' Explores Public Health Lessons and Provides Insights for Future Pandemic Preparedness—The Center for Health Security Contact us: Have a question about something you heard? Looking for a transcript? Want to suggest a topic or guest? Contact us via email or visit our website. Follow us: @‌PublicHealthPod on Bluesky @‌JohnsHopkinsSPH on Instagram @‌JohnsHopkinsSPH on Facebook @‌PublicHealthOnCall on YouTube Here's our RSS feed

Yet another fictional health simulation was conducted in Brussels, Belgium on October 23, 2022, that simulated a deadly respiratory virus that was unleashed upon the world and disproportionately impacted children. The event was organized by the Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security, the World Health Organization, and the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. Again. Just like the other simulations Johns Hopkins has held, this one called for draconian policies to be implemented in the name of “global health”, and for a “Pandemic Corps” to be formed and installed worldwide in order to be ready for the next outbreak. This wasn't the only simulation that happened recently. There was an unusual event that was also quietly held in Europe during the COVID pandemic, but nobody in the media seems to want to talk about it much, for obvious reasons. The Octopus of Global Control Audiobook: https://amzn.to/3xu0rMm Website: www.Macroaggressions.io Sponsors: Chemical Free Body: https://www.chemicalfreebody.com Promo Code: MACRO C60 Purple Power: https://c60purplepower.com/ Promo Code: MACRO Wise Wolf Gold & Silver: www.Macroaggressions.gold LegalShield: www.DontGetPushedAround.com EMP Shield: www.EMPShield.com Promo Code: MACRO Christian Yordanov's Health Transformation Program: www.LiveLongerFormula.com Privacy Academy: https://privacyacademy.com/step/privacy-action-plan-checkout-2/?ref=5620 Brain Supreme: www.BrainSupreme.co Promo Code: MACRO Above Phone: http://abovephone.com/?above=macro Promo Code: MACRO Activist Post: www.ActivistPost.com Natural Blaze: www.NaturalBlaze.com Link Tree: https://linktr.ee/macroaggressionspodcast

Text “Do people even want to know about some of these issues? Because I think some of the meat production concerns, it's kind of like people would rather in some cases, I think some people might not really want to know all the nitty gritty. They don't want to know how the sausage is made. That poses an interesting question and challenge about how you communicate about some of these issues, when maybe there's a resistance among a subset of people who don't want to know more.” - Patti Truant Anderson    Today's episode is the final installment in our special four-part series where we take a deep dive into the food system with experts from the Johns Hopkins Center for a Livable Future. Our guest is Patti Truant Anderson, a senior program officer at the Center and a faculty associate in the Department of Health Policy and Management at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health. Patti's work focuses on public health risks, environmental challenges tied to food production, and how to communicate these critical issues more effectively. Patti and I explore how polling helps uncover public perceptions around food systems and why the country isn't as polarized on these issues as we might think. We also talk about the challenge of engaging people who may resist learning about the harsh realities of our food system. This episode is not just about data—it's about how we can foster a shared understanding and move forward, even in times of deep political division.   Links: Johns Hopkins Center for a Livable Future  - https://clf.jhsph.edu/ Patti Truant Anderson - https://clf.jhsph.edu/about-us/staff/patti-truant-anderson

About this episode: The U.S.'s first reported human death from bird flu is another sign that the virus is not going away anytime soon. In this episode: why it's time to double down on efforts to limit H5N1 transmission among cattle and birds, concerns about cats and other mammals, and how response measures need to scale up quickly and more broadly to try and prevent the virus from gaining a foothold in humans. The experts also discuss why bird flu poses an existential threat to the dairy industry. Guests: Dr. Meghan Davis is a veterinarian and public health researcher at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health with a joint appointment at the School of Medicine. Dr. Andy Pekosz is a virologist at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health with appointments in Molecular Microbiology and Immunology and Environmental Health and Engineering. Host: Stephanie Desmon, MA, is a former journalist, author, and the director of public relations and communications for the Johns Hopkins Center for Communication Programs, the largest center at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health. Show links and related content: Bird flu H5N1 claims first human life in U.S.: “We remain vigilant”—Pittsburgh Post-Gazette Detections of Highly Pathogenic Avian Influenza—USDA Defend The Flock: Biosecurity Practices—USDA Contact us: Have a question about something you heard? Looking for a transcript? Want to suggest a topic or guest? Contact us via email or visit our website. Follow us: @‌PublicHealthPod on X @‌JohnsHopkinsSPH on Instagram @‌JohnsHopkinsSPH on Facebook @‌PublicHealthOnCall on YouTube Here's our RSS fe

About this episode: A new report from the Bloomberg American Health Initiative finds that the U.S. lags behind many other high-income countries in life expectancy. In this report, researchers found that babies born 40 years ago in the U.S. and U.K could expect to live to the same age. Today, however, life expectancy is nearly three years shorter for those on our side of the Atlantic Ocean. In this episode: a look at the four main causes of death driving this gap—all of which are preventable—and how one of the world's richest countries that spends the most on healthcare is continually failing to improve the health of its people. Guest: Dr. Josh Sharfstein is vice dean for public health practice and community engagement at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, a faculty member in health policy, a pediatrician, and former secretary of Maryland's Health Department. Host: Stephanie Desmon, MA, is a former journalist, author, and the director of public relations and communications for the Johns Hopkins Center for Communication Programs, the largest center at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health. Show links and related content: A Tale of Two Countries: The Life Expectancy Gap Between the United States and the United Kingdom—The Bloomberg American Health Initiative Americans Die Younger Than U.K. Counterparts Due to Four Preventable Causes—Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health Expanding Access to Methadone Treatment for Opioid Use Disorder in Carceral Settings—Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health Contact us: Have a question about something you heard? Looking for a transcript? Want to suggest a topic or guest? Contact us via email or visit our website. Follow us: @‌PublicHealthPod on X @‌JohnsHopkinsSPH on Instagram @‌JohnsHopkinsSPH on Facebook @‌PublicHealthOnCall on YouTube Here's our RSS feed

“People in the animal welfare world, I think, should broaden their purview to the human parts of it and sort of work in coalition. Like if you can really expose the labor conditions, you're weakening the industry, and if you can increase labor regulations, if you can make it to where workers don't routinely get repetitive stress injuries and they're not breathing in harsh chemicals, and if you slow the kill line down, that hits their profits and you are weakening the industry. And, also remember, this industry doesn't just slaughter billions of animals a year, it also makes life hell for the people who work in it. Expand your level of solidarity to those people.” – Tom Philpott     This is the third episode in a special for part series, where we go deep into the food system with some of the brightest minds at the Johns Hopkins Center for a Livable Future. In this episode, we dive into one of the many hidden and hideous aspects of our food system: the exploitation of workers in industrial meat production. Tom Philpott is a senior research associate at the Center. He joined in 2022 after a distinguished three-decade career in journalism, reporting on the injustices and ecological ramifications of the industrial food system. He is the author of the critically acclaimed book, Perilous Bounty. I asked Tom to shed some light on the grueling conditions faced by meatpacking workers, from dangerous line spades to repetitive injuries and the shocking lack of basic protections, and even though much of this was exposed during the covid 19 pandemic, to explain how it's all still happening. Tom also hosts the Center for a Livable Future's podcast, it's called Unconfined. It's really good. Take a listen to learn a whole lot more about the impacts of food animal production.   Links Center for a Livable Future: https://clf.jhsph.edu/ Tom Philpott: https://www.tomphilpott.net/ Perilous Bounty: https://bookshop.org/p/books/perilous-bounty-the-looming-collapse-of-american-farming-and-how-we-can-prevent-it-tom-philpott/8555300?ean=9781635578454&gclid=Cj0KCQjw48OaBhDWARIsAMd966DtJTjYQl6nh5J9Gk9ib9f3SXgKnCfTwujd-YMhRK-UC1X-ihdAiyIaAsm3EALw_wcB Unconfined Podcast: https://clf.jhsph.edu/unconfined-podcast

“I remember during my training having professors tell me, ‘one day you might do something important and you'll tick off a vested interest, and they're going to come into a meeting with you, and they're going to bring a copy of your dissertation and slam it on the table and start challenging you.' And that is exactly what happened.” – Keeve Nachman   This is the 2nd episode in a special four-part series about where we go deep into the food system with some of the brightest minds at the Johns Hopkins Center for a Livable Future.  This conversation is Dr. Keeve Nachman, a powerhouse in the fields of environmental health, risk assessment, and food systems research. Keeve is the Robert S. Lawrence Professor and Associate Director of the Johns Hopkins Center for a Livable Future. He's also a leading voice on issues like antibiotic resistance and industrial agriculture's impact on public health. I asked Keeve to come on the show to talk about how his work helped ban the use of arsenic in our food system—a fight that spanned 15 years and had a ripple effect around the globe.  Keeve's story is a masterclass in persistence and the power of science-driven policy change. We also explore his ongoing efforts to address antibiotic misuse in industrial agriculture, a growing threat to global public health, and discuss what it will take to create lasting change in our food system.   Links : Keeve Nachman: https://clf.jhsph.edu/about-us/staff/keeve-nachman Johns Hopkins Center for a Livable Future:  https://clf.jhsph.edu/ Unconfined Podcast https://clf.jhsph.edu/unconfined-podcast  

About this episode: For decades, regular mammograms to detect breast cancer have been recommended for women ages 50-75. In 2024, the age range dropped to include women 40-49 as well. But what do we really know about mammography as a tool to save lives? Are all scans created equal? What is the risk/benefit analysis to upping the number of screenings a woman is recommended to receive in her lifetime? In today's episode: a deep dive into the evidence around mammography, and a look at the new guidelines—including the controversy around them. Guest: Dr. Otis Brawley is a globally-recognized expert in cancer prevention and control whose work focuses on developing cancer screening strategies and ensuring their effectiveness. He is a Bloomberg Distinguished Professor and faculty at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health in epidemiology with a joint appointment in oncology at Johns Hopkins Medicine. He was the former Chief Medical Officer of the American Cancer Society. Host: Stephanie Desmon, MA, is a former journalist, author, and the director of public relations and communications for the Johns Hopkins Center for Communication Programs, the largest center at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health. Show links and related content: Final Recommendation Statement: Breast Cancer Screening—U.S. Preventive Services Task Force The Rise of Colorectal Cancer Among Younger People—Public Health On Call (June 2024) Contact us: Have a question about something you heard? Looking for a transcript? Want to suggest a topic or guest? Contact us via email or visit our website. Follow us: @‌PublicHealthPod on X @‌JohnsHopkinsSPH on Instagram @‌JohnsHopkinsSPH on Facebook @‌PublicHealthOnCall on YouTube Here's our RSS feed

“My colleague and I went out to Arizona because there was a community that was concerned about the expansion of an egg laying operation, essentially in their backyard. At full capacity, that operation was slated to house 12 million birds. 12 million birds. It's like New York City, but with chickens.” – Brent Kim   We know that what we eat has an enormous impact on billions of animals, our health and the health of the planet. If we fail to change our diets and the food system, the planet will face increasingly severe environmental, social, and economic consequences, many of which are already beginning to unfold. We know this, we know that there is much we could be doing about it, on large and small scales, yet the urgency is not there.  I think the more knowledge we have, the more we are willing to demand change and even change ourselves. So, I wanted to go deeper into the food system to get a better understanding of its impact on public health, the planet, ecosystems and social justice, and mostly - to hear about how we change it. This episode marks the beginning of a special four-part series with some of the experts from the Johns Hopkins Center for a Livable Future.   This conversation is with Brent Kim. Brent is a program officer for the Center's Food Production and Public Health program. His research spans issues from farm to fork with published works on sustainable diets, climate change and industrial food, animal production, food and agriculture policy, soil safety, and urban food systems. He and I talk about much of it, how to change it and solutions for a much better future. Johns Hopkins Center for a Livable Future https://clf.jhsph.edu/ Brent Kim https://clf.jhsph.edu/about-us/staff/brent-kim Unconfined Podcast (from the Center for a Livable Future) https://clf.jhsph.edu/unconfined-podcast  

About this episode: The day after the 2024 presidential election, Joe Amon—the brand new director of the Johns Hopkins Center for Public Health and Human Rights—was set to give a speech for a panel about health discrimination. But the one he'd prepared wasn't going to cut it for a moment suddenly marked by uncertainty and change. He pivoted to a different message: one that acknowledges that public health doesn't have everything figured out, and that it works best when it's viewed as a social movement. In this episode: a moment of reflection for the field, considerations of some of the challenges that lay ahead, and the critical importance of thinking about public health as a human right. Note: You can read an adaptation of the speech in the link below. Guest: Joe Amon is the director of the Johns Hopkins Center for Public Health and Human Rights. Host: Lindsay Smith Rogers, MA, is the producer of the Public Health On Call podcast, an editor for Expert Insights, and the director of content strategy for the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health. Show links and related content: Post-Election Public Health Needs to Keep On Keeping On—Hopkins Bloomberg Public Health Magazine Contact us: Have a question about something you heard? Looking for a transcript? Want to suggest a topic or guest? Contact us via email or visit our website. Follow us: @‌PublicHealthPod on X @‌JohnsHopkinsSPH on Instagram @‌JohnsHopkinsSPH on Facebook @‌PublicHealthOnCall on YouTube Here's our RSS feed

About this episode: Lingering environmental policy legacies from Trump's last administration may be harbingers for what's to come in 2025. Concerns include widespread deregulation leading to increased use of fossil fuels and a lack of vigilance around protecting drinking water and air quality. But it isn't just the EPA itself that's in peril: Major shift towards the politicization of climate change, and the disempowering of scientists and agencies in the court system could create lasting—and even irreversible—impacts to human health. In this episode: a look at what Trump's second term may mean for environmental health, and why it will be crucial for policymakers and scientists to galvanize around innovation and local action. Guests: Dr. Tom Burke is an emeritus professor at Johns Hopkins and a former top official with the Environmental Protection Agency in the Obama administration. Host: Stephanie Desmon, MA, is a former journalist, author, and the director of public relations and communications for the Johns Hopkins Center for Communication Programs, the largest center at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health. Show links and related content: New poll indicates that voters support the EPA—NM Political Report SCOTUS—Not The EPA—Is Now Regulating Environmental Protection—Public Health On Call (August, 2024) Why The Supreme Court Ruling on The EPA Isn't The End of Fighting Climate Change (2022)—Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health Contact us: Have a question about something you heard? Looking for a transcript? Want to suggest a topic or guest? Contact us via email or visit our website. Follow us: @‌PublicHealthPod on X @‌JohnsHopkinsSPH on Instagram @‌JohnsHopkinsSPH on Facebook @‌PublicHealthOnCall on YouTube Here's our RSS feed

About this episode: Outbreaks of H5N1 continue to rise in dairy cattle and poultry, and human cases are also starting to creep up including a Canadian teen who was hospitalized in critical condition. In this episode: the latest on viral sequencing and patterns of spread, the potential for economic impacts and interruptions in the food supply, risks to the general public, and concerns about how an administration change in January may impact public health's ability to mount a sufficient response. Guest: Dr. Meghan Davis is a veterinarian and public health researcher at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health with a joint appointment at the School of Medicine.   Dr. Andy Pekosz is a virologist at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health with appointments in Molecular Microbiology and Immunology and Environmental Health and Engineering. Host: Stephanie Desmon, MA, is a former journalist, author, and the director of public relations and communications for the Johns Hopkins Center for Communication Programs, the largest center at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health. Show links and related content: Why a teenager's bird flu infection is ringing alarm bells for scientists—Nature ‘We are not testing enough': new US bird flu cases stoke fears over poor response—The Guardian Contact us: Have a question about something you heard? Looking for a transcript? Want to suggest a topic or guest? Contact us via email or visit our website. Follow us: @‌PublicHealthPod on X @‌JohnsHopkinsSPH on Instagram @‌JohnsHopkinsSPH on Facebook @‌PublicHealthOnCall on YouTube Here's our RSS feed

About this episode: Water fluoridation is considered one of the greatest public health achievements of the 20th Century. Yet for as long as there has been fluoride in the water, some have raised concerns about its safety. In this episode: the history of water fluoridation, its enormous benefits for preventing tooth decay, and the recent wave of interest in whether fluoridation policies should change. Guest: Dr. Charlotte Lewis is a pediatrician at Seattle Children's, a professor at UW Medicine, and an expert on infant and child nutrition and oral health. Host: Stephanie Desmon, MA, is a former journalist, author, and the director of public relations and communications for the Johns Hopkins Center for Communication Programs, the largest center at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health. Show links and related content: Skeletal Fluorosis Due to Excessive Tea Drinking—The New England Journal of Medicine Fluoride Exposure: Neurodevelopment and Cognition—National Toxicology Program AAP stands by recommendations for low fluoride levels to prevent caries—American Academy of Pediatrics Contact us: Have a question about something you heard? Looking for a transcript? Want to suggest a topic or guest? Contact us via email or visit our website. Follow us: @‌PublicHealthPod on X @‌JohnsHopkinsSPH on Instagram @‌JohnsHopkinsSPH on Facebook @‌PublicHealthOnCall on YouTube Here's our RSS feed

About this episode: From frozen waffles to deli meat and even fast food burgers, outbreaks of foodborne illnesses seem to be everywhere. But are they happening more often or is our surveillance system just getting better? And how do bacteria like listeria and E. coli survive the manufacturing process, and persist long enough to sicken and even kill consumers? In today's episode: a look at foodborne pathogens and how they persist, the U.S. food safety system, and how you can take precautions at home and when you go out to eat. Guests: Dr. Meghan Davis is a veterinarian and public health researcher at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health with a joint appointment at the School of Medicine. Dr. D'Ann Williams is a former food safety official and an assistant scientist at the Johns Hopkins Center for a Livable Future. Host: Stephanie Desmon, MA, is a former journalist, author, and the director of public relations and communications for the Johns Hopkins Center for Communication Programs, the largest center at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health. Show links and related content: Active Investigations of Multistate Foodborne Outbreaks—CDC Food recalls in the U.S. spike due to Listeria, Salmonella, and allergens—Food Safety News Contact us: Have a question about something you heard? Looking for a transcript? Want to suggest a topic or guest? Contact us via email or visit our website. Follow us: @‌PublicHealthPod on X @‌JohnsHopkinsSPH on Instagram @‌JohnsHopkinsSPH on Facebook @‌PublicHealthOnCall on YouTube Here's our RSS feed

You are what you eat…right? Or maybe, we are what we eat. And together, most of the meat we consume is raised on factory farms that degrade our environment, our pocketbooks, and yes, our health. Abdul reflects on the role financialization has played in creating factory farms. Then he sits down with Bob Martin, Senior Policy Advisor at the Johns Hopkins Center for a Livable Future and co-editor of the new book “Industrial Farm Animal Production, the Environment, and Public Health.” This show would not be possible without the generous support of our sponsors. America Dissected invites you to check them out. This episode was brought to you by: Marguerite Casey Foundation: Sign up for their free Summer School webinar at CaseyGrants.org/SummerSchool.