Podcast appearances and mentions of laura thomas

More than 300 children were kidnapped from a school in the Western Nigerian village of Papiri in November, but in the aftermath, accounts of the kidnappings were confused and misleading. BBC Africa's Madina Maishanu was part of a team of journalists who faced huge risk to visit the site of the kidnappings and hear the testimonies of parents. In October this year, a young Chechen woman living in Armenia, Aishat Baimuradova, was killed. She'd previously escaped a repressive life in Chechnya but is now believed to be the first Chechen woman in exile to be killed outside of Russia. BBC Russian's Zlata Onufrieva and Olga Prosvirova set out what is known about Aishat's life and death, and consider the implications of her killing for Chechen women living in exile. This episode of The Documentary comes to you from The Fifth Floor, the show at the heart of global storytelling, with BBC journalists from all around the world. Presented by Faranak Amidi. Produced by Laura Thomas, Caroline Ferguson and Hannah Dean. (Photo: Faranak Amidi. Credit: Tricia Yourkevich.)

Around one fifth of the world's oil tankers now belong to the 'shadow fleet', more than a thousand ships which Russia uses to skirt sanctions and - increasingly - conduct acts of sabotage and hybrid warfare. BBC Russian's economics reporter Alexey Kalmykov explains how, with its opaque ownership structures and uninsured, poorly maintained ships, the shadow fleet presents an ecological, economic and strategic threat. On the night of 13th November 1985, the Nevado del Ruiz volcano in Colombia erupted, and the resulting landslide of mud and debris devastated the nearby city of Armero, causing twenty thousand deaths in the city itself and a further 5,000 in the wider area. In the aftermath, a baby called Jennifer was left with the Red Cross by her mother, who is then believed to have ventured back to the ruins of the family home to search for her partner. She never returned. BBC Mundo's Jose Carlos Cueto tells the story of Jennifer, who has become known as the 'daughter of the volcano' and continues to search for the truth about her mother. Chicken 65 is a spicy, crispy chicken dish adored in the south of India. You can eat it in upmarket restaurants and roadside food stalls alike. But how did it get its name? From the BBC's Delhi Bureau, Bimal Thankachan joins Faranak as they eat some Chicken 65 and dive into the story of how it got its name. This episode of The Documentary comes to you from The Fifth Floor, the show at the heart of global storytelling, with BBC journalists from all around the world. Presented by Faranak Amidi. Produced by Laura Thomas, Caroline Ferguson and Hannah Dean. This is an EcoAudio certified production. (Photo: Faranak Amidi. Credit: Tricia Yourkevich.)

The winter season is upon us. This week on “Off the Record”, Laura Thomas and Steve Swenson, representatives from the Telluride Ski Resort, join for a conversation on negotiations with ski patrol and the upcoming season.

For nearly 60 years, the Indian government has been fighting a violent group of Maoists in the country. They are followers of the late Chinese leader, Mao Zedong and have carried out bombings and killings in different parts of India. Now, the Indian authorities claim to be on the brink of defeating these insurgents and has said that they will be fully removed by March 2026. There is one group that has been attributed with the recent success against the Maoists, known as the DRG or District Reserve Guard. They are part of the police, with the sole purpose of defeating the Maoists. But although they have successfully reduced Maoist attacks in recent years, critics have questioned the use of force by the DRG. Jugal Purohit, who reports for the BBC in India, recently travelled to the frontline of this nearly 60 year war, to meet the DRG and the locals who have been affected by the violence.Rare access: Inside India's claims to eliminate Maoist insurgency https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=848zVNZV7ssIn Thailand, for the past 154 years, people have come together for the annual Buffalo Racing Festival. The festival honors the vital role of buffaloes in Thai agriculture, offering thanks for their hard work throughout the year. BBC's Thuong Le is based in Bangkok and she recently traveled to Chonburi province where the festival takes place to grab a front row seat. This episode of The Documentary comes to you from The Fifth Floor, the show at the heart of global storytelling, with BBC journalists from all around the world. Presented by Faranak Amidi. Produced by Laura Thomas, Caroline Ferguson and Hannah Dean. This is an EcoAudio certified production. (Photo: Faranak Amidi. Credit: Tricia Yourkevich.)

Drone surveillance, sign language and 'looking American' are all suggestions that Brazilian immigrants are making to each other as ways to avoid being deported. Since the beginning of President Donald Trump's second term, there have been increased Immigration and Customs Enforcement or 'ICE' raids all over the country. These raids are designed to crack down on people from overseas living in the US illegally, and in September ICE focused on Massachusetts, where there is a huge Brazilian population. Many Brazilian people living in the US are there perfectly legally, but many aren't and if they are arrested by ICE they face detention and ultimately deportation. Vitor Tavares of BBC Brasil has been looking into how the Brazilian communities in the US have been using messaging apps to respond to the raids in Massachusetts.In traditional silk making methods the cocoons are boiled, killing the silkworm inside. But a state in western India is pioneering a new way of making silk, where the silkworm is allowed to mature into a moth, and leave the cocoon still alive. It's called 'Karuna' silk, which means compassion. Shivalika Puri who reports for the BBC in India went to go and meet the people who are making this more compassionate silk. Spanish people and most Latin Americans have two surnames, but why? It's a tradition that goes back centuries, but it's not common across most Christian origin countries – which got BBC Mundo journalist Paula Rosas thinking, and digging into the history. This episode of The Documentary comes to you from The Fifth Floor, the show at the heart of global storytelling, with BBC journalists from all around the world. Presented by Faranak Amidi. Produced by Caroline Ferguson, Laura Thomas and Hannah Dean. This is an EcoAudio certified production.

Following the ceasefire in Gaza, this week has seen the release of hostages and prisoners on both sides and the beginning of the return of the remains of some of the deceased. Over the past two years, The Fifth Floor has been speaking to language service colleagues reporting on the conflict. This week, we reconnect with them to find out how networks of citizens on both sides have informed and provided new perspectives on their reporting. Amira Dakroury checked in from the BBC's Cairo Bureau where she's part of the team producing Middle East Diaries, formerly Gaza Lifeline; and from Tel Aviv, BBC Arabic's Michael Shuval reflected on reporting the stories of hostage families. Dr Tri Maharani's videos about how to treat snake bites are beginning to be well known in Indonesia. For fifteen years, she's worked to improve outcomes for snakebite victims in her country, where only one antivenom is currently available, but more than eighty species of poisonous snake are a threat. BBC Indonesian's Astudestra Ajengrastri spoke to her. This episode of The Documentary comes to you from The Fifth Floor, the show at the heart of global storytelling, with BBC journalists from all around the world.Presented by Faranak Amidi Produced by Laura Thomas and Caroline Ferguson

After 188 days without setting foot on land, the Avontuur finally arrives in Horta, in the Azores. Before the crew can finally get off the ship, there are a few last hurdles to contend with. Ship's cook Giulia has played her part in getting them here in reasonably good spirits, but now her patience is beginning to wear thin.15 people, 188 days at sea, one extraordinary ship: how the Avontuur was locked down at sea during the Covid-19 pandemic.Narrated by Siobhán McSweeney Produced by Christina Hardinge Sound and music by Noémie Ducimetière Artwork by Joe Magee Narration written by Laura Thomas For Lives Less Ordinary, the series producer is Laura Thomas and the editor, Munazza Khan.Lives Less Ordinary is a podcast from the BBC World Service that brings you the most incredible true stories from around the world. Each episode a guest shares their most dramatic, moving, personal story. Listen for unbelievable twists, mysteries uncovered, and inspiring journeys - spanning the entire human experience. Step into someone else's life and expect the unexpected.Got a story to tell? Send an email to liveslessordinary@bbc.co.uk or message us via WhatsApp: 0044 330 678 2784 You can read our privacy notice here: https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/articles/5YD3hBqmw26B8WMHt6GkQxG/lives-less-ordinary-privacy-notice

Denied entry to a series of ports in the Caribbean, the crew of the Avontuur begin to wonder whether they will ever be able to get off the ship. They mend sails and find creative ways to entertain themselves until, one night, Giulia begins to feel unwell. 15 people, 188 days at sea, one extraordinary ship: how the Avontuur was locked down at sea during the Covid-19 pandemic.Narrated by Siobhán McSweeney Produced by Christina Hardinge Sound and music by Noémie Ducimetière Artwork by Joe Magee Narration written by Laura Thomas For Lives Less Ordinary, the series producer is Laura Thomas and the editor, Munazza Khan.Lives Less Ordinary is a podcast from the BBC World Service that brings you the most incredible true stories from around the world. Each episode a guest shares their most dramatic, moving, personal story. Listen for unbelievable twists, mysteries uncovered, and inspiring journeys - spanning the entire human experience. Step into someone else's life and expect the unexpected.Got a story to tell? Send an email to liveslessordinary@bbc.co.uk or message us via WhatsApp: 0044 330 678 2784You can read our privacy notice here: https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/articles/5YD3hBqmw26B8WMHt6GkQxG/lives-less-ordinary-privacy-notice

As the crew of the Avontuur fight their way out of the Gulf of Mexico and battle a hurricane that delays their journey back across the Atlantic, ship's cook Giulia faces the spectre of food and gas shortages with ingenuity and a determination to get back home. 15 people, 188 days at sea, one extraordinary ship: how the Avontuur was locked down at sea during the Covid-19 pandemic.Narrated by Siobhán McSweeney Produced by Christina Hardinge Sound and music by Noémie Ducimetière Artwork by Joe Magee Narration written by Laura Thomas For Lives Less Ordinary, the series producer is Laura Thomas and the editor, Munazza Khan.Lives Less Ordinary is a podcast from the BBC World Service that brings you the most incredible true stories from around the world. Each episode a guest shares their most dramatic, moving, personal story. Listen for unbelievable twists, mysteries uncovered, and inspiring journeys - spanning the entire human experience. Step into someone else's life and expect the unexpected. Got a story to tell? Send an email to liveslessordinary@bbc.co.uk or message us via WhatsApp: 0044 330 678 2784

Unable to step off the ship, tensions are rising amongst the crew of the Avontuur and coping mechanisms begin to emerge. When the dry store is raided and boxes of biscuits go missing, ship's cook Giulia is forced to turn detective.15 people, 188 days at sea, one extraordinary ship: how the Avontuur was locked down at sea during the Covid-19 pandemic.Narrated by Siobhán McSweeney Produced by Christina Hardinge Sound and music by Noémie Ducimetière Artwork by Joe Magee Narration written by Laura Thomas For Lives Less Ordinary, the series producer is Laura Thomas and the editor, Munazza Khan.Lives Less Ordinary is a podcast from the BBC World Service that brings you the most incredible true stories from around the world. Each episode a guest shares their most dramatic, moving, personal story. Listen for unbelievable twists, mysteries uncovered, and inspiring journeys - spanning the entire human experience. Step into someone else's life and expect the unexpected.Got a story to tell? Send an email to liveslessordinary@bbc.co.uk or message us via WhatsApp: 0044 330 678 2784 You can read our privacy notice here: https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/articles/5YD3hBqmw26B8WMHt6GkQxG/lives-less-ordinary-privacy-notice

In the middle of the Atlantic, the crew of the Avontuur receive a satellite email with news from land that throws everything they'd been counting on to the winds. Their mission and schedule are in disarray, but turning back isn't an option. So ship's cook Giulia and the rest of the crew find ways to cope with the uncertainty. 15 people, 188 days at sea, one extraordinary ship: how the Avontuur was locked down at sea during the Covid-19 pandemic.Narrated by Siobhán McSweeney Produced by Christina Hardinge Sound and music by Noémie Ducimetière Artwork by Joe Magee Narration written by Laura Thomas For Lives Less Ordinary, the series producer is Laura Thomas and the editor, Munazza Khan.Lives Less Ordinary is a podcast from the BBC World Service that brings you the most incredible true stories from around the world. Each episode a guest shares their most dramatic, moving, personal story. Listen for unbelievable twists, mysteries uncovered, and inspiring journeys - spanning the entire human experience. Step into someone else's life and expect the unexpected.Got a story to tell? Send an email to liveslessordinary@bbc.co.uk or message us via WhatsApp: 0044 330 678 2784 You can read our privacy notice here: https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/articles/5YD3hBqmw26B8WMHt6GkQxG/lives-less-ordinary-privacy-notice

This was such a thrilling insightful conversation! Join me as Laura Thomas helps to 'complicate simplistic food narratives for our overall peace' - I love that phrase! We discuss the societal and cultural influences on food choices and Laura's ultimate thorn, the hyper focus on ultra-processed foods in modern diets. As always, there is so much more to the story! Capitalism, domestic gender equality and politics all come into play on our plates. Find Laura Thomas, PhD in Nutritional Sciences, registered nutritionist, and author of the newsletter "Can I Have Another Snack." Her newsletter and podcast Here, IG here and her books here (apologies that the ‘zon was the only spot I could find selling them in the US).Subscribe to the Busybody Podcast for more discussions on topics like this! Follow me on Instagram at @BrooklynStrength and visit brooklynstrength.com for more information and ways you can work with me! (including to de-program your brain to stop fighting with your body)I've written about the joys of ‘eating a lot' here Guacamole FulfillmentAnd how not all poor mental health is ‘bad' - enjoy!Curious about exercise? HATE exercise? Please check out my offerings…You can still jump into the Summer Series! Grab it now and get consistent, safe, fun, (anti-anxiety cardio anyone??) movement on YOUR schedule all summer long.I also teach beginner strength and stability via The Self Paced Series as well as several restorative classes and workshops including Anti-Anxiety Cardio and Fascia Release™ all of which are designed to gently shift our bodies into balance without the ableist, fat shaming ‘sweat is fat crying' mentality that infects so much of mainstream fitness. Want to deep dive with me on YOUR unique issues? Get the accountability that private coaching creates? Join me for virtual one-to-one sessions, we'll move together, relieving your pain, or talking about your needs and goals.Chapters00:00 Introduction to Laura Thomas and Her Work02:51 Cultural Perspectives on Food: US vs UK05:33 The Role of Mothers in Nutrition and Food Choices11:42 The Burden of Food Work on Mothers14:37 Ultra-Processed Foods: Definitions and Implications29:34 The Societal Impact of Food Choices44:20 Critical Thinking in Food Consumption58:40 Conclusion and Future ConversationsIf you liked this conversation please rate, review and subscribe wherever you get your podcasts AND heart comment or share on this substack post! It helps spread the word and get this podcast and these wonderful conversations heard and seen.Music by Rob Byrne, performed by the Wild Yaks. Podcast produced by Brad at Trains Sound Studio. Illustrations by Jackie Mendez and me#Nutrition #FoodCulture #Podcast #LauraThomas #BusybodyPodcast Get full access to After Class with Cadence at cadencedubusbrooklynstrength.substack.com/subscribe

You're listening to Burnt Toast!We are Virginia Sole-Smith and Corinne Fay, and it's time for your July Indulgence Gospel!And… it's our 200th episode! To celebrate, we're making today's Indulgence Gospel free to everyone and offering a flash sale — 20% off to celebrate 200 episodes! Grab this deal here.This newsletter contains affiliate links, which means if you buy something we suggest, we may earn a small commission at no extra cost to you. We only ever recommend things we love and use ourselves! One Good ThingNow that it's summer, ice cream is a daily state of being here and I've been using my East Fork ice cream bowls constantly (they are also the perfect size for cherries and for many of your favorite snacks). If you are also an East Fork disciple, heads up that their annual Seconds Sale starts today! This is where they sell pots that are slightly imperfect but still 100 percent functional and food safe for 30-40% off. And yes, there are a lot of cute ice cream bowls. PS. You can always listen to our episodes right here in your email, where you'll also receive full transcripts (edited and condensed for clarity). But please also follow us in Apple Podcasts, Spotify, Stitcher, and/or Pocket Casts!Episode 200 TranscriptCorinne200! Can you believe it?VirginiaI can and I cannot. It's one of those things where I feel like we've always been making the podcast, but also 200 feels like so many.CorinneI went back through, to look at some old episodes. And I was like, you know, I kind of remember all of them. I was like, surely there are some I have forgotten. But yeah, kind of not.VirginiaWhen I was looking back at the old episodes, it was like visiting old friends. I was like, I know you guys. We're cool.CorinneIf you write into us with a question and we answer it, it really sticks with us!VirginiaWe continue to think about you. And would like updates, honestly. We don't always get them, so putting that out there. We'd like to know.CorinneTo celebrate, we have a special two part episode for you. We're picking favorite moments from the archives to revisit, to see if our feelings and opinions have changed.VirginiaAlright, I decided to look back at our many excellent guest conversations and pull out some favorites. First up, I thought I'd look back at our work ultra-processed foods since it is such an annoyingly evergreen topic. We did a great pair of episodes with Laura Thomas, PhD, who writes “Can I Have Another Snack?” which ran in July 2023. Here is a little excerpt from the first conversation.VirginiaIt feels like it's important to say very clearly that processed is not synonymous with has no nutrition, and that actually processing foods is a good thing to do in order to eat, right?LauraYeah, well, all forms of cooking are a process, right?So unless you like want to go down some raw vegan path, you can't really avoid processing your food to some extent.Now, advocates of NOVA, I think, would say that's a bit of a red herring, because what we're actually talking about is this additional level of processing, this ultra processing sort of phenomenon.But even within that category, I think there are merits to processing–even Ultra processing–our foods. One of the things that happens when we process food is we extend the shelf life of it, and that means that we are wasting less food overall, which I think we would all agree is probably a helpful thing.But industrial food processing, it reduces foodborne pathogens. It reduces microbes that would spoil food and make things like oils turn rancid faster. It also significantly cuts down on the time and labor that it requires to cook a meal. And I think that's for me as a parent, and I know for you as well, like, that's huge.VirginiaIt's really everything, honestly. For me personally. Nothing should be everything for everybody, but limiting the amount of time I spend cooking dinner is the thing that enables me to eat dinner with my family at night.LauraBut it's not just like super privileged white women that have a lot of you know nutrition knowledge, right, that benefit from ultra processed foods. I'm also thinking about kids with feeding disorders that would struggle to get all the nutrition that they need without processed foods. I'm thinking about elderly or disabled people who can maintain a level of independence because they can quickly cook some pasta and throw an ultra processed jar of pasta sauce on that and have a nourishing meal. I'm thinking about pregnant people who otherwise might not be able to stomach eating because of morning sickness and nausea, which we know lasts forever, not just morning, right?So there are so many groups of people that benefit from ultra processed foods, and they just seem to be missing entirely from the conversation around these foods.VirginiaSo often there's this pressure of like, we have to just get poor people cooking more and get them cooking more. And it's like, okay, but if you live in a shelter, you don't have a kitchen. If you are crashing on a couch with family member, you know, in a house with lots of different people, and it's not easy for you to get time in the kitchen. There's so many different scenarios where cooking is not a practical solution, and having greater shelf stability is very important.LauraBut it also says a lot about where we place our values, right? And who is making decisions about where we cook our values? Because it's not everyone's value system to spend more time cooking from scratch and buying fresh ingredients and spending more time in the kitchen.VirginiaI picked this clip because I think Laura is summing up so many important pieces of this conversation that I just continue to see nowhere in the mainstream media discourse around ultra-processed foods. Like the fact that they are useful and convenient. And convenience is not a moral failing. I don't know where we decided food should be inconvenient to be valuable and healthy? But it seems like that's a thing that we believe.CorinneI know Maintenance Phase just did an ultra processed food episode. I listened to that.VirginiaOh, it's excellent. CorinneAnd both they and you and Laura got into the way that “processed” is just such a moving target. It means so many different things.VirginiaIt means literally anything.CorinneAnd also nothing.VirginiaYes, when I say this is missing from the discourse, I don't mean Maintenance Phase, who I think we're very much in conversation with. As Mike and Aubrey kept discussing on their episode—I think Laura says some of this, too—depending whose classification system you go by, honey is ultra-processed or it's not ultra-processed. Foods are moving categories all the time.And as Aubrey said: Really what it comes down to is they're categorizing foods so that the ones that “people who make less money than you buy” are bad. And I was like, yep, there it is. This is really classism and racism and all the other isms to say let's demonize these foods that people rely on. Which is not to say we shouldn't improve the overall quality of food in the food system! But doing it through this policing of consumer habits just will never not make me furious.CorinneReally feels like this hasn't gotten better since the episode aired two years ago? VirginiaIf anything, I think it has intensified. I think RFK and MAHA has really put this one in their crosshairs, and it's just getting worse and worse. It's really maddening, because we're just not having any of the real conversations we need to have about how to improve food quality in this country or anywhere.CorinneWhat a bummer. All right, let's listen to this next quote, which is about jeans.VirginiaOh, jeans.VirginiaSo the backstory is on recent Indulgence Gospels, we have talked about how Corinne converted me to the universal standard straight leg jeans, and I do really like them. But earlier today, I had to be in photos, and we had a plan. The three of us had a plan that I was going to wear those jeans, and at the last minute, I texted Dacy. I didn't even text Corinne because I knew she'd yell at me. I texted Dacy, and I was like, I can't do it. I'm in my skinny jeans for the photos. And, yeah, it was like, do I look too sloppy? Are these, like, saggy in a weird way that I have no control over?And I feel like for something like having your picture taken, like, wear the pants, you're not going to feel like you're only thinking about your pants. You know what I mean?CorinneOkay, so I wanted to revisit some of your feelings about jeans. You may recall that we used to open like every podcast episode by chatting about pants!VirginiaWe did. We haven't done that!CorinneWe kind of fell off pants chat, and I don't know why.VirginiaBring back pants chat! CorinneBut I do feel like since we started doing the podcast, your feelings about jeans have evolved? True or false?VirginiaThey have evolved. They definitely have. I mean, I still own a pair of emotional support skinny jeans. The same pair I mention in that episode. CorinneWhen is the last time you wore them?VirginiaI actually have not worn them very much at all. I did wear them two weeks ago under a shirt dress because it turned out to be colder than I thought. And I was like, “Oh, it's not a bare leg dress day.” So I put on skinny jeans under it, but I haven't worn them for any other reason in a really long time.And I will say: I'm wearing my Gap straight leg jeans the most, the baggier fit ones the most. So I do think I've evolved to embrace a more relaxed fit of jean, which does make it much easier to get jeans to fit your body.I still think the primary finding of Jean Science was correct, that jeans are designed terribly, that fashion in general is terrible at fitting people's bodies, but particularly when it comes to fitting pants onto fat people. They're really bad at it. And so I think all the jeans are bad.But I will say if you can embrace a wider leg or a more relaxed fit, you will have more options.CorinneYeah, I think that's true.VirginiaI still cannot solve for the factor of, if you wear a more relaxed fit, they will still stretch out when you wear them, and they will be falling off you by the second day, if not later in the first day. And nobody has solved this.CorinneI think someone did solve it, and it's belts.VirginiaThat is not a solution that is available to me, personally. I don't like belts. I guess I should try belts? I don't know about belts. Okay, that's a whole other thing.CorinneThis is kind of neither here nor there, but I just read this post from Em Seely-Katz who writes Esque, and I think they were actually writing about something else, raw hem jeans. But they were saying that men's jeans, the zipper goes all the way from the bottom of the crotch up to the top. Why don't women's jeans do that?VirginiaWait, men's jeans have a different zipper?CorinneLike, the zipper on women's jeans is shorter. It doesn't go all the way down.VirginiaIs it because they don't want men to pee on their pants?CorinneWell, I think it's so you can open them up more to get your… whatever but, but I think women's jeans should also have that option for access.VirginiaI just really have to pause on how uncomfortable Corinne was saying penis right there. She was like… whatever you've got down there.CorinneI think I was going to say dick and then I was like, is that inappropriate?VirginiaWhatever, we swear all the time. Anyway, the zipper is longer so that men can deal with their junk.CorinneI think women should have the option of being able to deal with their junk as well.VirginiaAgreed, agreed. Pro longer zipper.CorinneAlso, I feel like it would be easier to to get jeans on if they opened up more at the top.VirginiaNow that you've put this very important issue on my radar, I'm ready to adopt it as a primary cause.CorinneOkay, thank you.VirginiaWe will have a petition for everyone to sign shortly. You are a diehard jeans person. You always look great in jeans. You're inspiring on the topic.CorinneThis year I have adopted drawstring jeans, which feels like it's barely jeans.VirginiaBut also sounds like a life hack.CorinneYeah, it's very comfortable.VirginiaI love drawstring. In the summer, I wear a lot of drawstring. I don't wear a lot of drawstring in the winter.CorinneDrawstring would probably solve your stretching out after a couple wears problem, similar to a belt.VirginiaIt would be like a belt, but not a belt, so it wouldn't trigger my belt concerns.I think my other struggle with jeans—that is maybe not really even about jeans—is that since I have broken up mostly with dark skinny jeans, there is sometimes a category of outfit I am trying to achieve where I'm trying to be dressed up, but not too dressed up. And I feel like the dark skinny jean really filled that need. Does that make sense?Like, you want to look like kind of polished because you're going to your kid's chorus concert or out to dinner with friends, but it's not like all the way to a dress level? That might feel like too much. I feel like the dark skinny jean really threaded this needle.This stems from having been in my 20s in the early 2000s and being trained in the School of the Going Out Top. The going out top and dark jeans was a uniform. And I think I'm still like, “So what replaces the dark jeans and the going out top?” And then I realized, like… anything? That's me trying to dress like it's 2003 and it's not.But that is one place I still struggle, because I don't feel like the lighter, more relaxed denim can can do that same category?CorinneHmm, what about darker, wide leg jeans? Is that not a thing?VirginiaMaybe I just haven't found a pair I really like that are darker. That's a good thought.CorinneOr maybe with wide leg jeans, you need a slightly fancier top, I don't know.VirginiaI think a lot of our dependency on the skinny jean was just because we'd really learned the outfit formulas for it. And I do feel like sometimes when I gravitate back towards it, it's because I'm feeling at sea with how to put an outfit together without them.CorinneThis is not about jeans, but I'm really into these Old Navy shorts I have that have stripes down the side. They're sweat shorts. And they're so comfortable. But then sometimes when I'm going out, I am like, wait, what do I put on the top so that it doesn't look like I'm just in sweats?VirginiaI just came here in pajamas. Yeah, don't you feel like that's a struggle with shorts and tank tops in general in the summer? And I feel like more of a struggle for fat folks?CorinneMaybe.VirginiaIt's harder to look like you got dressed or something, right?CorinneLike, how do I look like I'm not just wearing a t-shirt and jeans?Lately, I've been experimenting with the answer to that being socks. Right now I'm wearing—am I about to try and show you my socks? Nope.I'm wearing chartreuse socks, kind of like a chartreuse dress sock. I'll send you a pic after. But I feel like that with the tank top and shorts kind of makes it look more outfit-y.@selfiefayStay for the pitbull cameo #ootd VirginiaYou should know my 11 year old is doing the same thing this summer.CorinneOh, that's cool.VirginiaThere are a lot of brightly colored socks with regular shorts and t-shirts. Also, she has a lot of animal print socks. So you're blessed by Gen Alpha or whatever she is.CorinneAmazing.VirginiaGood job.All right. Well, for the final clip, I went back to another favorite guest conversation. To be clear, I love all of our guest conversations. But this was one that was just like one of my favorite ever. It was with Martinus Evans, who is the author of Slow AF Run Club: The Ultimate Guide for Anyone Who Wants to Run. Martinus also runs the Slow AF Run Club, which is a running community for folks to run in the bodies they have. He is so hilarious and delightful. This episode ran in June 2023 so here's the clip.MartinusSo what that looks like is like letting them know that obstacles and rising up in the face of adversity is a good thing. Because for a lot of people, they think it's a bad thing. Like, oh, I face adversity. I'm slow.Or, here's the thing I always get, is that I started running, and then I got a little tired, and I started walking, and I felt absolutely horrible that I had to walk. And then me come in and say, Well, what was wrong with that? Did you start running again? Yeah, I did. Well, fuck like, let's celebrate that then? It's that thing of letting people know that it's okay to bumble and stumble and figure this thing out because you're doing something with your body that you have not been A. celebrated to do, right? But B. You're kind of stifled, like being a plus size person, like you may have even been stifled with movement, because you haven't had the liberty to actually explore the things that your body might be able to do. You got to explore and figure all this stuff out.So, like, that's where providing psychological safety is letting them know that it's okay. It's almost like, imagine a kid who's like, riding a bike for the first time. They ride the bike, you let it go, they lose their balance, they fall, they scrape their knee. They're going to cry. They're going to be like, Oh, I don't want to ride this bike anymore. It's horrible. I don't want to do this. Don't make me do this. But as a good parent or as a good coach, you're going to like, okay, let's cry it out. You done crying? Okay, now let's get your ass back on that bike. The same thing is true with physical activity. All right. You did it. You got a side stitch? Okay, cool. Let's figure this out. Oh, you got shin splints. Okay, cool, yeah, let's figure this out. Oh, oh, you got delay, onset, muscle soreness? Great. Let's figure this out. But guess what? Yeah, that's going to continue to move.That's the approach that I take. Like we're all going to fall off, and somewhere around us being grown start to be embedded in us, like doing something and then like failing or like not getting it right on the first time is a bad thing. I think it's school.VirginiaI think school is a lot of it, yeah. I'm thinking, like, when a baby's learning to walk, they fall a million times, and people aren't like you should stop trying to walk. You know what I mean?MartinusImagine that like walking a baby trying to walk. And I said, screw you baby! Like you suck you're not. Damn you for trying to walk.VirginiaYeah, you are a fat baby who can't walk. And yet we have this narrative that then kicks in of somehow, if I have to stop to walk during my run, that's like a moral failing. Like walking and running are morally equivalent activities, right? Like if you're walking, some of it, if you're running, some of that, as you said, like the pace of your running, if you are slow, that is still running. There's no need to be attaching all these values to it.But it does seem like the culture of running at large is so built on that paradigm, and you are really challenging an entire paradigm here.MartinusYes, I am. Here's why. If you're not an elite athlete who's like their life depends on winning prize money and like going to the Olympics, all of us are then paying for a participation medal to participate in a parade.CorinneI love this. He's really delightful.VirginiaHe's so good. And the reframing of running marathons as participating in a parade will just make me happy forever. It's so correct.I mean, obviously we stand by everything Martinus said. There's not really a lot more to say. So I thought we could also talk a little bit about how working on the podcast has changed each of our relationship with exercise. Because I think we've done a lot of good fitness content over the last 200 episodes, and I personally feel like I'm in a better place with exercise than I was when I started this project.CorinneHmm, that's awesome. Well, I think I started lifting around the same time that I started doing the podcast.VirginiaThere was an early episode where you were, like, “I'm using a broomstick.”CorinneOh, that's right! I was doing Couch to Barbell!VirginiaAnd look at you now, power lifter.CorinneI mean, one thing that is interesting about maybe starting any exercise, or maybe specifically powerlifting, is I think, in the first like year that you do it, you get better fast. Like, really consistently, almost every time you go to the gym, you're lifting more weight. And that is so rewarding. And probably a little addictive.Now that I have been doing it for two and a half years, I'm not getting better every time. Sometimes I can't lift weights that I have previously lifted for various reasons. Even if I'm maxing out, sometimes not hitting my previous maxes. I think it can be hard to figure out what am I doing? I took a little bit break last summer. I went to visit family, and I decided to just not go to the gym.VirginiaI remember, that seems good. I feel like it was good you took that break.CorinneYeah, it was good. And it sucked getting back. So yeah, I'm still figuring it out.VirginiaI guess that's the tricky thing about any sport where there's progress attached to it, which power lifting is still a sport organized around progress.CorinneI mean, there are different ways you can measure progress, too. Like how many reps, versus just straight up how much weight.VirginiaBut it's still measuring progress. It's still expecting there to be progress, which is both exciting, and I think progress can be very motivating. And what do you do then when you're in a period with it where it's not really about progress? How do you find value in that relationship? That's a tricky question.CorinneOr when the progress is just much smaller.VirginiaAnd can you still feel good about that?. Or do you start feeling like what's the point? I think for me, it's so funny that I love this conversation with Martinus so much, because I am just never going to be a runner again. Running was such a bad relationship that I'm so glad to be done with.I think for me, so much of finding joy and exercise is about not having progress goals of any kind. Like just having different activities I like doing for their own sake, and kind of rotating. Like, I like weight lifting. It was exciting when I went up to larger weight, heavier weights. At some point I hope to go up to heavier weights again.But I'm not tracking it. I'm like, these still seem hard. I don't know, it seems fine.Then the other stuff I do, like walking the dog and gardening, are really not things you would be like, wow, I weeded two more flower beds this week. It's not progress.But I do feel good that I, in various flavors, work out much more consistently than I have at other points in my life. Because it's more built into my lifestyle. And, I think talking to people like Martinus, Anna Maltby, obviously Lauren Leavell, Jessie Diaz-Herrera and all the folks who've come on and talked to us about different approaches to fitness have just really helped me claim it for myself in a way that I really was struggling to do. So that's been cool.CorinneYeah, that is cool. That's inspiring.ButterCorinneWell, this was fun to look back on some favorite episodes! Should we do butter?VirginiaI just came up with my Butter while I was eating lunch. And it is what I ate for lunch. And it is Sushi Salad. I invented this today. I had some leftover sushi, but it wasn't quite enough to be lunch by itself. So I chopped up the spicy tuna roll, with the rice and everything, chopped it up into little chunks, and I put it over a bed of greens with some some chopped bell peppers, some red onion, and then I kind of made up a fake spicy mayonnaise Asian-ish salad dressing. I'm not saying this is culturally authentic in any way. I need to underscore that a lot. But it was such a good lunch. So Sushi Salad is my Butter.And in general, I've been a big fan of leftovers plus salad as a lunch formula. A lot of leftovers lend themselves well to being a chopped ingredient in a good salad, and then it's like a new take. If you're someone who gets sick of leftovers, it's a whole new experience.CorinneI'm also going to do a food.VirginiaGreat. We love food Butter.CorinneI had some friends over for dinner earlier this week, and I made this Smitten Kitchen recipe, she calls it garlic lime steak and noodle salad.VirginiaOh, sold.CorinneIt's a really good hot weather meal, because it's rice vermicelli that you basically dunk in hot water for a few minutes and can serve cold or room temp. Then you chop up cucumbers and tomatoes and green beans, and then you make a marinade that also doubles as a dressing that has fish sauce, sugar, stuff like that, and and grill some steak and put that on top.VirginiaOh my gosh, I'm making this this week. I love this kind of recipe. Also, a great salad. Don't sleep on main course salads.CorinneYes, I had the leftovers as a salad yesterday. So good.Well, coming up next week, we're going to visit another bunch of favorite moments. Including: Feelings about aging, heterosexual marriage and what happens when your partner is on a diet.VirginiaThat episode WILL be paywalled, just like all our other Indulgence Gospels, so you should become a paid subscriber so you don't miss it! Here's that sale link again. The Burnt Toast Podcast is produced and hosted by Virginia Sole-Smith (follow me on Instagram) and Corinne Fay, who runs @SellTradePlus, and Big Undies—subscribe for 20% off!The Burnt Toast logo is by Deanna Lowe.Our theme music is by Farideh.Tommy Harron is our audio engineer.Thanks for listening and for supporting anti-diet, body liberation journalism! This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit virginiasolesmith.substack.com/subscribe

In this engaging podcast episode, Jaime Wright welcomes Laura Thomas, an author from British Columbia, Canada. They chat about Laura's writing journey, her latest book in the Bite of Betrayal series, and the intricate characters and themes that shape her stories. The conversation delves into the romantic suspense genre, exploring the layers of character development, personal connections to opera, and the significance of surrender in relationships. Laura shares insights into her creative process and the inspirations behind her characters, particularly the unique choice of an opera singer as a protagonist. It's a MUST LISTEN!

 Love suspense that keeps you convinced that nothing will ever go right again?  Love characters you fall in love with on the first page?  Love wondering how these guys are going to get out of the terrifying situations authors put them in?  Well, you've not seen anything until you've read a Laura Thomas book. Listen in for a glimpse of what you'll find in her newest release, The Final Word. note: links may be affiliate links that provide me with a small commission at no extra expense to you.  When it comes to research, Laura Thomas goes all out. A trip to Paris?  If she has to... Off to England to find the perfect pink cottage?  YEP! How about returning to give the owner of that cottage a copy of the book inspired by that cottage?  You betcha! And we only have to wait a YEAR for the next book. *whimpers* The Final Word  by Laura Thomas When aspiring author Sophie Brooks chooses to trade a vibrant Paris life for the tranquility of a quaint English village, she imagines her final days in the City of Lights will be magical. Sophie doesn't anticipate a chilling encounter with an old flame—nor does she plan to find a new love on her very last night. Miles Morgan's life has been defined as a successful opera singer—until now. His chance encounter with Sophie in Paris ignites renewed hope ... if he can figure out his next chapter and if she can accept what his future may hold. In the heart of the English countryside, Sophie and Miles' fairy tale romance turns into a noxious nightmare as the darkness of Sophie's past—and her volatile ex—catch up with her. Both Sophie and Miles must surrender everything to the One they thought had betrayed them as they lean into love and fight for their lives. Learn more about Laura on her  WEBSITE and follow her on GoodReads and BookBub. To learn about Captured in Frame, listen HERE. Like to listen on the go? You can find Because Fiction Podcast at: Apple Castbox Google Play Libsyn RSS Spotify Amazon and more!

The strait between Bristol and Portsmouth, Rhode Island, was busy in the early 1800s, with all manner of vessels passing between Narragansett Bay to the west and Mount Hope Bay to the east. A lighthouse was built on the Bristol side in 1855, with a small brick dwelling and a lighthouse tower attached to its southern end. The lighthouse's days as an aid to navigation ended with the construction of the Mount Hope Bridge in 1929, almost directly over the lighthouse. The lantern was removed and the property passed into private ownership. Bristol Ferry Lighthouse, photo by Jeremy D'Entremont Simon and Laura Thomas Owners Carol and Bob Lundin restored the building and had a new lantern room fabricated and installed in the 1990s. Today, the lighthouse is owned by Simon and Laura Thomas and managed as an inn, with bookings available through AirbnB and Vrbo. Simon and Laura are interviewed in this episode along with Rhode Island marine photographer Matthew Cohen. Judianne Point co-hosts. Below: inside Bristol Ferry Lighthouse, photos by Jeremy D'Entremont

I know I'm not the only one filled with anticapatory grief as I watch my parents age- it's a needed conversation and not nearly happening often enough.   Today, Laura Thomas joins us to share her story about caretaking for her dad in his final days. She gives us insights into the physical and emotional strength needed to navigate this time (this is why we lift, ya'll) as well as other important considerations like navigating the financial and logistical aspects that come in the wake of a parent passing away. Connect with Laura: On her website On IG: @laurathomasfitness

Andy Cam and Todd Glister talk to Laura Thomas, Head of Training at Vaillant about her off the tools role and find out about her experiences delivering training in a male dominated industry. Todd also gives an update on how fatherhood has been for him professionally and personally so far in 2025...

Registered nutritionist, author, and friend of the pod Laura Thomas joins us to unpack the problematic notion that you need to eat a ridiculously large number of plants per week for gut health, and what we actually know about how plant foods affect the gut microbiome. We also get into how to distinguish good science from hype, how ultra-processed foods have become so demonized despite a lack of strong evidence, how anti-fat bias is baked into the discourse about both gut health and ultra-processed foods, and lots more. (This episode originally aired on Rethinking Wellness in March 2024.) Laura is a Registered Nutritionist who helps people feel less afraid of the food they eat and more comfortable in their bodies. Through her work with individuals and families, as well as in her writing, she challenges dominant ideals about ‘good' and ‘bad' foods and ‘good' and ‘bad' bodies. She holds a PhD in Nutritional Sciences from Texas A&M University, and worked as a post-doctoral research associate at Cornell University before starting her private practice. More recently she received a diploma in Clinical Nutrition and Eating Disorders from UCL. She has published two books: Just Eat It and How To Just Eat It, both of which focus on healing our relationship with food and our body through Intuitive Eating. Her clinical work is focussed on supporting families to end the intergenerational transmission of body shame and disordered eating. She writes the newsletter Can I Have Another Snack? Check out Christy's three books, Anti-Diet, The Wellness Trap, and The Emotional Eating, Chronic Dieting, Binge Eating & Body Image Workbook for a deeper dive into the topics covered on the pod. If you're ready to break free from diet culture and make peace with food, come check out Christy's Intuitive Eating Fundamentals online course. For more critical thinking and compassionate skepticism about wellness and diet culture, check out Christy's Rethinking Wellness podcast! You can also sign up to get it in your inbox every week at rethinkingwellness.substack.com. Ask a question about diet and wellness culture, disordered-eating recovery, and the anti-diet approach for a chance to have it answered on Rethinking Wellness. You can also subscribe to the Food Psych Weekly newsletter to check out previous answers!

In this engaging conversation, Jaime Jo Wright kicks back and chats with Laura Thomas, a romantic suspense author, about her latest book 'Captured in Frame'. There is so much happening in this fictional English village--not to mention Laura's English accent--you won't want to miss eavesdropping on this one!

Welcome to season 2 episode 6 of A Friend for the Long Haul - A Long Covid Podcast! This episode features my friend, Laura Thomas. Laura and I met in an Austin, Texas-based long covid support group, and started talking when she found out that I had moved from Texas because I discovered that my MCAS symptoms improved out of state. Laura hosts a podcast called Rescued By A Dog, which features stories of dogs saving their people. In this episode, Laura and I discuss: How we met and our long covid experiences Moving out of state in an attempt to see any improvement in our symptoms Acknowledging the privilege we both had to be able to move Low dose Naltrexone, Paxlovid, anesthesia, and ketamine therapy (none of this is medical advice!) What we call "zero dignity moments" with chronic illness EMDR, brain retraining, staying present "Resentment rebellion" Lymphatic massage The story behind Rescued by a Dog Find Rescued by a Dog on Spotify: https://open.spotify.com/show/0t6XikdERybsS3wwwaJb6j?si=c1654161e4504d1e And Apple Podcasts: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/rescued-by-a-dog/id1648960693 Support the podcast via Laura's Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/RescuedbyaDogPodcast Don't forget to like, subscribe, follow, and share A Friend for the Long Haul if you can. And if you're feeling extra generous, leave a review. Your support helps get this in front of more earballs and helps me bring more episodes. You can listen to the A Friend for the Long Haul Long Covid Theme Songs playlist on Spotify: https://open.spotify.com/playlist/3n0GXLFRWqDJyifglNNM4K?si=7948dbf2222c4392 If you'd like to support this low budget/high love podcast, you can check out my Bonfire shirt for silly long covid apparel where I'm raising money for a pro license of Zoom (as of right now, I can only record 30-40 minutes at a time and then we have to hang up and come back. Not great for conversational flow!): https://www.bonfire.com/store/a-friend-for-the-long-haul/ or my Amazon wishlist: https://www.amazon.com/hz/wishlist/ls/3MYBB5G0P7YUD?ref_=wl_share Thanks again for listening!

Rev. Dan Ramthun of Guardian, Dearborn and Mrs. Laura Thomas, Michigan District, LCMS Director of Development join the podcast to discuss Church Worker Appreciation Month which starts in October.   […]

Tune in to this week's episode for another engaging author interview! We had the pleasure of chatting with the delightful Laura Thomas about writing, breaking into publishing, and her latest book, Captured in Frame. Don't miss it!

Nutritionist and author Laura Thomas joins us to discuss what it's like for kids living in the long shadow of “clean eating,” the “almond mom” trend on TikTok, the "wellness to woo pipeline," how parents and caregivers can let go of wellness-culture beliefs about food for themselves and their kids, and more.Laura Thomas is an anti-diet Registered Nutritionist. Her clinical work focuses on supporting parents and families to end intergenerational dieting and body shame, and work towards a greater sense of embodiment and ease in their relationship with food. She supports families of children experiencing a wide range of feeding and eating challenges, such as concerns with weight, very selective eating, food preoccupation, and other feeding and eating differences. Laura also runs the newsletter, podcast, and community Can I Have Another Snack? on Substack, where she is exploring bodies, appetite, and identity with a focus on parenting. She is the author of two books: Just Eat It and How To Just Eat It.If you like this conversation, subscribe to hear lots more like it! You can also sign up to get it in your inbox each week (with a full transcript) at rethinkingwellness.substack.com.Pre-order Christy's upcoming book, The Wellness Trap, for its April 25 release, and get access to an exclusive webinar discussing the book by submitting your proof of purchase at christyharrison.com/bookbonus.If you're looking to make peace with food and break free from diet and wellness culture, come check out Christy's Intuitive Eating Fundamentals online course. This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit rethinkingwellness.substack.com/subscribe

You're listening to Burnt Toast. I'm Virginia Sole-Smith. Today I am chatting with the brilliant Laura Thomas, PhD.Laura is a Registered Nutritionist who specializes in responsive feeding and anti-diet, body affirming nutrition. Her work centers on helping parents and families end inter-generational dieting and body shame, and work towards a greater sense of embodiment and ease in their relationship with food. She writes the newsletter Can I Have Another Snack? and is the author of two books; Just Eat It and How to Just Eat It.Laura did an awesome three part series on her newsletter last summer, and as soon as I read it, I knew I wanted to have her on the podcast to discuss. We'll be getting into:* What even is an Ultra-Processed Food?* What does the research tell us about how UPFs impact our health?* How should we be thinking about the current UPF discourse?This episode first ran as a two-parter, so if you find today's conversation helpful, you'll also want to go back and listen to episode 102, where we answer your nitty gritty questions about the UPFs in your diet.If you want more conversations like this one, please rate and review us in your podcast player! And become a paid Burnt Toast subscriber to get all of Virginia's reporting and bonus subscriber-only episodes.Disclaimer: Virginia is a journalist and human with a lot of informed opinions. Virginia is not a nutritionist, therapist, doctor, or any kind of health care provider. The conversation you're about to hear and all of the advice and opinions she gives are just for entertainment, information, and education purposes only. None of this is a substitute for individual medical or mental health advice.BUTTER & OTHER LINKSLaura's three part series on UPFsVirginia on processed foods here and therelabor rights violations for Amy's workersFAT TALK is out! Order your signed copy from Virginia's favorite independent bookstore, Split Rock Books (they ship anywhere in the US!). Or order it from your independent bookstore, or from Barnes & Noble, Amazon, Target, or Kobo or anywhere else you like to buy books. You can also order the audio book from Libro.fm or Audible.The Burnt Toast Podcast is produced and hosted by Virginia Sole-Smith (follow me on Instagram) and Corinne Fay who runs @SellTradePlus and Big Undies—subscribe for 20% off.The Burnt Toast logo is by Deanna Lowe.Our theme music is by Jeff Bailey and Chris Maxwell.Tommy Harron is our audio engineer.Thanks for listening and for supporting anti-diet, body liberation journalism! This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit virginiasolesmith.substack.com/subscribe

Why do so many people get into conservation because of a love of animals, only to discover that it's all about people?And why if you're interested in working as a social scientist particularly, should you focus on improving on your softer skills, especially if you want to get ahead in your career?We discuss these questions and many more with today's guest Dr Laura Thomas-Walters.Laura is the Deputy Director of Experimental Research for the Yale Program on Climate Change Communication. She describes herself as an environmental social scientist with a focus on behaviour change who works closely with governments and NGOs to enact change through research.In this episode, we delve deep into the fascinating world of conservation science and climate change communication.Laura shares her journey into conservation, driven by a passion for big, cuddly animals, and how it evolved into a focus on behaviour change and climate activism.We explore the multifaceted nature of Laura's research, from demand reduction in the wildlife trade to linking extreme weather events with climate change.We also discuss the importance of cultural awareness, interdisciplinary collaboration, and the challenges of transitioning between academia and government work.Finally, Laura also provides valuable insights into the soft skills needed for conservation social science and offers advice for aspiring conservationists on how to navigate the complexities of this field.It's a social-scienceing, climate-communicating, behaviour-changing podchat. Enjoy.

This episode of the Ecosystemic Futures Podcast explores the opportunities and challenges of deep tech innovation, with a focus on emerging technologies like quantum computing, fusion energy, and their implications for society, industry, and national security.  The conversation features insights from Laura Thomas, a former CIA case officer and current advisor to cutting-edge startups, and Co-Hosts Vikram Shyam and Dyan Finkhousen. They discuss the complexities of regulating rapidly evolving technologies, the need for better collaboration between the public and private sectors, and the importance of addressing sustainability and equity concerns alongside technological progress. Guest: Laura Thomas, Advisor for a quantum technology company, Infleqtion and fusion energy company, Fuse. Co-Hosts: Vikram Shyam, Lead Futurist, NASA Glenn Research Center Dyan Finkhousen, Founder & CEO, Shoshin Works Series Hosts: Vikram Shyam, Lead Futurist, NASA Glenn Research Center Dyan Finkhousen, Founder & CEO, Shoshin Works

You'll never look at postcards or silver cars the same in Laura Thomas' new romantic suspense, Captured in Frame. Listen in to learn all about Laura's new series, its cool location, and what we'll see with these three sisters. note: links may be affiliate links that provide me with a small commission at no extra expense to you.   When Laura and I chatted about her upcoming release, Captured in Frame, I hadn't yet read it, but I have now, and wow.  A blend of edge-of-your-seat moments, wild rides (literally) and a total Wuthering Heights moment, the mystery will keep you on your toes even while you try to keep Laura's characters on theirs. Rich in faith and local culture, you won't want to miss this series.   Captured in Frame by Laura Thomas  In an idyllic village nestled in the English countryside, photographer Georgia Brooks is desperate to begin a new chapter in her life. Bramble Cottage was supposed to give her space to heal and hope again after suffering betrayal and rejection by the only man she ever loved. This was Georgia's chance to rekindle her faith and reconnect with her sisters in a place that held sweet childhood memories—not expose herself to the ugly underbelly of the art world and put her family in danger. Local pediatric surgeon, Doctor William Hughes, is captivated by the Canadian beauty with a camera over one shoulder and the weight of the world on the other. After suffering his own tragic loss and balancing a demanding career with raising a toddler, he recognizes the heaviness of grief . . . and the burden of guilt. When Georgia discovers she could be in possession of incriminating evidence to frame a criminal ring, she needs to trust someone. She chooses Will. Postcards, photographs, paintings—something about Bramble Cottage is worth killing for. Can Georgia uncover the truth in time? Learn more about Laura on her  WEBSITE and follow her on GoodReads and BookBub. Like to listen on the go? You can find Because Fiction Podcast at: Apple  Castbox  Google Play Libsyn  RSS Spotify Amazon and more!

In this episode of the Digital Learning Today Podcast, Jeff welcomes Laura Thomas on the program to discuss the 2024 ISTELive conference! If you are a new listener to TeacherCast, we would love to hear from you.  Please visit our Contact Page and let us know how we can help you today! ISTE 2024 Sessions to Check Out! ONSITE ATTENDEE CONTENTChallenge Design: Getting Started and Going Deeper Learn how to design experiential, standards-driven, problem-based challenges that grow with you and your students. This session will introduce you to a process for designing experiences to teach and practice academic content alongside skills and dispositions. Sunday, June 23, 2:30 p.m. – 3:30 p.m.Colorado Convention Center, 603 Higher-Order Thinking Playground — Engage in Critical Creative Thinking Activities and Resources!Monday, June 24, 9:00 a.m. – 11:00 a.m.Colorado Convention Center, Playground A Two Great Things, Better Together: Designing PBL Challenges for SEL & Academics Learn how to design experiential, standards-driven, problem-based challenges that grow with you and your students, designed to teach and practice both academic content and skills and dispositions. Magnify the power of both your SEL & PBL efforts by taking a developmental approach to design, facilitation and assessment. Tuesday,  June 25, 2:30 p.m. – 4:00 p.m. Colorado Convention Center, Mile High Ballroom 4EF VIRTUAL ATTENDEE CONTENT Challenge Design: Getting started and Going Deeper - Learn how to design experiential, standards-driven, problem-based challenges that grow with you and your students. This session will introduce you to a process for designing experiences to teach and practice academic content alongside skills and dispositions. Sunday, June 23, 2:30 p.m. – 3:30 p.m. Follow Our Podcast And Subscribe View All Episodes Apple Podcasts Spotify Follow Our Host Jeff Bradbury | @JeffBradbury TeacherCast | @TeacherCast About our Guest: Laura Thomas After nearly a decade of teaching high school English, debate, theatre, and speech, Laura Thomas joined the Education Department faculty at Antioch University New England, first as the assistant director/director of what would become the Antioch Center for School Renewal and later as the director of the Experienced Educators Program, which provides MEds and certificates for working teachers. Laura's portfolio includes Antioch's PBL/Critical Skills Classroom concentration (a K–12 teaching methodology that combines project-based learning, social and emotional learning, and 21st-century skills in meaningful, authentic contexts) and its related programs in Integrated STEAM Education and Teaching and Learning Laura's primary areas of study center on the development of teachers' assessment and pedagogical approaches, social justice and equity (particularly in rural schools), resistance to change, and student-centered classroom practice. In 2020 she completed a four-year clinical...

This is a really special episode for me, because today we are celebrating 6 months of the Mystic Dog Mama podcast, and 6 months of growing this beautiful community together! In this special episode, I have created a compilation. If you've been with me for a while, you'll know that I ask all of my guests what dogs have taught them about what it means to be human. The answers are so profound and beautiful, and they offer a real opportunity to reflect on who we are as individuals, and who we aspire to be. I've brought all of my guests' answers to this particular question together in this episode, so you can hear them again in one timeline. I hope you enjoy hearing the breadth and depth of their responses. I've listed everyone in the time stamps below, so you can see the speaking order. When I first decided to create the podcast, I set the intention that this would be a safe space to bring people together to talk about what nourishment for our dogs, ourselves, and the planet could look like. But, I never imagined that this little corner of the internet could create such a sense of home for myself, and for those of you joining me in this journey. We live in a strange time-space continuum that can be so divisive, and so alienating. It's such a testament to the canine spirit that a little 10lb chihuahua walked into my life, and became the catalyst for creating such a beautiful community. I am grateful to each and every one of my guests, and each and every one of you listening. This means the world to me to have you and your pups walking the spiritual path alongside me and Lucky. A quick note that this episode was sponsored by Aspirationery, which, in full transparency, is another project of mine where we create books, notebooks, and stationery to help you become all you aspire to be. You can check out our shadow work and moon magic journals and workbooks, as well as our popular “My First Period Tracker” for young girls and tweens on Instagram @aspirationery. Ok, let's go! TIME STAMPS 00:22 INTRO 03:38 David Ian Howe, archaeologist 12:05 Vivian Birlie, canine reflexologist 14:09 G.G. Silverman, author and creative 16:16 Dr Tom Lonsdale, veterinarian and author 21:30 Dr Laura Donaldson, professional dog trainer and behavior consultant 25:51 Sarah Vrba, astrology and tarot expert 27:73 Susan Raven, author and musician 28:40 Laura Thomas, host of Rescued by a Dog podcast and author 30:31 Berdhanya Swami Tierra, spiritual teacher 44:38 Caroline Griffith, pet nutrition consultant and founder of Canine Flow 46:31 Jessica Green, integrative health practitioner and health coach 47:39 Kay Stewart, veterinary technician and lead educator at Feed Real Institute 48:34 Rachel Knott, zoopharmacognosy expert and animal communicator 50:25 Dr Odette Suter, veterinarian 53:16 Veronica Mezzetti-Draia, human design expert and coach 57:56 Niki French, professional dog trainer, author, and host of PupTalk 59:38 Wendy Welpton, natural movement expert and host of Make Movement Matter podcast 1:02:56 Kim Brophey, professional dog trainer and behaviour consultant, applied ethologist, and author 1:05:11 Rhi Anderson, life coach 1:08:37 Simone Mueller, professional dog trainer and behaviour consultant, and author 1:09:56 Dr Saskia von Diest, Nature communicator and founder of Ecofluency 1:11:52 Jess Adam, therapist and coach 1:13:50 Sally Morningstar, author, photographer, and hedgewitch 1:16:12 Amy Arnold, professional life fulfilment coach 1:18:04 Hannah Zulueta, canine nutritionist 1:20:14 OUTRO DISCLAIMER: This is not a substitute for medical advice or other relevant professional advice. 

Today, we talked to Laura Thomas, a former Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) case officer and Chief of Base in Afghanistan. She has served over 17 years in national security and leadership roles. We discuss:How a CIA station operatesWhat kind of intelligence failure was October 7th?The holes in how CIA teaches tradecraftWhy did intelligence agencies predict Kabul would fall quickly to the Taliban?Read the transcript at https://www.statecraft.pub/p/how-to-run-a-cia-base-in-afghanistan This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.statecraft.pub

In this episode of OODAcast, Bob Gourley interviews Laura Thomas, a deep tech consultant and former CIA officer. Laura discusses her journey from a small town in North Carolina to a career in the CIA, where she served as a case officer. She emphasizes the importance of critical thinking and decision-making under uncertainty, and how these skills have translated to her work in deep tech. Laura also highlights the potential of quantum computing and fusion energy, stressing the need for innovation and strategic investment in these transformative technologies. Laura's refreshing comments underscore why healthy debate is absolutely critical to good organizational decisions. She says “Disagree with me, I want to hear it, and don't hold back!” She provides some frameworks that can help leaders seeking to assess the dynamic geopolitical world we live in today. Her advice: “Zoom out.” Look at the bigger picture. And think through multiple scenarios. She is a huge fan of scenario planning. Anyone who claims they know the future, she says, is likely a charlatan. Be very careful when you hear someone trying to tell you they know exactly what comes next. We talk about Deep Tech. Laura publishes online at Lauraethomas.com. Her writings there include expert insights into topics like how to engage technical experts at US national labs, agencies and academia to land your next role, things to know about national security deep tech, unique insights into transitioning to the private sector, and fact based observations on espionage and sex. Find Laura on linkedin at: Laura Thomas

Last month's spectacular terrorist attack on a concert venue on the outskirts of Moscow, which left 144 people dead, was quickly followed by startling news that US intelligence had warned the Russians about the impending assault. When the Kremlin said the warnings hadn't been specific, moreover, US officials pushed back, saying, in effect, “Oh yes they were,” and added details to its rejoinder. Likewise, it turned out that back in January, US intelligence had warned Iran about an impending Islamic State terrorist attack at a gathering to honor its fallen Quds Force leader Qasem Soleimani, who had been killed by a US drone strike in Baghdad.  The revelations that our spy services had actually warned two of our greatest mortal enemies astounded many people and triggered a lot of acidic commentary, confusion and the inevitable conspiracy theories on social media. Today's guest, former CIA case officer and base chief Laura Thomas, who held a number of senior intelligence positions during her nearly 16 years of government service, says those actions followed a standard practice in American intelligence. It's called “a duty to warn.” And she's here to explain how that seemingly esoteric, even confounding, practice is not only a staple of the spy world—at least on the American side—but it has some espionage benefits as well. Laura Thomashttps://twitter.com/laurae_thomashttps://www.lauraethomas.com/   Follow Jeff Stein on Twitter:https://twitter.com/SpyTalkerFollow SpyTalk on Twitter:https://twitter.com/talk_spySubscribe to SpyTalk on Substackhttps://www.spytalk.co/Take our listener survey where you can give us feedback.http://survey.podtrac.com/start-survey.aspx?pubid=BffJOlI7qQcF&ver=short

This is a free preview of a paid episode. To hear more, visit rethinkingwellness.substack.comRegistered nutritionist, author, and friend of the pod Laura Thomas joins us to unpack the problematic notion that you need to eat a ridiculously large number of plants per week for gut health, and what we actually know about how plant foods affect the gut microbiome. We also get into how to distinguish good science from hype, how ultra-processed foods have become so demonized despite a lack of strong evidence, the rhetoric around how and ultra-processed foods (and how anti-fat bias is baked into the discourse about both), and lots more. Paid subscribers can hear the full interview, and the first part is available to all listeners. To upgrade to paid, go to rethinkingwellness.substack.com. Laura is a Registered Nutritionist who helps people feel less afraid of the food they eat and more comfortable in their bodies. Through her work with individuals and families, as well as in her writing, she challenges dominant ideals about ‘good' and ‘bad' foods and ‘good' and ‘bad' bodies. She holds a PhD in Nutritional Sciences from Texas A&M University, and worked as a post-doctoral research associate at Cornell University before starting her private practice. More recently she received a diploma in Clinical Nutrition and Eating Disorders from UCL. She has published two books: Just Eat It and How To Just Eat It, both of which focus on healing our relationship with food and our body through Intuitive Eating. Her clinical work is focussed on supporting families to end the intergenerational transmission of body shame and disordered eating. She writes the newsletter Can I Have Another Snack?If you like this conversation, subscribe to hear lots more like it! Support the podcast by becoming a paid subscriber, and unlock great perks like extended interviews, subscriber-only Q&As, full access to our archives, commenting privileges and subscriber threads where you can connect with other listeners, and more. Learn more and sign up at rethinkingwellness.substack.com.Christy's second book, The Wellness Trap, is available wherever books are sold! Order it here, or ask for it in your favorite local bookstore.If you're looking to make peace with food and break free from diet and wellness culture, come check out Christy's Intuitive Eating Fundamentals online course.

Featured StoriesIowa River Power Restaurant brunch, dinner menu returns to Iowa City with new Supper Club at The Highlander HotelLinn-Mar school board appoints Laura Thomas to fill vacancyBlind Boys of Alabama bringing gospel sounds to Englert Theatre

This is a free preview of a paid episode. To hear more, visit laurathomas.substack.comOne of the things that came out of the 2023 Reader Survey was that you wanted a Q+A/AMA of the pod. So we're giving it a shot. Now our monthly pod schedule will consist of 1-2 guest episodes a month, with 1 Q+A with myself and Lucy. Guest episodes will be free for everyone to listen to, with the Q+A episodes being a perk for paid subscribers. In these episodes, we'll be answering the more juicer questions… and the answers may be a little on the spicy side! We're sharing a trailer of today's episode with free subscribers to give you a taste of what you can expect. And we'll always make sure there's something in there for everyone - whether you're a parent or a nutrition student, or just here for rice cake drama (IYKYK).Today I'm joined by CIHAS audio engineer and host of the podcast , Dearlove, to answer listener and reader questions. Tune in to hear us:* Revive and old classic (DSMG fans, this one's for you!)* Share non-lame-gym-bro snack ideas for pre/post workout* Explain why a certain gut health shot is a lot like a bad night out* Talking about why it's important to be calm in the face of a new medical diagnosis rather than falling into diet culture* Offering some advice towards handling the challenges of co-parenting with someone whose views on diet culture are very different from your own* And lastly, why you should ignore influencers who boast about their kids eating stilton and sushiAgain paid subscribers can set up their own private RSS feed to listen to paid-only episodes in their favourite podcast player by following these instructions.This was a super fun episode to create and I know you'll love it too!Find out more about Lucy here.Follow her on Instagram here and here.Follow here on Substack Follow Laura on Instagram here.Subscribe to Laura's newsletter here.TranscriptLaura: Hey, and welcome to the Can I Have Another Snack podcast, where we talk about food, bodies, and identity, especially through the lens of parenting. I'm Laura Thomas. I'm an anti diet registered nutritionist, and I also write the Can I Have Another Snack newsletter.Lucy: And I'm . I am the audio engineer for CIHAS podcast normally, and I also host the food podcast, . Uh, I'm delighted to be joining you for this, Laura. This is really fun.Laura: So we're mixing it up a little bit today to answer some listener questions that you all sent in. I've asked Lucy to join me so that I'm not just sat here talking to myself, but Lucy, I actually have a little surprise for you that I didn't tell you about. So I'm putting you on the spot, but don't worry, It's hopefully a fun surprise. It's not high stakes. But I don't know if you know, but I used to have another podcast called Don't Salt My Game. And at the beginning…Lucy: I'm aware of it.Laura: Oh yeah, you've heard of it. Okay, that's good. That's a good start. At the beginning of every episode, I used to ask my guests some quick fire questions. So I'm just like, rapid speed, throw them out and justLucy: I remember this.Laura: Just throw whatever comes to the top of your head, okay? So it's meant to be fun.Lucy: Okay, I'm on the spot. I'm in the hot seat. I'm ready.Laura: You ready? Alright. Here we go. Tacos or pizza?

I think what it means to be human, at the core, is the same as what it means to be a dog…to love and be loved My guest today is Laura Thomas, host of the Rescued by a Dog podcast, author, musician, documentary maker, and all-around creative, and a mystic dog mama herself. I reached out to Laura after finding myself binge-listening to her podcast where she invites guests who have had some pretty extraordinary experiences of their dogs quite literally saving their lives in a variety of unbelievable circumstances. Laura also shares her beautiful story of how her dog Cody saved her during her battle with long Covid.  I wanted to bring Laura on to Mystic Dog Mama to talk about some of her favourite stories she's been witness to on her podcast, to share her own story with her dogs, and to talk more in depth about what  - and how - our dogs are teaching us about what it means to be human. This was such a fun episode to record, despite the fact that a construction crew decided to start working just as we were recording, and both my dog, Lucky, and Laura's dog, Izzy, were super eager to be involved in the podcast! I've done my best to edit out the annoying constructions noises, so I apologise in advance, but I've left in the dog interactions, because, I mean, this is Mystic Dog Mama, and I will always forgive interruptions of the canine variety! If you want to see some cameos of Lucky and Izzy, definitely check out the video version on Spotify or YouTube where you'll get to see Lucky plant a wet one on my cheek just as Laura describes how dogs are teaching us about unconditional love! If that's not wonderfully magical and mystical, I don't know what is. You can find Rescued by a Dog wherever you stream podcasts, or on Buzzsprout: https://rescuedbyadog.buzzsprout.com/ You can find Laura's book, Not Just a Dog, anywhere that books are sold. This was a listener-inspired episode, because you have mentioned that you'd love to hear inspiring stories of people and their dogs! Keep the feedback coming! Let me know what topics you'd like me to cover on future episodes to help you live your best mystic dog mama (or papa!) life with your own pup! Message me on Instagram @mysticdogmama. This episode is supported by Aspirationery, which in full transparency, is another project of mine. At Aspirationery, we make books, notebooks, and stationery to help you become all you aspire to be! You can check out our shadow work & moon magic journals and workbooks on Instagram @Aspirationery Ok! Until next time! TIMESTAMPS 00:20 Intro 03:22 Welcome Laura Thomas 05:00 Laura shares her story of moving to Austin to run a last chance dog rescue program, her battle with long COVID, and the inspiration to start the Rescued by a Dog podcast 11:25 Craving the intimacy of storytelling 13:20 Dogs save us when we have lost ourselves, Laura and I talk about some of our favourite stories on her podcast 23:50 What do we mean that dogs are our healers? 28:00 The magical moment when you know you have found your dog 29:30 Animal communication: you are already doing it! 36:00 What dogs know 40:35 Laura's mystical novel of a dog saving a woman's life that was inspired by a true story 45:20 Dogs meet you wherever you are at on your spiritual journey 50:00 What dogs have taught Laura about what it means to be human 55:00 Outro

In today's episode, I'm speaking to writer and parent educator Eloise Rickman. Eloise's work focuses mainly on challenging adultism, championing children's rights, and helping parents and educators rethink how they see children. In this episode, we touch on how diet culture shows up in gentle parenting spaces and how mainstream ideas of gentle parenting don't always challenge where power comes from and how it's leveraged. We'll also talk about kids' embodied resistance and Elosie's new book, It's Not Fair.Don't forget to leave a review in your podcast player if you enjoy this episode - or let me know what you think in the comments below.Find out more about Eloise's work here.Pre-order Eloise's new book here.Follow her on Instagram here.Follow here on Substack - Follow Laura on Instagram here.Subscribe to Laura's newsletter here.Enrol in the Raising Embodied Eaters course here. Here's the transcript in full:INTRO:Laura: Hey and welcome to the Can I Have Another Snack? podcast where we talk about appetite, bodies and identity, especially through the lens of parenting. I'm Laura Thomas, I'm an anti-diet registered nutritionist and I also write the Can I Have Another Snack? Newsletter.Today we're talking to . Eloise is a writer ( ) and parent educator. Her work focuses on challenging adultism, championing children's rights, and helping parents and educators rethink how they see children. Today we're going to talk about how diet culture shows up in gentle parenting spaces and how mainstream ideas of gentle parenting don't always challenge where power comes from and how it's leveraged. We'll also talk about kids' embodied resistance and Elosie's new book, It's Not Fair.But first - just a quick reminder that Can I Have Another Snack is entirely reader and listener supported. If you get something from the newsletter or podcast, please consider a paid subscription - it's £5/month or £50/ year which helps cover the cost of the podcast,  gives you access to our weekly subscriber only discussion threads, the monthly Dear Laura column, and the entire CIHAS archive. Head to laurathomas.substack.com to subscribe now. And thank you to everyone who is already a paid subscriber.Alright team, here's this week's conversation with Eloise Rickman. MAIN EPISODE:Laura: Alright Eloise, can you start by telling us a bit about you and your work?Eloise: Yeah, of course. And whenever I do these, I'm always absolutely terrified, that I'm gonna forget something really big , like “I'm a writer” or “I work with parents”. So yeah, I'm a writer and I work with parents. I write books about children and about children's rights.And I've just finished writing my second book, which is on the idea of children's liberation. which looks at all different sorts of topics from parenting to education to children's bodies. And alongside my writing work, I also work with parents running courses on home education and on rights-based parenting and on workshops as well.I'm also – at the same time as doing this – home educating my daughter, who at the time of recording is eight, which also kind of feels like a full time job and just because life is not complicated enough, I'm also doing a Masters in children's rights at the moment, which is brilliant.Laura: Okay, I have no idea how you find the time in the day to do all of those different things, but I am in awe. And you mentioned that you just finished writing your second book, but you didn't say what it's called.Eloise: Sorry, I didn't, you're right! So it's called It's Not Fair. Which is a title we deliberated over for a really long time, but I really like it because it's something which we hear so often from our children's mouths.It's not fair, this isn't fair. So it's called It's Not Fair: Why it's Time for a Grown Up Conversation About How Adults Treat Children. And that really does sum it up. It's really looking at how we treat children in all different aspects of life. And why a lot of that treatment isn't fair and why we need to rethink it as adults who have more power than children.Laura: Yeah, and I mean, that's really what I want us..we're going to explore these ideas a little bit in a second. But yeah, I've had a little sneaky peek of the book so far. And what I read is incredible. And I'm so excited for this book to be in people's hands because – we'll talk about this a bit more as well – but unlike a lot of just, you know, gentle parenting, like, more prescriptive books, I think that just tell you how to parent, what I really appreciate about your work is that you bring in the kind of socio-political lens, which I feel often gets missed out of a lot of these conversations. So, yeah, I'm really excited about your book coming out and we'll pop a pre-order link to it in the show notes so that people can have that little happy surprise delivered to their doorstep. There's nothing better than, just like, a book showing up that you've forgotten…  Eloise: Oh, I love it. Laura: …that you ordered six months ago! Okay. A lot of your work centers on the idea of dismantling adultism. I'm not sure that people will be completely familiar with that term, so for anyone who is just coming across it, can you explain what even is that and where do we see it show up in our kids' lives?Eloise: Absolutely, and I think you're totally right that it's not a term that most of us are familiar with at all, and I think that's a huge problem actually.You know, we are now, I think, generally, as a society, getting better at spotting things like sexism or racism or ableism, and that is really important, you know, being able to name injustice when you see it is the first step to dismantling it, to tackling it. Otherwise, how do you really know what it is that you're dealing with and why it's a problem?But yet, when we think about some of the treatment which children experience at the hands of adults, whether that's the fact that in England, at the time of recording, it's still legal to hit your child, even though we would never dream of women being allowed to be hit by their partners, or the fact that, you know, it's still really normal in so many school settings for children to be publicly humiliated, to be losing their break times and so on.All of these seem to be quite disconnected from one another because we don't have the language to join them up. And I think that's why having a word like adultism is the first step in kind of joining those dots and being able to see that children as a social group are marginalised and discriminated against vis-à-vis adults.And I think that term probably feels quite uncomfortable for a lot of us, especially if our children are relatively privileged. You know, if you have a wealthy white child who is not disabled, the idea that your child is discriminated against or is somehow marginalised might feel really shocking. Like, whoa, what do you mean?You know, our child is so lucky, but again, as we've seen with times, like with racism, we talk about white supremacy. The idea isn't that if you have white privilege, you don't have any other problems. You know, you can still be poor or disabled and still have white privilege. And I think in the same way we can see that adults have it easier in a lot of different aspects of their lives.And that doesn't mean being a child is always terrible. It just means they're discriminated against because they're children. So the idea of adultism is really just a way of referencing this age based discrimination, which children face. And I think it really encapsulates this idea that in so many of our societies, adults are seen as the kind of default position, and they are seen as more competent, more capable, more rational, more sensible than children are. And there's a wonderful academic called Manfred Liebel, who talks about these four conditions of adultism. And one of them is that children are just seen as less capable, less competent, less rational, and that they're seen as sort of unfinished. So there's this idea that you're not really a proper person until you become an adult. And that justifies a lot of adult control.Laura: Yeah. Sorry. I was just going to say, there's like this sense that, okay, well, you don't really know what you're talking about. You don't really have any kind of, like, say in what's going on until you turn 18.And, and it's almost like this idea that, yeah, your life is..it doesn't matter, anything that happens to you before 18. It's kind of like a write off somehow. Yeah. Anyway, that was just what was coming to my mind. And I'm sorry for interrupting you. I'm curious to hear more about these conditions of adultism!Eloise: Yeah, but I think that absolutely is true. And that's a really big part of it or where we don't see children's lives as important or their experience as important. And I think we're getting better now as a society at noticing when things are traumatic or when things are adverse childhood experiences, but often those are described in terms of: this has an impact when they become adults.So they have poorer earning potential or it harms their future intimate relationships, but it's not…so much of it is not focused on children's lives in the here and now, and under adultism, it's very frequent, I think, whether it's in policy documents or whether it's in the language that schools use, or whether it's in parenting manuals, this idea that childhood is this sort of preparation or training ground for when you're a real person, for when you're an adult, and that parenting, education, all of these different things, thus, should be you know, optimising the child's future life without really thinking very much about children's experiences right now. So, and some other examples of adultism as well are, that tied to this, we often think that because parents know best, parents can protect their children from things that we see as harmful. And I think this probably links quite a lot also to diet culture and the way that we see that, you know, oh, I must protect my child from ultra processed food or from sweets because I know best, but actually these things can end up being quite harmful to children because they're not given the opportunity to take risks or make mistakes or to figure out their own body's needs, decide what's best for themselves. And I think there is this real assumption that adults know best and that if a child makes a decision, which is against what adults believe is best, then the child must not be capable of making that decision yet. They must be incompetent. So even if we're saying to a child, okay, you choose. And then the child says, well, I'm going to eat all of my Hallowe'en sweets in one go, or I'm going to eat all of the, you know, chocolates out of my Christmas stocking in one go. And then the adult says, well, actually that shows they can't be trusted. And next time we'll have to, you know, divvy them out or give them more slowly. And I think that sense that children cannot make good decisions if they vary from what we as adults believe are good decisions, also have a wider consequence in that children are really excluded from political decision making.And I think this is twofold, both in terms of the fact that children can't vote, which as you're listening to this, you might think, ‘well, of course children can't vote, you know, why would they be able to vote? They're only children.' But yet, this is exactly the kind of argument which used to be made for women not being able to vote.And actually, over the course of history, we've seen huge changes in which populations were seen to be considered sort of capable and sound of mind and able to take part in the very scary business of voting and putting a cross in a box. And again, there are lots of people now challenging this, but I think just the very fact that we have a whole section of society who we say ‘you don't have a voice' is really important to grapple with.I think there could be an argument made for this if our politicians were genuinely taking children's voices, views, concerns into account. But as we've seen with things like education funding, childcare funding, the complete lack of any sort of meaningful action on the climate crisis, children's priorities and futures aren't being safeguarded by those in power. And we tend to have very short termist political structures. Which again, exacerbates this sort of, you know, serving adult populations, but actually the things that children need, the things that are important to children get completely left out of the conversation.Laura: Yeah. Oh, I mean, I don't even really know where, where to kind of go from there. I think you've just…Eloise: Sorry, it's a lot!Laura: It is, it's a lot. And you summed it up. And I think, like, what I kept thinking about as you were speaking is, I think, there is this, like, notion or fantasy that we're not living in Victorian workhouse era, kind of, you know, we're not putting kids into workhouses anymore.And there's this sort of sense that, like, childhood is held in such high esteem, such high regard, like…But what you're saying is there's a real disconnect, right, between this kind of, like, fantasy of childhood versus the reality of how we're treating our children. Do you know what I mean?Eloise: Absolutely. Yeah, totally. And I think that's exactly right.And I think, again, to a lot of people, it will seem strange to talk about children being discriminated against because we're spending, you know, hundreds of pounds on Christmas presents for the children in our families or because we are seeing that children now have access to all these cool opportunities that we didn't when we were their age. And we tend to think that childhood is generally getting better. And in some ways it is, you know, in terms of things like corporal punishment, we are actually getting better as a society. Fewer children are being smacked. It's becoming less normalised, but there is still this real disconnect between the fact that children are…in some circumstances have better material goods, except we're definitely not seeing that for everyone. And actually, you know, as we know in the UK, one in three children more or less lives in poverty, which is a huge political issue in terms of adultism, actually. And it is a real…it's a political choice rather than just a side effect.And, you know, we might not need to get into it now, but there have been lots and lots of policy decisions over the last decade or so, which have pushed families deeper and deeper into poverty. But even for those of us living in very privileged households, we might see, oh yes, well, my child now has an iPad or my child has this, that or the other.But actually in terms of the things that really matter to children, having a safe, healthy environment, having the freedom to be able to go out and see their friends without being overly controlled, having privacy, having independence. We're not really doing much better on any of those sort of key indicators, really. And that power discrepancy. And I think that power is probably the main word in all of this, that adults still have the say, adults still have a final decision. Adults still have more power in our families…hasn't changed since those times. And I think that's what we're really needing to grapple with now.Laura: And I think that that is shifting a little bit in terms of kind of the explosion of gentle parenting, which I think is a concept that probably most of the listeners are familiar with. But just for anyone who isn't, do you think that you could maybe just, like, give your…because I know there's no, like, one set definition of gentle or respectful parenting, but can you tell us a bit about what that concept means to you?Eloise: Yeah, of course. So I think the way that gentle parenting, in a kind of mainstream definition of books like…well, I'm not going to name a lot, but you know, any kind of gentle parenting book you might walk into Waterstones and pick up off the shelf will tend to be much more child focused than, you know, Gina Ford type parenting books.So it will focus on, you know, how is your child feeling, validating their emotions, listening to them, not making them feel bad for crying or for having strong feelings, for trying to work together with them to fix problems rather than just doling out punishments, you know, not putting children in timeouts, really listening to them, having a very warm, nurturing relationship with children.It doesn't necessarily have to go into attachment parenting, but I think there is a sense in gentle parenting that the real aim is trying to have this loving relationship with your child, where they feel heard, they feel listened to, they feel seen. For me, that feels like such a positive move forward collectively as a society.I know that my mum for example feels that she might have parented in a different way had she had more options around at the time. I'm sure my grandparents would have also parented in a very different way if they had had access to some of these ideas. So I think as a society we're definitely moving in the right way.I think the piece for me that feels still sort of missing from gentle parenting, is a lot of it still doesn't question this fundamental aspect of child-parent relationships, which is that it is a fundamentally unequal power dynamic. So what traditional gentle parenting will do, I don't know if you or anyone listening has heard of this idea of these different sort of parenting styles from someone called Diana Baumrind, who talked about. On the one hand you have the authoritarian parenting. She's very strict, very cold, has very high expectations of children's behaviour. On the other side, she talked about permissive parenting. Which is very warm, but has very low expectations of children. So, you know, you might imagine a kind of warm chaos where the kids are kind of running around doing whatever.Laura: Right. There's no, there are very few boundaries. It's a bit more of a…Eloise: Very few boundaries.Laura: Free for all.Eloise: Free for all. It's chaos. Yeah. Kids are in charge kind of idea. Then she posited for actually the middle ground, which I think is what a lot of gentle parenting writers will refer to, is that in the middle you have what she kind of called authoritative parenting, which is both very warm, seeks to understand the child, seeks to not have too many rules, but yet still has those expectations in terms of behaviour.So, you know, you're going to step in if you see your child drawing on the walls or going to hit their sibling, you know, you're going to have expectations, for example, of how dinner times might be held or how you greet other people. And I think this is where a lot of gentle parenting books sit, in this idea that you have power as a parent, but you use it benevolently to try and do your best for your child.And I have a lot of sympathy for that. You know, I think as parents we're under so much pressure to do well, to do right, especially when we're told from so much developmental psychology, but the impact of these early years on children is so important and it's going to ruin your child's life. But I think for me, what feels like perhaps the next step, and I think we're already starting to see more and more conversations doing this, is being able to step outside of that sort of traditional view that you're either very authoritarian or permissive or you're kind of somewhere in between and remove ourselves from that entirely and say, well, what about the power dynamics?What if parents weren't the ones in charge, but actually we were in partnership with children, making decisions collectively and aiming for respectful relationships just as we would do in our romantic partnerships, in our friendships, in our work relationships of just being humans in the world, trying to figure out how to get along together in as respectful a way as possible.And obviously this is much, much easier said than done. I am absolutely not doing this all the time in my own parenting, let's be really clear. But for me, that feels like the conversation we need to be having more of. And alongside that, it needs to be not just looking at the parent child relationship.Which I think again, a lot of traditional parenting books will do, but really trying to understand that your parenting is impacted by so many things. You know, we live in a capitalist society and the fact that so much of our society is based on getting parents away from their children, separating families out, trying to put children into often very underfunded childcare systems, school systems, making it almost impossible for parents to be relaxed when they're having to work sometimes two, three jobs where they're dealing with poverty, where they're worried about the climate crisis, you know, these things don't happen in a vacuum. And I think it is completely unrealistic to be talking about having this beautiful, you know, egalitarian, no power differentiation relationship with our children, when we're not also trying to dismantle the many, many, many structural issues which are keeping us stressed and exhausted and, you know, kind of triggered by our children as well.Laura: Yeah. As I was preparing to speak to you, I was thinking about a couple of New York Times articles that came out, I think it was last year, that really pushed back on gentle parenting.And then I also saw something in Romper yesterday that was like, you know, here are 10 reasons why gentle parenting doesn't work for my family. And to me, I have a lot of, like, sympathy for parents who are trying out these tools, these ideas, these suggestions, which, you know, may or may not be helpful for them. But, you know, like maybe they buy into the idea sort of cognitively and emotionally, but then when they, when they put it into practice, like it all kind of falls apart for them. And it seems like with those NYT articles and, and with the Romper piece, it really was just missing the lens of like all the systemic and social stuff that we're kind of dealing with that makes it so much more difficult to have a kind of equal distribution of power in those relationships and and not, not sort of a certain power over but but you know giving power to our children to have some autonomy to have some say in their their day and over their bodies and what they want to do it all just feels so impossible when we have yeah like capitalism breathing down our neck, colonialism breathing down our neck, racism, ableism, anti-fat bias, like all of these systems that are, are making our lives so much more difficult.They have an impact on gentle parenting or our ability to parent, but it's not, it's not the, the gentle parenting in and of itself. That's the problem, right? It's all the other shit that we're dealing with.Eloise: Absolutely. Yeah. And like you say, I think there is a fundamental sometimes misread of gentle parenting, but it's just another tool. You know, you do this because you want your child to be more empathetic to their peers, or because you want them to learn more moderation in the long run, or because you want them to be able to self regulate their emotions. And some children absolutely will do all of those things. So there's lots of research showing that actually, if you want children who do tend to have more pro social behaviors, as they're called, that being very controlling, being authoritarian is not the way to do that. And the more we punish children, the more there are lots of different outcomes, all of which are pretty negative. But I think that still misses this wider picture that fundamentally we don't, for example, decide to not punish our daughter or not shout at her or not put her in timeout because we think that's the best way to create a good, happy person. Laura: Compliant child. Eloise: Yeah, we do it because it feels really fucking unfair. Like, I wouldn't want it if my husband was like, ‘Hey, I don't like the way you just spoke to me. So I'm going to remove your debit card for two days'. You know, that would be abuse. We would call that abuse.He, you know, I wouldn't like it if one of my friends was like, ‘Oh, you replied to my text a bit late'. Or like, ‘I didn't like that you didn't, you know, you, you missed something out. So I'm just going to ghost you for a while.' You know, that's not how we have relationships with people we care about, but yet we have completely normalised this way of treating children.And I think that, yeah, there's a missing piece, which so many of those big New York Times and so on articles seem to miss is that this is not about having another method. This is just about fundamentally treating children like fellow human beings in a respectful way.Laura: Yeah, you're so right, that oftentimes we're kind of weaponising gentle parenting as a, like as a ‘nice' way, inverted commas, a ‘kind' way, caring way to try and control and manipulate our children. Eloise: Yes, totally. Laura:  Like, again, I get that. I get why, like, you know, having some tools in your toolkit so that your kid will put their fucking socks on or brush their teeth in the morning so you can get out the door, like why that's helpful. And yeah, if we're doing it solely for the purposes of compliance, that in and of itself can become problematic because it's another way that you're kind of leveraging power, I think.It's a complicated, kind of topic to discuss. Sorry, I'm having like a few different thoughts of where to go! I think maybe I'll stick with gentle parenting just because we've kind of been on that topic. And I was saying to you off mic that I have a feeling that gentle parenting has a diet culture problem.And what sort of spurred this was a reel that I saw, I think just before Hallowe'en. So we're recording this at the beginning of November. We've just had Hallowe'en a couple of weeks ago and there was a kind of quite well known, like, I guess they're gentle parenting influencer coach? I don't know what you would, you would call them.And they basically were talking about how they only let their kid have, I think it was like a cake pop or something on special occasions, which turned out to be like three times a year. And I was like, I was just waiting for people to send me this reel and be like, what, what do you think of this? And the first person to send it to me was Molly Forbes from Body Happy Org. And she was like, gentle parenting has a diet culture problem. And I wanted to get your take on that. Is this something you've seen in, not necessarily gentle parenting, I'm sort of picking on that, but like in children's liberation spaces where there's kind of like a, we want to change the power structures so much. But when it comes to food, and policing bodies, there seems to be like a bit of a disconnect there.Eloise: So I think there are two different strands to this. And I think maybe first we can talk about the kind of more, I guess, like mainstream Instagram version of sort of gentle parenting, which I think absolutely does have a diet culture problem. And then maybe we can talk a bit about this idea of children's liberation, which I think to me feels much less…you know, a lot of the people I know who are talking about children's liberation are also talking about fat liberation, around black liberation, around disability liberation.Laura: Right. They have that intersectional lens on. Yeah. And I think that's a really important distinction. So I'm glad, I'm glad that you made that. Cause like my next question is, was going to be, could you tell us more about, you know, children's liberation. So yeah, I'm really glad that you kind of separated out those two strands.So maybe start with the, like, Instagram…which I can see, just like, I can see the despair in your face. I think it seems like how I feel a lot about, like, a lot of kids feeding stuff online is probably how you feel about a lot of parenting stuff.Eloise: Yeah. Again, I think so much of it means well, but I think there is quite a big intersection between sort of like gentle parenting influencers on the one hand and wellness culture. And I think that often goes really hand in hand. So this idea of kind of like crunchy parenting, you see it a lot as well in homeschool spaces. So obviously I home educate my daughter. I follow home ed accounts. I often get shown stuff in my, like, what is it, like, ‘Explore' section of my Instagram. And I think depending on where you hang out online, there is a really strong mix of, you know, I home educate my children and I gentle parent, and I also use essential oils. And I also don't ever buy processed food and all of these things coming together in a very aesthetically beautiful and pleasing package, which doesn't…  Laura: Ballerina Farm effect. Eloise: Totally. Yeah. I'd love to know if Ballerina Farm has a, like a secret snack cupboard with her kids. It's just like a munching on dandelions.Laura: Sourdough and yeah, dandelion butter.Eloise: Yeah, absolutely. And again, I think that is this sense from people who maybe were raised, you know, lots of us were raised in the eighties, the eighties, especially in the UK, didn't have great culinary vibes. Sure, like I get that we want to do better.Laura: I grew up in Scotland, we had battered Mars bars. I don't know what you're talking about.Eloise: That sounds great, sign me up. Yeah, I think that sometimes we can maybe go too far or not go far enough. So a great example of this for me feels like the division of responsibility approach to family meals, which I think for so many people feels like, yes, this is kind of different to how I was raised, you know, this isn't about children finishing their plates or being reserved the same meal until they finished it.You know, you really do hear some horror stories when it comes to people and their relationships with food, which started, as so many things do, when they were children. Yeah. And so I totally get that there is this searching for something better. And I think for some people, this idea of division of responsibility, which I'm sure people will be familiar with as they're listening to your podcast, but this idea that I choose what to serve and I choose when to serve it, but you choose what to eat. It looks nice on the surface, but again, it doesn't have any of that interrogation of a power again, like I'm going to sound like a broken record, but imagine if my husband was like, ‘right, I've planned out all of our meals for the week, all of the snacks, all of our meal times, but like you can choose. It's up to you, babe. You know, if you want it, you can have it. If not, have shit.' And I feel like, again, we wouldn't do this to people who were not children. You know, we might do it to people at institutions, but again, is that really what we want to be going for? And I think a lot of this is done with real love. You know, we want our children to be healthy. We want our children to be happy. We're constantly told in every aspect of our lives, if you have a fat child, they will be miserable and unhappy and unhealthy. And that's the worst possible thing you can do as a parent. And I think that unless you have really engaged with anti-diet culture, fat liberation culture, I can see the appeal of this quite like wellness, you know, Deliciously Ella style approach to feeding children, which I think goes really hand in hand with this idea of wooden toys and gentle parenting and kind of slightly alternative living, but which is packaged up in a very kind of consumerist way. Laura: Totally. Yeah. Yeah. I've talked before about not being a division of responsibility purist and kind of going back to what you were talking about before about authoritarian versus permissive, is that right? And then, yeah, I always get confused, authoritative is kind of in this, in the middle.  And I think a lot of people do position the division of responsibility as being that middle ground. And in a lot of ways, I think, especially when kids are really little, it can be like a really helpful way to kind of parse out and, and help kids kind of understand like hunger and fullness cues, for example, and things like that. But yeah, like as kids get older, they, like, want to have a bit more autonomy over what they're eating. They want to have some decision making power. Why, why wouldn't they, right? Like you say, we make decisions about what we're eating all the time. And if somebody tried to stop us from doing that, we would like, yeah, throw a conniptions. So yeah, I think this is where the, the responsive feeding piece comes in, where it can be really helpful, is that it can be containing for a child to have sort of set meal times, you know, to know like, okay, I will always provide breakfast. I will always provide lunch. I will always provide dinner and, you know, snacks are maybe sort of like somewhere in the middle there. Yeah. I think having that, like a bit of structure can. In the same way that boundaries can be helpful, that that can be helpful. But yeah, if we are then, especially as kids get older and start socialising with people outside of our families and you know, are going to like, you know, outside of primary school, going into secondary school and have more, you know, have their own money to buy things, for example, if we are then still trying to like micromanage every single aspect of what they're eating. Then, yeah, that's really, really unhelpful. And I guess I never really thought of it so much as through the sort of like lens of power dynamics, but I think that that's a really important piece that you're, you're bringing to that conversation. What do you see in terms of, like, in those same spaces around like conversations about sweets and restriction and that kind of thing? I'd love to hear, yeah, what you see around that.Eloise: Yeah, I mean, you can probably imagine, I think. And again, I think there is a real diversity. So I'm kind of caricaturing a bit here. And I think it's also important to say that, like, with all of these conversations…you know, we were just talking about division of responsibility.I think that is quite a big gulf between, say, a wealthy influencer who is talking about this stuff and someone who genuinely has no choice about just serving three meals a day because they've just been to a food bank. So I think all of these questions around, like, giving children choice and being able to be very child led still do come with quite a privileged lens.I have to say again, you know, in terms of sweets and things, I have seen people being like, here's how to make your own fruit flavoured gummies and switch these out instead. And, you know, look, I have no problem with any of this. I enjoy cooking. So that's something…like, I've never made my own gummies, but I would absolutely, you know, I sometimes make our own cakes or biscuits or bread.It's fun. It's part of, like, eating nice food. I enjoy doing it. But I think this idea that to be a kind of good parent, you have to restrict…often the discourse is around, like, refined sugars…seed oil. That's a new thing that I haven't really engaged with. Laura: Don't, don't, don't.Eloise: E numbers, red dye, all of this stuff. And again, look, I get it. I get that you want to give your child a healthy diet. And, you know, I think I would be hypocritical…like we also try and give our daughter a pretty balanced diet where she has access to lots of vegetables and fruits alongside things typically kind of coded as unhealthy, like chocolate or crisps. But for me, it just feels like it makes such a big issue out of these foods.And then…you know, I say this as someone who, as a child, had quite restricted food. So I had really bad eczema as a young child, and my parents were also on a very low income, and so we didn't just have a snack drawer with loads of like pre-packaged snacks, you know, that wouldn't have been in my parents budget, and also with terrible eczema, my mum… She was quite a young parent.She, you know, she didn't know what to do with it. And she went to lots of doctors. They couldn't help. We tried all sorts of different things. And one of the things she tried was cutting out refined sugar, for example, because people had told her this might help. So for a lot of different reasons, I had quite, like, a restricted upbringing in terms of, again, things typically coded as like ‘junk food'. And I really saw the impact that that had on me as I grew older and had access to my own money or had access to, you know, food choices at school. And I remember being absolutely mystified going to friends' houses that they could have cupboards with, like, chocolate and crisps in and not just want to sit and eat the whole thing because like, ‘Oh my God, you have chocolate and crisps. Why wouldn't you want to eat the whole thing?' And I think for me that has served as quite a powerful reminder of so many of the brilliant conversations I see, like the ones you have had around not overly restricting certain types of food. And I've really seen it in action with my daughter as well, where we're pretty chill about what she wants to eat.It's her body, you know, we might have some conversations if she was wanting to eat doughnuts for every meal. What has been really fascinating is just seeing that because this stuff has never been separated out from other foods. She isn't hugely fussed. And again, you know, sometimes she is. Hallowe'en, it's really exciting to have access to all these new different chocolates.Laura: Totally. The goal is not to take the pleasure out of food like that, right? Like, I think that's sometimes what parents…the interpretation of sort of the message that I'm trying to communicate and other people in this space are trying to communicate is that we want to, like, burn kids out on sweets so that they never eat them again.That's not it. Like, food is joyful and pleasurable and like, that's, you know, especially in the context of kids not having any, like, any autonomy or any power over anything. Like, can we just throw them a fucking bone and give them some chocolate, right? I really appreciate what you were saying Eloise about, well, there were just a couple of things that I think, are really important to highlight, you know, in these conversations that a lot of people don't have the choice, right, to offer their kids a more liberal access to sweets and chocolates and crisps and things. And, and the restriction is born out of poverty and deprivation rather than what I think we see in a lot of sort of more privileged well to do spaces where, you know, people may have, can afford plenty of, I don't know, Oreos, but they're not providing their kids access to them. And yeah, I think also the piece around having complex medical needs where you might have no choice, even if there's an allergy or something where it's also really difficult to provide kids the things that you would like to provide them all of the time.So it's not a straightforward conversation and I'm glad that you kind of brought in that complexity. Something else that you mentioned was, you know, if you separate out the kind of like Instagram aesthetic approach to gentle parenting versus kind of more of a radical approach to parenting that is rooted in children's liberation. Can you tell me more about that and yeah, how, how things feel different in that space?Eloise: Definitely. So a very potted history is that people started talking about children's liberation with that language in the 1970s with writers like John Holt, who some people will be familiar with. He writes a lot about alternative education…wrote. And people like A.S. Neill, who founded the Summerhill School, which again is like a big radical school in the UK. But the children's liberation of the time – as many of the writing in the 70s was – was very radical, so it was sort of based on this idea that children should be given the exact same rights as adults, even when it came to things like sexual relationships or information in terms of, you know, children should be allowed to watch whatever movies they wanted to.I think some of these ideas are still absolutely worth exploring and engaging with today, but obviously some of them will be very radical. And I think what he missed…this was before the UN declaration on the rights of a child. And I think what that did is for the first time brought together this idea that children have lots of different rights. They have rights to be protected as well, as well as being able to participate fully in society and to be provided with basic levels of, you know, healthcare and decent quality of living and so on. And I think children's liberation now has to be able to grapple with these things. So the idea that yes, children…we should be fundamentally trying to rethink these power differences, but they do need to be also rooted in the understanding that children's needs are a bit different from adults and that we can still assume that children are competent and still listen to children's voices and involve them in every aspect of society without having to go as far as absolute like legal equality. So we can still give them equality in their rights and equality and just dignity in how they're treated. So for me, this is what Children's Liberation is really trying to do. It's this idea that it's a way to sort of combat adultism that we talked about earlier and really trying to see children as complete people who are able to have a say in every aspect of their lives and where they're really trusted. But that goes alongside having adults around who are also willing to provide support and care too. And I think that then when you start looking at things like food from this perspective, you really see it as just a wider aspect of children's bodily autonomy of being able to choose what happens to their bodies and for children to be able to learn and make mistakes. And yes, have it within these really loving, supportive relationships, either with parents or with other people where, you know, if your child is routinely eating so much chocolate that they're making themselves sick. Then of course, you know, I'm not saying, well, you just ignore it and you think, well, this is a great learning experience. Although it might be if they did it once, you know, this is about sitting down and having a conversation just like we would do with any other thing. And saying, how are you feeling? This is what I'm noticing. Do you want to talk about different strategies? You know, we can also have these just really being in relationship with our children and trying to figure these things out as a team. I think it's fine to have conversations with children around, okay, we don't buy this food because X, Y, Z, or as a family we prioritise X, Y, Z. Does that feel cool with you? You know, is this working for you? It's not about making sure that…you know, sometimes I see the opposite position as well. Like, you know, mothers are already so stressed. Do you expect us to be short order chefs? Of course not. But it can be as much as checking in when you're doing the grocery shop and just being like, ‘Hey, are there any meals you especially want to eat over the coming week? Is there anything, this was what I was thinking, is there anything here you really don't like the sound of?'And you know, sometimes I cook stuff that my daughter doesn't like and that's fine. But I just have the assumption then that she can eat something else and I'm not going to be cross at her for doing that. Again, just as I would with my partner, I'd be like…I know the kind of foods he likes. I will sometimes prioritise those and I'll sometimes prioritise the stuff that I like. You know, it's just about being in relationship together. But I think we are getting better at highlighting where children are able to consent, for example. And I think that food is such an important part of that. And it's also such an important part of children's sort of embodied resistance when they feel that they don't have enough power.You know, we tend to see a child pushing their plate away and being like, I don't like it. I don't want it, as bad behaviour or being overtired and maybe they are overtired, but also maybe they're really fed up of having their meals controlled all the time, and that's something we should at least be exploring.Laura: Yeah, I love that in your book you have a chapter on, I forget what the title is, but it's sort of the intersection of children's liberation and body liberation. What's the title of the chapter?Eloise: It's called Body PoliticsLaura: Body Politics. There you go. And I love the way that you talk about embodied resistance and how children literally will protest with their bodies, like things that don't feel good, that things that don't feel uncomfortable.And I think like you say, so often that's written off as they're tired or they're hungry or, or something like that. But oftentimes they're like really giving us a clue as to how they're feeling. ‘No, I don't want more food, like, forced into my body. No, I don't want to eat that particular thing. I don't want to… whatever it is. Like I'm fed up. I'm feeling like I don't have any agency or autonomy in any of these situations.' And the only way that I can exert that is through, like, stiffening my body and going, like turning it into a plank so that you can't get me in the bath or whatever it is. I really love that section in that chapter where you talk about that.Is there anything else that you wanted to say? Because again, like the intersection of children's liberation and body liberation or body politics is like, it's so much more than just food, right? That's kind of my, like, bias, but you talk about a lot of other intersections. in the book, and I'm wondering if there's anything else that you wanted to say, anything that feels really pertinent right now.Eloise: Yeah, I mean, I think we're getting really good as women at noticing how things to do with our bodies are actually deeply political, whether that's diet culture, whether that's the way that we're marketed anti-ageing products too, whether that's abortion rights. There are so many different aspects to this, but we tend to see that these are political and that they can be engaged with in these political ways.But again, I think we miss the nuance of this when we're talking about children's bodies, whereas actually even from the tiniest age, the way that we manage, measure, control, discipline children's bodies are all so deeply political and are all tied into all of these different ideas. And I think what we really see with diet culture is it becomes yet another thing that adults do to children from a young age and then children inevitably will often learn to do this to themselves and we see this in other things too, you know, and not all of it is bad. For example, many of us will teach our children table manners because we know that eventually it will help them later on in life because, I don't know, people will treat them better because they'll see that oh, my child is not speaking with the mouth full or whatever.And that's part of that is just the social norms of whatever society you live in. And as we can see, table manners look radically different across the world. But sometimes, you know, and we can see, I think there are really strong parallels with diet culture and with the way that we treat neurodivergent children in terms of kind of masking.And, you know, when you talk to lots of autistic adults or adults who are neurodivergent in other ways. They talk about how as children, they really had to learn to mask. And so much of that would have been adult led, you know, telling your child, don't wriggle, don't do that. Don't make that noise or your teachers at school…don't do that.And then as adults, they've kind of internalised those things. And they don't do it and they mask so much and then, you know, so many autistic adults now will talk about this process of unmasking and de-masking and learning how to sit in yourself in a way that to me feels very much in parallel with people who as adults come to this idea of being anti-diet culture, of fat liberation, of trying to slowly unlearn these habits of how we look at our bodies and how we feed ourselves and so on.And I mean, you can see in other aspects too, but to me, they feel, like, so strongly linked. And once we start recognising this, you know, so much of it is about how – and you've written beautifully about this in the past – how as children, we are so embodied, you know, we make sense of the world through our bodies.We often…most children, unless children are very unwell, will find joy in their bodies. They'll move their bodies, they'll make noises, they'll explore things. And gradually as they get older, and sometimes from a really quite heartbreakingly young age, they will learn to start being critical around their bodies, judging their bodies, comparing their bodies to other people.And I think that, again, if we are thinking about this in terms of adultism and how we can start to dismantle it, I think thinking about this lens of what does society expect of children? In my book, I use the term, we have this sort of normative view of children or what a ‘normal' child should be, whether that's in terms of our physical development, what their body looks like, their emotional development, their intellectual development, and at every stage of children's lives, starting before children are even born, you know, we're ranking them, we're plotting their centiles.Laura: Fundal height! Yeah. Eloise: Yeah, absolutely. And we're figuring out, you know, what “abnormalities” our children might have, you know, I've put that in scare quotes. And as parents. Or educators, if you've got teachers listening, we're so used to now viewing children through this deficit lens of, ‘oh, you're too fat. You're too noisy. You're not smart enough'. Rather than just seeing children as these glorious individuals who all have differences and who all bring different stuff to the table. Laura: Yeah, I love that. And I really, really love the parallels that you drew between unmasking and kind of unlearning a lot of the things that we have internalised around diet-culture, around policing our bodies. I'd never made that connection in quite that way before. And I think it's, it's really powerful. And particularly when you think about it through the lens of adultism and, and how so much of, so much masking is learned because of adults expectations and the power that adults hold over children. Likewise, you know, so much of the healing from diet culture involves unlearning the messages that we internalise from our, you know – and again, well meaning most of the time – caregivers that in a lot of ways we're probably trying to keep us safe, but in a sort of misplaced kind of way. So yeah, I appreciate that and I love that final sentiment that you had there around just embracing the differences that children have and, and the unique qualities that they bring and, and sort of…yeah, just kind of going back to what we talked about earlier, just really like having an appreciation for who they are right now, even if they're not adults, but the things that they have to bring to the table and that, that they have to offer, like in the here and now rather than waiting until they like ripen and mature or whatever. They're kind of bad analogies people use. I really appreciate this conversation. Thank you so much Eloise. Before I let you go though I would like for you to share your snack. So at the end of every episode my guest and I share something that they've been snacking on can be anything, a literal snack, a book, a podcast, a TV show, something you're wearing, whatever.What do you have for us today?Eloise: So I've got a great book, which fits actually really nicely and kind of accidentally with the theme of this conversation today, which is called Trust Kids. And it's edited by someone called Carla Joy Bergman. And it is this wonderful collection of, she's got some essays in there, interviews. Some of the interviews are between parents and their children. They've also got young people writing some of the essays. There's poetry in there, so it's kind of something for everyone and it deals with lots of different themes, including lots of themes around bodies as well. And it is great. And because of its format, you know, no piece is more than I would say four or five pages, so it is perfect to snack on. And especially as a parent or caregiver, you know how it is. Your kid is engaged in something, so you grab a book for two minutes and it's perfect to read while the kettle is boiling, whatever else you've got going on. And it is brilliant. So I can really recommend it.Laura: Oh, I've heard of that book. It's been kind of on my, like, to read list, but I haven't got around to it yet. So thank you for the little nudge there. I'll link to it in the show notes so other people can check it out. And I really, I've been struggling to read lately. So the thought of, like, dipping in and out of something is really appealing.Okay. So my snack is, well, today is actually my husband's birthday. So I guess my snack is birthdays in general. We've got our birthday tree up, which I've talked about before. It's a big bright pink Christmas tree, basically that we decorate with like happy birthday lights. There's balloons everywhere. And this morning we had a delivery from Flavourtown.Do you know Flavourtown Bakery? Yeah, Eloise knows. So we've got chocolate sprinkle cupcakes. They look amazing. I'm very excited about them. And we're going out for dinner tonight as well. So like, yeah, just the whole like birthdays, but specifically Flavourtown cake. If you haven't had it, they do like vegan options. They do gluten free options and just like regular. And they're like American style, like loads of frosting. You can get, like, rainbow cakes. You can get ones with Biscoff. Like if you like a really saccharine, sweet, indulgent cake, then these are the ones for you. All right, Eloise, before I let you go, could you let everyone know where they can find out more about you and remember to say the name of your book one more time, uh, so that people can pre order.Eloise: So yes, my book, It's Not Fair: Why it's Time to Have a Grown Up Conversation About How Adults Treat Children. You can pre order it. It's out in June. It's very exciting. I can't wait for you all to read it. And then I'm also on Instagram @mightymother_. And I also have a Substack called Small Places, which is probably the best place to kind of find out more broadly about my work and find links to ongoing things as well. So yeah, those are the best places.Laura: We will link to all of those in the show notes so that people can find you. I really appreciate this conversation. Thanks so much for coming on. Eloise: Thank you so much for having me. It's been such a joy.OUTRO:Laura: Thanks so much for listening to the Can I Have Another Snack? podcast. You can support the show by subscribing in your podcast player and leaving a rating and review. And if you want to support the show further and get full access to the Can I Have Another Snack? universe, you can become a paid subscriber.It's just £5 a month or £50 for the year. As well as getting tons of cool perks you help make this work sustainable and we couldn't do it without the support of paying subscribers. Head to laurathomas.substack.com to learn more and sign up today. Can I Have Another Snack? is hosted by me, Laura Thomas. Our sound engineer is Lucy Dearlove. Fiona Bray formats and schedules all of our posts and makes sure that they're out on time every week. Our funky artwork is by Caitlin Preyser, and the music is by Jason Barkhouse. Thanks so much for listening. ICYMI this week: What Are You Eating Right Now?* How are you flipping gender scripts for your kids?* Nourishing Full Bodied Awareness with Hillary McBride* Let's Talk About Snacks, Baby This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit laurathomas.substack.com/subscribe

The Mitchell Institute for Aerospace Studies invites you to enjoy the rollout for our newest policy paper: The Quantum Advantage: Why it Matters and Essential Next Steps by Heather Penney, Senior Resident Fellow. She was joined by Dr. Michael Hayduk, Deputy Director, Air Force Research Lab Information Directorate and Laura Thomas, Chief of Staff, Infleqtion. The event was moderated by Lt Gen Dave USAF (Ret.) Deptula, Dean of the Mitchell Institute. Quantum information science and technology (QIST) is a major focus of defense innovation, yet few in the defense community really understand what is needed to mature these technologies into valuable warfighter capabilities. U.S. policy makers often jump to quantum computing when speaking of QIST advantages. Yet, other quantum applications are advancing at a pace that can fix known defense vulnerabilities and capability gaps within the next five years—things like timing, navigation, sensing, and radio frequency reception. Because many applications are defense specific, DoD needs an investment strategy that goes well beyond research and development. This series of reports by Heather Penney helps to demystify the science behind quantum technologies, explain why securing a lead in this field matters to warfighters, and recommend next steps U.S. defense leaders should take to achieve a quantum advantage.

This week Amy and Libby are joined by our Senior Pastor's wife, Laura Thomas.

Hey everyone, and welcome back to the Can I Have Another Snack? Podcast where we talk about food, bodies, and identity, especially through the lens of parenting. I'm Laura Thomas, I'm an anti-diet registered nutritionist and I also write the Can I Have Another Snack newsletter.Today I'm sharing part 2 of my conversation with Professor Karen Throsby, author of Sugar Rush.  If you're just joining us then make sure you go back and listen to part 1 of this episode before you jump into this one. We talk about mortified mothers, how removing sugar from the diet is gendered work that falls on women, and how the certainty around the ‘badness' of sugar belies a lot more doubt and ambiguity coming from the scientific community. So go back and check out part 1 if you haven't listened already. Today we're getting into why the so-called ‘war on ob*sity' has to constantly reinvent itself to stay relevant, and how it fails to meet its own objectives. We also talk about how ultra-processed foods are quickly becoming the new sugar and how that conversation fails to acknowledge the role that convenience foods play in offering immediate care or the privilege in being able to eat for some nebulous future health. And we couldn't talk about sugar and not talk about Jamie Oliver and the sugar tax.INTROBefore we get to Karen, a super quick reminder that all the work we do here is entirely reader and listener supported and the podcast is my biggest operating cost. I will do everything I can to keep it free and accessible to everyone, and you can help by becoming a paid subscriber - it's £5/month or £50 for the year (and you can pay that in your local currency wherever you are in the world). Paid subscribers get access to the extended CIHAS universe including our weekly discussion threads, my monthly column Dear Laura and the whole back archive. You also support the people who work on the podcast, and help ensure we can keep the lights on around here. You can sign up at laurathomasphd.co.uk and the link is in your show notes. As always, if you're experiencing financial hardship, comp subscriptions are available, please email hello@laurathomasphd.co.uk and put the work ‘snacks' in the subject line and we'll hook you up. Thank you as always for your support and for making this work possible.Alright team, I know you're going to love the second installment of this episode so let's get straight to it - here's part two of my conversations with professor Karen Throsby.  Here's the transcript in full:MAIN EPISODELaura: Karen, I want to come back to this idea that you articulate so well in the book. You say that “the so-called war on ob*sity has been unable to warrant its core empirical claims” – I'm quoting you now, “and has been a notable failure when measured against its own goals of sustained population level weight loss.”Can you explain how in order to sustain itself, the war on ob*sity had to reinvent itself like Madonna? By casting a new villain…and kind of talk about that arc a little bit? Karen: Yeah. So if we think about, I mean, obviously the sort of attack on fat bodies has, has a very long history, but if we think about its most recent history in, in the form of the war on ob*sity, which dates to around the turn of the millennium as a new kind of intensified attack where dietary fat was seen as the core problem.Sugar has always been seen as a problem. We can even go back to the 1960s and the rise of artificial sweeteners. and their take up in the diet industry. So it's always been there as a problem, but it was really fat, fat, fat, fat, fat. And that's why, when I looked at the newspaper articles, sugar was hardly talked about because the focus was different.And I think what we get is then with that repeated failure, where there has been a base, I mean, there's…in the UK, there's been a leveling off of ob*sity rates, but it doesn't meet the aspirations of the attack on ob*sity. It has been a failure. And I think it runs out of steam because it's not achieving the change.And, and yet you get this kind of constant hectoring and sort of constant renewal. I can't…there's been…I can't remember. It's like 17 policies or something, you know, in the last 20 years. And it's, you know, none of them are successful, have been successful. And then, so we get to about 2012, and one of the things that happened in the UK, of course, was the Olympics, where there was a lot of anti-ob*sity talk.It was seen as a way of refreshing the war on ob*sity, and I think that partly opened the door. Laura: Yeah. I'm sort of smirking, because I was in the States at that point doing my PhD, so I kind of, like, missed a lot of what was going on here, around 2012 in the Olympics. So yeah, it's really interesting that you're, you're not, you noted that, that that kind of anti…Karen: Like a core, a core justification for the, for funding, you know, a mega event like the Olympics was that it would boost sport, which would boost attempts to reduce ob*sity. And so you've got that in the background, you've got the fact that it is losing steam, you know, and so it needs to find another, another enemy, something to pick it back up again. And sugar, I think…because at the same time, as I mentioned earlier, we've got austerity measures being consolidated through the Welfare Reform Act in 2012, all of those welfare cuts in place. So then the idea of sugar, and the kind of an austerity worked really well together, the idea that individuals should make small economies to get by to manage their own consumption, that you shouldn't over consume because it costs the state, it costs other people money. And so those narratives came together perfectly and sugar just became this, this model enemy for the moment.And then what we see then is the rise of interest in the sugar tax. which was announced in 2016, which is the peak in the newspaper coverage, and then was launched in 2018. So in a, in a sense, the history of the social life of sugar during this moment is an arc that sort of covers the rise to the sugar tax and then its implementation.But all of the expectation that had been laid on fat is then laid onto sugar as the problem. If only we can solve this problem. And so again, as I said before, it creates this erasure of the absolute complexity of food and eating. The idea that food is only ever swallowing and metabolising, it's, you know, it's so social, it forms so many social functions around love, care, comfort, you know, all of those things that it's just completely inadequate.And then what we've got now is a tailing off. And actually it tailed off during the pandemic, there was a little peak at the beginning, if you can remember when Boris Johnson launched an anti-obesity policy, when he came out of hospital, he was blaming his own body size on the fact that he'd been very unwell. And so we saw a little peak then, but it's basically dropped off now.So in sort of 10 years, we've had a sort of complete focus on sugar and then this tailing off of interest in it. And I think now what's coming in instead is ultra processed food is now filling that gap, but it's folded sugar into it because obviously ultra processed food is, as almost all, I mean, has always got sugar in it. And so it's picked up the sugar as it's gone. So it's, all of that is still there, but it's now being talked about in terms of ultra processed food.[SMALL PREVIEW OF FIRST UPF ARTICLE]Laura: I imagine that what you, you might say about kind of almost this like third phase of the, the ‘war on ob*sity' in terms of who or what is responsible, because there almost has to be this singular entity that we can point at.And at the same time, I think it's so interesting that ultra processed food has just kind of subsumed every kind of nutritional villain that we could have. Fat, sugar, sweeteners, and just the complexity within the concept of ultra processed food in terms of just from a lay perspective, right? To try and wrap your head around what is and isn't.I mean, I have a PhD in nutrition and I struggled to get through the NOVA documentation on ultra processed food. And to bring it back to the sort of gendered aspect of this for a second, something that I noted that…so Carlos Monteiro is the guy, right, that developed the NOVA classification. I'm not sure if you've read much around this.I don't know if this is a book that's in the works for the future, but one of the things he said is that ultra processed food is the undoing, basically of the family meal. I mean, there's…there's a lot that we could unpack there in terms of, like, the sort of putting a family meal on a pedestal and how that even has sort of classed and, you know, all kinds of connotations.But, I mean, as a mother of a small child, to my thinking, actually, ultra processed food saves our family meals, right? Like, it makes it feasible to get something on the table while you have, you know, a child kind of hanging around your legs begging you to play with them. All of the, kind of, the rhetoric from Carlos Monteiro and the men of science, it kind of, it misses the piece of labour, around labour, which we've talked about, but it also misses this piece of just how we're all just struggling to survive in late stage capitalism, and how none of us in our lives have the conditions available to us where, you know, we have affordable childcare or family close by because we're living in these like hyper isolated, splintered, you know, individual houses, and we have no community and I think there's this a piece that gets missed out of this conversation about the bigger, broader social structures that we're living within, which I suppose, you know, speaks to the thesis of your book.So yeah, I was just tying it back to some of my observations around ultra processed food, so it's really interesting that you've gone there and I'm curious to hear what additional thoughts you have about that?Karen: Yeah, I mean, I think for me, the, the alarm that goes off for me when I hear this talk about ultraprocessed food is very similar to my alarm around the way the sugar, that sugar is talked about. It's carrying a lot of weight that it's, it's being now framed as again, the problem. But now it's a very different kind of problem to sugar. So we know that sugar is in a lot of foods. If you go to a supermarket, it's, you know, there's a considerable proportion of the foods will have added sugar.But there's a real difference there between, say, observing that, where you could, for example, purchase lower sugar items and so on. But to say that, I mean, what is it, 60 to 80 percent of, of food that we eat – this is the figure that we get, I mean again, who is we? – is ultra processed food and we shouldn't eat it. What, what do they expect people to eat?Are they seriously suggesting that people take out 60 to 80 percent of their habitual diet?Laura: Well, I have an answer to that actually, Karen. So Gyorgy Scrinis, who I know you reference a lot in your book, he thinks that we should all… well, he had two recommendations from one podcast I listened to. One was that we should all, there should be lots of markets everywhere that people can just pick up food, fresh food, right?And secondly, he also thinks we should all be able to go into our garden and pick a salad. Karen: Right. I mean, it's a lovely fantasy. It's a lovely fantasy. Promised on the labour of women, again.Laura: I would love to have a garden, first of all, that I could be able to do that. Karen: Lots of people don't have those gardens. They don't have farmer's markets.It's a lovely fantasy. It's probably not a bad idea, but realistically, people can't do that for all kinds of complicated reasons. And I think what gets lost there is, I think, the idea of health in the present. So, for example, we know that, when I talk about the, we, you know, the, we are eating this, what's often meant there is they are eating this, right?We know that a lot of the people, the, the big figures in the anti UPF field are not and yeah, they're not eating it. So they are eating it and there is this complete lack of understanding around, for example, if you have no money, if you really have no money, if you're very poor, if you're poor in every way, which many, many people are in this country, to feed your child a processed meal that is highly palatable, calorific, that you know they'll finish and not be hungry, is an act of care in the present, that your kid's not going to be hungry. They'll be able to concentrate at school, get a good night's sleep, those things. Whereas those…that act is not credited. So if you were to cook food from scratch or buy an unfamiliar food, for example, and give it to a child. Now I've never raised a child, but from what I kind of understand, children are incredibly conservative and it takes many, many goes at a new food before they will eat it. So if you have no money and you give your child an apple that they won't eat, you can't give them anything else. And so the cost of experimentation is very, very high for people with nothing to fall back on. And so there's lots of reasons. And then we talk about time poverty. It's better to, you know, sit down and grab something that is processed rather than not having the time to cook anything. And so lots of those reasons why people might eat this food. And until you address, I think, the inequalities that are absolutely central to food choice, it makes no sense to actually dictate food choice unless you are prepared to entrench those very same inequalities.Laura: Yeah, thank you for that. I think you articulated it so beautifully with that example around the opportunity cost of feeding a child or, you know, exposing them..we would use the language of ‘exposure' in nutritional science in terms of, you need 15 to 20 exposures before a child will accept a food and even that's horseshit, right?We know that it can take a lot more than that and, and, and even then, you know, the…say they do eat the green beans or the broccoli or whatever it is, that's unlikely to fill them up and stave off hunger for, for that child. So, yeah, I think framing it as an act of care is such a beautiful way to, to put it because, you know, the, the alternative that's being peddled by these, UPF sort of evangelists is that that you're doing something harmful for your child and setting up that binary is so problematic because again, you're just flattening down so much nuance there.Karen: Yeah, exactly that. This idea that food is either good or bad and sugar is…is bad. And if you say it's good, then you must work for the sugar industry. And if you make, if you make a set of claims, as I have, a kind of critical claim where I, I refuse the idea that it's either good or bad, I've never said that it's good or bad, I just get accused of working for Coca Cola.You know, which I'm not, by the way.Laura: Yeah, no, you're, you're an academic and what you're doing is complicating a lot of these things that, that seem….are, I suppose, where the, the rhetoric around them is so, um, binarised and flattened and yeah, just, just, uh, you're, you're asking questions, which I think we need to do a lot more of.Speaking of questions, there is one, one more thing, little topic that I'd like to – I say, little topic, it's not a little topic at all, but one of the things that you, or one of the threads that felt really important in your book that I feel often gets obscured from any conversations about sugar is the really troubling history stemming from colonialism and enslavement of sugar.Can you speak to how nutrition and public health sort of washed their hands of this history and maybe tell us a little bit about that history and, and what happens when we erase it?Karen: Yeah, I mean a lot of people are aware, even though it doesn't come to the fore as much as it should, that there is a terrible history, and in many ways present, attached to sugar.Obviously it was, you know, a central product in, in the slavery, in the slavery trade. It was, um…you know, millions of people were enslaved in the interests of sugar production, um, the murder of, of uncountable people, the dislocation of uncountable people to get sugar. And this kind of partly relates to its, its, its kind of history as a, firstly as a luxury item, and then as a kind of everyday in, in sort of, you know, the, the 20th century, it becomes a, um, it becomes a more everyday item that you know that workers would put in their tea to get to get energy. But also we can even see more recently in, in, say, Australia, for example, there's a really terrible history of indentured labour…so post slavery. At the end of slavery, there was a use of indentured labor so Pacific Island people, for example in Australia, under absolutely horrific conditions, working conditions, of profound racism as well. And these things leave a long legacy. And we know, the legacy of slavery, you know, has led to the marginalisation of people of colour, you know, into the present. And so I think it's an important point. One of the things that bothers me a little bit about the ways it does get talked about is that it gets, there's a couple of books that talk about it as a kind of essentially evil product. Look, it was connected with slavery and now it's killing everybody. Um, as if it's sort of in itself, it was contaminated, whereas in fact, of course, it was colonialism, it was capitalism, that was the problem, not sugar, because we saw things with cotton and tobacco and so on as well. So it's an interesting thing, because in some ways it gets talked about as, well, it's clearly a kind of terrible product, look at its history, and yet at the same time, we don't talk about its history and what the legacy is of that in terms of racism, the legacies of colonialism and also we should also think as well about the present environmental damage of the sugar industry, which, you know, is incredibly greedy of water, for example, and causes a great deal of environmental damage.Which is also always through the lens of colonialism in the sense of who bears the weight of that damage, which areas, which places?Laura: Absolutely. I thought there was a really…I mean, there were lots of really illuminating examples in the book, but one thing – maybe you could speak more to this – is the kind of voyeuristic aspect of Jamie Oliver's Sugar documentary where he acts…he is almost behaving like the coloniser in, or embodying the coloniser by going to Mexico and sort of, you know, as he claims, seeing the damage that has been caused by companies like Coca Cola, but that that is missing a lot of the, the historical context. Can you just describe that probably a bit better than I can?Karen: Yeah, sure. I mean, Mexico has got this, this kind of, sort of unique status in the anti-sugar world as a place where sugar consumption is very high, but was also one of the first places to introduce a sugar tax.And so it's, it's seen as, as a sort of model site – and sort of everybody references Mexico and all the policy papers and things. And what Jamie Oliver did is in this, his documentary about sugar, he went to Mexico and went to the area of Chiapas, which has a very troubled history of conflict and profound poverty, and he actually goes to a family, a family dinner, a family event. It's actually a memorial event for a family member who died and they have, and they cook up a big dinner. And he looks on very approvingly at the food that they're cooking. They're sort of, you know, frying up all these great vegetables and spices. And he, he keeps saying how authentic it is and how, what a great job they're doing.And then we, he starts seeing what they're drinking and they're drinking pop. They're drinking fizzy drinks from the bottles. And also we see, we see several shots of women feeding babies, or toddlers, giving them pop, uh, to drink. And he sort of..his disapproval is so palpable and he sort of looks at the camera like, ‘why would they do this? Don't they know?'.You know, and he seems to have forgotten that earlier he's spoken to an activist in the area who tells him that there is, there is very little drinkable water in the region. And so actually, again, we can see the pop as an act of care, that the kids are being given, you know, something safe to drink.He never asks the next question. And he's got this very colonial gaze, which is…if only these people knew they would make different choices.Laura: Yeah, that's, it's so interesting. And there was another moment, again, that there, I think there were children drinking Coca Cola and with a similar sort of like, Oh my God, don't they know any better sort of stance? It was a dentist! Who said that they saw a lot of children who had been drinking high amounts of, of, like fizzy drinks, sweetened drinks, and that that they…the dentist started asking questions and the one of the, I think it was the mother maybe, or someone in the family had said that they were giving the child a fizzy drink to help keep them quiet. And then the dentist said, well, why do you need to keep them quiet? And they had said, well, because otherwise they will be beaten by their extended family. Karen: Yeah, I think it's the case from, from Alaska actually, that particular case. But what I think what's in…but yes, the point is that the mother giving the baby fizzy drinks was again performing an act of care to protect the child, in terms of present health, the child wouldn't be beaten for crying and so on. But this, this kind of trope of babies being given pop to drink runs right the way through the anti-sugar field as like the worst, the most egregious example. And of course, it's another version of mother blaming. And of kind of…and then it goes through this colonial lens of ignorance. If only they knew…Laura: And then they need these white male chef saviours to come in and…Karen: Exactly. So again, it's about…it's not, I'm not saying that, you know, giving the babies pop is, is a good thing or a bad thing.It's performing a particular function for the people caring for that child. And then it's, it's framed through this colonial lens of: if only these people knew better, and we are the ones who can teach them. Rather than asking, what is it in your life that influences your food choices? How could we make your lives better?Laura: Yeah, that makes giving our children a sweetened drink, you know, a necessity in the first place, what necessitates that. So then, we've talked a lot about this Jamie Oliver character, and I was telling you before we started recording that I now inextricably have the image of Jamie Oliver dancing outside of Parliament playing in my mind whenever I think about the sugar tax.I don't know if you intended your book to be funny, but I found it hilarious, the way that you were just name dropping all these people who I ,like, know through nutrition, but that's that's an aside! But I wonder if you could tell us a little bit more about the sugar tax and specifically the ways that the sugar tax is constructed so that it cannot fail.Karen: So the sugar tax is… if sugar is a problem about which something must be done, then sugar tax was the something, in the UK context. And the promise of the sugar tax was that it would reduce consumption of sugar, which in turn would a) produce more money to use for health projects and b) create health benefits. It would lead to a reduction in ob*sity, diabetes, all kinds of chronic diseases. Okay.But it's set up in such a way that…so its ultimate goal is to reduce illness, right? So to reduce ob*sity – which I don't consider as being illness – but to reduce ob*sity and to improve measures…make measurable health improvements at population level. That's the target. But actually, it doesn't have to do that to succeed. So the first thing it needs to do, the first way it can succeed is by reducing consumption, which is taken as a proxy for expected benefits. So, the sugar tax did reduce consumption of sugar. A lot of drinks were reformulated in advance of the tax to have less sugar. It did reduce purchasing of the high sugar drinks to some extent. Uh, it's a fairly modest reduction, but it is a reduction and that's been mapped fairly, you know, across the board globally in these taxes, right? But there is no evidence of the measurable health impacts that were assumed to follow. And instead what happens is they get pushed into the future. Ah, ‘we haven't seen them yet, but we will see them, especially if we have more taxes'. So the problem is not that the tax hasn't worked, but that there aren't enough of them, so we need to tax sweets and, and other, you know, cereals and things. So there's that way that as long as it reduces consumption, it can't fail. Even if it doesn't produce measurable health effects. The second is financial. So it will produce money, revenue, which can then be invested into, I mean, in our case, it was, they said it would go towards breakfast clubs and sporting facilities. Although when you look across the documents, the number of times over that the money is spent is amazing. And the idea is that you get, then you get health gains by other means. So you'll have breakfast clubs, so kids will have a healthy breakfast. So it doesn't matter if the sugar reduction doesn't lead to health gains because there's a revenue gain that will lead to health benefits.What's interesting is that also can't lose because if, if the tax doesn't raise very much money, it means that the tax has worked to reduce consumption. And if the tax raises a lot of money, you can say, well, it's worked because we can now compensate for the high consumption by investing in health benefits. So…and actually, I mean, there's, there's a whole other set of questions about what actually happened to the money.Laura: Well, that was what I was wondering, because I'm still seeing that there are 4 million children in England who are food insecure. Where are the free school meals for the 800,000 children that…whose parents are on Universal Credit that aren't eligible for free school meals, like…?Karen: And Sustain, the organisation Sustain actually raised some very specific questions about money that they knew had been raised in revenue that hadn't been…that had just been drawn into the sort of, into the wealth of the country. And so there's that. And then the final way that the sugar tax can succeed is its best way…it's the most nebulous way, is that it's seen as raising awareness. That simply by the fact of its existence, it's alerting people to the dangers of sugar. And so in a sense, it doesn't have to produce any of the other benefits because it's raised awareness. And what's interesting about this to me is that that then flings it straight back onto the individual. “Well, we told you, we've signaled it through the sugar tax. You're still not eating appropriately. You're still not feeding your children appropriately.” So it's a kind of abnegation of political responsibility, even while claiming to be taking responsibility by having the tax. So this is my concern about the tax is that it can't fail. And actually it ends up throwing responsibility back onto individuals and. As always, particularly women, where food is concerned. Laura: Yeah, well, that's exactly what Matt Hancock wanted, so he's got his way. But I do, I think it's really interesting that, especially that first part that you talked about, the sort of constantly moving goalposts and, you know, oh yes, we'll see these these benefits in the future. And it just all feels so nebulous. And, and then that being used as justification for us needing more and additional, you know, taxation, again, sort of obfuscating from all of the social and structural things over here going that, that nobody is addressing. Karen: I mean, you can think about the attack on sugar and, really on the, on the war on ob*sity more generally, as it's a very future oriented project. The benefits all lie in the future. If I give up sugar now, I will experience these, these benefits in the future, which is in itself a profound active privilege. And that's why I kind of mentioned the, the healthcare in the present of giving your child a bag of chips or something that will fill them up is being an active healthcare in the present because they don't have the luxury to invest in the future in the way that is being determined, um, in these prescriptions to give up sugar.Laura: And simultaneously you see this sense of urgency on the political side of things, even though these alleged benefits to people aren't going to be seen for years and years in the future, but the sense of urgency in terms of policymaking and you get these very off the cuff, ill thought-out, you know, not thinking about the potential collateral damage of these policies just for political gain.Yeah, we're all just collateral damage in this.Karen: I mean, interestingly we're not all collateral damage, it's particular groups of people are collateral damage. Laura: Well, that's true.Karen:…is the really salient point – I agree with you – but that's the really salient point that the weight of this damage does not fall evenly. And that's where my concern, that's kind of where the book really tries to focus, is where the weight of those exclusions falls. Laura: Yeah. No, absolutely. That's so on the point. So thank you for that. Karen, before I let you go, I would love to hear what your snack is. So at the end of every episode, my guest and I share what they've been snacking on. So it could be anything, a show, a podcast, a literal snack, whatever you have been snacking on lately. So what have you got to share with the listeners? Karen: Okay. So, so mine is a…it's an activity, really. So I love to swim and I swim in an outdoor pool, which is unusual in the UK, at a health club. And just, just recently…I swim in the evening and it's got very dark, but it's been very autumnal and the leaves have been kind of falling while, and the, the, the pool is surrounded by trees and it is the most peaceful and delicious space at the end of a very busy day to just go into the pool and be surrounded by this. It's very cold. The pool is warm, but the air is very cold. And it's a very particular moment that happens in the autumn where you get this beautiful colour and the sort of mist is rising off the pool. And it's the most peaceful, relaxing space at the end of a difficult day or a long day and I just look forward to it all day and then I just love…the first 10 minutes of that swim is just, is the best moment ever. So that would, that's my, that's my snack.Laura: So I'm sitting here so envious of you right now because I know exactly what you're talking about. I live, like, a five minute walk from a Lido. here in London. It's very close, but I'm navigating some pelvic pain. I haven't been able to go for a swim for such a long time, but I know exactly that moment that you're referring to, which, um, yeah, it's so lovely when… apart from when you get to the stage in autumn where they, like, leave out baskets and with the idea that you gather up leaves as you're going. Karen: But I love the leaves being in the water. I love having the leaves in the water and it's just, it's such a comforting space for me.Laura: I agree. There's something really holding, containing about being in the water. So my snack is…it's an actual, literal snack. But it's an anticipatory snack because every year…so my brother lives in the States, and every year we do like an exchange of like, I send him a bunch of, like, Dairy Milk and all these like chocolates, and he sends me stuff from from the US, so I've sent him with a list of stuff from Trader Joe's. So I'm vegan, which I believe you are as well. I just ask him to, like, clear the shelves of any, like, vegan shelf stable snacks and just box them all up and send them to me. So I know I have, like, peanut butter pretzels and the almond butter pretzel. They're like these little nuggets filled with peanut butter and almond butter, but like a pretzel casing. So I know that they're coming and they're so salty on the outside. Public Health England…I can see Susan Jebb is just, like, screaming at me right now. But it's okay. So yeah, I'm looking forward to getting that. By the time that this episode comes out in January, I will have had my snacks.Karen: You will have had your snacks. That is fantastic. Laura: Karen, before I let you go, can you please tell everyone where they can find your book? Actually say the title of it! And where they can get it and where they can find more of your work.Karen: Yep. So the book is called Sugar Rush: Science, Politics, and the Demonisation of Fatness. And it's published by Manchester University Press and you can buy it through their website. And if you want to learn more about the work that I'm doing, you can find me at the University of Leeds. If you put my name, Karen Throsby, into the search engine, or into Google, I'll pop up. And there's a list of sort of publications that I've done there and how you can get hold of me as well.Laura: Well, I will definitely link to the book and to your part on Leeds website in the show notes that everyone can find you and learn more about your work. Karen, this has been such a treat. Thank you so much for coming and speaking with us and thank you so much for your really brilliant and important work.Karen: Thank you so much for having me on. OUTRO​Thanks so much for listening to the Can I Have Another Snack? podcast. You can support the show by subscribing in your podcast player and leaving a rating and review. And if you want to support the show further and get full access to the Can I Have Another Snack? universe, you can become a paid subscriber.It's just £5 a month or £50 for the year. As well as getting tons of cool perks you help make this work sustainable and we couldn't do it without the support of paying subscribers. Head to laurathomas.substack.com to learn more and sign up today.  Can I Have Another Snack? is hosted by me, Laura Thomas. Our sound engineer is Lucy Dearlove. Fiona Bray formats and schedules all of our posts and makes sure that they're out on time every week. Our funky artwork is by Caitlin Preyser, and the music is by Jason Barkhouse. Thanks so much for listening. ICYMI this week: “Why Do You Wear Makeup??”* Dear Laura... how do I stop fat shaming my partner's kid?* Rapid Response: Actually, Maybe Don't Say That to Your Kid* Why Are We So Obsessed With Hiding Vegetables in Our Kids' Food? This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit laurathomas.substack.com

Hey everyone! Happy New Year and welcome back to the Can I Have Another Snack? podcast, where we talk about food, bodies, and identity, especially through the lens of parenting. I'm Laura Thomas, I'm an anti-diet registered nutritionist and I also write the Can I Have Another Snack newsletter.I am really excited to share this week's conversation; it is the perfect antidote to the January diet culture hellscape that we're all living through. My guest today is gender studies professor and author Dr. Karen Throsby, whose book Sugar Rush (affiliate link) was an absolute highlight for me in 2023. I have been recommending it to everyone. Karen's thesis in the book is essentially how the public health and popular science discourse around sugar obscures the social and structural inequality responsible for health disparities and by doing so, actively embeds it further into the fabric of society. I've split this conversation into two parts - so you'll get the second half of the conversation in two weeks. But today we talk about how the conversation around sugar being bad for you is framed with so much certainty, whereas the science holds a lot more doubt and ambiguity. We talk about how nostalgic fantasies of a past where nobody ate sugar and everyone climbed trees all day long erases the unpaid labour of women, and how even modern day efforts to eliminate sugar are dependent on unequal distribution of household labour and are framed as work that is pleasurable, or else women get scapegoated as bad mothers. So much great stuff in this episode and like I said, I'll share part two soon, where we get into the rhetoric around ultra-processed food, how the so-called war on ‘obes*ty' fails to live up to it's own aims and loads more. Before we get to Karen just a quick reminder that the entire CIHAS universe is reader and listener supported, meaning I literally can't do this work without your support. If you like what we do here and want to help keep the lights on then you can upgrade your account to become a paying subscriber - it's £5/month or £50/year. Not only do you support the time and labour that goes into producing the newsletter and podcast, but you get access to our weekly community discussion thread Snacky Bits. You can comment on posts, and you get access to my monthly Dear Laura column and the full archive. You'll also see a bit more bonus content on free essays that's just for paid subscribers in the coming months, so make sure you're signed up to get in on that action. Head to laurathomas.substack.com or check out the show notes for that link. Follow Laura on Instagram here.Subscribe to Laura's newsletter here.Enrol in the Raising Embodied Eaters course here.Here's the transcript in full:Laura: Karen, I'd love if you could begin by sharing a bit about you and the work that you do.Karen: Yes, thank you. So I'm a sociologist, I'm a professor of gender studies at the School of Sociology and Social Policy at the University of Leeds. And throughout my 20 plus years of career, I've been looking at issues of gender, bodies, technology and health.So I've done work on reproductive technology, on surgical weight management, I've done work on endurance sports and what you do to a body when you engage in endurance sports socially, what does that mean? And then most recently, I've been working on what I've been calling the social life of sugar. How can we think about sugar in a moment when sugar is being attacked as a kind of health demon, the constant in my career has been this idea about bodies and how we try and change bodies or how bodies change and then most recently in relation to food and particularly sugar,Laura: Tell us a little bit more about that because, you know, you kind of say this almost quite flippantly. “Oh yeah, I've been doing sugar”, but that's like a whole like undertaking in terms of research and then the book that came out of that. So, could you maybe tell us a little bit about the research that you did that went into, you know, studying the social life of sugar and, and maybe a little bit about the process of writing the book as well?Karen: Yes, of course. So, it started from observation, which is where a lot of research comes from – of noticing just a lot of sugar talk in the media, for example. And so, I decided to look at it more formally. So, I actually did a, I started with newspapers and I looked at newspaper coverage from 2000. So I ended up looking to 2020 when I searched for newspaper articles in nine UK newspapers. So across the political spectrum and broadsheet, tabloids as well, looking for articles of quite substantive articles like sort of 500 words or more with the word sugar in the title.And then I filtered those. So I took out all of the irrelevant things. So there's lots of mentions of Alan Sugar, uh, for example, lots of sugar metaphors, like a ‘spoonful of sugar' that you get in business reporting. And I took all those out. And then I kind of looked at the pattern and what you see from 2000 to about 2012, it's very, a very low level of coverage, just trickling along very low.And then in 2013, it starts to shoot up. And then by 2016, it's really high and it peaks there. And then it drops off a little bit, picks up again at 2018 and then slowly falls away. And so I took 2013 through to towards the end of 2020 as the period of study, and that ended up with about 550 newspaper articles that then became my objective analysis of what's happening with sugar.And then I dug out anything else I could find. So policy documents and newspaper, medical articles, self-help books, popular science tracks – anything I could find about sugar. And that became the body of data that I then was analyzing just to see: how is sugar being talked about? Who is being excluded when we talk about sugar?Trying to see it, not literally, but thinking about what is sugar doing socially when we talk about it.Laura: Yeah. It's, it's an, I'm just thinking of this from a research perspective. It's a huge undertaking. I'm just imagining you going through your Nvivo now, it's just like, Karen: exactly. You're right there. I mean, it was an unusual project for me, because all my other projects have been broadly ethnographic. So I've actually gone and observed groups, a social, social organization, and so on, um, or done interviews and things like that. So this was a departure for me that it's very text based. It's looking at how it's reproduced and represented in text, in different kinds of text.But you ask the same questions, what is a newspaper trying to achieve in writing in this particular way? What is a popular science track trying to achieve in writing about sugar in a particular way? And then you can start thinking about, so what does sugar mean in different contexts, but also what kind of work does sugar enable us to do socially?Laura: Mm hmm. So can you tell us a little bit more about the sort of, maybe just like the headline conclusions that you drew out with this and then and we can kind of get into some of the more specifics in a second. Karen: Yeah, I mean the bottom line for me was that sugar and what I'm calling the attack on sugar, this targeting that happens quite suddenly around this time and and taking over from fat in that sense as being the enemy that this talk around sugar appears to be in relation to everyone. It's seen as a problem, a problem that we all have. So you'll see the opening line of, there's a Public Health England document in 2015. And the opening line is ‘we're eating too much sugar', and it's bad for our health. Right? So it seems like it's everybody's problem.But actually, what happens when you do that is that you ignore social inequality. And so the core argument of the book is that actually by focusing on a single nutrient – like sugar – as the cause of multiple problems, you actually make inequalities worse rather than better. Because it actually relies on erasing inequality from the start to say, we eat too much sugar.So a sociologist would always want to ask, well, who is ‘we' here? And in fact, what we see by looking at the newspaper coverage and so on, is those who are deemed to be eating ‘too much sugar' are also those who are already the most marginalized in society. So it provides cover for actually an intensification of attacks on marginalized groups in society. And I argue in the book that that rise that happens in 2012, 2013, is actually related to the implementation of austerity measures in the UK, which is the retrenchment of benefits, the cutting welfare and so on, and targeting particular groups as somehow as ‘over consumers' of public resources.And therefore they're easily translated as ‘over consumers' in other ways. And so that this figure of the kind of poor, fat, irresponsible, individual as a caricature comes up as kind of someone who can be blamed and targeted. So the argument in the book is really that by focusing on a single nutrient, you not only ignore those groups, but you actually compound the inequalities that they're already experiencing.Laura: Yeah, you're furthering the marginalization and the stigmatization of those groups. There are a few things within what you've just said there that I wanted to kind of come back and revisit if it's okay. And the first is this idea of certainty. You know, you say at the beginning of those Public Health England documents, and I think throughout the headlines and the media reporting and some of the documentaries that you discuss, there's this thread of certainty.Certainty that sugar is bad for us. Certainty that sugar makes us fat. Certainty that fat is even a bad thing in the first place. Can you talk to us a bit more about how certainty is used in this way as a sort of political device to drive discourse in a specific direction?Karen: Yeah, that's a really good question.And what we can see with these certainty claims, I mean, that sugar is bad for you. That's the core claim is that it's bad for us. But actually, when you look at the arguments against sugar, there isn't very much agreement over what kind of problem it is in the first place. There's two core ways that this plays out.The first is that it's bad for you because it makes you fat. Because it's empty calories. It's more calories than you need. So that's why it's bad for you. It could be anything, but it just happens to be something that is very calorie dense without bringing other nutritional benefit. The other version of the problem of sugar is that it is actively toxic.So not just a source of calories as much as any other, but that it's actively disrupting; it's creating a metabolic dysfunction and disruption. That it creates this chaos around your management of blood sugar and brain chemistry and everything. And they seem to be in opposition to each other, but in fact have managed to coalesce around the certainty that sugar is bad; almost as if it doesn't really matter why it's bad, but it just is.And it's created a kind of lowest common denominator platform that brings everyone together. And so it's provided a space where multiple vested interests can meet. So politicians, for example, have a vested interest in this kind of narrative because it provides targets of blame. It provides a site where you can appear to be doing something about a problem.And people who are writing books saying that it's toxic are invested in that because they have a kind of a brand that is then created. And then there's a whole diet industry that is invested in the idea of empty calories and, you know, and, and so on. And so I'm not suggesting it's a terrible plot. Right.I'm just saying it provides an opportunity for multiple interests to come together. And I think there's a number of ways this is facilitated. So, for example, around the idea that ‘ob*sity' is a disaster. Is an awful thing. Tthat ‘ob*sity' is terrible. Around the idea that sugar is ‘addictive'. Yeah. Which is a very common thing that's used.Again, what constitutes addiction is extremely vague. And then there's a nostalgia that comes back. We didn't use to eat like this. Sort of in the 1950s, post war rationing. Although we didn't eat like this. We all just ran around all day and we never ate sugar and we were all fit and healthy. And so those things kind of tie these together to create the certainty that sugar is bad.And that we eat too much of it and it's bad for our health. And so certainty for me, this certainty is manufactured and it is providing political cover for doubt. Which, actually, when you look at the science, science is always much more riddled with doubt and uncertainty than the claims that are made for it.Um, and often that doubt is in the journal articles and so on, but then it gets sort of extracted as a certainty. And so we get this, this sense of certainty that creates an imperative to act. A sense of urgency. For example, and sugar by sort of, as its proxy, is framed as a problem about which something must be done.And so in a sense, then, the need is to be seen to act. And so you could have an intervention, say, like the sugar tax, um, which I would argue is much more about being seen to do something that actually achieving its stated goal. And so I think what this sense of certainty does is it provides cover, and it also erases the inconvenient uncertainties around why do some people eat in particular ways? What are the social reasons? What are the inequalities and the other factors that determine how people choose to eat? And I think those get erased by that certainty. So it's very functional in that way.Laura: Mm hmm. Everything just gets flattened down and collapsed in this, yeah, really problematic way.I mean, there's, there was so much that we could kind of get into what you just said there. But I suppose one section of the book, I mean, I enjoyed all of your book, but I really enjoyed the section where you talked about nostalgia as well, that you just mentioned there in this kind of like going back to a time where we didn't have much sugar in our diet and we, you know, we had all these home cooked meals, everything was, you know, freshly pulled from the ground and we could just climb trees all day.First of all, what kind of utopia were these men living in anyway? But secondly, I think the part that I really appreciated there was how you talked about the erasure of women's labor in making that a reality in the first place. Do you want to just say a little bit about that? Because I want to come back to gender in a bigger, more expansive sense in a second, but I would just be interested while we're there.Karen: In that particular context, you know, there is this vision that it's never, it's never located strictly in time, but it clearly speaks to some kind of post war, sort of immediate post war imagination – fantasy really – that rests, if we were to accept that this vision is true, that everyone was running around, burning off calories, never snacking, coming home to splendid, home cooked, home grown meals.What isn't discussed, of course, is who cooked these meals? How does this food appear? You know, this, this handcrafted food. And of course, that is the completely unrecognized and largely unpaid labor of women. That a lot of these fantasies around the sugar free life are built on this idea. That food just somehow happens that what's often referred to as real food.It just sort of happens. And then the labor of women is completely written out. Which of course then leaves standing that expectation that women should do that work because it doesn't even count as work because; it's just kind of what's done. I mean, interestingly, the other, the other dimension to the nostalgia is a much longer view, which is this idea of a kind of paleolithic past, but again, is never located strictly in time, but definitely pre-agricultural revolution, where we were hunter gatherers and basically it was based on times of plenty. So you would only eat fruit when the berries came out and that would be it. But of course, again, what gets written out here is there's a great focus on hunting and on meat consumption, but actually it erases the work of women who would have been doing the gathering and the preparing of food.And there's, there's interesting archaeological research that points out that actually We find bones from hunting and tools that were used to hunt. But a lot of the preparation of vegetables and fruit and so on leaves no trace. And so the work of women is literally erased in these stories.Yeah. And, and it just disappears.Laura: And presumably as well, there's a lot of embodied wisdom that gets kind of passed through generations to know like, which berries are safe to eat. And there's another layer to it, it feels like there, that that's also being erased.Karen: Yes. Who are the bearers of knowledge? Who teaches? The next generation and so on is lost in the celebrations of hunting cultures, just as much as it's lost in this, this kind of post-war fantasy. Laura: Yeah. Well, actually, since, since we're here, let's maybe let's stay on the topic of, of gender and, and labor, because I think it has implications, right, for the conversations that we're having in this moment around whether it's eliminating sugar from the diet or ultra processed foods from the diet or whatever it is that I think a lot of that rests on women's unpaid labor to make that come to fruition.Again, that's something that I think is completely left out of this conversation on, generally in nutrition, it's left out of the conversation in terms of who's actually doing this work. And I wrote a series about ultra processed foods a little while ago. And that was my central question; who's growing grains and soaking beans? And, uh, you know, like planning menus and doing the shopping? And, you know, even things like who is making sure that this fresh food is being eaten before it gets spoiled?And, you know, that there is a lot of labor there that just kind of gets kind glossed over. And so I wondered if you could tell us some of your thoughts on the work of eradicating sugar and how that's gendered and specifically how mothers shoulder that additional reproductive labor. Karen: No, it's a really important point.I think, so there's, there's a genre of newspaper story that I call the mortified mother story. Laura: I love this. Karen: Which is when the mother, it's always the mother, and it is always households with children. Sort of heterosexual households with children. And what the woman does is she records all the food that the family members eat.Sometimes it's just the children. Sometimes it's the whole family including the male partner. She records everything that they eat and then the sugar is calculated and then a nutritionist or some kind of sort of dietary expert will come in and basically correct her and sort of tell her where she's going wrong and it's always a kind of shock story.‘I had no idea I was giving them so much sugar and often, you know, I thought this was a I thought cereal bars were really healthy'. But actually they're loaded with sugar. And so those kind of revelations. And then she has a kind of confessional moment where she sort of says, ‘oh, you know, this is terrible.I've done all of these things wrong. And now I'm going to do, I'm going to calculate everything online. I'm going to cook their breakfast from scratch. I'm going to do this, that, and the other.' And what's really striking about the story. Well, first of all, it's always women. The very kind of deliberate harnessing of guilt and shame that's cultivated. I haven't seen a single story of this kind or in any of the self help books that I looked at or any source that I looked at where a redistribution of household labor was part of the recommendations, right? So it's never there. It's about her doing it. But what's clever about it in a way is that it's done in such a way as to make it not work.It's not a kind of work because it's seen as pleasure. As leisure. So she, she is being a mother and therefore, you know, she, it's meant to be, she's gaining pleasure from acquiring these new skills, from being a better mother and so on. Learning these new cooking techniques and things. And so it ends up being not coded as work, which is, uh, you know, like the perfect patriarchal fantasy and do it because they love it so much.And so it's never even, ‘oh dear, I'm really sorry. You have to do all this extra work'. It's ‘lucky you'. Like having to get even more pleasure from cooking and but it's not just cooking. This is the thing that you alluded to as well. It's the planning; it's the shopping; it's the knowing; the remembering.And often in the case of men, actually, one of the responsibilities of women is actually to change their tastes, if you like, without them noticing. So they're not inconvenienced by it. They don't even have to be on board. So they kind of sneak lower sugar things in so that it won't be noticed, so that they never have to actually engage with the process, but it still gets done.And so the guilt and shame and responsibility of this also then makes it impossible to refuse it or hard to refuse it in the sense of, you know, if a good mother does this, what does it mean for someone who doesn't? Can't do it for whatever reason. And of course, all of these things that are recommended, um, in terms of sugar reduction are really oriented towards a middle class set of tastes and dispositions.They assume that you have the money to keep a stock store cupboard of what can often be quite expensive items. That you have a fridge and freezer that you can afford to run. That you have a stove that you can run, that you, you know, that you can have on. And all of these things that you have the time, you're not working three jobs for very little money. But you have the time to cook and prepare and soak the beans and do all these things. And so the gendering of it, then it also ties to a whole set of class expectations about what a good mother is.Laura: I think it's really interesting in the context of sort of, I don't know, third wave feminism and all the rhetoric around how, you know, women are liberated in so many different ways and, and all the, everything that you're talking about.It sort of, I guess, covers up the, the sort of the double burden of work that women now face inside and outside of the home. And how women, particularly mothers, are still scapegoated for a lot of society's problems. Which, you know, we could debate whether or not ‘obesity' is a problem in the first place. And sugar consumption, is a problem in the first place. But I'm just thinking about how much we still blame mothers. You know, there was um, a whole sort of theory of, well there's, there's many different mother blame theories, isn't there? Sort of ‘refrigerator mums' causing autism. The, you know, the sort of sexist and fatphobic and racist sort of narrative around black mothers causing high levels of, of, um, unemployment in black, in black men. There's the, um, the mother blame for, you know, anorexia, that was, that was a big one. And then sort of in the mid-century, we see ‘ob*sity' start to become blamed on mothers, which was kind of, it seems like a, a reaction to undernutrition being the issue then moving to so called ‘overnutrition'. So it feels like on one hand it's something that's very like confined to history, like it's something in the past. It's actually still going on, it's alive and well. There's academic papers being published by reputable institutions, like there was a paper I found from 2019 that blamed working mothers for higher weight children.There was 2022 paper, saying that children's weight was dependent not on how much ultra processed food they ate, but on how much ultra processed foods their mothers ate. So then indicating this sort of butterfly effect, right? That the smallest flap of a wing can cause, you know, ‘catastrophe', again, in inverted commas, for your child.So that was just a bit of a download of my brain. I'm curious to hear what it kind of like, for you. I mean,Karen: I think, I think that's a really good point. I mean, for me, this kind of raises what we could think of as a dilemma, the dilemma of femininity in itself, that you can never get it right. Right. You're either too focused on your body or not enough, not focused enough on your body.You know, there's, there's always that fine line that women have to walk in so many ways. And I think this comes out in the food. So one of the things I was looking for when I was looking at these stories, the, the, um, these mortified mother stories was to find one, see if I could find one where the mother was doing okay.And I found, I found one where actually the, the, the expert couldn't really find anything wrong with the diet. They ate lots of fresh fruit and vegetables. A lot of home cooking. Um, you know, they had this, this, what would count as a healthy diet in normative terms. But then there's just this moment at the end where they say, ‘aha'. And because she had a daughter, the nutritionist said, but you don't want her to become obsessed.You don't want the daughter to become obsessed because she'll get an eating disorder. So you need to relax. And not be over strict on sugar, you've got to give them treats sometimes, otherwise she'll go down this very dangerous path. So, again, you can control sugar for others, but not too much because you don't want to become obsessed and risk eating disorders.And so, she literally can't ever, and so her confession is, yeah, you're right, I have been a bit strict, I'll make sure we have some treats. And so you, there's really no, no winning. I think the other thing that I thought about as you were talking, was the fact that women themselves are seen as hyper vulnerable to sugar.Yeah. They themselves are seen as having no control over sugar. And a bit like children, actually. They're seen as being kind of incontinent in the face of sugar. And I found quite a few studies that aimed to show how women just have no kind of…couldn't do anything in the face of, in the face of sugar.And there's, um, uh, David Gillespie, who writes about giving up sugar. He, writes about this and kind of says, you know, ‘you need to go cold turkey'. You've got to, you know, just get it out of your system. And that for men, this can happen quite quickly, but for women, it can take several months. And then doesn't really explain it.It's sort of, there's a mention about hormones. Because that's, you know, when, you know, that's like the go to for everything. But there's no real explanation. And so there is this idea of women as needing to exercise control over the family's diet. But also of being quite dangerous in the sense that they're, they're seen as always perpetually out of control as well. And so kind of not to be trusted in that. Laura: We are the witches witches, Karen: Exactly. And so it's another dimension of the not being able to win. Like, for women in the field of diet and body, body management, it's very hard to find a position where women could be said to be kind of safe.Laura: Absolutely. I have kind of, you know, conversations with friends about this push and pull that we experience particularly as mothers, but women broadly.And you know, the thing I would say to my friend is like, the game is rigged, right? We cannot win. We can't win at all. So we have to figure out something that, that feels authentic to our values.​Alright team. That is where we're leaving off for part 1 of this episode. I'll share part 2 in two weeks' time where we're talking about the sugar tax we have in the UK, how the so-called war on ‘ob*sity' has to constantly renew itself like Madonna to make itself relevant and how ultra-processed foods are becoming the new sugar. Plus you'll hear our snacks so make sure you're subscribed, either on Substack at laurathomas.substack.com or on your podcast player. And if you want to support the show further and get full access to the Can I Have Another Snack universe, you can become a paid subscriber. It's just £5/ month or £50 for the year. As well as tons of cool perks you make this work sustainable and we couldn't do it without the support of paying subscribers. Head to laurathomas.substack.com to learn more and sign up today! Can I Have Another Snack is hosted by me, Laura Thomas, Our sound engineer is Lucy DearloveFiona Bray formats and schedules all of our posts and makes sure they're on time every week. Our funky artwork is by Caitlin Preyser and the music is by Jason Barkhouse. Thanks for listening. ICYMI this week: The ‘Do Diet'* Kitchen joy, making the table a safe space, and trusting kids bodies* Fundamentals: Why Teaching Kids That Food is ‘Healthy' Can Backfire* What Are Your Fave Size-Inclusive Swimwear Brands? This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit laurathomas.substack.com/subscribe

Hey and welcome to the Can I Have Another Snack? Podcast. This week I'm talking to specialist diabetes dietitian Erin Phillips about all things insulin resistance and type 2 diabetes. Erin shares some background on what happens in the body that leads to type 2 diabetes, why ‘prediabetes' is a dubious diagnosis and the things the keto-bros often leave out this conversation. We talk about why sugar and higher weight aren't the cause of type 2 diabetes, and how there is so much more we can do to care for diabetes outside of cutting carbs and losing weight, especially if you have a background of an ED or disordered eating. Lots of you have requested more content around this topic - let me know what questions you still have after listening to this episode!Find out more about Erin's work here.Follow her on Instagram here.Follow Laura on Instagram here.Subscribe to Laura's newsletter here.Enrol in the Raising Embodied Eaters course here.Here's the transcript in full:INTROErin: I think sometimes a diagnosis of prediabetes or type 2 diabetes can be a traumatic event, especially when it's not in the presence of someone caring and that you trust. Or especially if you have a family history of diabetes where you've seen…maybe some scary things. Which I will – now that I said that – I will add that it's, that's not a definite outcome either, those scary things, yeah.But it can be, that can be really stressful, and that's the opposite of what is helpful for blood sugars.Laura: Hey and welcome to the Can I Have Another Snack? podcast where we talk about appetite, bodies and identity, especially through the lens of parenting. I'm Laura Thomas, I'm an anti-diet registered nutritionist and I also write the Can I Have Another Snack? newsletter.Today's guest is registered dietitian Erin Phillips. Erin's work is grounded in health at every size and fat positive nutrition. She has an advanced certification as a diabetes specialist and has spent most of her career working with people living with all types of diabetes. She has a private practice that focuses primarily on the intersection of diabetes and eating disorders. She works with people living with diabetes through individual counselling, as well as providing consultation to clinicians looking to be more grounded and confident in supporting their clients and patients with co-occurring diagnoses of diabetes and eating disorders. So I've had a lot of feedback from newsletter readers and people who listen to the podcast saying that you'd like more information about weight-inclusive approaches to so-called prediabetes – which we'll get into in a minute – insulin resistance and elevated glucose levels as well as type 2 diabetes. Most of the advice out there centers on carbs. So I was excited to talk to Erin about why these approaches are not only unhelpful for a lot of folks, but how they can be harmful. And why you don't need to get sucked into diet culture to care for yourself. In this episode, we discuss why type 2 diabetes isn't caused by too much sugar or having a bigger body, why pre-diabetes is a fake diagnosis, and why you don't need to cut out carbs to manage your blood sugar. I'm so excited for you to hear this episode. But before we get to Erin, I want to remind you that the Can I Have Another Snack? universe is entirely listener and reader supported. If you get something out of the work that we do here, please help support us by becoming a paid subscriber. It's £5 a month or £50 for the year. And as well as getting you loads of cool perks, you help guarantee the sustainability of this newsletter, have a say in the work that we do here and help ensure I can keep delivering deeply researched pieces that provide a diet culture-free take on hot nutrition topics like ultra processed foods, the Zoe app, and the deep dive on folic acid and folate that I just did recently.All of those you can read at laurathomas.substack.com if you haven't already. And if you're not totally sold yet then maybe this lovely review that I got recently will help convince you. So one reader wrote: “I feel so lucky that I found your work around the same time I started feeding my kid real food. It saved me so much angst and has allowed me to relax and really enjoy seeing him explore eating. Your essays on sugar especially was a game changer. I'm sure it won't always be plain sailing, but I feel so much more prepared to ride the waves of his changing appetite. and tastes as he grows, accepting them as a feature and not a bug.So hopefully he can have a much more relaxed relationship to food than I had for a long time. And I pay my £5 a month because I so value the work you put into your writing and think it's worth paying for. There's a lot of free advice out there, but I never know what I can trust. This is such a safe haven.”So yeah, it's £5 a month or £50 for the year. You can sign up at laurathomas.substack.com or check out the show notes for this episode. And if you can't stretch to a paid subscription right now, you can email hello@laurathomasphd.co.uk for a comp subscription. No questions asked. You don't need to justify yourself. Just put ‘Snacks' in the subject line. This is actually going to be our last podcast of the year. I'll be back in your ears in January with brand new guests. Paid subscribers will continue to hear from me in your inboxes and in the group chat, where I'm going to be holding space for all the venting and screaming at diet culture shit that gets dredged up over the holidays and into January. If you'd like to join us, you can sign up at LauraThomas.substack.com. Otherwise I'll speak to you in January. Okay, team. Over to Erin. MAIN EPISODE:Alright, Erin. Can you please start by telling us a bit more about you and the work that you do?Erin: Yeah. I am a registered dietitian. Well, in the United States, based in, um, the Seattle, Washington…I was gonna say, the ‘state of Washington'! And I'm also a certified diabetes care and education specialist. It used to be a certified diabetes educator and they wanted to add more letters. So I'm in private practice and I focus on working with people with diabetes and eating disorders at the same time, or people who had a history of an eating disorder and then were recently diagnosed with diabetes but don't want like It wouldn't be helpful or safe for them to go to just any diabetes educator.So those are the folks that I work with.Laura: Okay, so you're kind of working at that intersection between eating disorder care and diabetes care. And I think, like, what's important to highlight, which people might not be...aware of or familiar with is the idea that people who have type 2 diabetes, I would say in particular, but all forms of diabetes are at a heightened risk of disordered eating and eating disorders. And does that relationship…? No, it doesn't go the other way, does it?Erin: I think it does.Laura: You think it does?Erin: I think it does. There isn't a lot of research on it, but clinically, I absolutely see that.Laura: Okay. That's interesting. Erin: And eating disorders and gestational diabetes. I was talking with a colleague about this, that we see people with a history of, of an eating disorder, it feels like are at much higher risk of gestational diabetes.But the research…I don't, I haven't looked into the research on that, but we definitely see it clinically.Laura: Yeah, that's an interesting observation that you've noticed. So, you use this term diabetes educator. We don't have that here so it might be helpful to just kind of explain a little bit about what that is and then maybe we can unpack what exactly we're talking about here when we talk about diabetes and sort of associated terms.Erin: Yeah, yeah, yeah. Thanks for clarifying that. I love talking to people in other countries to learn about like, what do things look like there? So, a diabetes educator, I know they have them in the States and in Canada, maybe Australia, but basically what it is, is...Laura: Just to clarify, like, okay, in case my, like...dietetics colleagues are all like yelling at me right now. We do have dieticians that specialise in diabetes, but it's like the diabetes educator title is kind of a, like a bolt on right to your, your like baseline nutrition training. Is that right?Erin: Yes. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. So here to become a. a certified diabetes care and education specialist – that's such a mouthful! You, yeah, you need, I think it's 2000 hours of working with people with diabetes after you've become, become a dietitian or you can be a social worker, you can be a pharmacist, you can be a nurse. There's lots of nurses that are diabetes educators. So you get those practice hours, you get continuing, I don't know how many hours of continuing education a lot. And then you take an exam, right? Then it's like, well, at least here, like the dietitian renewal where every five years you renew by getting enough continuing education credits.Laura: Okay, so it's safe to say you know a lot of stuff about diabetes.Erin: Yes, I think so, yeah.Laura: It's kind of your thing. So, I really wanted to talk to you specifically about type 2 diabetes today because, 1) there seems to be a lot of confusion about it. 2) It kind of gets bundled up with a lot of anti-fat bias and carb-phobia and diet culture. And then 3), it's something that listeners of the podcast and readers of the newsletter have requested that we talk about. Would you mind starting by just telling us what exactly type 2 diabetes is, and how it relates to concepts like prediabetes and insulin resistance? So that's a big question. Where feels like the best place to start?Erin: I think actually starting with insulin resistance, because I think of that as kind of an umbrella and then prediabetes and type 2 diabetes fall underneath that umbrella. Yeah. So, insulin resistance is a term that means…so all humans have glucose floating around in their blood at all times. That is the main source of fuel. It's so funny to look at you while I'm talking about this because I'm like, you know this! But anyway, all humans have glucose floating around in the blood. It's our main source of fuel for the body. And then for glucose to get into our cells, we need insulin. And I always use the analogy of: insulin is the key that unlocks the cell to let the glucose in. And so insulin resistance is where that key gets a little, like, sticky or…kind of like the key to my car right now that I have to wriggle it the just the right way. So it can take a little bit longer for the glucose to get into the cell. It still happens but it just takes a little bit longer.So that is insulin resistance and that is one of the key features of both ‘prediabetes' and type 2 diabetes. Often, when I say ‘prediabetes', I do bunny ears or air quotes because it's a misunderstood term and we can totally get into that later. But so type 2 diabetes is where a body has either lived with insulin resistance long enough or something else has happened that has made, in addition to insulin resistance, glucose levels get high enough in the blood to meet this diagnostic criteria.And we've actually…this is something I love sharing with people because often type 2 diabetes is just like, all we focus on is insulin resistance, but there's actually at least 10 other changes in the body that lead to elevated glucose levels that are going on in addition to insulin resistance.Laura: Okay, before we go on, I want to actually reverse and back up a little bit here, because…so you talked about how we have glucose in our bloodstreams that needs to get into our cells all the time.That's like everybody, always – even if you're like a keto bro. What I just wanted to make really clear for anyone who's totally new to these conversations is that glucose…it gets into our bloodstream from the food that we eat and it's a sugar, right? So I think those are two important points to clarify, that we consume food, it gets broken down and digested and absorbed across the gut lumen. And that's what raises our blood glucose levels. And then insulin is the hormone that's secreted by the pancreas that unlocks the door to the cell, to let glucose move into the cell, so we have energy, so we can do things, so we can go about our business as being humans. Sometimes what can happen is that the door gets a little rusty, or the key gets a little rusty, and it's harder for that insulin to get into the cell. Is that like a fair summary of... Wow. What's going on? Erin: That was beautiful. I was nodding furiously.Laura: Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. It's almost like I know something about this! Right. So then can you tell us a little, like – I think you alluded to this – but maybe speak to it a little more to how the kind of the cells get rusty and how it's harder to shift insulin into the cells.Can you talk to us about what happens next? Maybe some of the symptoms people might experience and then what's going on physiologically as well.Erin: Yeah. So when a body is experiencing those like rusty cell doors, there's a lot of different hormones that are actually involved in not only glucose regulation or blood sugar regulation, but just metabolism.So glucose regulation is just one part of metabolism. And when I say metabolism, I mean using energy from food and turning that energy into energy for the body and then using energy to the body.Laura: Yeah, thank you for clarifying that because this is something I come up against a lot where like metabolism is used as this kind of catch-all phrase to mean how quickly your body burns energy or it's like this really diet culture-y kind of thing.But when you and I are talking about it... I think we're talking about all the biochemical processes that are going on inside your body, all these cascades of reactions and like how a nutrient that we ingest in food or in a supplement winds its way into our body and becomes part of these chemical reactions that are going on, like, deep inside our tissues.Erin: Yep. Yeah, that good old Krebs cycle. So when the cell door gets rusty, that's a big kind of flag for the body, I guess you could say, for the metabolic process. So, I think you mentioned the pancreas already. So the pancreas is the organ in the body that produces the hormone insulin, along with other hormones. When the pancreas notices the cell doors getting rusty, the pancreas will say, Oh, that's cool. I got this. And we'll start producing more and more insulin because the signal that the pancreas is getting is from the cells. The cells are saying, we're not getting the glucose that we're wanting, that we need, that we need to survive or not getting it as quickly or as much. And so then the pancreas starts producing more and more insulin.Laura: So it's trying to, it's getting the message that there's not enough insulin to, to get the glucose from the bloodstream into the cell so it starts to produce more. And can you maybe speak to the impact that this can have on the pancreas? Is it helpful to explain that a little bit?Erin: Yeah, yeah, I think so, because I think that's also something that people don't think about or aren't explained. Yeah. So the beta cells are the cells in the pancreas that produce insulin, and as they produce more and more insulin, they start to, after... I should say after decades of producing more and more insulin, those beta cells start to kind of poop out.Laura: Yeah, they get exhausted.Erin: Yeah. That's a better word.Laura: Crap out, poop out, exhaustion. Yeah, like ultimately they're working really hard for a really long time and that takes a toll, I think is what we're saying.Erin: Yeah, they start to go on strike, like they're doing the work of more…Laura: Like the teachers and the nurses and the doctors and the train drivers and yeah, we're having a lot of strikes here at the moment.So yeah, it's almost as though governments are failing globally, right? Almost.Erin: Yeah, you have to laugh because otherwise you cry! So the pancreas starts to get exhausted, in the research that's called beta cell exhaustion or beta cell failure. So the pancreas isn't able to produce quite as much insulin anymore.And after decades and decades and decades, the pancreas will not be able to produce enough insulin to meet the needs of the body. And that's when I say, store bought insulin works really well for that.Laura: Store bought! I love it. I love it because to me that just feels like a much kinder non-judgmental framing of what I think is…often a condition that is attached with a lot of shame and judgment. Like, yeah, there's, there's a real narrative that if you get to the point where you need the store bought insulin, that that's a failure.And there's a lot of research and a lot of conversations at the moment about this idea around ‘remission' and, you know, ‘reversing diabetes' and, and all of those kinds of things, which we're going to speak to a little bit in a minute, but I think that just adds so much to the shame of needing the store bought insulin. So yeah, that just feels like a really kind kind of framing around that. So let's see, we've talked a little bit about the mechanisms whereby we find it harder to get glucose into the cells over a long, long, long period of time that can kind of exhaust the pancreas, which means that we might need to get that store bought insulin. But there's kind of a wide spectrum between, like, the cells starting to get rusty and getting to the point where you might need insulin...endogenous? Exogenous! Exogenous insulin.Erin: That's why I say store bought!Laura: Store bought, yes. And I think that's where maybe this idea of like prediabetes comes in. And we've, you've talked about how that's maybe not the most helpful label.I suppose what I'm trying to say is that there's a period where somebody might have some insulin resistance, might have elevated blood glucose levels. But it's not considered high enough for a type 2 diabetes diagnosis. So could you explain what's going on there and why that's a contested term?Erin: Yeah, yeah. So if we think about a timeline of a body experiencing insulin resistance, the first thing that will happen is the insulin resistance And then the next thing that will happen…I shouldn't say will, that's the biggest thing that I don't like about the term pr diabetes is this, that it, it makes us think that it will happen.So what could happen, a body experiences insulin resistance. What could happen is that their glucose levels start to increase to a level where they meet the prediabetes diagnostic criteria. And then, the assumption with the term prediabetes is that that means eventually, unless you do something, like in big, bold, scary letters, that eventually, your body will meet the diagnostic criteria for type 2 diabetes.But what research shows is that that's not, that's not the case. I'm maybe I'm getting ahead of myself.Laura: No, I know. That's absolutely…I think it's a really important point. And so I have, and Erin, you can tell me if this isn't quite right, but my understanding is that progression from prediabetes to type 2 diabetes is less than 2% per year or less than 10% in 5 years.And I also have another statistic that 59% of people with prediabetes return to normal blood glucose values between 1 and 11 years with no treatment at all. Does that corroborate with your understanding? .Erin: Yeah, yeah, I recently was looking into this research and that sounds like exactly what I found. And it really depends on where you look and what study you look at and what population they were looking at. But the, the biggest takeaway for me was that it's not…Laura: It's not a done deal.Erin: Yeah, someone's body can just be in that prediabetes range forever or um, either forever or they can go back to below the prediabetes range that it…by focusing on the blood glucose values, we're looking at a symptom and we're not really looking at what's going on underneath.And so it's, I find that less, less helpful for that reason.Laura: Yeah, absolutely. So I think what we're saying is that prediabetes is somewhat of a dubious diagnosis, and I'd be interested to hear your thoughts on this too, but my sense is that like, giving that label can create a lot of shame and create stigma.It freaks people out, is my... experience of working with clients who their doctors have flagged that they have elevated blood sugar levels, let's say, and then….we know that stress and anxiety is not great for blood sugar management, so like, I mean, yeah, do you have anything to add to that? Like, what are your thoughts on that?Erin: That's exactly what I see in my practice and what I saw when I worked in a GP's office as well, that people are freaked out by either, either one of those labels and…yeah, stress and worry and anxiety and trauma. I think sometimes a diagnosis of prediabetes or type 2 diabetes can be a traumatic event, especially when it's not in the presence of someone caring and that you trust, or especially if you have a family history of diabetes where you've seen maybe some scary things, which I will – now that I said that – I will add that it's, that's not a, what's the word? That's not like a definite outcome either of those scary things. But it can be, yeah, it can be really stressful and that's the opposite of what is helpful for blood sugars.Laura: Yeah. Tell us a little about what the difference between a ‘prediabetes' diagnosis is versus a type 2 diabetes diagnosis? Is it just a difference of the level of sugar in the blood?Is it, is there a factor of time or like, is time factored into that? Like how long it's elevated for? Can you maybe speak to how, you know, you go from ‘prediabetes' as it were to type 2 diabetes?Erin: Yeah, that's a really good question. The way that I think about it is just in the diagnostic criteria, which is for a type 2 diabetes diagnosis, your blood sugar needs to get so high in the States, we usually diagnose it based on an A1c.So an A1c is usually what we use in the States to diagnose both prediabetes and type 2 diabetes. And here a type 2 diabetes is diagnosed at 6.5 and prediabetes is diagnosed at 5.7 up to 6.4. So ours is actually lower than yours in the UK and lower than Canada and lower than the rest of the world, basically.Laura: I feel like that's probably a really important and intentional thing, and we could probably go off on some conspiracy theories there. Erin: I have many. Yeah. Laura: Yeah, maybe it would be helpful to just briefly explain what HbA1c is, or A1c, and how it's measured and, like, what, what it's measuring. Erin: Yeah. A1c, I call it A1c, but you guys call it HbA1c. Should I say HbA1c?Laura: No, it's, it's fine. And I don't, I don't know why I call it that because I did my dietetics training in the US but I, I dunno, who knows, who knows?Erin: I've noticed everybody calls it something a little bit different.Laura: So, because I guess the HB refers to it being the hemoglobin is the hemoglobin one. But it's the same thing. A1c is easier, so let's just go with that. Erin: Okay, okay, cool. So A1c is a measurement of average glucose levels over the past two to three months. And the reason that it's average and two to three months is that as hemoglobin, so hemoglobin A1c is the full name of the lab value.As hemoglobin is part of our red blood cells, so in our veins and arteries, our red blood cells are floating around and glucose is also floating around. And so as glucose is bumping up against those red blood cells, it leaves a little bit of stickiness of glucose on the red blood cells. And then red blood cells live for 60 to 90 days, so that's 2 to 3 months.So then when they draw blood to check an A1C, they measure what percentage of the red blood cells are…kind of have this glucose levels on them or glucose on them. And then they can give us that A1C measurement in percentage form. So like 5.7 means... That according to the United States, we're classifying that as prediabetes and then 6.5 is type 2 diabetes. And the reason that we diagnose type 2 diabetes or all diabetes at a 6.5 is that long, long, long term research…or we followed, not we, I'm not part of it, the fancy researchers have followed thousands of people for decades and found that if blood sugar stays kind of in that 6.5 to 6.9 range, risk of those scary things like blindness or kidney disease or circulation problems is very, very, very, very, very, very low, basically the same as people without diabetes. So that's why we diagnose it at that, what I think of as like a pretty conservative level, because we want to keep people from experiencing those scary things.Laura: Absolutely. HbA1c is a sort of medium-ish term measurement of your average blood glucose levels, whereas if we were to just do a blood test randomly at any point in the day, there are like a bajillion different factors that could influence, you know, whether it's a high reading or a low reading, like how recently you ate, it can, you know, it can vary according to a whole bunch of different things.So a better way of measuring blood glucose is to look at that value over a slightly longer period of time and get that average, even though there are still some issues with looking at that number, but it's, it's a better number than, than just doing a random blood glucose test. So we've talked a little bit about insulin resistances, what prediabetes is and what type 2 diabetes is. There is this really pervasive myth that type 2 diabetes is caused by eating too much sugar. What do we know about that? Is that true?Erin: Absolutely not. Absolutely not.Laura: That was such a leading question, right?Erin: Is that true? Tell us! The way I think of that is that it's a real, just a misunderstanding of, of the complicated nature of type 2 diabetes – and when I say complicated, I mean, like referring back to those 11 different changes in the body that I mentioned earlier.Laura: Oh, so tell us about that because you, we said we were going to come back to this. What are the different changes?Erin: I can't even remember them all off the top of my head, but some of them are…the insulin resistance is one, the kidneys are responsible for filtering out our glucose when there's too much. And in type 2 diabetes, the kidneys start holding on to more glucose than we would want them to.Another is a decreased level of incretin hormones. So, GLP 1 is an incretin hormone. GIP is another incretin hormone, and those hormones are responsible for helping regulate glucose levels. And, and many people with type 2 diabetes and someone with prediabetes, they have a decreased level of those hormones.Laura: Okay, so I guess what, what you're saying here is that we often just focus on the changes to the pancreas and insulin, which is what I was asking you about before, but actually there are systemic changes that are going on throughout the whole body, right? Is that what we're saying? Erin: Yeah. Laura: Okay.Erin: Yeah. And those are absolutely not caused by eating, quote, too much sugar or eating sugar.Laura: Right, right, right, but because what we're dealing with is elevated blood glucose levels, the sort of obvious, or what people think of is the obvious pathway, as well…it's too much sugar in the diet, therefore your blood sugar level is too high. But what I'm hearing you say is it's just not as straightforward as that.Erin: Absolutely, yeah.Laura: Okay. Anything else that you wanted to add about, like, that particular myth, or?Erin: I wish I had more, like, definitive, like, it, that is not true because X, Y, Z, but you can't disprove a myth with research, you know what I mean?Laura: Yeah, yeah.Erin: Like, if somebody was like, yeah, unicorns exist, I'd be like, I don't know how to prove that to you. Because I can't show you, like, there is not a unicorn here.Laura: Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. No, I hear you. But I guess, like, what I would want people to take away from this and understand is that, like, you didn't cause your type 2 diabetes, like, you're not to blame. And, you know, similarly to how there are all different changes in the body that take place when somebody has type 2 diabetes, there are all sorts of factors that contribute to and help explain why somebody might develop type 2 diabetes. And they are everything from, you know, stress and sleep and things that, you know, often get called like lifestyle variables, even though that in and of itself is problematic, all the way through to experiencing racism, homophobia, transphobia, anti fat bias, you know, all of these like discrimination and prejudiceracism, homophobia, transphobia, anti fat bias, you know, all of these like discrimination and prejudice. Those things are also going to play a part in our blood glucose regulation, but we don't think of that. We don't think about the social determinants of health. We just think about like, well, you ate too many carbs. Therefore you need to cut out carbs. And this is the advice that people are given, we hear this idea that like carbohydrates cause, in inverted commas, type 2 diabetes, but we've…we also hear that it's caused by being a higher body weight.So, I'd love to hear you unpack that a little bit and, and kind of…yeah, is it a similar thing to what I just said about carbohydrates or is there anything else that you would add to that?Erin: So the thing that I go back to a lot with that, I guess, argument is that there's a really big difference between a correlation and a causation.So the example that I give with that is that as soon as ice cream sales go up, there's also an increase in shark attacks. Like, those things are correlated, but we can't say, we can't draw from that that correlation.Laura: Yeah, that ice cream causes shark attacks.Erin: Shark attacks, yeah. Right. And with that one, there's a really obvious, you know, third factor, which is weather, that contributes to both of those things going up, and it's not quite so clear with weight and, and type 2 diabetes.But there's one theory, which is that weight gain can be a symptom of type 2 diabetes. Another problem with that argument is that it really ignores just the natural body diversity that exists and occurs in the world. There are plenty, plenty of people in higher weight bodies who don't have diabetes and If it were true that higher weight causes type 2 diabetes, then all people in larger bodies would, would have type 2 diabetes, and that is...absolutely not true at all and the research shows thatLaura: And I guess the inverse is also true, right, that people who have a lower body weight, a lower BMI also get type 2 diabetes. And so it's, it's again, not looking at the, the correlation and drawing kind of the cause and effect conclusion, but also thinking about, okay, what other factors are going on that we're not seeing?And I think, to my mind, at least, it goes back to some of the things that I talked about before, some of the things that are, well, a lot of things that are outside of our control, like again, how we are treated in society, and how that, you know, that has been shown to like..even things like the Whitehall studies.Are you familiar with the Whitehall studies? Erin: No.Laura: So the Whitehall studies are kind of what I think Michael Marmot's work on the social determinants of health are based on, whereby they studied like civil servants who worked in Whitehall, which is like part of the government in the UK. And basically they stratified, I think it was mostly on men. Whitehall 1 was mostly done on men, because, of course, we need to know more about men, but this was, this was, these studies were done, done a while back and they have since added women. But effectively they stratified people by like their pay grade essentially, and they found that people who were in a lower pay grade, you know, they all worked in the same place. There was a lot of factors that were very similar about these men. But one of the key aspects was how much like autonomy they had in their job and what their income was. And they found that the people who hadl ess autonomy, so they were like a lower pay grade, basically, even though they had sort of overall similar working conditions, that the people in the lower pay grades had, I think, higher risk of cardiovascular disease compared to upper management and that kind of thing.And so it's a similar sort of effect here. And we also see it with like racism and anti-fat bias that there are all these structural things that contribute to our health in really, really complex ways. So I feel like that is a big part of what happens with type 2 diabetes that again, like kind of just seems to get overlooked by the keto bros.Hopefully some of that rambling made sense, but I'd like to maybe now think about...For anyone who has received this prediabetes diagnosis or a type 2 diabetes diagnosis, like, one of the first line pieces of advice that a GP or even a dietitian might give is around weight loss and around limiting carbohydrates in the diet.Where to start, really, Erin? Like, in terms of both of those. But basically, I would be interested to hear from you. Is that where you would start with someone? Or like, even putting it another way, are those helpful places to start? I mean, again, a leading question.Erin: The short answer is no, I do not find that to be a helpful place to start.You know, I'm really looking at this from the perspective of the population that I work with, who are people who have, who have restricted their eating many, many, many times throughout their life, or engaged in intentional weight loss many, many, many times in their life.Laura: Sorry, I just wanted to clarify as well for anyone who's like newer to the podcast that you say intentional weight loss and when you say that someone who has restricted their food for whatever, like, who has restricted their food, that doesn't necessarily mean someone who has an eating disorder, right? Like, like, what I'm trying to get at that people might not immediately realise is that that applies to people who have been chronic dieters, like people who have been dieting their whole life, right? That also kind of falls under that umbrella, right?Erin: Yeah, absolutely. And most people fall under that umbrella versus the, like, the full eating disorder umbrella. So yeah, it really applies to…most people who have been socialised as female, I would be so bold as to say that most, most people who have been socialised as female and many others have, have restricted their eating or dieted or gone on a lifestyle change, many, many times.And. So, because…I'm trying to think of how to say this without getting too into the weeds of, of, um, like clinical weeds…but because the body is hardwired against famine, what will happen if someone tries this again or says like, okay, I've been told to lose weight and restrict carbs or eat less carbs because I've had this diagnosis of prediabetes or type 2 diabetes, what will happen is things will look, quote, better for a little while. And so that's why, that's why the research shows like, oh, yeah, that's the thing that we need to do is because for 12 to 24 months, things are gonna get better. And when I say better, I mean, glucose levels will go lower.Laura: I was just gonna say because research in this area is generally done over like a fairly short term period where maybe If you're really, like, persistent, you can diet for that length of time, but yeah, so that's kind of, I guess what I'm trying to say is that over that shorter time frame, people, especially if they're given lots of support, like in a research study setting, might be able to continue with a restrictive diet for a bit longer, right? But then what happens?Erin: Yeah, but then the body…since the body's hardwired against famine, the body will start to engage in all of these compensatory mechanisms. Yeah. Basically like that, that carb restriction or yeah, any kind of caloric restriction, but especially carb restriction will kind of start the spring loading effect for the body to protect against that famine at all costs, which means that glucose levels will go up higher than they were before, and weight does the same thing, insulin level, same thing. So If we follow people longer than that 12 to 24 months, what we see is that these metabolic health markers are worse than they were at the beginning.Laura: Interesting. Yeah. So, I guess what, what you're saying is... And I see this in practice as well, is that people, yeah, in the shorter term, they might be able to restrict their eating, they may even lose a little bit of weight, or maybe even a lot of weight in some instances, and then in the short term, those biomarkers might seem as though they're improving.But then, because the body is, as you said, hardwired to, yeah, to protect itself, to move, like, protect itself against starvation, and the body can't really tell the difference between, you know, famine. And self imposed or medically imposed dieting and restriction, it eventually fights back against that in the form of like, it dials up cravings for these foods.It might also…like your metabolism, like all of that, those metabolic functions that we talked about right at the beginning, they start to slow down, which means that you start to maintain your weight or, or even put weight on. And what I see – and I'm, I'm curious if you see this as well – is that that degree of restriction that is often asked of people in these very low carb diets that sometimes get prescribed, certainly here in the UK on the NHS or that a lot that are sort of endorsed by a lot of diabetes organizations even, they cause people to fall into a binge restrict cycle. So rather than having kind of a more…moderate's not the right word, but like having a healthier relationship with food where you maybe are eating more regularly, but maybe in a way that feels more attuned to your body and also caring for yourself in all of these other ways that are really important. I don't want to just put that emphasis on food, but we're talking about food here. That what you end up happening is people restrict, restrict, restrict, but then they can't maintain that restriction forever. And so they end up in a blowout, right? Like where they're eating past the point of comfortable fullness, which can send their blood glucose levels sky fucking high, and I don't mean that in like a shaming way. I'm not blaming any individual person who has been caught in this cycle because it's not your fault. But just to illustrate like how kind of messed up that advice is that it can send people sort of, yeah, into this, this downward spiral of binge restrict, binge restrict.And I think what's kind of important to note here is that you could have someone who has what looks like on paper, perfect A1C, right? But they are binging and restricting, binging and restricting, and that the average blood glucose level over time looks like…you know, on paper, it looks great. But if you were to actually look at what was happening to that person and their relationship with food and how they were feeling, you might see a different picture.Erin: Mm hmm. Mm hmm. Yeah, that's a really good point. A really good point. And to add on to what you were saying about it not being someone's fault, that binge restrict cycle is, is a very predictable result of the exact recommendations that people are being given. People are being given these recommendations to restrict calories, restrict carbs, and that is…the most predictable outcome of that is weight gain, higher glucose, and that binge restrict cycle when we look at the long, in the long term.Laura: Yeah, and I think that there's, there's something kind of psychological that goes on here as well when we ask people to really focus on the minutiae of detail around carbohydrates, around what they're eating, that that in and of itself, like that mental restriction can create, like, what I call the fuck it effect, like, or, yeah, just even the threat of restriction and deprivation can kind of trip a switch for people who have had an experience or had a history of disordered eating or chronic dieting or, you know, even, even people who have just tried to maintain a quote, a healthy lifestyle or wellness lifestyle and it really lead to problems for them.So, Erin, for anyone who's listening to this, who is like, well, my doctor has told me to lose weight. My doctor has told me that I need to cut out carbs or my diabetes nurse or my dietitian. But you're telling me, and actually my lived experience is that that's not a great option for me. Where can people start? Like, or more specifically, like, where do you start with people who come to you with this exact?Erin: The first place I start is by repeating over and over that you did not cause your diabetes. This is absolutely not your fault. You did all the things right, quote, right. Like there's nothing that you could have done differently to make this different, to make this not happen. Because like you were saying, Laura, that's most of the, the biggest factors here are stress, trauma, marginalisation. Those, those are the biggest factors and you don't, those are things are completely out of – and genetics! I didn't, we haven't even mentioned…Laura: Yeah, there's the genetic thing too.Erin: So, I think that's really hard for people to believe because it's the opposite of what they've been told for so long. There's so much of like, if you don't blah blah blah, you're gonna get diabetes. And so I repeat that over and over, that you did not cause your diabetes, it's not your fault. And then the next thing that we talk about is actually eating enough. So making sure that you're nourishing your body enough. Mm hmm. There's a lot of, like, biochemical metabolic processes that we can talk about about the why behind that. But I think we've, we've talked a lot about that today so we can take our words for it. That eating enough is just really, really important.Laura: Yeah, I think there's something there about sort of, you know, if it's available to you, like doing some work maybe around figuring out what your hunger and fullness cues look like, feel like. Because, again, just purely anecdotally, I've noticed that people who are, you know, not so attuned to those signals might, you know, put off, not eat enough throughout the day, so that then it does leave them feeling a bit more vulnerable to bingeing or, you know, like eating in a way that that feels like out of control or chaotic.Not that eating has to be this like super controlled thing, but also just recognising how unsettling and disturbing it can feel, if it feels like you have no say in what's going on as well. So yeah, I love that that's kind of like your, your starting point is like, hold up, are you actually eating enough?Erin: Mm hmm. And I say this in, you know, in this blanket way, talking to you today, because way more often than not, I see that people are not eating enough. And people are shocked at like, wait, I eat that much?Laura: Yeah. And, and I just want to, like, underscore that point. Especially for my clients who are fat or in bigger bodies, plus size, whatever language you feel comfortable using there. When I've said to clients in bigger bodies before, like, I don't think you're eating enough. There is just like a…I don't know, like, just this complete disbelief because it's so counter to what they've always been told, which is like you're eating too much. So, yeah, I just wanted to like flag that as well that like this is not just a thin people thing. That's for everyone.Erin: Absolutely. Yeah. Thank you for highlighting that.Laura: Are there any other like, kind of like, I suppose what I'm thinking of is like low hanging fruit, like things that are like, maybe not easy for people, but like, that might feel more accessible. That's maybe the right word.Erin: Yeah. Yeah, yeah. I think it, you know, really, really depends on the person and their, their experiences with food and movement and the medical system and their body, but some other things that may or may not be low hanging fruit are finding a doctor or a, or a medical team that you really vibe with, or at least that you hate less, we can say, like that feels less terrible. Because one of the biggest, most helpful things you can do with any type of diabetes is monitoring. And when I say monitoring, that can be anything from, well, mostly that's just like checking in with your medical team like quarterly or a few times a year, depending on what's going on for you. And if, if you absolutely dread it, that's not going to happen, right? Like you're not going to be able to be monitored.So finding somewhere that is less terrible, or maybe even someone you vibe with is really important.Laura: Yeah. That's really good advice. And I'm just…I'm thinking about the pathways that we have here in the UK and as far as I know, and it will probably depend slightly on different NHS trusts, but as far as I know you get an annual diabetes review for type 2 diabetes and I'm just thinking like about that in relation to the point that you're making which is that, yeah, having that check in that support just…you know not necessarily like a full review but like just to, yeah, see how things are going and, and see like what you might need, like that might not be available to everyone, certainly in this country. And I'm sure it depends on things like insurance and stuff in other countries, but I guess what I'm learning is just how fucking atrocious a lot of medical…or like not atrocious, that's not what I mean. But like, how under-resourced a lot of medical systems are in terms of like giving people the things that would be most useful, which is again why we're like, here's a diet sheet off you go, and that's not helpful.Erin: Yeah. No. Yeah. Not helpful at all. Gosh, that's, that's so maddening. t's really easy for us here in the U. S. to be like, uh, everywhere else has it better with healthcare, but it's really grounding to hear that not everybody's figured it out.Laura: It's like, what, 13 years of a Tory government? So. It's not surprising that our healthcare system has been absolutely obliterated.And again, it will depend on the area that you're in as to how good that care is. And that's not a reflection on any, like, individual practitioner within that system. Like, we all know how hard they are working and how kind of up against it they are. But what I'm hearing you say, really, Erin, is that, like, the going in hard with, like, weight loss and restricting carbohydrates, that is probably counterproductive to the overall aim of, like, caring for yourself, and that there are some other things that we can, like, think about and incorporate that might…Okay, they're maybe not such a like, go hard or go home approach, but that maybe they're more sustainable. Maybe they're like, kinder and gentler. And I think that reminds me of something that I will say to people if they come to me and they're like, you know, my doctor has flagged this, I'm feeling really stressed is…this is not an emergency. Right, like this is your arm is not hanging off or whatever it is. We can take a beat. And if there's other stuff that you just need to like, get a handle on, like life stuff or whatever it is, like, maybe this isn't your top top priority right now. Like, what are some like, small things that we can do to help you feel like you're caring for yourself or are being cared for that don't sort of, are maybe not going like full throttle, like, you know, what the common narrative is that we should be like cutting out carbs and losing all of this weight. But what are maybe some like softer things that we can start with? Yeah. Oh, well, Erin, thank you so much. This has been really helpful. And I know that you have a ton of resources on your website, on your Instagram that people can dig into. And I'll link to all of that in, in the show notes. I also want to mention that a while back at LCIE, we produced a guide, a weight inclusive guide to insulin resistance, and it has some more information about things like medication, supplementation, and again, some of those like lower hanging fruit things that might be helpful if this is something you're navigating and it has, you know, information about what we talked about today, Erin, the lock and key thing and like the how ‘prediabetes' is a dubious diagnosis. So I'll also link to that for anyone who's interested in the show notes. Okay, Erin, before I let you go, At the end of every episode, my guest and I share what they've been snacking on. So it can be anything, you know, a show, a podcast, a literal snack, whatever it is. I'd love to hear what recommendation you have for the listeners.Erin: Can I share a couple? Laura: Of course! Yeah. Erin: Okay, cool. Well, I'm literally snacking on all things peanut butter, which I don't know if you guys like peanut butter, but I. Just had some peanut butter pretzels again recently and I was like, gosh… Laura: Whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, are they the Trader Joe's ones? Erin: Yes. Laura: Okay. So last Christmas, my brother sent me like a huge ass box of stuff 'cause he lives in Oklahoma. From Trader Joe's. And it had those peanut butter pretzels in them and I hadn't had them before. And we don't have good snacks here. I'm just gonna say like the snack game in the States is just like…it's so much better than it is here, but I know those pretzels and they're so good. They're so good, yeah.We're gonna do a, like a snack box exchange again this year. So I sent him like, he loves chocolate, so I sent him like a ton of like Dairy Milk and like chocolates from... the UK and he sends me stuff from the US. So like, that's, that's fun. But I'm going to add them to the list because they are so good.Erin: They are so good. And you can, if you're in the States, you can also get them at Costco. Very similar ones.Laura: Okay.Erin: In bulk. Yeah. Big ol thing. So that's what I'm snacking on. My other thing is the podcast Normal Gossip.Laura: Oh yeah! I have heard a couple of episodes of that. And like, for anyone who hasn't heard it, can you explain the premise?Erin: Yeah, they get a story sent in from someone, like a true story, and then they share the story, like they're gossiping with a guest on, and they'll pause a lot in the story where they're like, okay, so this is what's going on, what would you do next? And so there's a little bit of like, choose your own adventure that I think is really fun.And then it's just so silly, but it's really nice to like, have some silliness.Laura: Oh, 100%. In the mess of everything. Do you have, like, a favourite episode that you would... Is there like a standout?Erin: Well, I just listened to one that was a live episode that I think it was like the plant story or something like that.And it was fun because they had a guest where they would ask them what they'd do. And then they'd have people raise their hands if they like absolutely disagreed in the audience. And then. So you just got a lot…there was even more choose your own adventure.Laura: There's like, yeah, more back and forth. Okay. Yeah. Like the plant story. I'm going to get you to send me the link and I will include it in the show notes because yeah, I am deep down a research rabbit hole at the moment looking at folic acid and folate and I'm like digesting all this biochemistry and I find that that happens a lot that I listen to a lot of like podcasts that are related to my work in some way and I forget the podcast can be fun.Erin: Uh huh!Laura: Yeah, I need to get back into that. All right, real quick, mine. So this is just like a fun, festive thing that I came across the other day, which I was looking for some new shoes and I came across gold sparkly converse high tops. Erin: Oh my God. Laura: And they are so cool. So I bought a pair. I don't know if I'm going to…they haven't arrived yet. I'm gonna try them on, but I feel like gold is a neutral, right? Like, it will go with everything.Erin: Oh, that's true. When I first heard you said neutral, I was like, are they? Is gold neutral? But it does go with anything.Laura: Yeah, so I'm gonna try them on, see what they're like, but I will, I will include a link in the show notes because, yeah, from the picture, I haven't seen them in real life yet, but from the picture, they don't look like they're too over the top and I feel like…if you know if like depending on what you're wearing like you probably get away with them at the playground, right?Erin: Totally. Totally. Laura: This is what I'm telling myself anyway. I kind of text them to all of my friends. I was like, what do you think of this? And there was like a lukewarm reception, but I think, I think I need new friends is really…with better taste is what, is kind of where I've come down on it! Maybe I'll put them on my Instagram stories and see what people think. Erin: There you go. Laura: All right, Erin. This was…uh, I was gonna say this was really fun, that little bit at the end was really fun. Like, all the bullshit around weight loss and low carb diets, not so fun, but I'm glad that we got to unpack, unpack that a little bit.For anyone who wants to dig into your work and your resources a little bit more, where can they find you and more about your work?Erin: My website is a good place. I have some free resources there and I try to update my blog with some kind of my push, my pushing back beliefs on kind of diabetes diet culture. And that is ErinPhillips.com. No, erinphillipsnutrition.com. Laura: Should we fact check your website?! Erin: I tried to buy erinphillips.com, but it wasn't available. So, erinphillipsnutrition.com. And then my Instagram, I think it's @ErinPhillipsNutrition.Laura: Okay, well we…just make sure you click on the link in the show notes because Erin's not a reliable resource on her own social media! So we'll make sure people get there in the end.All right, thank you so much, I really appreciate it Erin. Erin: Yeah, thank you, Laura. Thanks so much for having me.OUTRO:Laura: Thanks so much for listening to the Can I Have Another Snack? podcast. You can support the show by subscribing in your podcast player and leaving a rating and review. And if you want to support the show further and get full access to the Can I Have Another Snack? universe, you can become a paid subscriber.It's just £5 a month or £50 for the year. As well as getting tons of cool perks you help make this work sustainable and we couldn't do it without the support of paying subscribers. Head to laurathomas.substack.com to learn more and sign up today.  Can I Have Another Snack? is hosted by me, Laura Thomas. Our sound engineer is Lucy Dearlove. Fiona Bray formats and schedules all of our posts and makes sure that they're out on time every week. Our funky artwork is by Caitlin Preyser, and the music is by Jason Barkhouse. Thanks so much for listening. ICYMI this week: Gift Concierge + Mini Gift Guide* Fundamentals: Helping Kids build a Good Relationship with Sugar* Here's Why You Might Want to Pass On Getting Your Kid Weighed in School* The One-upMUMship of Kid Food Instagram This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit laurathomas.substack.com/subscribe

In this episode of ER VET, Dr. Justine Lee, DACVECC, DABT interviews producer, podcaster, animal welfare advocate and author Laura Thomas on her newest book "Not Just a Dog," about a woman lost in the jungle of Costa Rica. Tune in as this author discusses the human-animal bond, portrayed in a beautiful, heartfelt story about woman and dog. SHOW NOTES: Not Just a Dog with Laura Thomas

In this special episode, hosted by Texas A&M University's The Bush School of Government & Public Service, Megan Jaffer and Cadie Hopkins conduct a live panel discussion with butterflies; Laura Thomas, Stephanie La Rue, and the Honorable Sue Gordon. The panel takes an independent look at women in the intelligence community and where they were on historic occasions, what it's like serving across administrations and political parties, and what they feel is the greatest threat to our national security today.Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/ironbutterflymedia/Video & Audio Production: https://poorbearstories.com/Technical Sponsor: https://nationalsecurity.gmu.edu/Promotion: Amazing Women of the ICPodcast Producer: Amanda Young Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Laura Thomas joins host Jeanne Meserve for a conversation on what quantum is and the future for scaling. This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit scsp222.substack.com

It's no secret that the espionage arena has been dominated by men. Former CIA case officer Laura Thomas joins Marc to discuss why this makes female case officers so indispensable, the effects of the ongoing harassment scandal, and why the CIA promotion system must adapt. Also, a call for accountability after the Afghan withdrawal, and the value that former USG officials bring to the private sector. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

It's no secret that the espionage arena has been dominated by men. Former CIA case officer Laura Thomas joins Marc to discuss why this makes female case officers so indispensable, the effects of the ongoing harassment scandal, and why the CIA promotion system must adapt. Also, a call for accountability after the Afghan withdrawal, and the value that former USG officials bring to the private sector. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Jeff talks with CIA operations veteran Laura Thomas about the gains and losses for women at the spy agency.Follow Laura ThomasOn Twitter - Laura Thomas (@laurae_thomas) Substack The Action LineRead Laura's piece Espionage is a Man's World - by Laura ThomasFollow Jeff Stein on Twitter:https://twitter.com/SpyTalkerFollow SpyTalk on Twitter:https://twitter.com/talk_spySubscribe to SpyTalk on Substackhttps://www.spytalk.co/Take our listener survey where you can give us feedback, too.http://survey.podtrac.com/start-survey.aspx?pubid=BffJOlI7qQcF&ver=short

Nutritionist and author Laura Thomas joins us to discuss what it's like for kids living in the long shadow of “clean eating,” the “almond mom” trend on TikTok, the "wellness to woo pipeline," how parents and caregivers can let go of wellness-culture beliefs about food for themselves and their kids, and more. Laura Thomas is an anti-diet Registered Nutritionist. Her clinical work focuses on supporting parents and families to end intergenerational dieting and body shame, and work towards a greater sense of embodiment and ease in their relationship with food. She supports families of children experiencing a wide range of feeding and eating challenges, such as concerns with weight, very selective eating, food preoccupation, and other feeding and eating differences. Laura also runs the newsletter, podcast, and community Can I Have Another Snack? on Substack, where she is exploring bodies, appetite, and identity with a focus on parenting. She is the author of two books: Just Eat It and How To Just Eat It. If you like this conversation, subscribe to hear lots more like it! You can also sign up to get it in your inbox each week (with a full transcript) at rethinkingwellness.substack.com. Pre-order Christy's upcoming book, The Wellness Trap, for its April 25 release, and get access to an exclusive webinar discussing the book by submitting your proof of purchase at christyharrison.com/bookbonus. If you're looking to make peace with food and break free from diet and wellness culture, come check out Christy's Intuitive Eating Fundamentals online course.