Podcasts about Leeuwen

De Leeuwen staan centraal in deze Nare Jongens Podcast. Nou ja, de varkens, de ratten, de aasgieren en die poesjes van Ronald Koeman dan. Plus: de gorigheid van Frits Bolkestein, die niet geschikt is voor kinderoren.Extra's ontvangen? Melden via https://petjeaf.com/narejongens

De eerste training van Oranje in Amerika is een feit. Valentijn Driessen, Mike Verweij, Jeroen Kapteijns en Hein Keijser bespreken onder andere de omstandigheden waarin het Nederlands elftal moet trainen. Volgens Driessen is het een goed idee om eens op een 'knollenveld' te trainen. Ook gaat het over de vermeende interesse van Ajax in Ter Stegen. En hoeveel is Jan Paul van Hecke is waard nu Tottenham concreet voor de verdediger lijkt te worden? En het interview van Verweij en Kapteijns met de directeur betaald voetbal van de KNVB, Marianne van Leeuwen, wordt uitgebreid besproken. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Waarom kiezen we zo vaak voor gemak? En wat doet dat met ons brein? In zijn nieuwe boek Liever moe dan lui onderzoekt hoogleraar neuropsychologie Erik Scherder hoe beweging, uitdaging en inspanning bijdragen aan een gezond en veerkrachtig brein.In deze aflevering van De Boekenpraktijk spreekt Willem van Leeuwen met Scherder over de verleiding van smartphones, social media en AI, de gevolgen van langdurig zitten en het belang van cognitieve reserve. Waarom zijn bewegen en denken volgens hem onlosmakelijk met elkaar verbonden? Wat gebeurt er als we steeds meer taken uitbesteden aan technologie? En hoe zorgen we ervoor dat ons brein zich blijft ontwikkelen, ook op latere leeftijd?Scherder pleit voor meer beweging in het onderwijs, op het werk en in het dagelijks leven. Zijn boodschap is helder: een gezond brein vraagt om uitdaging. Niet alleen fysiek, maar ook mentaal. Of zoals hij het zelf samenvat: doe moeite.StellingenElke aflevering van De Boekenpraktijk legt host Willem van Leeuwen de gast een aantal stellingen voor. De stellingen bij deze aflevering zijn:De smartphone is het gevaarlijkste apparaat dat we ooit hebben uitgevonden.Scholen die kinderen de hele dag laten zitten plegen wetenschappelijk gezien kindermishandeling.

Oil flows will not return to normal until the second half of next year - even if the Strait of Hormuz opens now.That's the grim prognosis of the UAE's most senior oil executive. But even if it does open, Iran is implementing a system of tolls that will have long-term implications, both in the Middle East and further afield. International economic editor Hans van Leeuwen tells Roland Oliphant how the ongoing crisis in the Strait of Hormuz is transforming shipping all over the world. Hans also looks at why India's leader Narendra Modi is in Europe at the moment trying to drum up deals amid fears the Iran war could impact his country's superpower trajectory. Meanwhile, Donald Trump and Benjamin Netanyahu clash over whether to restart active hostilities, Pakistan's army chief heads to Tehran to coax the regime towards a peace deal, and Iran says it will not give up its Uranium. HighlightsHow Iran's Strait of Hormuz toll could spread worldwideWhy the Iran war is throwing India off its superpower trajectoryCONTRIBUTORS:Roland Oliphant, co-host and chief foreign affairs analyst @RolandOliphantHans van Leeuwen, international economics editor @hansvan333 CONTENT REFERENCED:How Trump trampled on Modi's dream of an Indian superpowerhttps://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2026/05/20/how-trump-trampled-on-modis-dream-of-an-indian-superpower/Iran weaponised world trade and others are following suithttps://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2026/05/19/iran-weaponised-world-trade-and-others-are-following-suit/Producer: Peter ShevlinExecutive Producers: Venetia Rainey & Louisa Wells► Sign up to our most popular newsletter, From the Editor. Look forward to receiving free-thinking comment and the day's biggest stories, every morning. telegraph.co.uk/fromtheeditor► EMAIL US: Contact the team on battlelines@telegraph.co.uk ► GET THE LATEST HEADLINES: Find all our latest Iran coverage here: https://www.telegraph.co.uk/iran-war/ Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

In het boek Zwijgverzuim laten Anneke Valk en Filip De Groeve zien waarom de menopauze op de werkvloer niet langer een privéprobleem genoemd kan worden. Het bekroonde boek – uitgeroepen tot Managementboek van het Jaar 2026 – verbindt biologie, leiderschap en organisatiebeleid rond een onderwerp waar volgens de auteurs nog altijd te weinig over wordt gesproken.In deze aflevering van De Boekenpraktijk spreekt Willem van Leeuwen met Valk en De Groeve over de impact van overgangsklachten op werk, welzijn en loopbaanontwikkeling. Want wat gebeurt er als vrouwen jarenlang klachten ervaren, maar daar op het werk nauwelijks over durven praten? Volgens de auteurs leidt dat tot ‘zwijgverzuim': verzuim dat ontstaat doordat mensen zwijgen over klachten, schaamte of taboes.Het gesprek gaat onder meer over de biologische kant van de overgang, de invloed van hormoonschommelingen op functioneren en de manier waarop organisaties vaak nog zijn ingericht op een ‘standaardmens'. Ook introduceren de auteurs hun model van de drie W's: wind (kennis), warmte (empathie) en weg (beleid en borging) als praktische aanpak om het onderwerp bespreekbaar te maken.Daarnaast bespreken ze waarom leidinggevenden niet direct de oplossing hoeven te hebben, maar wél veiligheid, erkenning en steun moeten bieden. Want inclusie draait volgens hen niet om mooie woorden, maar om de vraag of mensen daadwerkelijk gezond en duurzaam kunnen blijven werken.Een tipje van de sluier: ‘Het is niet de vrouw die moet worden gerepareerd, maar het systeem.'Wil je weten hoe organisaties taboes kunnen doorbreken én tegelijkertijd verzuim kunnen verminderen? Luister deze aflevering van De Boekenpraktijk.StellingenElke aflevering van de podcast legt host Willem van Leeuwen de gast een aantal stellingen voor. De stellingen bij deze aflevering zijn:Het is niet de vrouw die moet worden gerepareerd, maar het systeem;Grotere aandacht voor de menopauze op de werkvloer vergroot het risico op discriminatie van vrouwen tussen 45 en 60 jaar.LinksManagementboek van het Jaar 2026 'Zwijgverzuim - Menopauze op de werkvloer: kennis en beleid voor duurzaam leiderschap' bestel je via managementboek.nl > https://www.managementboek.nl/boek/9789090407265/zwijgverzuim-anneke-valk  OverIn de Boekenpraktijk, de podcast van Managementboek, praat Willem van Leeuwen met auteurs van nieuw verschenen boeken over de brede thema's ontwikkeling en verandering: van persoonlijke ontwikkeling en verandering tot op het niveau van een gehele organisatie. Altijd met een koppeling naar de dagelijkse praktijk.

(01:24) Het is weer examentijd. Deze week zitten meer dan honderdduizend scholieren over hun centraal schriftelijke examen gebogen. Voor vwo-leerlingen met het vak geschiedenis hoort daar een flink blok over China bij. Examentrainer Ellie van Eijk bekeek de stof waarmee ze zich voorbereiden en sloeg alarm: er staan gewoon fouten in. Verkeerde data, fout gespelde plaatsnamen en soms zelfs informatie die ronduit niet klopt. Hoe kan dat? En wat zegt het over de manier waarop wij de Chinese geschiedenis onderwijzen?     Sinoloog, mantsjoeroloog en voormalig docent vakdidactiek in Leiden Fresco Sam-Sin vertelt meer, samen met koreanist en historicus Van Eijk, die de kwestie op LinkedIn aankaartte.    (19:06) Zeg Texel en je denkt aan schapen. Wie met de boot aankomt, ziet de ansichtkaart vrijwel meteen tot leven komen: witte ooien op groene dijken, lammetjes in de lentezon. Maar de Texelse schapenhouderij staat economisch op omvallen. Er zijn voor het eerst in de geschiedenis minder schapen dan mensen, en de schapenstand blijft maar dalen. Wat blijft er over van het imago van het eiland als de markt de eeuwenoude band tussen Texel en schaap lijkt te gaan breken?   We praten erover met schrijver en Texelaar Lodewijk Dros. (31:16) Van Slavoj Žižek tot Rutger Bregman tot Bart de Wever: de Italiaanse communist Antonio Gramsci wordt gretig aangehaald door politieke denkers. Terwijl hij zijn belangrijkste teksten zo'n 100 jaar geleden in gevangenschap schreef. Is dat omdat zijn tijd, van opkomend fascisme, politiek geweld en autoritaire leiders zo lijkt op de onze? En waarom dweept ook extreemrechts met hem? We vragen het Arthur Weststeijn, filosoof, historicus en intussen ‘s lands grootste Gramsci-kenner. Hij maakte een nieuwe vertaling en schreef een inleiding bij het nieuw verschenen Notities uit de gevangenis van Gramsci.    (43:44) Elke week bespreken we historische tips met afwisselend Nadia Bouras, Wim Berkelaar, Bart Funnekotter, Sanne Frequin, en Fresco Sam-Sin. Deze week is de beurt aan Nadia Bouras. Zij bespreekt twee boeken en een tentoonstelling:  De bezetting - Sanne Thierens  Het boek van de verdwijning - Ibtisam Azem (vert. Djûke Poppinga)  Kho Liang Ie – Mid-Century Modernist (https://www.stedelijk.nl/nl/tentoonstellingen/kho-liang-ie) - Stedelijk Museum Amsterdam  (55:47) Het kan op het eerste gezicht misschien een beetje een lugubere oproep lijken: afgelopen week riep genealogieplatform Geneanet mensen op om met Hemelvaart naar een begraafplaats te gaan en daar graven op de foto te zetten. Toch zit er een serieuze boodschap achter. Elk jaar verdwijnen er duizenden grafstenen door verval, ruiming en achterstallig onderhoud, en daarmee gaat ook vaak een tastbaar stuk familiegeschiedenis verloren.   Met het initiatief Red onze grafstenen probeert Geneanet dat verlies te beperken. Vrijwilligers leggen grafzerken en gedenktekens vast en uploaden die in een vrij toegankelijke databank. Inmiddels zijn er zo meer dan acht miljoen graven gedocumenteerd door ruim 32.000 mensen wereldwijd. Te gast is Angelo Verbrugge, vrijwilliger bij Geneanet.   (01:01:19) In de voormalig Nederlandse kolonie in Indië liepen veel machtsdynamieken door elkaar heen; de aanwezigheid van de VOC, verschillende geloofsovertuigingen en bijvoorbeeld de aanwezigheid van lokale heersers. Minder bekend is de cruciale rol die seks had in de kolonie.     Antropoloog Lizzy van Leeuwen nam seks als uitgangspunt om de wisselwerking tussen de overheersten en overheerser te beschrijven, wat resulteerde in haar nieuwe boek Indehoy! Geschiedenis van seks in Indië, 1602-1942.    (01:15:24) OVT Doc: Uit de pas, Het vrijgevochten leven van danseres Darja Collin (Deel 1)  Ze was vrijgevochten, gedreven, getalenteerd en van grote betekenis voor de dans: Darja Collin, de eerste Nederlandse danseres die internationaal doorbrak.    Programmamaker Katinka Baehr maakte samen met Arend Hulshof, die het boek Alleen in dans kon zij wonen over haar schreef, een tweedelige documentaire. Over haar avontuurlijke leven, haar dans en haar (korte en ongelukkige) huwelijk met schrijver, dichter en scheepsarts Slauerhoff. Vandaag deel één.    Meer info: https://www.vpro.nl/ovt/artikelen/ovt-17-mei-2026  (https://www.vpro.nl/ovt/artikelen/ovt-17-mei-2026)

  From a 10-bed lying-in hospital to Handel's Messiah, the Rotunda Maternity Hospital has operated continuously for 281 years. A Nurses' Week story. Summary Across the street from Danny’s Dublin hotel stood a large white institutional building with no signage. It turned out to be the Rotunda Hospital — the oldest continuously operating maternity hospital in the world, delivering babies in the same building since December 8th, 1757. Surgeon Bartholomew Mosse founded it after losing his wife and child in childbirth, trained as a midwife in Paris at a time when physicians were penalized for practicing midwifery, and returned to Dublin determined to build something that didn’t yet exist. The first version had 10 beds and delivered 190 babies in its first year, with one maternal death. Unable to raise money for a larger hospital — no one wanted to fund poor women’s care — Mosse attended the world premiere of Handel’s Messiah in Dublin in 1742 and was inspired. He turned the future hospital site into a pleasure garden with orchestras, dances, and theater to attract wealthy donors. He was later imprisoned for debt, escaped through a castle window in Wales, hid in the mountains for three weeks, and died exhausted and broke in 1759, less than two years after the new hospital opened. Sara E. Hampson, one of Florence Nightingale’s original nurses, became the hospital’s first female superintendent in 1891 — a thread that ties Nurses Week directly to this building, Danny almost walked past. Click here to view the printable newsletter. More readable than a transcript. Contents Podcast episode on YouTube Episode Proem: No Signage, No Appointment, No Problem Hello. Welcome to 2026 Nurses Week, May 6th through 12th. I’m very proud to be a nurse. I’ve been a nurse for 50 years. And my grandson’s going to nursing school next year. He’s graduating as a senior and will attend Loyola University in Chicago for its nursing program. I’m very proud. I want to tell you a story about one of the most significant things that happened during our trip to Ireland a couple of weeks ago. We were staying in the north-central city of Dublin, Ireland. Across the street, I saw a big white institutional facade with no signage. It looked like the side of the building. Next to it, on its right, was a dome with a more modern sign that read “Ambassador”. So, I went into the hotel and asked, “So what’s this building?” And they didn’t know. I looked it up, and it turned out to be the Rotunda Hospital. The Rotunda Hospital is the oldest freestanding maternity hospital in the world. Midwifery Was Scandalous. He Did It Anyway. Now let me see. I’ve got some notes here. The hospital was founded in 1745 by a man named Bartholomew Mosse, M-O-S-S-E. He was a certified surgeon. His wife and child died in childbirth. After this tragedy, he left Ireland to serve as a doctor with the British Army. While he was away, he received midwifery training at a hospital in Paris and obtained his midwifery license, which was unusual. In fact, fellows of the Royal College of Physicians were even penalized if they practiced midwifery. But Mosse wanted to change that. So, he built this small place, 10 beds, that… Let’s see, when did it open? I guess it opened in 1745. Mosse’s ambition was to build a dedicated maternity hospital in Dublin to provide medical care and shelter to the city's penniless mothers. This came after he encountered unspeakable conditions during his practice, particularly in the aftermath of the 1739 famine. So he established this 10-bed hospital. It was in a small theater called the New Booth Theatre. It says here that it was the first lying-in hospital of its kind in the world. It had only 10 beds, but in its first year, 190 babies were born, and just one mother died. But obviously, they couldn’t meet demand with 10 beds. When No One Funds Poor Mothers, Try Dancing Mosse tried to raise money to build a larger hospital, but nobody really wanted to give money to poor women. So he happened to attend the world premiere of Handel’s Messiah on April 13, 1742. While he was there, he was inspired to raise money by entertaining the wealthy. Somebody sent me a picture of the Handel statue that’s in front of the theater where the premiere was, which I thought would be interesting. According to my research, on the evening of April 13th, 1742, Handel conducted the world premiere of his Messiah on Dublin’s Fishamble Street, and Mosse was present. Historians suggest that this moment crystallized Mosse’s idea of using high-society entertainment to fund a hospital for the poor. So Mosse turned the proposed hospital site into a pleasure garden with a live orchestra, theatrical performances, and dances in a coffee house, marrying philanthropy with frivolity to reach the wealthy. Debt, Daring Escape, Death Here’s a little interesting tidbit. Lotteries nearly destroyed Dr. Mosse. Before he was able to return to Ireland, he was arrested and charged with being 200 pounds in debt, and he’s thought to have been imprisoned in Beaumaris Castle in Anglesey, Wales. The story was that he managed to escape through a window and hid in the Welsh mountains for three weeks before reaching Ireland. He then vindicated himself by publishing his receipts and lottery accounts, whatever. But less than a year after the hospital opened, he was taken seriously ill, exhausted, heavily in debt, and petrified about the prospect of arrest and imprisonment. He died on February 16th, 1759. Fix the Air, Save the Babies. Then and Now. Around 1781, when the hospital was poorly ventilated and every sixth child died within nine days of birth, they realized the problem was poor ventilation. Ventilation was improved, and mortality dropped to 1 in 20 over the following five years. They’re also planning to celebrate their millionth birth in 2026. It’s just amazing. I met a saleswoman in a sweater store who asked where we went in Dublin. When I told her about the Rotunda Hospital, she said she had a difficult pregnancy and birth without insurance. She received care at the Rotunda Hospital, with her baby in neonatal intensive care for three weeks and herself as an inpatient for two weeks. Awesome care! So, when we were there, I, an old white guy in a wheelchair, motored into the Rotunda Hospital and stopped at the registration desk to ask if I could speak with someone. I had not made an appointment. I was leaving the next day. Very nice people. I tried to get hold of people in their library, research, and marketing, but they were busy, of course. Oldest? It's Relative. I’m really impressed by the idea of being the world's longest-operating specialist hospital. I was trying to get some perspective on that, so I looked up the oldest continuously operating hospitals, and here’s what I learned. I learned that in the United States, the oldest continuously operating hospital is Bellevue Hospital in New York City, which opened in 1736 as a six-bed infirmary.[1] So, it began as a haven for the indigent and is still a major public hospital on the East Side of Manhattan. It opened nine years before Mosse opened his first lying-in hospital. The other long-running hospital is the Pennsylvania Hospital in Philadelphia[2], established in 1751 by Benjamin Franklin and Dr. Thomas Bond. It’s still operational as part of the University of Pennsylvania Health System. The oldest hospital is the Hôtel-Dieu in Paris[3], which officially opened in 650 AD, and that’s the hospital where Mosse became a midwife. There’s St. Bartholomew’s Hospital in London, founded in 1123[4]. And there’s the Hospital de Jesús Nazareno in Mexico City, opened in 1524. But really, the Rotunda is the oldest maternity-only specialist hospital, continuously operating in the world, which is a more specific and arguably more impressive claim than the general acute care hospitals Bellevue and Hôtel-Dieu, which have both moved buildings, changed missions, and been rebuilt. The Rotunda has been delivering babies in the same building since December 8th, 1757. That’s really something. Reflection: Nightingale Was Here Too So, let’s bring this back to Nurses Day and to Florence Nightingale. Interestingly, Sara E. Hampson was one of the original Nightingale nurses and the first lady superintendent of the Rotunda Hospital in 1891. So yay, nursing. Yay, history. I’m really looking forward to exploring more of this amazing hospital in Dublin. I wonder who was in charge all these years, and how it survived past Mosse and through those first decade or first few years? And then, how did the Rotunda Hospital survive war, famine, pandemics, and technological change? What research occurred there? Is there a diaspora of Rotunda alumni? Anyway, more to come. Thanks. Referenced in episode [1] By Harper’s Weekly – Harper’s Weekly, Public Domain, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=6014479 [2] William Strickland (1788-1854) Engraver: Samuel Seymour (1796-1823), Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons [3] I, Clio, CC BY-SA 3.0 , via Wikimedia Commons [4] See page for author, CC BY 4.0 , via Wikimedia Commons Are you part of the Rotunda Hospital diaspora? Find me at dannyhealthhats@gmail.com. Tell me your version. Please comment and ask questions: at the comment section at the bottom of the show notes on LinkedIn  via email YouTube channel  DM on Instagram, TikTok to @healthhats Substack Patreon Production Team Kayla Nelson: Web and Social Media Coach, Dissemination, Help Desk  Leon van Leeuwen: editing and site management Oscar van Leeuwen: video editing Julia Higgins: Digit marketing therapy Steve Heatherington: Help Desk and podcast production counseling Joey van Leeuwen, Drummer, Composer, and Arranger, provided the music for the intro, outro, proem, and reflection Claude, Perplexity, Auphonic, Descript, Grammarly, DaVinci Inspired by and Grateful to: Dr. Lisa Masinter and Dr. Michele Whitt, Janice Tufte, Linda DeRosa, Luc Pelletier, Cherie Binns Photo Credits  Ann Boland, Paul Boland, Janice Tufte, Danny van Leeuwen, and as referenced in the transcript Related episodes from Health Hats https://health-hats.com/pod133/ https://health-hats.com/ob-nurse-cannabis-nurse/ https://health-hats.com/build-it-and-they-will-come/ Artificial Intelligence in Podcast Production Health Hats, the Podcast, utilizes AI tools for production tasks such as editing, transcription, and content suggestions. While AI assists with various aspects, including image creation, most AI suggestions are modified. All creative decisions remain my own, with AI sources referenced as usual. Questions are welcome. Creative Commons Licensing CC BY-NC-SA This license enables reusers to distribute, remix, adapt, and build upon the material in any medium or format for noncommercial purposes only, and only so long as attribution is given to the creator. If you remix, adapt, or build upon the material, you must license the modified material under identical terms. CC BY-NC-SA includes the following elements:    BY: credit must be given to the creator.   NC: Only noncommercial uses of the work are permitted.    SA: Adaptations must be shared under the same terms. Please let me know. dannyhealthhats@gmail.com  Material on this site created by others is theirs, and use follows their guidelines. Disclaimer The views and opinions presented in this podcast and publication are solely my responsibility and do not necessarily represent the views of the Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute®  (PCORI®), its Board of Governors, or Methodology Committee. Danny van Leeuwen (Health Hats)

Hoe leg je verbindingen tussen de ervaringen en vragen van mensen nu en zingevende bronnen (zoals de Bijbel) en tradities? Hoe doet daarin ook je eigen spiritualiteit en biografie mee? Over deze vragen gaat het in de hermeneutiek of de hermeneutische competentie. Een belangrijke vaardigheid in het werk van geestelijk verzorgers, predikanten, kerkelijk werkers – maar in de praktijk blijkt het ook vaak een lastige, zowel qua inhoud (waar hebben we het nou precies over?) als in de uitvoering: hoe leg je dan concreet die verbindingen?In deze aflevering gaat Koos hierover in gesprek met Theo van Leeuwen en Nellie van Voornveld. Theo was docent pastoraat aan Hogeschool Windesheim, is supervisor, en promoveerde begin 2025 aan de Protestantse Theologische Universiteit op een onderzoek over hermeneutische communicatie. Nellie is buurtdominee in Slotervaart, Amsterdam en ontmoet mensen met allerlei religieuze en niet-religieuze achtergronden. Hoe leg je dan contacten en hoe komen geloof en zingeving daarin ter sprake? Luister in deze aflevering naar een vruchtbaar zoeken naar taal voor wat er gebeurt in de ontmoeting als je ruimte biedt aan de ander - en iets kunt doen of aanreiken dat een hoopvol licht werpt op de situatie. Het vraagt om alert zijn op verschillende lagen in de communicatie, om het kunnen horen van metaforen en om bewustzijn van je eigen spiritualiteit. “Soms is het samen stamelen bij de grote vragen van het leven”. Een gesprek vol inzichten en voorbeelden uit praktijk en onderzoek.ReferentiesHet proefschrift What Layer are we on? Conversational Hermeneutics in Chaplaincy and Pastoral Care van Theo van Leeuwen is open access beschikbaar: What layer are we on? | Theo van LeeuwenHeilige Grond is een podcast van de Protestantse Theologische Universiteit en de Theologische Universiteit Utrecht.

Europa heeft heel veel moeite met de manier waarop Amerika onder leiding van Trump met ons continent omgaat. Maar het verbreken van de banden met elkaar is juist niet wat we moeten doen, vindt Geoffrey van Leeuwen, stafchef van Mark Rutte bij de NAVO. Volgens hem heeft Europa geen keus. 'De kwetsbaarheid van Europa op het gebied van defensie is zo enorm.' Hij is te gast in BNR De Wereld bij Bernard Hammelburg en Geert Jan Hahn. Luister ook | 'Kans op een betere nucleaire deal tussen VS en Iran is buitengewoon klein' Van Leeuwen verwijst daarbij naar de capaciteiten die Europa op militair gebied heeft. Een confrontatie met Rusland ziet hij op dit moment somber in zonder de Amerikanen. 'Ik zie niet in hoe we daar nu goed uitkomen.' De F-35 is volgens hem het beste toestel ter wereld. Op de vraag of we het ook met een iets minder Europees toestel kunnen antwoordt hij dat dat niet wenselijk is. Bovendien heeft de NAVO zonder Amerika grote gevolgen voor ons defensiebudget. 'Dan moeten we wel acht tot negen procent aan defensie besteden.' Toch is Oekraïne een toonbeeld van het feit dat je wel degelijk een goede defensie-industrie kan opbouwen. Maar ook daarvoor wijst Van Leeuwen naar de Amerikanen. 'Daar hebben ze echt wel hulp in gehad. Daarnaast levert Amerika nog verreweg de meeste intelligence aan Oekraïne.' Europa-verslaggever Geert confronteert hem met een uitspraak van Macron dat Frankrijk nu tweederde van de intel levert. 'Dat is een mooie gedachte', aldus Van Leeuwen. Lees ook | Moskou waarschuwt buitenland: ‘Neem dreiging aanval op Kyiv heel serieus’ Rusland in zwaarder weer Het gaat niet goed met Rusland. Voor het eerst in lange tijd heeft het meer gebied verloren dan gewonnen in Oekraïne. Dat concludeert het toonaangevende Institute for the Study of War (ISW). Ook in het binnenland gaat het slecht. De economie bevindt zich in een recessie en het rekruteren van soldaten gaat steeds moeizamer omdat de arbeidsmarkt stagneert als gevolg van de oorlogseconomie. Over de gevolgen daarvan is te gast Hubert Smeets, medeoprichter van Raam op Rusland, columnist voor NRC en voormalig correspondent in het land. Luister ook | Amerika Podcast President Rubio? | Postma in Amerika De vraag rijst wie Donald Trump op gaat volgen. Eén iemand die goede kaarten in handen lijkt te hebben is minister van Buitenlandse Zaken Marco Rubio, die zich best wel opvallend profileert, ziet Amerika-correspondent Jan Postma. Over de makers Bernard Hammelburg is buitenlandcommentator en columnist voor BNR Nieuwsradio en het FD, en presentator van BNR De Wereld. Als oorlogsverslaggever was hij o.a. ooggetuige van de Culturele Revolutie in China, de revolutie in Iran en de oorlogen in Vietnam, het Midden-Oosten en Afghanistan. Hij was twintig jaar correspondent in de VS. Hij verdeelt zijn tijd tussen zijn woonplaatsen Amsterdam en New York. Redactie Michaël Roele, buitenlandredacteur bij BNR Nieuwsradio.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Johan Derksen, Wilfred Genee, René van der Gijp en Frank van Leeuwen bespreken in razendsnel tempo de actualiteit: Ali B en Peter Gillis veroordeeld, paniek in de studio en beelden van Curaçao-promo.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

In het boek Geldgeluk laat ondernemer en auteur Martin Schuurman zien dat ons geldsysteem geen vast gegeven is, maar een set spelregels – en dus veranderbaar. Maar waarom groeit de schuldenberg steeds verder? En wie heeft daar eigenlijk baat bij?In deze aflevering van De Boekenpraktijk gaat podcasthost Willem van Leeuwen in gesprek met Schuurman over de werking van geld, schulden en banken. Want wat veel mensen niet weten: nieuw geld wordt vooral gecreëerd door commerciële banken op het moment dat zij leningen verstrekken. Dat maakt schulden geen bijproduct van de economie, maar juist de motor ervan.Schuurman stelt dat dit systeem leidt tot een voortdurende prikkel tot groei, toenemende ongelijkheid en een economie die de samenleving is gaan domineren in plaats van andersom. Tegelijk ziet hij ook oplossingen. Van het invoeren van een tweede, lokale geldsoort naast de euro tot het herinrichten van het bankenstelsel en het opnieuw nadenken over hoe en door wie geld wordt gecreëerd.Opvallend is zijn overtuiging dat echte verandering niet vanuit de politiek komt, maar van onderop. Door bewustwording en lokale initiatieven kan het systeem stap voor stap kantelen. We hoeven niet méér te blijven consumeren om vooruit te komen – we kunnen ook anders gaan organiseren.Wil je begrijpen hoe geld écht werkt – en wat jij zelf kunt doen? Luister deze aflevering van De Boekenpraktijk.StellingenElke aflevering van de podcast legt host Willem van Leeuwen de gast een aantal stellingen voor. De stellingen bij deze aflevering zijn:We accepteren een systeem dat we niet begrijpen – en dat is precies waarom het blijft bestaan;De tweedeling in Nederland is geen politiek probleem, maar een wiskundig probleem.Links'Geldgeluk', en later de andere boeken van Martin Schuurman bestel je via managementboek.nl > https://www.managementboek.nl/auteur/153090/martin-schuurman OverIn de Boekenpraktijk, de podcast van Managementboek, praat Willem van Leeuwen met auteurs van nieuw verschenen boeken over de brede thema's ontwikkeling en verandering: van persoonlijke ontwikkeling en verandering tot op het niveau van een gehele organisatie. Altijd met een koppeling naar de dagelijkse praktijk.

Luuk van Leeuwen (27) begon zijn carrière als YouTuber, maar al snel viel hij op en rolde hij de acteerwereld in. Hij heeft in verschillende series gespeeld, zoals 'Goede Tijden, Slechte Tijden' en 'Verborgen Verleden'. In 2020 brak Luuk door als TikTokker AkaLuuk, waar hij in een rap tempo meer dan 345.000 volgers behaalde. In 2024 begon Luuk zijn eigen ondergoedlijn 'AKA by Luuk', waarmee hij spraakmakende campagnes maakt. Presentator: Stijn de Vries Fotograaf: Julia Huikeshoven

Who Wears The Uniform? is a new historical exhibit that shares the real-life stories of modern service from people right here in Saskatchewan. Kelsey Lonie, Executive Director and Chief Historian at the Royal United Services Institute of Regina, is behind the project and Constable Ash van Leeuwen is one of the many people featured. They join Evan to chat about the exhibit and the importance of oral storytelling.

Het Europees Parlement stemde dinsdag met ruime meerderheid voor een wet met een duidelijk boodschap. Seks zonder uitdrukkelijke instemming moet in heel Europa gewoon verkrachting worden. Marit Maij van PRO hoorde bij de 447 europarlementariërs die vóór stemden, terwijl Jessika van Leeuwen zich namens de BoerBurgerBeweging van stemmen onthield.

In deze aflevering ontvangt Eva Koreman documentairemaker, researcher en fotograaf Rein van Leeuwen (https://www.instagram.com/rein.vanleeuwen/). Rein maakte samen met Jesse Bleekemolen de documentaire Fuck Drugs (https://www.npodoc.nl/artikelen/fuck-drugs) die vorige week uit kwam. Hij deelt zijn cultuurtips met Eva en de Luisteraar. De tips van Rein: Muziek: Madonna (https://oor.nl/news/madonna-hint-op-nieuw-album-confessions-ii/) Boek: Ik wil geen seks (https://www.lebowskipublishers.nl/boek/3208/jill-mathon-ik-wil-geen-seks.html) Tentoonstelling: ben ik mannelijk? (https://www.hetnoordbrabantsmuseum.nl/bezoek/tentoonstellingen/ben-ik-mannelijk/) Dans: Raiging Against Various Elements (https://www.arkconnorschumacher.com/projects/raging-against-various-elements/) Kunst: Leigh Bowery (https://www.instagram.com/leighbowery/) Bioscoop: Pillion (https://www.imdb.com/title/tt32321317/) Podcast: En niemand bleef onaangeraakt (https://www.vpro.nl/en-niemand-bleef-onaangeraakt) Gratis: Schotse Musea Heb je cultuurtips die we niet mogen missen? Mail de redactie: eenuurcultuur@vpro.nl

The US-Iran ceasefire has limped into its third week, but can stuttering peace talks deliver a deal before war resumes? Roland Oliphant is joined by Sanam Vakil, director of the Middle East and North Africa program at Chatham House, to discuss the latest news and updates, including what Mojtaba Khamanei's reported injuries tell us about the balance of power in Tehran. She also explains why the normally factional Iranian regime is united in its need to end the war, and how Donald Trump's attempt to drive a wedge between “moderates” and “hardliners” is likely to fail.Plus, international economics editor Hans van Leeuwen explains why the world has been watching the wrong oil price - and how the global impact of the war could be worse than we thought. Highlights Why time is not on Trump's side in the Iran warMojtaba Khamenei's injuries and what they say about the Iranian regimeCONTRIBUTORS:Roland Oliphant, co-host and chief foreign affairs analyst @RolandOliphantHans van Leeuwen, International economics editor @hansvan333Sanam Vakil, MENA programme director Chatham House @SanamVakilCONTENT REFERENCED:Hans van Leeuwen: The world is watching the wrong oil priceProducer: Elliot LampittExecutive Producers: Venetia Rainey & Louisa Wells► Sign up to our most popular newsletter, From the Editor. Look forward to receiving free-thinking comment and the day's biggest stories, every morning. telegraph.co.uk/fromtheeditor► EMAIL US: Contact the team on battlelines@telegraph.co.uk ► GET THE LATEST HEADLINES: Find all our latest Iran coverage here: https://www.telegraph.co.uk/iran-war/ Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

In het boek 'De vraag die je vreest' laat mediatrainer Machteld Kooij zien waarom we vragen in interviews vaak spannend vinden - en hoe je daar als geïnterviewde juist regie in kunt nemen. Na 25 jaar ervaring als trainer van presentatoren, journalisten en interviewgasten deelt zij haar belangrijkste inzichten en praktische technieken.In deze aflevering van De Boekenpraktijk spreekt podcasthost Willem van Leeuwen met Machteld over het spel dat een interview eigenlijk is. Want hoewel het soms voelt als een overhoring, werkt een gesprek volgens haar het best als beide partijen ‘winnen'. Hoe zorg je ervoor dat je niet overvallen wordt door lastige vragen? En hoe geef je antwoord zonder de regie te verliezen?Machteld introduceert haar kaartjesmethode: een eenvoudige manier om je voor te bereiden, waarbij je vooraf bepaalt wat je wilt zeggen én hoe je dat aantrekkelijk verpakt. Want journalisten zoeken geen standaard kernboodschappen, maar sterke, losknipbare uitspraken. Ook gaat het gesprek in op metacommunicatie, omgaan met spanning en het belang van emotie in een goed interview.Wil jij beter leren omgaan met spannende vragen en sterker voor de dag komen in gesprekken of interviews? Luister deze aflevering van De Boekenpraktijk.Een tipje van de sluier: ga niet ‘naakt' het interview in, maar trek je tenue aan.StellingenElke aflevering van de podcast legt host Willem van Leeuwen de gast een aantal stellingen voor. De stellingen bij deze aflevering zijn:1. Mediatraining maakt mensen beter in communiceren, maar slechter in eerlijk zijn;2. Een interview zonder emoties is geen goed interview.LinksDe boeken van Machteld Kooij bestel je via managementboek.nl > https://www.managementboek.nl/auteur/96481/machteld-kooij OverIn de Boekenpraktijk, de podcast van Managementboek, praat Willem van Leeuwen met auteurs van nieuw verschenen boeken over de brede thema's ontwikkeling en verandering: van persoonlijke ontwikkeling en verandering tot op het niveau van een gehele organisatie. Altijd met een koppeling naar de dagelijkse praktijk.

Participatory governance in healthcare means asking the right people the right questions. Three stories where listening as leadership changed everything. Summary This episode is about listening as leadership — the gap between where knowledge lives and where decisions get made, and what it costs when we pretend that gap doesn’t exist. Three stories from my career as a nurse manager, quality director, and VP — three moments where participatory governance in healthcare produced the same result: a no to the status quo. Not a radical no. An obvious one. Obvious, that is, once someone finally asked the people living inside the system. Topics covered: Open visiting hours in the ICU — and what happened when staff pushed back Seven therapy visits, no prior authorization required — and what happened when the company was acquired A disability services resident on a board of directors — and the simple fix that improved every patient experience metric Why participatory governance is the fastest, cheapest diagnostic tool most health system leaders never use The honest difference between patient advisory boards and actually sharing power with patients What patient-centered care looks like when it moves beyond consultation into real shared decision making Click here to view the printable newsletter. More readable than a transcript. Contents Table of Contents Toggle EpisodeProemPart 1: ICU Doors OpenPart 2: Seven Visits, No Questions AskedPart 3: The Right to Say GoodbyeSynthesis: What's Common Across All ThreeReflection Podcast episode on YouTube Episode Proem I’ve spent most of my career in institutions, hospitals, managed care companies, and disability services agencies. These are large, slow-moving systems with their own inertia, logic, and knack for designing processes that work best for billing, and not so well for those receiving or providing services. I should know. I’ve been inside these systems as a clinician, boss, consultant, caregiver, and patient. The boldest changes I was part of didn’t come from a consultant’s report. They didn’t come from a board retreat or a leaders' strategic planning day off-site — though, Lord knows, I’ve sat through plenty of those. They came from the moment when someone, usually someone with very little institutional power, said: This doesn’t work. It’s hurting us. The hardest part wasn’t hearing that. The hardest part was finding the gumption to act. Institutions are good at explaining why things are the way they are. They have binders of policies for that. My secret as a consultant was embarrassingly simple: the people who hired me already had the answers they needed. The nurse who’d been there fifteen years knew. The member who couldn’t get her calls returned knew. I sought them out, listened, and translated their words into a PowerPoint that the boardroom could hear. I want to tell you about three times I got it right. Three moments when the change that mattered was a no. No to visiting hours that kept families from the people they loved. No to a prior authorization process that treated patients and clinicians like suspects and required an army to administer that suspicion. No to a system that let care aides disappear from people’s lives without warning or goodbye, as if the people whose lives they were in didn’t deserve a heads-up. None of these nos were mine originally. I heard them from a family pacing a waiting room, from a member who couldn’t get the help she needed, and from a man with a disability who sat on our board and told us, plainly, what it felt like to wake up one day to find that someone essential to his life was simply gone. Participatory governance sounds like it belongs in a policy manual, right between stakeholder alignment and learning organization. When participatory governance works, it's permission. Permission for the people living and working within a system to tell the truth about it. And the willingness, on the part of whoever’s in charge, to let that truth land. Even when it’s inconvenient. Especially then. Part 1: ICU Doors Open My first experience as a boss was as an ICU nurse manager, a job I got, I should mention, without ever having worked in an ICU or having been a boss. A story for another day. The honeymoon was short. Strictly prescribed visiting hours, ninety minutes in the morning, ninety in the evening, were leaving families miserable. I could see it. They could feel it. In collaboration with my bosses, the ICU medical director, and the chief nurse, I eliminated visiting-hour limits entirely. My staff, who had recruited me for the role, now deeply regretted it. I hadn’t consulted them or thought through the workflow implications. They were furious, and they weren’t wrong to be. But we kept the visiting hours open. Over time, something shifted. I learned how to be a boss. Nurses learned to include families in care and treatment. Patients and families arrived home better prepared. Physicians, for their part, didn’t much care either way. The lesson I learned: this was a story about control. Mine, the nurses’, and ultimately the families’. We eventually set up an informal patient and family advisory group, not because I had planned to, but because we needed them in the room. Part 2: Seven Visits, No Questions Asked My job title was Director of Quality at a behavioral health managed care company. If you’ve spent any time in managed care, you know what that means: Director of Trying to Get an A+ in Every Measure, Whether It Has Meaning or Not. Prior authorization was the centerpiece. A member needs therapy. Their provider submits a request. Someone on our end reviews it, approves or denies it, requests more information, waits, and follows up. The member waits. The provider waits. And somewhere in all that waiting, the person who needed help either got it, gave up, or got worse. I inherited this process. I did not invent it. My boss and I set up an advisory group with members on one side and providers on the other. We asked about their experiences with our company. They were not subtle. Members said the pre-auth process made them feel they had to prove they deserved care. Providers said the company’s default assumption was that they were lying. Neither response was a ringing endorsement. So, we experimented: seven visits, upon request. No authorization required. If a member or their provider asks, they get them. No forms, no review, no waiting. The result: outcomes held. Members received care faster. Providers stopped spending half their administrative time on the phone with us. And our call center, the engine room of the prior authorization machine, grew quieter. Then quieter still. A substantial portion of our staff spent all day managing a process that, in large part, was designed to manage itself. Strip it out, and you didn’t need nearly as many people to run it. The bureaucracy wasn’t protecting anyone. It was the cost. We had real data. Member satisfaction trended up. Providers, for the first time in recent memory, said something positive about the company. The advisory group had surfaced a truth that no quality metric had found, because no quality metric had asked the right people the right question. Then the company was acquired. New owners, new priorities, no appetite for any of this. The program was terminated, and the advisory group disbanded. I can only assume the prior authorization process resumed its proud tradition of making everyone miserable in the name of oversight. I learned that participatory governance surfaces the truth faster than most quality improvement methodologies I’ve encountered. But institutions don’t always want the truth. Sometimes they want the process. The process is familiar. It distributes responsibility. It means nobody has to decide. The advisory group uncovered a truth. It turned out that the people who bought the company got a veto. Part 3: The Right to Say Goodbye There’s a particular kind of organizational meeting where everyone knows something is wrong, the data is right there on the slides, and somehow the conversation goes nowhere. Lots of nodding. Lots of concern. Lots of commitment to further analysis. I worked as VP of Quality at an organization supporting forty thousand people with disabilities, many of them living in group homes, relying on personal care aides for the most intimate parts of daily life. Getting dressed. Eating. Toileting. Moving through the world. At my first Board meeting, we reviewed satisfaction survey results, which were poor. They were not nuanced, requiring careful interpretation. They told us something was bad. And we were doing what organizations do: analyzing, discussing, and scheduling follow-up meetings to review the analysis. We were not asking the people who lived there. The agency was committed to resident/patient participation in governance committees, including the Board; in this case, a resident of one of our group homes served on the Board. Not as a symbol. As a Board member. At one of these meetings, in the middle of what was shaping up to be another productive session of collective concern, he said something that stopped the room. He said: People leave without warning. A personal care aide, someone who helps you start each day, who knows how you take your coffee, which jokes make you laugh, and how you like your blanket folded, is just gone one morning. No notice. No goodbye. Someone new shows up, and you’re expected to adjust. He said it plainly, not as an accusation but as a fact. He apparently assumed, incorrectly, that we already knew. We didn’t. Or rather, someone knew. The people living in the homes knew. The aides probably knew. It just hadn’t made it into the meeting room until he put it there. The fix was insultingly simple. When an aide left, for any reason, residents would be told in advance. A chance to say goodbye. A proper introduction to whoever came next, rather than a key, an address, and good luck. That was the intervention. Advance notice, a goodbye, a hello — the basic courtesies we’d extend to anyone, anywhere, in any other context. Survey results improved dramatically in the next cycle. Not in one or two categories. Across the board. Because what was wrong wasn’t a program or a resource allocation. It was that the people living inside the system had been treated as though their experience of it didn’t count as information. The lesson I carry from that room is the simplest I know: the person living inside the system always knows. They know what’s breaking, what would fix it, and they’ve usually been waiting, sometimes for years, for someone to ask. You just have to put them in the room and believe them when they speak. The keyword is just. Just assumes a lot. Synthesis: What's Common Across All Three Three organizations. Three populations. Three problems, unresolved within systems staffed by smart, well-meaning people. In every case, the answer was already there. It lived in the wrong room. I want to be honest about something. Looking back, only one of these three was truly participatory governance: the man in the group home who served on our board. The ICU families and advisory group members had real influence but no structural authority. They could inform decisions, but they couldn’t stop them. That distinction matters, and I don’t want to paper over it. What they all shared was something simpler yet harder than governance design: someone with institutional power chose to ask, then chose to act on what they heard. The families pacing the ICU waiting room knew visiting hours weren’t protecting patients; they were protecting the unit’s sense of order. The members and providers in that behavioral health advisory group knew prior authorization wasn’t ensuring quality; it was ensuring paperwork. The man on our board knew what was breaking down wasn’t resources or staffing ratios. It was the simple human expectation of a goodbye. None of them needed a consultant. They needed someone with enough authority to ask the question and enough humility to sit with the answer. Here’s what I’ve come to believe: participatory governance, done seriously, is the fastest and cheapest diagnostic tool any leader has. Faster than a consultant. Cheaper than a task force. More accurate than a satisfaction survey that asks the wrong questions of the right people and calls it listening. The nos in these stories weren’t radical. They were obvious, embarrassingly obvious, once you asked the people who already knew. What made them feel radical was the gap between where the knowledge lived and where decisions were made. That gap has a name. Several, actually. We call it hierarchy, liability, chain of command, and expertise — the comfortable assumption that the people at the top understand a system better than those inside it every day. Sometimes that’s true. Often it isn’t. And the cost of acting as though it’s always true is borne by those with the least power to push back. The anxious family in the hallway. The member who couldn’t get through. The man in the group home who, generously, assumed we already knew what he was about to tell us. They were the experts. We had the org chart. Reflection Honestly, I’m proud of these three stories, but I’m not sure I deserve much credit. In each case, the hard work, the observing, the enduring, the knowing, was done by someone else. A family pacing a hallway. A patient who kept calling back. A man who showed up for board meetings and told the truth to a room that had been avoiding it. I contributed a willingness to ask and enough positional authority to act on what I heard. I'm struck by how long those answers had been waiting. The ICU families weren’t new. Frustration with prior auth wasn’t a surprise to anyone who’d navigated it. How long had group home residents been losing people without warning? Nobody seemed to know exactly, long enough that it had stopped registering as a problem and had started registering as just the way things were. That’s the part I can’t shake: the way systems normalize their own failures. The way this is how we do it becomes indistinguishable from this is the only way it can be done. And the people most hurt by that confusion are usually the least positioned to correct it. I got lucky. Three times, I was in the right seat, and the right person was willing to tell me what I needed to hear. Not every leader gets that, and not every leader goes looking for it. The question I’d leave you with — the one I still ask whenever I walk into a new system, a new organization, or any room where decisions are being made about people who aren’t present: Who already knows the answer? And what would it take to let them say it out loud? If you’ve been in that room — where someone finally said the quiet part and the right no was finally spoken — I want to hear about it. Find me at dannyhealthhats@gmail.com. Tell me your version. I promise you: it’s better than you think. And someone out there needs to hear it. Please comment and ask questions: at the comment section at the bottom of the show notes on LinkedIn  via email YouTube channel  DM on Instagram, TikTok to @healthhats Substack Patreon Production Team Kayla Nelson: Web and Social Media Coach, Dissemination, Help Desk  Leon van Leeuwen: editing and site management Oscar van Leeuwen: video editing Julia Higgins: Digit marketing therapy Steve Heatherington: Help Desk and podcast production counseling Joey van Leeuwen, Drummer, Composer, and Arranger, provided the music for the intro, outro, proem, and reflection Claude, Perplexity, Auphonic, Descript, Grammarly, DaVinci Inspired by and Grateful to: Jan Oldenburg, Laura Marcial, Ronda Alexander, Libby Hoy, Lacy Fabian, James Harrison Photo Credits  NASA Referenced in episode   Related episodes from Health Hats https://health-hats.com/patient-family-advisors-back-2-basics/ https://health-hats.com/teachable-spirit-patient-family-advisors/ https://health-hats.com/pod237/ Artificial Intelligence in Podcast Production Health Hats, the Podcast, utilizes AI tools for production tasks such as editing, transcription, and content suggestions. While AI assists with various aspects, including image creation, most AI suggestions are modified. All creative decisions remain my own, with AI sources referenced as usual. Questions are welcome. Creative Commons Licensing CC BY-NC-SA This license enables reusers to distribute, remix, adapt, and build upon the material in any medium or format for noncommercial purposes only, and only so long as attribution is given to the creator. If you remix, adapt, or build upon the material, you must license the modified material under identical terms. CC BY-NC-SA includes the following elements:    BY: credit must be given to the creator.   NC: Only noncommercial uses of the work are permitted.    SA: Adaptations must be shared under the same terms. Please let me know. dannyhealthhats@gmail.com  Material on this site created by others is theirs, and use follows their guidelines. Disclaimer The views and opinions presented in this podcast and publication are solely my responsibility and do not necessarily represent the views of the Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute®  (PCORI®), its Board of Governors, or Methodology Committee. Danny van Leeuwen (Health Hats)

In the German novel “I'm Your Man” a couples therapist and her robot partner Tom explore the limits of post-human love. Holly Yanacek wrote the English translation of the novel about what happens when our perfect partner is a machine. And: An after-school philosophy club has elementary school children discussing deep ideas with undergrads. Anne van Leeuwen says readings of Frog and Toad and Shel Silverstein are giving rise to conversations about bravery and infinity. Later in the show: In The Historical Mind, Ryan Holston argues that our biggest political problems can be traced to a "thinning" of the human character, and that without self-restraint even the best Constitution becomes useless. Plus: State and local candidates are drowning in the national political divide. Jesse Richman says the polarization nationally is driving voters in state elections to make choices based on the letter next to a candidate's name.

In Merwede in Utrecht, straks de grootste autovrije buurt van Nederland, zijn grote stappen gezet om mobiliteit, afval en energie anders te organiseren. Met hulp van het MerwedeLab is het daarbij ook gelukt om gedurende het ontwikkeltraject steeds nieuwe innovaties in te brengen en deze gebiedsbreed in te zetten. Een podcast waarin we ‘onder de motorkap' van Merwede kijken.Te gast deze podcast zijn Mirjam Schmüll, programmamanager van MerwedeLab en mede-oprichter van de Brokkenmákers, en Finn van Leeuwen, projectmanager Merwede bij de gemeente Utrecht en oprichter van Nine Square. Met hen spreken we over verschillende publiekprivate samenwerkingen die voor de buurt zijn opgezet, die dus gezamenlijk door de ontwikkelende partijen en de gemeente Utrecht zijn opgezet.Mobiliteitsbedrijf – beheert de twee logistieke hubs, de parkeergarages met zo'n 1.550 parkeerplekken voor bewoners en zo'n 250 parkeerplekken voor deelauto's, plus de fietsenstallingen voor gasten. Reguliere busjes kunnen de buurt in basis niet meer in. Busjes die bijvoorbeeld pakketjes komen afleveren, kunnen die in de logistieke hubs achterlaten in pakketwanden of servicewinkels, of anders die pakketjes met karretjes de buurt in brengen. Het is daarbij ook mogelijk om in de logistieke hubs de pakketjes over te slaan op bakfietsen of kleinere elektrische voertuigen.Afvalbedrijf – systeem van compactere afvalcontainers met persen die in de verschillende gebouwen geplaatst zijn (dus niet in de openbare ruimte) en die met elektrische busjes opgehaald worden (in plaats van grote vrachtwagens).WKO-bedrijf – gezamenlijke warmte-koude-opslag in de bodem met uitwisseling met het Merwedekanaal om afkoeling van de ondergrondse opslag te voorkomen. Drie zes meter hoge warmwaterbuffers, die opgenomen worden in de gebouwen, gaan ervoor zorgen dat op piekmomenten iedereen warm water heeft. Via een tender heeft Essent de concessie verworven om dit 30 jaar lang voor de buurt te beheren.Energiecoöperatie – omdat voor Merwede minder netcapaciteit beschikbaar was dan er eigenlijk voor nodig was, is met Stedin de afspraak gemaakt dat de buurt het zelf zo organiseert dat het binnen de beschikbare capaciteit blijft. Daarvoor wordt onder andere gekeken naar bidirectioneel laden van de elektrische auto's in de parkeergarages, maar zullen ook enkele buurtbatterijen nodig zijn, die ook weer in de gebouwen een plek moeten gaan krijgen. Het opladen van auto's zal verder vooral buiten de piekmomenten kunnen.MerwedeLab – voorafgaand aan iedere volgende fase in de gebiedsontwikkeling heeft dit lab onderzocht welke innovaties mogelijk waren en specialisten daarbij betrokken. Zo heeft het lab eraan bijgedragen dat veel innovaties breed in het gebied zijn toegepast. Een goed voorbeeld daarvan is de inpassing van de fietsenstallingen, die steeds aan de entrees van de gebouwen zijn gekoppeld, hoogwaardiger zijn afgewerkt, en verbonden zijn met gezamenlijke voorzieningen; zodat je via de fietsenstalling echt prettig binnenkomt of vertrekt.Deze podcast wordt mede mogelijk gemaakt door AGC. Halverwege de podcast vertelt Anton Peters van AGC hoe bij woontoren Bold in Amsterdam, ontworpen door OZ, PV-panelen onzichtbaar zijn geïntegreerd in de gevels en hoe juist die plaatsing in de gevel bijdraagt aan een gelijkmatiger opwekking van energie over de dag en de seizoenen.De beelden bij de podcast zijn gemaakt door LOLA Landscape Architects en tonen de autovrije buurt Merwede in Utrecht.

Nu bekend is geworden dat Renze Klamer na de zomer in zijn eentje de talkshow van RTL gaat presenteren, ettert het chagrijn achter de schermen bij RTL Tonight door. Zo is zijn grappig bedoelde instagrambericht over het zoeken naar een talkshowtafel in het verkeerde keelgat geschoten. Volgens Angela de Jong is er zelfs meer dan chagrijn. ,,Ik heb gehoord dat Beau boos de redactie van Pauw & De Wit is op gestormd met de vraag op of ze daar nog een presentator zochten”, zegt ze. Het panel met Angela de Jong, mediaverslaggever Dennis Jansen en presentator Manuel Venderbos bespreekt de toekomst van Renze en zijn talkshow op RTL. Krijgt hij het nog moeilijk? Het trio behandelt verder de mogelijke verhuizing van Van Roosmalen & Groenteman naar Net 5, de ‘hete aardappel’ Ongehoord Nederland, de omroep die geen onderdak kan vinden bij de omroepenhuizen, en kijkt terug op de finale van De Verraders. ,,Het beste seizoen ooit”, jubelt het gezelschap, al was de finale een anti-climax. ,,En drie afleveringen per week is wat mij betreft te veel”, aldus Jansen, tevens een groot liefhebber van De slimste mens. Het programma is bezig aan de finaleweek. Wie er gaat winnen? ,,Frank van Leeuwen”, roepen Angela de Jong en Manuel Venderbos in koor. Wie de rechtszaak tussen Talpa en Yvonne gaat winnen? De juicevlogger eiste vorige week in een kort geding dat Talpa Network haar complete loon uitkeert. Talpa vroeg haar vorig jaar een dagelijkse talkshow voor Net 5 te maken. Het programma De Juice kwam er uiteindelijk niet. Toen het mediabedrijf stopte met het uitkeren van haar salaris, stapte ze naar de rechter. Het panel van de AD Media Podcast kijkt terug én vooruit met het AD-interview van de juicevlogger in de hand. Coldeweijer lijkt behoorlijk zeker van zichzelf. ,,Als haar juice klopt over Jutta en Jake, dan is Yvonne weer helemaal terug. Reken maar dat er wat aan de hand is”, zegt Angela de Jong. Luisteren dus! Naar de wekelijkse AD Media Podcast, waarin columnist Angela de Jong en mediaverslaggever Dennis Jansen alle hoofd-, rand-, en bijzaken bespreken op het gebied van media. De presentatie is in handen van Manuel Venderbos. Luister je liever via Spotify of Apple, of een andere podcastapp? Dat kan! Vind al onze podcasts op ad.nl/podcasts.Support the show: https://krant.nl/See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Wethouder Bas van Leeuwen over Kamervragen nav besluit spooronderhoud Haarlems by Haarlem105

Hélène Hendriks, Johnny de Mol, Frank van Leeuwen en Rutger Castricum bespreken de actualiteit: De landstitel van PSV na puntenverlies Feyenoord, de energiecrisis in Nederland en Boer Harm. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

In deze aflevering van The Autonomy Show spreken we met Marijn van Leeuwen, mede-oprichter van Cryptotopic.nl, het Nederlandse crypto-educatieplatform dat diepgang zet boven hype.We gaan van alles langs: de eeuwige discussie of Bitcoin een betaalmiddel is of een store of value, wat er werkelijk gebeurt als BlackRock een Bitcoin fork zou uitvoeren, en waarom de 21 miljoen cap misschien minder waterdicht is dan je denkt. We duiken ook diep in de wereld van CBDC, is de digitale euro een bescherming voor burgers of juist een instrument van controle? En waarom mogen stablecoins geen yield aanbieden, terwijl de centrale bank dat straks zelf wél wil doen?Chhay deelt ook een persoonlijk verhaal dat hij nog nooit eerder heeft verteld: hij verloor ooit 25 Bitcoin op een centrale exchange. En we bespreken eerlijk waarom de memecoin-funnel eigenlijk de standaard onboarding is voor de crypto-ruimte en wat daar mis mee is.Of zoals Marijn het zegt: "Ik kwam voor het geld, maar ik sta voor de vrijheid."

In deze aflevering van De Boekenpraktijk onderzoeken we een vraag die steeds urgenter wordt: past de manier waarop we werken nog wel bij deze tijd?De traditionele 9-tot-5-werkweek staat onder druk. In een wereld waarin AI razendsnel ontwikkelt en kenniswerk steeds centraler staat, lijkt het oude model steeds minder goed te werken. Toch blijven we hardnekkig vasthouden aan vaste structuren, volle agenda's en een focus op uren in plaats van energie.Gedragspsycholoog en AI-expert Sanne Cornelissen en performance-expert Colin Cleeren laten zien hoe het anders kan. Niet door harder te werken, maar door slimmer te organiseren: werken op momenten waarop je energie hebt, taken clusteren en bewust ruimte maken voor focus en creativiteit.AI speelt daarin een sleutelrol. Niet als vervanger van ons werk, maar als partner. Mits je het goed gebruikt. Want wie gedachteloos leunt op AI, loopt het risico minder scherp te worden. Maar wie AI combineert met eigen denkvermogen, kan juist beter, sneller en creatiever werken.Tegelijkertijd blijkt veranderen lastig. We zijn gewoontedieren. Motivatie helpt, maar zonder slimme keuzes en kleine experimenten vervallen we al snel in oude patronen.Wat betekent dit voor jouw werkweek? Hoe voorkom je dat technologie je agenda alleen maar voller maakt? En hoe ontwerp je een manier van werken die past bij jouw energie, doelen en omgeving?Voor meer inzichten luister je deze aflevering.StellingenElke aflevering van De Boekenpraktijk legt host Willem van Leeuwen de gasten een aantal stellingen voor. In deze aflevering zijn dat:De traditionele 9-tot-5-werkweek is een industrieel overblijfsel dat niet meer past bij kenniswerk;AI maakt ons werk niet alleen efficiënter, maar ook afhankelijker – en dat is een risico voor onze eigen denkkracht.LinksDe boeken van Sanne Cornelissen bestel je via managementboek.nl > https://www.managementboek.nl/auteur/144806/sanne-cornelissen En ook het boek van Colin Cleeren hebben we hier: https://www.managementboek.nl/auteur/147224/colin-cleeren  OverIn de Boekenpraktijk, de podcast van Managementboek, praat Willem van Leeuwen met auteurs van nieuw verschenen boeken over de brede thema's ontwikkeling en verandering: van persoonlijke ontwikkeling en verandering tot op het niveau van een gehele organisatie. Altijd met een koppeling naar de dagelijkse praktijk.

Welcome back to the 277th episode of The Cup which is our a weekly (give or take, TBD, these are unprecedented times) performing arts talk show presented by Cup of Hemlock Theatre. With the theatres on a come back we offer a mix of both reviews of live shows we've seen and continued reviews of prophet productions! For our 277th episode we bring you a Duet Review of Anywhere, written Michael Ross Albert, directed by Cass Van Wyck, presented by Leroy Street Theatre and One Four One Collective, starring Kaitlin Race and Anne van Leeuwen. Join Mackenzie Horner and Ryan Borochovitz, as they discuss meaty roles, poverty tourism, and precariously scattered Lego.Anywhere is playing at the Assembly Theatre (1479 Queen St W, Toronto, ON) until April 2nd, 2026. Tickets can be purchased from the following link: https://www.theassemblytheatre.com/anywhere This review contains many SPOILERS for Anywhere. It will begin with a general non-spoiler review until the [12:15] mark, followed by a more in-depth/anything goes/spoiler-rich discussion. If you intend to see the production, we recommend you stop watching after that point, or at least proceed at your own risk. Follow our panelists: Mackenzie Horner (Before the Downbeat: A Musical Podcast) – Instagram/Facebook: BeforetheDownbeatApple Podcasts: https://apple.co/3aYbBeNSpotify: https://spoti.fi/3sAbjAu Ryan Borochovitz – [Just send all that love to CoH instead; he won't mind!]; if you enjoy his theatre thoughts, more can be found at https://nextmag.ca/search/borochovitz Follow Cup of Hemlock Theatre on Instagram/Facebook/Twitter: @cohtheatreIf you'd like us to review your upcoming show in Toronto, please send press invites/inquiries to coh.theatre.MM@gmail.com

In deze VI ZSM staan Simon Zwartkruis en Kalum van Oudheusden in de Johan Cruijff ArenA om de oefeninterland tussen Nederland en Noorwegen na te bespreken. Welke speler viel het meest op in positieve zin en wat kon er beter, dat én meer komt voorbij in deze aflevering. 0:00 Intro 1:15 Koopmeiners 4:51 Kees Smit 10:52 Spelhervattingen 12:31 Tijjani Reijnders 15:21 ConclusieSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

In deze aflevering van De Boekenpraktijk spreekt Willem van Leeuwen met Sandra Bouckaert over haar boek 'Deep Democracy in de keertijd'. Wat vraagt deze tijd van leiders en organisaties, nu veranderingen elkaar in hoog tempo opvolgen en onzekerheid de norm lijkt te worden?Bouckaert laat zien waarom het vermijden van conflict organisaties juist belemmert. Volgens haar zit de echte vooruitgang vaak in de stemmen die we liever niet horen. Door juist die minderheidsstem ruimte te geven, ontstaat er een dieper gesprek en betere besluitvorming. Maar dat vraagt wel iets: vertragen, luisteren en het ongemak durven opzoeken.In het gesprek gaat het onder andere over hoe je polarisatie zichtbaar maakt en benut, waarom snelle besluiten vaak voortkomen uit angst voor dialoog en welke rol leiders hebben in het begeleiden van groepsprocessen. Ook bespreekt Bouckaert hoe Deep Democracy niet alleen een methode is, maar ook een manier van kijken naar organisaties en verandering.Wil je beter leren omgaan met verschillen in je team en ontdekken hoe je tot gedragen besluiten komt? Luister dan deze aflevering. StellingenElke aflevering van De Boekenpraktijk legt host Willem van Leeuwen de gast een aantal stellingen voor. De stellingen in deze aflevering zijn:1. Snel besluiten nemen in organisaties is vaak een vermomde vorm van angst voor dialoog;2. Leiders die hun eigen schaduwkanten niet onderzoeken, beschadigen onbewust hun team. LinksDe boeken van Sandra Bouckaert bestel je via managementboek.nl > https://www.managementboek.nl/auteur/120828/sandra-bouckaert Haar boekentip is 'Corporate Rebels' van Joost Minnaar en Pim de Morre, Deze vind je hier > https://www.managementboek.nl/boek/9789047011316/corporate-rebels-joost-minnaar OverIn de Boekenpraktijk, de podcast van Managementboek, praat Willem van Leeuwen met auteurs van nieuw verschenen boeken over de brede thema's ontwikkeling en verandering: van persoonlijke ontwikkeling en verandering tot op het niveau van een gehele organisatie. Altijd met een koppeling naar de dagelijkse praktijk.

De schuldenindustrie moet gestopt worden, want schulden maken mensen ziek. Dat zegt Vereniging Humanitas. De vrijwilligersorganisatie bood vandaag in de Tweede Kamer een petitie aan, die ruim 100.000 keer ondertekend werd, waarbij ze pleiten voor een verandering van ons schuldensysteem. Moet het systeem inderdaad op de schop? En hoe dan? Hans van der Steeg gaat erover in gesprek met: - Jerzy Soetekouw, directeur van Humanitas - Michel van Leeuwen, directeur van Flanderijn, een incasso- en gerechtsdeurwaardersorganisatie.

Afrika-correspondent Sophie van Leeuwen deed wat geen enkele andere westerse journalist deed: naar Sierra Leone om verslag te doen over Bolle Jos. Het kwam haar op arrestatie en een spionageverdenking te staan. Voor Follow The Money tekende ze haar bloedstollende relaas op. In dit audioverhaal, dat haar geschreven reportage combineert met een interview, hoor je alles over haar ervaring in het land van de meest gezochte crimineel van Nederland. In detail vertelt ze hoe haar reis verliep, hoe ze werd opgepakt en hoe ze uiteindelijk vrijkwam.

In this episode of the Epigenetics Podcast, we talked with Oliver Bell from the University of Southern California in Los Angeles about his work on chromatin-based regulatory systems that encode cellular memory and their implications for development and disease. The Interview starts with Dr. Bell describing his early career contributions to understanding the functionality of histone methylation in facilitating dosage compensation and gene silencing. His efforts at dissecting the complexities of epigenetic regulation culminate in significant discoveries that highlight the nuanced effects of chromatin adjustments on gene activity and stability across cell divisions. As we progress, Dr. Bell shares details about his postdoctoral research, where he engineered systems to study chromatin remodeling and the maintenance of transcriptional states through development. His innovative use of induced proximity to manipulate chromatin modifiers offers groundbreaking approaches to understanding how epigenetic states can be established and sustained, alongside the implications for therapeutic strategies in cancer treatment. An important aspect of our discussion centers on his identification of the ZFP462 protein, which plays a critical role in neurodevelopmental disorders. Dr. Bell outlines his lab's ongoing research into deciphering how this zinc finger protein interacts with enhancers to influence gene regulation in embryonic stem cells and its potential connection to specific diseases. This leads to an engaging dialogue about the relationship between 3D genome organization and epigenetic regulation, focusing on how disruptions in chromatin architecture may affect gene expression. Towards the end of our conversation, we touch upon the emerging potential of AI in epigenetic research, exploring how advances in technology could facilitate the screening of small molecules targeted at chromatin-modifying complexes. Dr. Bell offers a forward-looking perspective on the future applications of this research, revealing his aspirations for therapeutic developments based on his findings. References Bell, O., Wirbelauer, C., Hild, M., Scharf, A. N., Schwaiger, M., MacAlpine, D. M., Zilbermann, F., van Leeuwen, F., Bell, S. P., Imhof, A., Garza, D., Peters, A. H., & Schübeler, D. (2007). Localized H3K36 methylation states define histone H4K16 acetylation during transcriptional elongation in Drosophila. The EMBO journal, 26(24), 4974–4984. https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.emboj.7601926 Hathaway, N. A., Bell, O., Hodges, C., Miller, E. L., Neel, D. S., & Crabtree, G. R. (2012). Dynamics and memory of heterochromatin in living cells. Cell, 149(7), 1447–1460. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cell.2012.03.052 Moussa, H. F., Bsteh, D., Yelagandula, R., Pribitzer, C., Stecher, K., Bartalska, K., Michetti, L., Wang, J., Zepeda-Martinez, J. A., Elling, U., Stuckey, J. I., James, L. I., Frye, S. V., & Bell, O. (2019). Canonical PRC1 controls sequence-independent propagation of Polycomb-mediated gene silencing. Nature communications, 10(1), 1931. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-019-09628-6 Yelagandula, R., Stecher, K., Novatchkova, M. et al. ZFP462 safeguards neural lineage specification by targeting G9A/GLP-mediated heterochromatin to silence enhancers. Nat Cell Biol 25, 42–55 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41556-022-01051-2 Bsteh, D., Moussa, H.F., Michlits, G. et al. Loss of cohesin regulator PDS5A reveals repressive role of Polycomb loops. Nat Commun 14, 8160 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-023-43869-w Related Episodes Effects of DNA Methylation on Chromatin Structure and Transcription (Dirk Schübeler) Polycomb Proteins, Gene Regulation, and Genome Organization in Drosophila (Giacomo Cavalli) Transcription and Polycomb in Inheritance and Disease (Danny Reinberg) Contact Epigenetics Podcast on Mastodon Epigenetics Podcast on Bluesky Dr. Stefan Dillinger on LinkedIn Active Motif on LinkedIn Active Motif on Bluesky Email: podcast@activemotif.com

Health Hats walks & floats through ancient Maya caves in Belize with forearm crutches, teamwork, trust, and shared decision-making every step of the way. Watch this episode on YouTube. Audio is published, but not the same Podcast episode on YouTube Summary What does it take to go cave tubing in Belize when you use forearm crutches and have no electric wheelchair? For Danny van Leeuwen, it takes the 3 T’s: Time (a half-mile walk), Trust (in guides and companions), and Talk (real-time decisions about stairs vs. river crossings). HHP245 is a first-person GoPro video of Danny floating through the sacred Caves Branch River — ancient Maya ceremonial grounds — with his wife and friend Linda. It’s part adventure, part health advocacy, and part proof that with the right team, you can push your capabilities further than you thought. Click here to view the printable newsletter with images. More readable than a transcript. Contents Table of Contents Toggle EpisodeProemNarrativeReflectionRelated episodes from Health Hats Please comment and ask questions: at the comment section at the bottom of the show notes on LinkedIn  via email YouTube channel  DM on Instagram, TikTok to @healthhats Substack Patreon Production Team Kayla Nelson: Web and Social Media Coach, Dissemination, Help Desk  Leon van Leeuwen: editing and site management Oscar van Leeuwen: video editing Julia Higgins: Digit marketing therapy Steve Heatherington: Help Desk and podcast production counseling Joey van Leeuwen, Drummer, Composer, and Arranger, provided the music for the intro, outro, proem, and reflection Claude, Perplexity, Auphonic, Descript, Grammarly, DaVinci   Inspired by and Grateful to: Mike and Linda DeRosa, Ann Boland, Ruben, David, and all our guides and helpers Photo Credits for Videos All by Danny van Leeuwen using GoPro10  Referenced in episode Nohoch Che’en Caves, Branch Archeological Reserve, Episode Proem I delight in pushing the boundaries of my capabilities. In Belize, floating in a tube through caves and snorkeling stretched me. How can tubing stretch anything? It's passive floating. The event included a mile-long walk to the cave entrance – relatively flat with some steps and wading across the river, a mere six-inches deep. No electric wheelchair, just my forearm crutches. Our guide and my compatriots shared in the decision-making and assisted me. This video episode was taken with a GoPro camera hanging around my neck. Watch the video. Reading will not give you the flavor. Narrative Let me tell you a little bit about where we are what you’ll see. Excuse me, as I will be certainly butchering some of the names of stuff. So where we are is Nohoch Che’en Caves, Branch Archeological Reserve, also called the Caves Branch River. It’s in the Cayo District, and districts are like provinces or states. It’s by far the most famous cave tubing destination in Belize and one of the most unique in the world. So this was sacred to the ancient Maya. They were considered portal to Xibalba, the Maya underworld. This wasn’t just mythology. The Maya actively used these caves for religious rituals and ceremonies, particularly during times of drought when they needed to communicate with the rain God, chaac. I don’t know. Archeologists have found ceramic offerings, jade artifacts and human remains inside; evidence of sacrificial rights dating back over 2000 years. The caves were largely forgotten after the Maya civilization declined and weren’t widely known to the outside world until the 1980s and nineties when the Belizean guides and explorers began documenting them and it became a active tourist destination in the early two thousands. So the Caves Branch River flows through a network of limestone caves carved out over millions of years. The system I floated on. Is part of a much larger Karst landscape riddled with interconnected caves. Some of them still unexplored. Pretty amazing, huh? Reflection That was it. Fifteen minutes of about an hour total time and 30 minutes of recording. I hope it gives you a flavor of what we did. It was awesome. I will be producing a couple more videos from Belize over the next few months. The next video will be of the Mayan ruins, then making tortillas and tamales, and then, we'll see. Related episodes from Health Hats https://health-hats.com/pod223/ https://health-hats.com/pod191/ https://health-hats.com/pod164/ Artificial Intelligence in Podcast Production Health Hats, the Podcast, utilizes AI tools for production tasks such as editing, transcription, and content suggestions. While AI assists with various aspects, including image creation, most AI suggestions are modified. All creative decisions remain my own, with AI sources referenced as usual. Questions are welcome. Creative Commons Licensing CC BY-NC-SA This license enables reusers to distribute, remix, adapt, and build upon the material in any medium or format for noncommercial purposes only, and only so long as attribution is given to the creator. If you remix, adapt, or build upon the material, you must license the modified material under identical terms. CC BY-NC-SA includes the following elements:    BY: credit must be given to the creator.   NC: Only noncommercial uses of the work are permitted.    SA: Adaptations must be shared under the same terms. Please let me know. danny@health-hats.com. Material on this site created by others is theirs, and use follows their guidelines. Disclaimer The views and opinions presented in this podcast and publication are solely my responsibility and do not necessarily represent the views of the Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute®  (PCORI®), its Board of Governors, or Methodology Committee. Danny van Leeuwen (Health Hats)

The Red Sea has become the centre of a geopolitical crisis. How to secure one of the world's most crowded trade routes? With, amongst others, NATO-Chief of Staff Geoffrey van Leeuwen we speak about proxy wars, maritime strategy and trade.Every year, roughly 33% of global containerised trade passes through the Red Sea. At its narrowest point, just 26 kilometres wide, the sea is one of the world's most critical maritime chokepoints. The attacks in the last years by the Yemen-based Houthis have once again demonstrated the vulnerability of this geostrategic corridor. By sinking four vessels and hijacking another with relative ease, the Houthis have found an effective means to exert political leverage and managed to decrease maritime traffic through the passage from November 2023 onwards with 55%, bringing international trade through the Red Sea effectively to a standstill.With the Bab el-Mandeb Strait and the Suez Canal no longer viable routes for most shipping companies, vessels traveling between Europe and Asia have increasingly diverted around Africa. For the EU, particularly for a maritime trading nation like the Netherlands, this divergence significantly complicates supply chains, increases costs, and critically exposes strategic vulnerabilities. As the cessation of Houthi attacks appears contingent on the fragile ceasefire in Gaza, European shipping companies ask whether a return to the strait is a realistic option at all.During this event we think through a set of interrelated questions: what geopolitical stakes are at play in the Red Sea region, what conditions are required to ensure safety and security, who are the key actors shaping developments in this strategically vital corridor, and specifically what role does NATO take on in its naval strategy?About the speakersGeoffrey van Leeuwen is NATO-Chief of Staff and Director of the Office of the Secretary General. Before taking over as Chief of Staff and Director of the Office of the Secretary General, Geoffrey van Leeuwen served as Minister for Foreign Trade and Development Cooperation for the Netherlands, after having spent several years as National Security Advisor to Prime Minister Mark Rutte.Benedetta Girardi is Programme Coordinator of the HCSS Europe in the Indo-Pacific programme and Strategic Analyst at HCSS. Her research focuses on the role of Europe in the Indo-Pacific, with specific attention to supply chains of energy, critical raw materials, and semiconductors as well as avenues for engagement between European and Indo-Pacific states. Paul van Hooft is expert on international security, nuclear deterrence and strategy, US-European relations, and the Indo-Pacific. He is a research leader at RAND Europe.Máté Szalai is a Research Fellow at the Conflict Research Unit of Clingendael. As a member of the Middle East group, he specializes in the international relations and the domestic political economic systems of the broader Gulf region.Programme editor: Senna FeliusModerator: Yoeri AlbrechtIn cooperation with: JASON InstituteZie het privacybeleid op https://art19.com/privacy en de privacyverklaring van Californië op https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Compleet van de wijs van Kristie Raaijmakers is een heerlijk feelgoodverhaal vol muziek, romantiek en vriendschap, en het eerste deel in de serie Rock & Flirt.  Uitgegeven door HarperCollins Spreker: Kiki van Leeuwen

Plooi u in tweeën is een bijzonder zelfportret van een auteur die niet eerder zo open over haar coming of age schreef, en over haar engagement met dat wat buiten de lijntjes valt. Uitgegeven door Querido Spreker: Joke van Leeuwen

Former Nike exec Mark Hochgesang interviews Danny on Heavy Hitter Sports Podcast about MS & being an adaptive athlete. Just back from Belize! Training works. Summary My friend Mark Hochgesang, former Nike exec and host of Heavy Hitter Sports, recently interviewed me. While I usually wear my life on my sleeve on Health Hats, this conversation revealed something different—how I think about myself as an adaptive athlete. Phil Knight’s mantra: “If you have a body, you’re an athlete.” I never thought of it that way until Mark helped me see it. Training to travel? That’s athletic training. Loading a 60-pound wheelchair into an SUV? Strength work. Walking 3,500 steps a day with MS? Competition with myself. Here’s what we covered:

In de nazomer van 1966 verhuisde Joke van Leeuwen als dertienjarig meisje van het Nederlandse dorp Zetten naar Brussel. Deze minuut is gemaakt door audiomaker Annelore van Gool in het kader van een project van deBuren, RITCS Radio en Klankverbond. Meer info: https://deburen.eu/podcasts

Host Mark Hochgesang huddles with the inspiring and relentlessly optimistic Danny van Leeuwen—athlete, nurse, storyteller, and champion for living fully with a chronic illness. Danny doesn't just talk about resilience; he lives it daily with multiple sclerosis while still pursuing movement, connection, and joy. His perspective flips the script from “What's wrong?” to “What's possible?” as we explore how folks can redefine success, choose hope, and keep moving forward even when the road gets rocky. If you're ready for a conversation filled with energy, laughter, practical wisdom, and a contagious belief in what the human spirit can do—this episode is for you. Enjoy sports fans!Danny's Health Hats Website: https://health-hats.com/Danny's Health Hats Podcast: https://health-hats.com/new-health-hats-blog/EPISODE TIME STAMPS0:00 –  Opening and Episode Setup01:18 –  Meet Danny van Leeuwen02:07 – Athlete Roots and Early Lessons04:56 – Danny's Competitive Spirit06:10 -  The MS Diagnosis 12:00 – Movement Matters15:42 – Attitude is Everything17:40 – Teamwork Makes the Dream Work20:37 – Beautiful Music22:50 – Oh the Places You'll Go24:09 – Winning Redefined25:00 – Pathological Optimist26:10 – What Do You Do When You Can't?28:56 – Final Takeaways and ClosingListeners, please subscribe to Heavy Hitter Sports wherever you listen to podcasts so that you don't miss any future episodes. Ideally, please also rate & review the show. And share this episode with a coworker, friend or family member who it might benefit. Feel free to reach out if you have suggestions re future episode guests or topics. Mark's contact info is noted below. Many thanks. mphochgesang@gmail.com971-985-6909

Hoe maken presentatoren een Oog-opening? Bert van Leeuwen over het Familediner Serie over de internationale rechtsorde

Met vanavond: Is Colombia het nieuwe doelwit van president Trump ? | Vijf jaar na de eerste coronaprik | Nieuw boek over zaak Heulmeisje | Bert van Leeuwen over 25 jaar Het Familiediner | Presentatie: Pieter van der Wielen

Metropolis: een dystopische blik op 2026 en De gasvlam als thuisgevoel    (01:36) Wil Trump in Venezuela doen wat de VS in 1989 in Panama deden, toen de strijd tegen drugs werd gebruikt om de toenmalige president van Panama af te zetten? Te gast is Edwin Koopman, Latijns-Amerika journalist en VPRO-collega (Bureau Buitenland).  (20:14) De film Metropolis uit 1927, over een futuristische stad waarin een hevige klassenstrijd wordt gevoerd. En regisseur Fritz Lang liet de film afspelen in het jaar 2026. Wat voor beeld wordt er van ons heden geschetst? Te gast is mediawetenschapper Dan Hassler-Forest.  (42:55) Het thuisgevoel is niet zo vanzelfsprekend als het lijkt. Dat gevoel is ook gemaakt, bijvoorbeeld met de gasvlam en het koken daarop. Religiewetenschapper en etnoloog Ernst van den Hemel schreef voor de bundel ‘Venster op thuis' de bijdrage ‘De gasvlam als thuisgevoel' en is te gast.  (52:25) Elke week bespreken we historische tips met afwisselend Nadia Bouras, Wim Berkelaar, Bart Funnekotter, Sanne Frequin, en Fresco Sam-Sin. Deze week is de beurt aan Bart Funnekotter. Hij bespreekt twee boeken en een documentaire:  Een schandaal in Königsberg - Christopher Clark (vert. Wil Hansen)  Dokter Satan - Jean-Marc Dreyfus (vert. Hans van Riemsdijk)  The Stringer: The Man Who Took the Photo - documentaire van Netflix    (01:08:07)  Biograaf Wies van Leeuwen over Pierre Cuypers, de architect van de in Amsterdam afgebrande Vondelkerk.   (01:16:22) Bevel! Miljoenen Europese mannen moesten zich tijdens de Tweede Wereldoorlog melden om dwangarbeid te doen voor Duitsland. Na thuiskomst werd er vaak nauwelijks nog over gesproken. In de serie Gedwongen vertellen de laatste getuigen over de Arbeitseinsatz. In de negentig zijn ze inmiddels. Ze vertrokken als tiener en werden maanden-, soms jarenlang tewerkgesteld. Zo werden ze volwassen in de snelkookpan van de oorlog. Voor welke dilemma's kwamen ze te staan? En wat doet dwang met een mens?  Gedwongen- tewerkgesteld in Duitsland is een podcast van het Nationaal Comité 4 en 5 Mei, het NIOD en Aldus' producties, geregisseerd door Tjitske Mussche met muziek van Darius Timmer.    Meer info:  https://www.vpro.nl/ovt/artikelen/ovt-4-januari-2025 (https://www.vpro.nl/ovt/artikelen/ovt-4-januari-2025)   

Health Hats Danny celebrates 50 – years with his honey & pounds lost. With gratitude for privilege, & best health thru family, media, music, travel, & advocacy. Summary Think of 2025 as Danny’s Sofrito year—familiar and unexpected ingredients simmering together. The base: 50 years married, daily saxophone practice, steady MS management. The aromatics: Cuban jazz immersion, co-founding a Personal Health Data Bank, and celebrating with old friends on Bloom Mountain. The heat: losing 50 pounds, earning $150 as a “professional” musician, and learning from his grandsons. What makes sofrito work is the slow sauté, the patient layering of flavors. Danny’s learning the same with music (leave white space), with health (five out of ten is excellent), and with AI (it changes the work but doesn’t replace Mom’s feedback). Between PCORI Board meetings, podcast production, band rehearsals, and startup strategy sessions, he’s discovered that retirement’s spicy complexity comes from knowing when to drop out, when to join the rhythm section, and when to let the energizing endorphins carry you through disturbing times. The recipe? Nap whenever and keep improvising. Click here to view the printable newsletter with images. More readable than a transcript. Contents Table of Contents Toggle EpisodeProemFrom Mom to AI50 Years of Love and Privilege RoastedRolling in CubaToo Many and Too Few HornsBest GovernanceGame-Changing StartupOnwardBest Health NowEndorphins and GratitudeRelated episodes from Health Hats Please comment and ask questions: at the comment section at the bottom of the show notes on LinkedIn  via email YouTube channel  DM on Instagram, TikTok to @healthhats Substack Patreon Production Team Kayla Nelson: Web and Social Media Coach, Dissemination, Help Desk  Leon van Leeuwen: editing and site management Oscar van Leeuwen: video editing Julia Higgins: Digit marketing therapy Steve Heatherington: Help Desk and podcast production counseling Joey van Leeuwen, Drummer, Composer, and Arranger, provided the music for the intro and outro Claude, Auphonic, Descript, Grammarly, DaVinci, Whisper Transcription Podcast episode on YouTube Inspired by and Grateful to: All of you! Photo Credits for Videos 50th Anniversary images by Patti Harris, Rich Rieger, Jodi Buckingham, Ann Boland, Christine Higgins, and me Swiss cheese image by Rahul Pugazhendi on Unsplash Nourish image by Santiago Lacarta on Unsplash Cuba images by Ann Boland, Richard Fish, Gisselle Perez, and me Zoom images by Michael Chaffin and Steve Heatherington Links and references The Curse of an Aching Heart Music by Al Piantadosi, Lyrics by Henry Fink 1913 played by the Summer Street Stompers https://health-hats.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/12/The-Curse-of-an-Aching-Heart-20251206.mp3  Referenced in episode Dan Fox and Morningside Studios,  the Havana Music School, the Havana Jazz Festival Lechuga Fresca Latin Band and Summer Street Stompers Dixieland Band Research partnerships and participatory governance of AI Personal Health Data Bank https://goodlistening.org Episode Proem I love retirement. I have plenty to do on my own schedule. I can nap almost whenever I want. I‘m no better at saying no. Every day feels rich, although I don't always know what day it is. From Mom to AI My podcast about best health continues to flourish and nourish. Thank you very much. I embrace the tension between creativity and productivity as I test new approaches and media. I published fifteen new episodes in 2025, plus 32 YouTube episodes, and countless social media shorts. What do you think of my new intro and outro? Grandsons Leon and Oscar encouraged me to update them. Leon has been updating my website, as a growing proportion of people access my back catalog. Both Leon and Oscar advise me on direction, content, and strategy, especially using social media. I meet regularly with my virtual, supportive, and challenging podcasting peeps. I enjoy experimenting with AI in production to find and create images and suggest brief descriptions and section headings. My favorite prompt is “Suggest three ironic titles, brief descriptions, and section headings, a tech-savvy teen would appreciate.” I rarely use the suggested responses, but I chuckle and take an unexpected path. AI does not make me more productive; it changes the work a tad. When I first started blogging, I would read draft episodes to my mom. Her feedback was more often helpful than AI's. I miss my mom. 50 Years of Love and Privilege Roasted The highlights of the year included celebrating our 50th wedding anniversary with old friends and my grandsons. Our son, Ruben, served as Master of Ceremonies. Nine people from our 1975 wedding joined us in July on Bloom Mountain in West Virginia to tell stories. We played the Dating Game and Danny and Ann Trivia. We, rather, I, got roasted. Oscar, Bruce Kimmel, and I played Simple Gifts on clarinet, bass, and baritone sax. We sang Simple Gifts at our wedding. Listeners and viewers, you can find full performances of this and other referenced tunes at the end of the podcast. Readers, click the links in the transcript or check the show notes. Rolling in Cuba Another highlight was our week-long trip to Cuba for a music extravaganza. Dan Fox and Morningside Studios arranged it, and the Havana Music School hosted a week of the Havana Jazz Festival, daily lessons and ensemble work, culminating in a gig at a restaurant attended by many Havana musicians in town for the Festival. One of the tunes I recorded from the gig, “Sofrito” by Mongo Santamaria, has had 48,000 views on YouTube as of this writing. Before this, my most-viewed videos had 300 views. I'm grateful to Pachy Silveria for saxophone instruction and to Claudia Fumero and Gisselle Perez for their kindness in hosting. I worried about wheelchair access before we went to Cuba, but I needn't have. My wheelchair was no more of a barrier there than it is anywhere else. Too Many and Too Few Horns Speaking of music, I'm playing in two bands now-Lechuga Fresca Latin Band and Summer Street Stompers Dixieland Band. Lechuga Fresca is reconstituting after several musicians moved on to other projects. I'm often the only horn player at rehearsals, while we have five horn players in the Summer Street Stompers. Too few and too many. Both situations have challenges. I've never had to hold my own in a band completely; usually, I hide behind someone. With a horn section, the music at its best is controlled cacophony. Too many horns are nuts. I'm learning to lay back, not hide, drop out sometimes, join the rhythm section other times, and leave more white space in my solos. I'm grateful to my teacher of 17 years, Jeff Harrington. Oscar and I figure that I must be a professional musician. While I don't make a living playing, I made $150 this year. I average 1 hour a day with my music, and it feeds my soul and creates new pathways in my Swiss-cheese brain. Best Governance I'm in my sixth year on the PCORI (Patient Centered Outcomes Research Institute) Board, focused on shifting the balance of power in community-research partnerships and in the participatory governance of AI used in research. If reappointed, I'll enthusiastically re-up for another six years. PCORI has the best Board, leadership, and staff dynamics, as well as the output, of any organization I've participated with during my 50-year career. A nod to Jan Oldenburg for outstanding coaching that kept me focused on two goals at a time. Game-Changing Startup A year ago, I would have said serving on the PCORI Board of Governors was the pinnacle of my career but let me tell you about my new career gig. For twenty-five years, I've worked with many collaboratives to advance patients’ abilities to turn their health data into useful information to make choices about their health and care. “Gimme my damn data” is a great slogan and first step, but success could be drinking dirty water out of a firehose. I virtually met my start-up partners, Tomas Moras and Marianne Hudgins in April and started working together in August. We're seeking seed funding to build a Personal Health Data Bank, an owner-controlled health data bank that promotes individual data ownership, safety, security, and trust by storing personal health data from any source and using AI-assisted synthesis to serve the data owner. Data owners' needs vary. We might need our data for research participation, health data summarization, clinician visit prep, care coordination with family in whatever diaspora, or tracking data over the years, across health systems and locations.  We have a sandbox where we are testing and enhancing existing open-source technology while we figure out participatory governance to address ethical, privacy, and usability issues. We favor a bottom-up rather than a top-down approach as we build community and services for owners and their trusted networks. I'm excited about the challenge of finding the smallest viable community that can use these Data Banks, with everyone making enough money to sustain the banks, service providers, and networks. No data broker would make money on the data. I'm revved up as I learn about a new audience – investors. The diversity of investors rivals that of any culture I'm new to. Onward I traveled to DC, Portland OR, New Orleans, and Colorado. In 2026, we booked a trip to Belize with Linda and Mike DeRosa. We are also planning a trip to Ireland and Wales with my brother-in-law, Paul Boland, I'll be sharing more about my adventures on my podcast and social media. Best Health Now Oh, I almost forgot. My health is excellent, meaning I spend a decent share of time in a state of best health. Talked to a friend, Shel. How do you answer people when they ask how you are doing? On a scale of 1 to 10, with this administration, the best is a seven. Considering the annoyances of MS, that brings it down to a five. So, how are you doing? Five out of ten is best health.  I lost 50 pounds this year after a Type II Diabetes diagnosis. Mobility remains steady, though I was slowing down before the weight loss. I rate symptoms as annoying, seriously annoying, or disabling. Episodes of disabling symptoms are rare and brief. I know how to handle most symptoms most of the time. I'm delighted with a five. Endorphins and Gratitude I'm grateful for my health, my pathological optimism, my privilege, my honey, my grandkids, and my health team. I appreciate all of you – family, friends, and colleagues. You infuse me with energizing endorphins, the best antidote to fatigue. May you celebrate the energizing moments you find in these disturbing times. A https://goodlistening.org poet wrote this poem for me. Related episodes from Health Hats https://health-hats.com/pod233/ https://health-hats.com/pod228/ https://health-hats.com/pod128/ Artificial Intelligence in Podcast Production Health Hats, the Podcast, utilizes AI tools for production tasks such as editing, transcription, and content suggestions. While AI assists with various aspects, including image creation, most AI suggestions are modified. All creative decisions remain my own, with AI sources referenced as usual. Questions are welcome. Creative Commons Licensing CC BY-NC-SA This license enables reusers to distribute, remix, adapt, and build upon the material in any medium or format for noncommercial purposes only, and only so long as attribution is given to the creator. If you remix, adapt, or build upon the material, you must license the modified material under identical terms. CC BY-NC-SA includes the following elements:    BY: credit must be given to the creator.   NC: Only noncommercial uses of the work are permitted.    SA: Adaptations must be shared under the same terms. Please let me know. danny@health-hats.com. Material on this site created by others is theirs, and use follows their guidelines. Disclaimer The views and opinions presented in this podcast and publication are solely my responsibility and do not necessarily represent the views of the Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute®  (PCORI®), its Board of Governors, or Methodology Committee. Danny van Leeuwen (Health Hats)

De Africa Cup begint dit weekend, het grootste voetbalevenement van Afrika. Het wordt dit keer georganiseerd in Marokko waar met torenhoge verwachtingen wordt gekeken naar de prestaties van het nationale team. Jan praat over deze Afrika Cup met Mustapha Esadik, die er onlangs een boek over schreef: de voetbalkampioenen van Afrika. En het Marokkaanse team al heel lang volgt want hij kocht van zijn zakgeld eind jaren negentig al het donkergroene T-shirt van de Leeuwen van de Atlas.

In de allereerste aflevering van Wereldzaken duiken we in de schimmige wereld van conservatieve denktanks in Brussel. EU-correspondent Rik Rutten en geopolitiek redacteur Michel Kerres nemen ons mee naar een wereld van slappe croissantjes en radicaal rechtse ideeën. Hoeveel invloed hebben deze clubs? Zijn zij de verborgen architecten van de Europese koers?Wil je meer weten over dit onderwerp of ben je benieuwd wat de aflevering niet heeft gehaald? Meld je dan aan voor onze nieuwsbrief via: www.nrc.nl/wereldzakenGast: Rik RuttenCo-host: Michel KerresPresentatie: Mandula van den BergProductie: Lotteke BoogertMontage: Lars van Leeuwen & Ruben PestVideo: Cato Visser, Rosa Juffer en Arno VanhollebekeHeb je vragen, suggesties of ideeën over onze journalistiek? Laat het de redactie weten via wereldzaken@nrc.nl.Zie het privacybeleid op https://art19.com/privacy en de privacyverklaring van Californië op https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

In 1992 worden in verschillende Amsterdamse grachten lichaamsdelen van een jonge vrouw gevonden. Ze is op gruwelijke wijze vermoord en haar lichaam is verminkt. Zo zijn haar vingertoppen en tenen afgesneden en is haar hart uitgesneden. Wie is deze vrouw, wat is er met haar gebeurd en wie heeft dit gedaan? De politie doet met man en macht onderzoek naar de gruwelijke moord, maar tot op de dag van vandaag is de zaak nooit opgelost. Oud-forensisch rechercheur en voormalig boegbeeld van het Cold Case Team van Amsterdam Carina van Leeuwen vertelt over het cold case onderzoek.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Kirk & Lacy on shifting research funding away from federal grants: what happens to community partnerships when the money—and the rules—change? Summary Three Audiences, One Report Lacy Fabian and Kirk Knestis untangle a fundamental confusion in community health research: there are three distinct audiences with competing needs—funders want accountability, researchers want generalizable knowledge, and communities want immediate benefit. Current practice optimizes for the funder, producing deliverables that don’t help the people being served. The alternative isn’t “no strings attached” anarchy but rather honest negotiation about who benefits and who bears the burden of proof. Kirk’s revelation about resource allocation is stark: if one-third of evaluation budgets goes to Click here to view the printable newsletter with images. More readable than a transcript. Contents Table of Contents Toggle EpisodeProem1. Introductions & Career Transitions2. The Catalyst: Why This Conversation Matters3. The Ideal State: Restoring Human Connection4. The Localization Opportunity5. Evidence + Story = Impact6. The Funder Issue: Who Is This Truly Benefiting?7. Dissemination, Implementation & Vested Interest8. Data Parties – The Concrete Solution9. No Strings Attached: Reimagining Funder Relationships10. Balancing Accountability and Flexibility11. Where the Money Actually Goes12. The Pendulum Swings13. The Three Relationships: Funder, Researcher, Community14. Maintaining Agency15. Listen and LearnReflectionRelated episodes from Health Hats Please comment and ask questions: at the comment section at the bottom of the show notes on LinkedIn  via email YouTube channel  DM on Instagram, TikTok to @healthhats Substack Patreon Production Team Kayla Nelson: Web and Social Media Coach, Dissemination, Help Desk  Leon van Leeuwen: editing and site management Oscar van Leeuwen: video editing Julia Higgins: Digit marketing therapy Steve Heatherington: Help Desk and podcast production counseling Joey van Leeuwen, Drummer, Composer, and Arranger, provided the music for the intro, outro, proem, and reflection Claude, Perplexity, Auphonic, Descript, Grammarly, DaVinci Podcast episode on YouTube Inspired by and Grateful to: Ronda Alexander, Eric Kettering, Robert Motley, Liz Salmi, Russell Bennett Photo Credits for Videos Data Party image by Erik Mclean on Unsplash Pendulum image by Frames For Your Heart on Unsplash Links and references Lacy Fabian, PhD, is the founder of Make It Matter Program Consulting and Resources (makeitmatterprograms.com). She is a research psychologist with 20+ years of experience in the non-profit and local, state, and federal sectors who uses evidence and story to demonstrate impact that matters. She focuses on helping non-profits thrive by supporting them when they need it—whether through a strategy or funding pivot, streamlining processes, etc. She also works with foundations and donors to ensure their giving matters, while still allowing the recipient non-profits to maintain focus on their mission. When she isn't making programs matter, she enjoys all things nature —from birdwatching to running —and is an avid reader. Lacy Fabian’s Newsletter: Musings That Matter: Expansive Thinking About Humanity’s Problems Kirk Knestis is an expert in data use planning, design, and capacity building, with experience helping industry, government, and education partners leverage data to solve difficult questions. Kirk is the Executive Director of a startup community nonprofit that offers affordable, responsive maintenance and repairs for wheelchairs and other personal mobility devices to northern Virginia residents. He was the founding principal of Evaluand LLC, a research and evaluation consulting firm providing customized data collection, analysis, and reporting solutions, primarily serving clients in industry, government, and education. The company specializes in external evaluation of grant-funded projects, study design reviews, advisory services, and capacity-building support to assist organizations in using data to answer complex questions.  Referenced in episode Zanakis, S.H., Mandakovic, T., Gupta, S.K., Sahay, S., & Hong, S. (1995). “A review of program evaluation and fund allocation methods within the service and government sectors.” Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Vol. 29, No. 1, March 1995, pp. 59-79. This paywalled article presents a detailed analysis of 306 articles from 93 journals that review project/program evaluation, selection, and funding allocation methods in the service and government sectors. Episode Proem When I examine the relationships between health communities and researchers, I become curious about the power dynamics involved. Strong, equitable relationships depend on a balance of power. But what exactly are communities, and what does a power balance look like? The communities I picture are intentional, voluntary groups of people working together to achieve common goals—such as seeking, fixing, networking, championing, lobbying, or communicating for best health for each other. These groups can meet in person or virtually, and can be local or dispersed. A healthy power balance involves mutual respect, participatory decision-making, active listening, and a willingness to adapt and grow. I always listen closely for connections between communities and health researchers. Connections that foster a learning culture, regardless of their perceived success. Please meet Lacy Fabian and Kirk Knestis, who have firsthand experience in building and maintaining equitable relationships, with whom I spoke in mid-September. This transcript has been edited for clarity with help from Grammarly. Lacy Fabian, PhD, is the founder of Make It Matter Program Consulting and Resources. She partners with non-profit, government, and federal organizations using evidence and storytelling to demonstrate impact and improve program results. Kirk Knestis is an expert in data use planning, design, and capacity building. As Executive Director of a startup community nonprofit and founding principal of Evaluand LLC. He specializes in research, evaluation, and organizational data analysis for complex questions. 1. Introductions & Career Transitions Kirk Knestis: My name’s Kirk Knestis. Until just a few weeks ago, I ran a research and evaluation consulting firm, Evaluand LLC, outside Washington, DC. I’m in the process of transitioning to a new gig. I’ve started a non-profit here in Northern Virginia to provide mobile wheelchair and scooter service. Probably my last project, I suspect. Health Hats: Your last thing, meaning you’re retiring. Kirk Knestis: Yeah, it’s most of my work in the consulting gig was funded by federal programs, the National Science Foundation, the Department of Ed, the National Institutes of Health, and funding for most of the programs that I was working on through grantees has been pretty substantially curtailed in the last few months. Rather than looking for a new research and evaluation gig, we’ve decided this is going to be something I can taper off and give back to the community a bit. Try something new and different, and keep me out of trouble. Health Hats: Yeah, good luck with the latter. Lacy, introduce yourself, please. Lacy Fabian: Hi, Lacy Fabian. Not very dissimilar from Kirk, I’ve made a change in the last few months. I worked at a large nonprofit for nearly 11 years, serving the Department of Health and Human Services. But now I am solo, working to consult with nonprofits and donors. The idea is that I would be their extra brain power when they need it. It’s hard to find funding, grow, and do all the things nonprofits do without a bit of help now and then. I’m looking to provide that in a new chapter, a new career focus. Health Hats: Why is this conversation happening now? Both Kirk and Lacy are going through significant changes as they move away from traditional grant-funded research and nonprofit hierarchies. They’re learning firsthand what doesn’t work and considering what might work instead—this isn't just theory—it’s lived experience. 2. The Catalyst: Why This Conversation Matters Health Hats: Lacy, we caught up after several years of working together on several projects. I’m really interested in community research partnerships. I’m interested in it because I think the research questions come from the communities rather than the researchers. It’s a fraught relationship between communities and researchers, often driven by power dynamics. I’m very interested in how to balance those dynamics. And I see some of this: a time of changing priorities and people looking at their gigs differently —what are the opportunities in this time of kind of chaos, and what are the significant social changes that often happen in times like this? 3. The Ideal State: Restoring Human Connection Health Hats: In your experience, especially given all the recent transitions, what do you see as the ideal relationship between communities and researchers? What would an ideal state look like? Lacy Fabian: One thing I was thinking about during my walk or run today, as I prepared for this conversation about equitable relationships and the power dynamics in this unique situation we’re in, is that I feel like we often romanticize the past instead of learning from it. I believe learning from the past is very important. When I think about an ideal scenario, I feel like we’re moving further away from human solidarity and genuine connection. So, when considering those equitable relationships, it seems to me that it’s become harder to build genuine connections and stay true to our humanness. From a learning perspective, without romanticizing the past, one example I thought of is that, at least in the last 50 years, we’ve seen exponential growth in the amount of information available. That's a concrete example we can point to. And I think that we, as a society, have many points where we could potentially connect. But recent research shows that’s not actually the case. Instead, we’re becoming more disconnected and finding it harder to connect. I believe that for our communities, even knowing how to engage with programs like what Kirk is working on is difficult. Or even in my position, trying to identify programs that truly want to do right, take that pause, and make sure they aim to be equitable—particularly on the funder side—and not just engage in transactions or give less generously than they intend if they’re supporting programs. But there are strings attached. I think all of this happens because we stop seeing each other as human beings; we lose those touchpoints. So, when I think about an ideal situation, I believe it involves restoring those connections, while more clearly and openly acknowledging the power dynamics we introduce and the different roles we assume in the ecosystem. We can’t expect those dynamics to be the same, or to neutralize their impact. However, we can discuss these issues more openly and consistently and acknowledge that they might influence outcomes. So, in an ideal scenario, these are the kinds of things we should be working toward. 4. The Localization Opportunity Health Hats: So Kirk, it strikes me listening to Lacy talk that there’s, in a way, the increased localization of this kind of work could lead to more relationships in the dynamic, whereas before, maybe it was. Things were too global. It was at an academic medical center and of national rather than local interest. What are your thoughts about any of that? Kirk Knestis: Yeah, that’s an excellent question. First, I want to make sure I acknowledge Lacy’s description philosophically, from a value standpoint. I couldn’t put it any better myself. Certainly, that’s got to be at the core of this. Lacy and I know each other because we both served on the board of the Professional Evaluation Society on the East Coast of the United States, and practice of evaluation, evaluating policies and programs, and use of resources, and all the other things that we can look at with evidence, the root of that word is value, right? And by making the values that drive whatever we’re doing explicit, we’re much more likely to connect. At levels in, way, in ways that are actually valuable, a human being level, not a technician level. But to your question, Danny, a couple of things immediately leap out at me. One is that there was always. I was primarily federally funded, indirectly; there’s always been a real drive for highly rigorous, high-quality evaluation. And what that oftentimes gets interpreted to mean is generalizable evaluation research. And so that tends to drive us toward quasi-experimental kinds of studies that require lots and lots of participants, validated instrumentation, and quantitative data. All of those things compromise our ability to really understand what’s going on for the people, right? For the real-life human stakeholders. One thing that strikes me is that we could be as funding gets picked up. I’m being optimistic here that funding will be picked up by other sources, but let’s say the nonprofits get more involved programs that in the past and in the purview of the feds, we’re going to be freed of some of that, I hope, and be able to be more subjective, more mixed methods, more on the ground and kind of maturein the, dirt down and dirty out on the streets, learning what’s going on for real humans. As opposed to saying, “Nope, sorry, we can’t even ask whether this program works or how it works until we’ve got thousands and thousands of participants and we can do math about the outcomes.” So that’s one way I think that things might be changing. 5. Evidence + Story = Impact One of the big elements I like to focus on is the evidence—the kind of, so what the program is doing—but also the story. Making sure both of those things are combined to share the impact. And one of the things that I think we aren’t great about, which kind of circles back to the whole topic about equitable relationships. I don’t often think we’re really great at acknowledging. Who our report outs are for 6. The Funder Issue: Who Is This Truly Benefiting? Health Hats: Yes, who’s the audience? Lacy Fabian: Describing the kind of traditional format, I’m going to have thousands of participants, and then I’m going to be able to start to do really fancy math. That audience is a particular player who’s our funder. And they have different needs and different goals. So so many times, but that’s not the same as the people we’re actually trying to help. I think part of actually having equity in practice is pushing our funders to acknowledge that those reports are really just for them. And what else are we doing for our other audiences, and how can we better uphold that with our limited resources? Do we really need that super fancy report that’s going to go on a shelf? And we talk about it a lot, but I think that’s the point. We’re still talking about it. And maybe now that our funding is shifting, it’s an excellent catalyst to start being smarter about who our audience is, what they need, and what’s best to share with them. 7. Dissemination, Implementation & Vested Interest Health Hats: So, in a way, that’s not only do we need to think about who the work is for. How do we get it to those people? So how do we disseminate to those people? And then, what are the motivations for implementation? And it seems to me that if I have a vested interest in the answer to the question, I am more likely to share it and to try to figure out what the habits are—the changing habits that the research guides. What are some examples of this that you’ve, in your experience, that either you feel like you hit it like this, worked, or where you felt like we didn’t quite get there? So, what are your thoughts about some practical examples of that? Kirk Knestis: I was laughing because I don’t have so many examples of the former. I’ve got lots of examples of the latter. Health Hats: So start there. 8. Data Parties – The Concrete Solution Kirk Knestis: A good example of how I’ve done that in the past is when clients are willing to tolerate it. We call them different things over the years, like a data party. What we do is convene folks. We used to do it in person, face-to-face, but now that we’re dealing with people spread out across the country and connected virtually, these meetings can be done online. Instead of creating a report that just sits on a shelf or a thumb drive, I prefer to spend that time gathering and organizing the information we collect into a usable form for our audiences. This acts as a formative feedback process rather than just a summative benchmark. Here’s what we’ve learned. You share the information with those who contributed to it and benefit from it, and you ask for their thoughts. We’re observing that this line follows a certain path. Let’s discuss what that means or review all the feedback we received from this stakeholder group. It’s quite different from what we’ve heard from other stakeholders. What do you think is happening there? And let them help add value to the information as it moves from evidence to results. Health Hats: This is the solution to the funder problem. Instead of writing reports for funders, Kirk brings together the actual stakeholders—the people who provided data and benefit from the program. They assist in interpreting the findings in real-time. It’s formative, not summative. It’s immediate, not shelved. 9. No Strings Attached: Reimagining Funder Relationships Health Hats: I think it’s interesting that a thread through this is the role of the funder and the initiative’s governance. I remember that we worked on a couple of projects. I felt like the funder’s expectations were paramount, and the lessons we learned in the process were less important, which aligns with what we didn’t show. Publication bias or something. Sometimes in these initiatives, what’s most interesting is what didn’t work —and that’s not so, anyway. So how? So now that you’re looking forward to working with organizations that are trying to have questions answered, how is that shaping how you’re coaching about governance of these initiatives? Like, where does that come in? Lacy Fabian: Yeah. I think, if we’re talking about an ideal state, there are models, and it will be interesting to see how many organizations really want to consider it, but the idea of no-strings-attached funding. Doesn’t that sound nice, Kirk? The idea being that if you are the funding organization and you have the money, you have the power, you’re going to call the shots. In that way, is it really fair for you to come into an organization like something that Kirk has and start dictating the terms of that money? So, Kirk has to start jumping through the hoops of the final report and put together specific monthly send-ins for that funder. And he has to start doing these things well for that funder. What if we considered a situation where the funder even paid for support to do that for themselves? Maybe they have somebody who comes in, meets with Kirk, or just follows around, shadows the organization for a day or so, collects some information, and then reports it back. But the idea is that the burden and the onus aren’t on Kirk and his staff. Because they’re trying to repair wheelchairs and imagining the types of models we’ve shifted. We’ve also left the power with Kirk and his organization, so they know how to serve their community best. Again, we’ve put the onus back on the funder to answer their own questions that are their needs. I think that’s the part that we’re trying to tease out in the equity: who is this really serving? And if I’m giving to you, but I’m saying you have to provide me with this in return. Again, who’s that for, and is that really helping? Who needs their wheelchair service? And I think that’s the part we need to work harder at unpacking and asking ourselves. When we have these meetings, put out these funding notices, or consider donating to programs, those are the things we have to ask ourselves about and feel are part of our expectations. 10. Balancing Accountability and Flexibility Health Hats: Wow. What’s going through my mind is, I’m thinking, okay, I’m with PCORI. What do we do? We want valuable results. We do have expectations and parameters. Is there an ideal state? Those tensions are real and not going away. But there’s the question of how to structure it to maximize the value of the tension. Oh, man, I’m talking abstractly. I need help thinking about the people who are listening to this. How does somebody use this? So let’s start with: for the researcher? What’s the mindset that’s a change for the researcher? What’s the mindset shift for the people, and for the funder? Let’s start with the researcher. Either of you pick that up. What do you think a researcher needs to do differently? Kirk Knestis: I don’t mind having opinions about this. That’s a fascinating question, and I want to sort of preface what I’m getting ready to say. With this, I don’t think it’s necessary to assume that, to achieve the valuable things Lacy just described, we must completely abrogate all responsibility. I think it would be possible for someone to say, money, no strings attached. We’re never going to get the board/taxpayer/or whoever, for that. Importantly, too, is to clarify a couple of functions. I found that there are a couple of primary roles that are served by the evaluation or research of social services or health programs, for example. The first and simplest is the accountability layer. Did you do what you said you were going to do? That’s operational. That doesn’t take much time or energy, and it doesn’t place a heavy burden on program stakeholders. Put the burden on the program’s managers to track what’s happening and be accountable for what got done. Health Hats: So like milestones along the way? Kirk Knestis: Yes. But there are other ways, other dimensions to consider when we think about implementation. It’s not just the number of deliveries but also getting qualitative feedback from the folks receiving the services. So, you can say, yeah, we were on time, we had well-staffed facilities, and we provided the resources they needed. So that’s the second tier. The set of questions we have a lot more flexibility with at the next level. The so-what kind of questions, in turn, where we go from looking at this term bugs me, but I’ll use it anyway. We’re looking at outputs—delivery measures of quantities and qualities—and we start talking about outcomes: persistent changes for the stakeholders of whatever is being delivered. Attitudes, understandings. Now, for health outcomes—whatever the measures are—we have much more latitude. Focus on answering questions about how we can improve delivery quality and quantity so that folks get the most immediate and largest benefit from it. And the only way we can really do that is with a short cycle. So do it, test it, measure it, improve it. Try it again, repeat, right? So that formative feedback, developmental kind of loop, we can spend a lot of time operating there, where we generally don’t, because we get distracted by the funder who says, “I need this level of evidence that the thing works, that it scales.” Or that it demonstrates efficacy or effectiveness on a larger scale to prove it. I keep wanting to make quotas, right, to prove that it works well. How about focusing on helping it work for the people who are using it right now as a primary goal? And that can be done with no strings attached because it doesn’t require anything to be returned to the funder. It doesn’t require that deliverable. My last thought, and I’ll shut up. 11. Where the Money Actually Goes Kirk Knestis: A study ages ago, and I wish I could find it again, Lacy. It was in one of the national publications, probably 30 years ago. Health Hats: I am sure Lacy’s going to remember that. Kirk Knestis: A pie chart illustrated how funds are allocated in a typical program evaluation, with about a third going to data collection and analysis, which adds value. Another third covers indirect costs, such as keeping the organization running, computers, and related expenses. The remaining third is used to generate reports, transforming the initial data into a tangible deliverable. If you take that third use much more wisely, I think you can accomplish the kind of things Lacy’s describing without, with, and still maintain accountability. Health Hats: This is GOLD. The 1/3: 1/3: 1/3 breakdown is memorable, concrete, and makes the problem quantifiable. Once again, 1/3 each for data collection and analysis, keeping the organization alive, and writing reports. 12. The Pendulum Swings Lacy Fabian: And if I could add on to what Kirk had said, I think one of the things that comes up a lot in the human services research space where I am is this idea of the pendulum swing. It’s not as though we want to go from a space where there are a lot of expectations for the dollars, then swing over to one where there are none. That’s not the idea. Can we make sure we’re thinking about it intentionally and still providing the accountability? So, like Kirk said, it’s that pause: do we really need the reports, and do we really need the requirements that the funder has dictated that aren’t contributing to the organization’s mission? In fact, we could argue that in many cases, they’re detracting from it. Do we really need that? Or could we change those expectations, or even talk to our funder, as per the Fundee, to see how they might better use this money if they were given more freedom, not to have to submit these reports or jump through these hoops? And I believe that’s the part that restores that equity, too, because it’s not the funder coming in and dictating how things will go or how the money will be used. It’s about having a relational conversation, being intentional about what we’re asking for and how we’re using the resources and then being open to making adjustments. And sometimes it’s just that experimentation: I think of it as, we’re going to try something different this time, we’re going to see if it works. If it doesn’t work, it probably won’t be the end of the world. If it does, we’ll probably learn something that will be helpful for next time. And I think there’s a lot of value in that as well. Health Hats: Lacy’s ‘pendulum swing’ wisdom: not anarchy, but intentional. Not ‘no accountability’ but ‘accountability without burden-shifting.’ The move is from the funder dictating requirements to relational conversation. And crucially: willingness to experiment. 13. The Three Relationships: Funder, Researcher, Community Health Hats: Back to the beginning—relationships. So, in a way, we haven’t really —what we’ve talked about is the relationship with funders. Lacy Fabian: True. Health Hats: What is the relationship between researchers and the community seeking answers? We’re considering three different types of relationships. I find it interesting that people call me about their frustrations with the process, and I ask, “Have you spoken with the program officer?” Have you discussed the struggles you’re facing? Often, they haven’t or simply don’t think to. What do you think they’re paid for? They’re there to collaborate with you. What about the relationships between those seeking answers and those studying them—the communities and the researchers? How does that fit into this? Kirk Knestis: I’d like to hear from Lacy first on this one, because she’s much more tied into the community than the communities I have been in my recent practices. 14. Maintaining Agency Health Hats: I want to wrap up, and so if. Thinking about people listening to this conversation, what do you think is key that people should take away from this that’ll, in, in either of the three groups we’ve been talking about, what is a lesson that would be helpful for them to take away from this conversation? Lacy Fabian: I think that it’s important for the individual always to remember their agency. In their engagements. And so I know when I’m a person in the audience, listening to these types of things, it can feel very overwhelming again to figure out what’s enough, where to start, and how to do it without making a big mistake. I think that all of those things are valid. Most of us in our professional lives who are likely listening to this, we show up at meetings, we take notes. We’re chatting with people, engaging with professional colleagues, or connecting with the community. And I think that we can continue to be intentional with those engagements and take that reflective pause before them to think about what we’re bringing. So if we’re coming into that program with our research hat on, or with our funder hat on, what are we bringing to the table that might make it hard for the person on the other side to have an equitable conversation with us? If you’re worried about whether you’ll be able to keep your program alive and get that check, that’s not a balanced conversation. And so if you are the funder coming in, what can you do to put that at ease or acknowledge it? Suppose you are the person in the community who goes into someone’s home and sees them in a really vulnerable position, with limited access to healthcare services or the things they need. What can you do to center that person, still like in their humanity, and not just this one problem space? And that they’re just this problem because that’s, I think, where we go astray and we lose ourselves and lose our solidarity and connection. So I would just ask that people think about those moments as much as they can. Obviously, things are busy and we get caught up, but finding those moments to pause, and I think it can have that snowball effect in a good way, where it builds and we see those opportunities, and other people see it and they go, Huh, that was a neat way to do it. Maybe I’ll try that too. 15. Listen and Learn Health Hats: Thank you. Kirk. Kirk Knestis: Yeah. A hundred percent. I’m having a tough time finding anything to disagree with what Lacy is sharing. And so I’m tempted just to say, “Yeah, what Lacy said.” But I think it’s important that, in addition to owning one’s agency and taking responsibility for one’s own self, one stands up for one’s own interests. At the same time, that person has to acknowledge that everybody else knows that the three legs of that stool I described earlier have to do the same thing, right? Yeah. So, it’s about a complicated social contract among all those different groups. When the researchers talk to the program participant, they must acknowledge the value of each person’s role in the conversation. And when I, as the new nonprofit manager, am talking to funders, I’ve got to make sure I understand that I’ve got an equal obligation to stand up for my program, my stakeholders, and the ideals that are driving what I’m doing. But at the same time, similarly, respecting the commitment obligation that the funder has made. Because it never stops. The web gets bigger and bigger, right? I had a lovely conversation with a development professional at a community foundation today. And they helped me remember that they are reflecting the interests and wishes of different donor groups or individuals, and there’s got to be a lot of back-and-forth at the end of the day. I keep coming back to communication and just the importance of being able to say, okay, we’re talking about, in our case, mobility. That means this. Are we clear? Everybody’s on the same page. Okay, good. Why is that important? We think that if that gets better, these things will, too. Oh, have you thought about this thing over here? Yeah, but that’s not really our deal, right? So having those conversations so that everybody is using the same lingo and pulling in the same direction, I think, could have a significant effect on all of those relationships. Health Hats: Here’s my list from the listening agency, fear, mistake, tolerance, grace, continual Learning, communication, transparency. Kirk Knestis: and equal dollops of tolerance for ambiguity and distrust of ambiguity. Yes, there you go. I think that’s a pretty good list, Danny. Lacy Fabian: It’s a good list to live by. Health Hats: Thank you. I appreciate this. Reflection Everyone in a relationship faces power dynamics – who's in control and who's not? These dynamics affect trust and the relationship’s overall value, and they can shift from moment to moment. Changing dynamics takes mindfulness and intention. The community wanting answers, the researcher seeking evidence-based answers, and those funding the studies, have a complex relationship. Before this conversation, I focused on the community-research partnership, forgetting it was a triad, not a dyad. The Central Paradox: We have exponentially more information at our disposal for research, yet we’re becoming more disconnected. Lacy identifies this as the core problem: we’ve stopped seeing each other as human beings and lost the touchpoints that enable genuine collaboration—when connection matters most. This is true for any relationship. The Hidden Cost Structure Kirk’s 1/3:1/3:1/3 breakdown is golden—one-third for data collection and analysis (adds value), one-third for organizational operations, and one-third for reports (mostly shelf-ware). The key takeaway: we’re allocating one-third of resources to deliverables that don’t directly benefit the people we’re trying to help. Perhaps more of the pie could be spent on sharing and using results. Three Different “Utilities” Are Competing Kirk explains what most evaluation frameworks hide: funder utility (accountability), research utility (understanding models), and community utility (immediate benefit) are fundamentally different. Until you specify which one you’re serving, you’re likely to disappoint two of the three audiences. Data Parties Solve the Funder Problem Pragmatically. Rather than choosing between accountability and flexibility, data parties and face-to-face analysis let stakeholders interpret findings in real time – the data party. I love that visual. It’s formative, not summative. It’s relational, not transactional. The Funding Question Reverses the Power Dynamic. Currently, funders place the burden of proving impact on programs through monthly reports and compliance documentation. Lacy’s alternative is simpler: what if the funder hired someone to observe the program, gather the information, and report back? This allows the program to stay focused on its mission while the funder gains the accountability they need. But the structure shifts—the program no longer reports to the funder; instead, the funder learns from the program. That’s the difference between equity as a theory and equity as built-in. Related episodes from Health Hats Artificial Intelligence in Podcast Production Health Hats, the Podcast, utilizes AI tools for production tasks such as editing, transcription, and content suggestions. While AI assists with various aspects, including image creation, most AI suggestions are modified. All creative decisions remain my own, with AI sources referenced as usual. Questions are welcome. Creative Commons Licensing CC BY-NC-SA This license enables reusers to distribute, remix, adapt, and build upon the material in any medium or format for noncommercial purposes only, and only so long as attribution is given to the creator. If you remix, adapt, or build upon the material, you must license the modified material under identical terms. CC BY-NC-SA includes the following elements:    BY: credit must be given to the creator.   NC: Only noncommercial uses of the work are permitted.    SA: Adaptations must be shared under the same terms. Please let me know. danny@health-hats.com. Material on this site created by others is theirs, and use follows their guidelines. Disclaimer The views and opinions presented in this podcast and publication are solely my responsibility and do not necessarily represent the views of the Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute®  (PCORI®), its Board of Governors, or Methodology Committee. Danny van Leeuwen (Health Hats)

Your health data belongs to you—but how can you share it safely? Fabienne Bourgeois, MD, exposes the complex truth about privacy, permissions, and data control. Summary According to Fabienne Bourgeois, MD, patients want control over their health data, but privacy preferences and constant changes complicate this. The discussion is relevant to people with disabilities, caregivers, and others navigating complex health information. About 80% of people share common privacy concerns that current systems can't address. The remaining 20% need more detailed controls and customization, though balancing autonomy with privacy remains challenging. Ownership means individuals have the right to participate in research and make informed choices. They need "digital intermediaries"— professionals who assist with data sharing—and genuinely intuitive interfaces. Privacy protections must remain a top priority as health and AI tools continue to develop. Click here to view the printable newsletter with images. More readable than a transcript, which can also be found below. Contents Table of Contents Toggle EpisodeProemWhen Life Throws Your Kid a CurveballEmerging Adults MatterYour Medical Records Called—They're Lost and SeparatedOne Size Fits All? Please!Spoiler: This Affects Way More People Than You'd ThinkCan We Teach Tech to Understand ‘It's Complicated'?All-or-Nothing Privacy: The Sledgehammer ApproachMacGyver Solutions: When Your Software Says ‘No'The Secret Society of People Who Actually CareJuggling Your Mom's Meds and Your Kids' Forms: A Sandwich Generative NightmarePlaying Gatekeeper (Because We're Scared You'll Overshare)80% We Can Solve + 20% That's a NightmareInformed Consent: What If People Actually Understood?Needles in a Haystack: Finding Your 100 People WorldwidePlot Twist: When It's Your Data, Everything ChangesTraining Wheels for Privacy: Teaching People to ChooseThe New Job Nobody's Hired Yet: Your Privacy ConciergeCan We Build This So My Oma Can Use It?Tech's Outrunning Privacy (And We're All Just Watching)ReflectionRelated episodes from Health Hats Please comment and ask questions: at the comment section at the bottom of the show notes on LinkedIn  via email YouTube channel  DM on Instagram, TikTok to @healthhats Substack Patreon Production Team Kayla Nelson: Web and Social Media Coach, Dissemination, Help Desk  Leon van Leeuwen: editing and site management Oscar van Leeuwen: video editing Julia Higgins: Digit marketing therapy Steve Heatherington: Help Desk and podcast production counseling Joey van Leeuwen, Drummer, Composer, and Arranger, provided the music for the intro, outro, proem, and reflection Claude, Perplexity, Auphonic, Descript, Grammarly, DaVinci Podcast episode on YouTube Inspired by and Grateful to:  Alexis and Sara Snyder, Amy and Morgan Gleeson, Fatima Mohammed Ighile, Esosa Ighile, Jill Woodworth, Tomas Moran, Marianne Hudgins Photo Credits for Videos 80/20 by Austin Distel on Unsplash Design flaws by Getty Images on Unsplash Privacy by Hector Reyes on Unsplash Links and references Fabienne Bourgeois, MD LinkedIn and Publications National Center for Medical Legal Partnerships Episode Proem The slogan, “Give Me My Damn Data,” began in 2009 with E-Patient Dave DeBronkart as a call for transparency and control: patients arguing that real involvement in their healthcare needs open access to their personal health information. But once we have our data, what will we do with it? Who will we share it with, and in what situations? What are the personal and technical challenges of managing that sharing? I know enough to be dangerous about data-sharing technology. I do understand the personal and relationship sides of data sharing, though. To learn more, I reached out to my former colleague, Fabienne Bourgeois, an Adolescent Medicine doctor and Associate Chief Medical Information ...

Atoms are the building blocks of our world. Many have been around since right after the Big Bang created the universe nearly 14 billion years ago. And if life on Earth is made of atoms that are from all the way back then... will those atoms keep existing forever? That's what CrowdScience Listener Rob in Australia would like to know. Caroline Steel investigates the immortality of atoms by travelling to CERN, the world's largest particle physics laboratory located along the border of France and Switzerland. There, theoretical physicist Matthew McCullough explains whether the smallest atoms can decay or survive the test of time. Physicist Marco van Leeuwen from Nikhef, the National Particle Physics Laboratory in the Netherlands, gives Caroline a behind-the-scenes tour of the ALICE experiment and the Large Hadron Collider at CERN. She learns how atoms are smashed at incredibly high speeds, and whether that might spell the end of an atom. And all life on earth is made up of atoms, but how does a collection of tiny particles become a living being? Astrobiologist Betül Kaçar from the University of Wisconsin, Madison, breaks down how life works from an atomic point of view. Presenter: Caroline Steel Producer: Imaan Moin Editor: Ben Motley (Photo: Hands cupping a glowing atom in the studio - stock photo. Credit: Paper Boat Creative via Getty Images)

Healthcare AI isn't a tech problem—it's a mirror reflecting how our health system already fails. Uncomfortable truths from Datapalooza 2025. Summary We're asking the wrong questions about AI in healthcare. Instead of debating whether it's good or bad, we need to examine the system-eating-its-tail contradictions we've created: locking away vital data so AI learns from everything except what matters most, demanding transparency from inherently secretive companies, and fearing tools could make us lazy instead of more capable. Privacy teams protect data, tech companies build tools, regulators write rules—everyone's doing their part, but no one steps back to see the whole dysfunctional picture. AI in healthcare isn't a technology problem; it's a mirror reflecting how our health system already falls short with privacy rules that hinder progress, design processes that exclude patients, and institutions that fear transparency more than mediocrity. The real question is whether we're brave enough to fix these underlying problems that AI makes impossible to ignore. Click here to view the printable newsletter with images. More readable than a transcript, which can also be found below. Contents Table of Contents Toggle EpisodeProemParadox, Irony, Catch 22Burying the Treasure to Keep It SafeBias, Treating the Chart, Not the PatientCircular Dependence, Chasing Your TailIt Doesn't Have to Make Sense.Throwing Out the Baby with the BathwaterClear as MudRedistricting to DemocratizeHumanize Through the Looking GlassDriving while looking into the Rearview MirrorA Million Interns Working for YouWhat Keeps Me Up at Night About AI?ReflectionRelated episodes from Health Hats Please comment and ask questions: at the comment section at the bottom of the show notes on LinkedIn  via email YouTube channel  DM on Instagram, TikTok to @healthhats Production Team Kayla Nelson: Web and Social Media Coach, Dissemination, Help Desk  Leon van Leeuwen: editing and site management Oscar van Leeuwen: video editing Julia Higgins: Digit marketing therapy Steve Heatherington: Help Desk and podcast production counseling Joey van Leeuwen, Drummer, Composer, and Arranger, provided the music for the intro, outro, proem, and reflection Claude, Perplexity, Auphonic, Descript, Grammarly, DaVinci Podcast episode on YouTube Inspired by and Grateful to:  Christine Von Raesfeld, Mike Mittleman, Ame Sanders, Mark Hochgesang, Kathy Cocks, Eric Kettering, Steve Labkoff, Laura Marcial, Amy Price, Eric Pinaud, Emily Hadley. Links and references Academy Health's Datapalooza 2025  Innovation Unfiltered: Evidence, Value, and the Real-World Journey of Transforming Health Care Tableau  a visual analytics platform Practical AI in Healthcare podcast hosted by Steven Labkoff, MD Episode Proem Here's the thing about AI in healthcare—it's like that friend who offers to help you move, then shows up with a sports car. The Iron Woman meant well, but it doesn't quite meet your actual needs. I spent September 5th at Academy Health's 2025 Datapalooza conference about AI in healthcare, 'Innovation Unfiltered: Evidence, Value, and the Real-World Journey of Transforming Health Care. a is Academy Health's strongest conference for people with lived experience. I'm grateful to Academy Health for providing me with a press pass, which enabled me to attend the conference. I talked to attendees about how they use AI in their work and what keeps them up at night about AI. I recorded some of those conversations and the panels I attended. When I listened to the raw footage, I heard terrible recordings filled with crowd noise and loud table chatter, like dirty water spraying out of a firehose. Aghast, I thought, what is the story here? I was stumped. How can I make sense of this? I had to deliver something. So, here's how I use AI in my work as a podcaster/vlogger.

Letters beat emails for trustworthiness. A gullible skeptic reflects on navigating trust in a 50-year marriage, and the energy cost of distrust. Click here to view the printable newsletter with images. More readable than a transcript, which can also be found below. Please comment and ask questions: at the comment section at the bottom of the show notes on LinkedIn  via email YouTube channel  DM on Instagram, TikTok to @healthhats Production Team Kayla Nelson: Web and Social Media Coach, Dissemination, Help Desk  Leon van Leeuwen: editing and site management Oscar van Leeuwen: video editing Julia Higgins: Digital marketing therapy Steve Heatherington: Help Desk and podcast production counseling Joey van Leeuwen, Drummer, Composer, and Arranger, provided the music for the intro, outro, proem, and reflection Podcast episode on YouTube Episode Dear Listener and Reader, I thought I'd start writing you letters. I miss letters. I send cards thanking my guests for their participation. People universally appreciate getting something via snail mail. But cards aren't letters. They're preformatted notes, where I just change the image and the name. For giggles, I looked back at my very first blog post, July 31, 2012. It was a paragraph, a letter of sorts, short and simple, Improv and Best Health. It's taking me longer to produce each episode. So, no more frequently than once a month. So, why not a letter, short and sweet, from time to time? Let's start with trust. A letter feels more trustworthy than an email or a tweet. It's signed; a person who writes a letter really wants to communicate and thinks about what they're saying. So, perhaps, not a troll, more trustworthy. I always open letters. My immediate, momentary, default reaction to almost anything is trust. My kids say I'm gullible. My next instant reaction is skepticism. I think about what's not true about whatever. ‘AI is the solution to everything.' What do you mean, everything? What is AI anyway? Like that. I've been married for 50 years because at our core, my wife and I trust each other. We disagree, we misunderstand, we anger, I sulk. Yet we trust. On the other hand, I make stuff up. I misremember, create a story, and if it serves my purposes, stick with it or modify it as needed. My wife and grandkids are my fact-checkers. Still, we trust each other. In my personal life, trust isn't an on-or-off switch, all or nothing. Well, not usually. It's a matter of degree; it's about something. I trust that I can count on you to be there for me, unless you can't. I trust that you'll return my call, unless you're hurt, don't feel like it, or missed it. Distrust sucks energy; be more careful with my words, self-censor, close my heart and mind. I don't expect to trust everybody or everything. When I do trust, it's priceless. Thanks for listening, I'll be back. Related episodes from Health Hats https://health-hats.com/improv-and-health/ https://health-hats.com/pod113/ https://health-hats.com/trust-willing-to-be-vulnerable-worth-the-investment/ Artificial Intelligence in Podcast Production Health Hats, the Podcast, utilizes AI tools for production tasks such as editing, transcription, and content suggestions. While AI assists with various aspects, including image creation, most AI suggestions are modified. All creative decisions remain my own, with AI sources referenced as usual. Questions are welcome. Creative Commons Licensing CC BY-NC-SA This license enables reusers to distribute, remix, adapt, and build upon the material in any medium or format for noncommercial purposes only, and only so long as attribution is given to the creator. If you remix, adapt, or build upon the material, you must license the modified material under identical terms. CC BY-NC-SA includes the following elements:    BY: credit must be given to the creator.