Podcasts about Leeuwen

Less, more frequently. Keeping my glorious subscribers up to date on some changes. Click here to view the printable newsletter. More readable than a transcript. Summary 600 blog posts and 250 podcast episodes in. I’m making a change. Production runs 50-60 hours per episode — unsustainable, even though I love every minute. In this trike-ride solo episode, I share what’s pulling my time: co-founding Trust My Own Health (a new startup, weekly one-screen newsletter ), co-leading an endometriosis series with Phee, and playing more baritone sax. The plan going forward: shorter, more frequent Health Hats episodes — 15-minute check-ins instead of long-form deep dives. Recorded live on a trike at 6:30 am, because that’s how I do things. Episode Okay, hello. How you doing? I’m back on my trike. It’s like 65, supposed to be 90 today. Maybe it’s 6:30 in the morning. I’m wearing a long-sleeve shirt just ’cause it’s a little cool, but not too bad. Anyway, good to be out here with you. So let’s see, what am I thinking about? I’m thinking I’m gonna make a change to my podcast. I thought I would take a moment with my most avid longtime followers. Thank you very much. ‘Cause I’ve been overwhelmed by my long-form podcasting. It’s taking 50 to 60 hours to do an episode. It’s just ridiculous. Actually, I enjoy every minute, but it’s too many minutes. And so let me tell you why it’s too many minutes and what my plan is going forward. I’m co-founding a startup, Trust My Own Health. And I will include a link to that ’cause I would love for you all to learn about it and subscribe to yet another Danny thing, a weekly one-screen newsletter. But anyway, this is taking a lot of my time, and I’m really enjoying it. I feel like it’s actually a culmination of my whole career, my whole life in healthcare, and I really wanna put the time in it. We’re in the raising money stage. And I’m actually, for the first time, feeling like we can do this and we’re getting ready to do this, and I wanna put in the time. But I don’t wanna stop doing Health Hats, the podcast, ’cause I love it. So I’m thinking about doing more frequent, like 15-minute things like this, just talking to you about life and health and what’s going on. And then meanwhile, What’s also happening is that I’ve been working with Phee, who is a person. with some very serious endometriosis. And over the past couple of years, my awareness of endometriosis has grown. Phee uses the pronouns they and him. So Phee wants to tell their story, and it’s a great story. I suggested that they co-lead the series about it. We’ve met a few times on Zoom, and we’re in the process of inviting a couple of guests. I see this as a series that will come out when it comes out. But I think I’m gonna– I think we are gonna put it out in half-hour bursts, just to go with the getting used to shorter, more frequent bursts. And actually, I’m spending a lot more time playing music, which I love. So again, it’s squeezing the podcast time, hence the change. I’m delighted to hear what you think of that, and you all have been with me through thick and thin for a lot of years. So this is probably the 600th episode since I started the blog, and we’re at 250 for the podcast. So there you have it. We’ll see you later 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: 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 Claude, Perplexity, Auphonic, Descript, Grammarly, DaVinci Resolve, DaVinci AI Art Generator, OpenArt AI Creator Studio Inspired by and Grateful to: Steve Heatherington, Tania Marien, Heidi Frei, Jane Beddall, Matt Neil, Phee Marcial 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)

Anthropic treft een schikking van 1,5 miljard dollar, nadat het bedrijf miljoenen boeken zonder toestemming gebruikte om AI-modellen te trainen. Uit onderzoek van techredacteur Niels Kooloos blijkt dat ook bekende Nederlandse titels, zoals ‘Het diner’ van Herman Koch en ‘De ontdekking van de hemel’, in de gebruikte databanken voorkomen, waardoor Nederlandse auteurs via het Amerikaanse systeem aanspraak kunnen maken op een vergoeding. Minister van Justitie en Veiligheid David van Weel voert de druk op om topcrimineel Jos Leijdekkers, alias Bolle Jos, uitgeleverd te krijgen uit Sierra Leone. Samen met Ghana en Liberia werkt Nederland aan een regionale coalitie tegen cocaïnesmokkel, met scanners op luchthavens en een permanent secretariaat, maar volgens Afrika-correspondent Sophie van Leeuwen staan corruptie en lokale belangen in de weg bij een snelle uitlevering. Goed nieuws voor alle koffie liefhebbers. Uit nieuw onderzoek van de American Heart Association blijkt namelijk dat 400 milligram cafeïne per dag - zo'n 5 kopjes per dag - goed voor je is. De wetenschappers leggen zelfs een verband tussen cafeïne en een betere gezondheid van het hart Deze omschrijving is met AI gemaakt en gecontroleerd door een BNR-redacteur. Over deze podcast BNR Nieuws Vandaag is de podcast met daarin BNR Ochtendnieuws en BNR Avondnieuws. Je krijgt ’s ochtends vroeg en aan het einde van de werkdag in 20 minuten het belangrijkste nieuws van de dag. Abonneer je via bnr.nl/podcast/bnrnieuwsvandaag, de BNR-app, Spotify en Apple Podcasts. Of luister elke dag live via bnr.nl/live.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

As a nurse with MS, I’m interviewed about AI’s real role in care: pattern recognition, human-in-the-loop skepticism, and the Three T’s and Two C’s framework. Click here to view the printable newsletter. More readable than a transcript. Click here for a verbatim transcript Summary I sit in the guest chair on Practical AI in Healthcare with Steve Labkoff. I walk through my experience feeding my own symptom logs, lab results, and ten years of clinician notes into an AI LLM: a physical therapy referral I needed and hadn’t scheduled, a medication side effect my neurologist later confirmed, and a rating scale buried in my chart that no one had surfaced. I describe the less impressive side: the four-pound box of unsorted paper my primary care practice mailed me and the 296 pages of unsearchable PDFs I got back from another system in fifteen minutes. Along the way, I lay out my framework for judging any digital health tool, the Three T’s and Two C’s: time, trust, talk, control, and connection, and explain why I insist on keeping humans in the loop even though the research on that is more complicated than people assume. This isn’t a pitch for AI in healthcare. It’s a working nurse and patient’s honest field report. What’s your experience been feeding your own health data into an AI LLM? Tell us in the comments. Episode Transcript Proem I usually ask the questions. This time I'm the guest. I met Drs. Steve Labkoff and Leon Rozenblit a couple of years ago at a DCI Network conference. They host Practical AI in Healthcare, a show I've listened to steadily, though it creates more tension for me than any other podcast I keep coming back to. Usually, I jettison podcasts that do that. I stay with this one because I approach AI in healthcare the way I approach best health; I'm an N of one and resist generalizing, while most guests do a fair amount of it. I bristle at most of them, wanting the shades of gray that reflect deep understanding. In four of 33 episodes, the guest has had lived experience: ePatient Dave DeBronkart, Amy Price, Hugo Campos, and me. I invited Steve and Leon to join my virtual Reckoning group, which I've hosted since 2019. We give podcasters warm critiques of selected episodes: the kind of feedback you give when you've made a hundred mistakes yourself, can spot them quickly in someone else's cut, and have endless thoughts about production, audience, dissemination, and life. They took the critique well. When Steve later asked me to come on his show to talk about how I use AI, not the theory but the daily grind, I readily agreed. They let me publish it here unchanged, apart from this Proem and Reflection. I struggled to prepare for this conversation. I wanted to wear all my hats, but had to narrow my focus to two. I chose my lived experience and nurse hats. Underneath it all was the question I keep circling back to. Not a cure. Best health, the most function, and Hello, and welcome to this week’s edition of Practical AI in Healthcare. My name is Dr. Steven Lapcoff, and this week I’m actually on my own because my partner, Dr. Leon Rosenblatt, is actually on spring break with his kids, so I am covering for him and he’ll be back in the next week. This week we have a guest who we met at a conference in Boston a few months ago at the Beth Israel at the DCI network. Steven Labkoff: We have Danny van Leeuwen. Danny is a nurse. He has background in giving actual physical care to patients. He actually runs his own podcast called Health Hats, the Podcast, and he’s been using AI in both his personal life and in his professional life very extensively. Also, Danny has a significant medical condition, and I’ll let him explain that in the course of the discussion because it’s with that lens that we got introduced at our patient-centric AI conference, and that’s why we thought it’d be a good idea to have Danny come and have a chat with us. So welcome to the podcast, Danny. How are you today? Health Hats: I’m good. Thank you. Thanks for having me. I appreciate it. Steven Labkoff: So Danny, as you probably have heard because you’ve helped us with our podcast, and for that I want to say thank you. For those who are listening in, Danny runs actually a group that actually helps folks running podcasts improve their podcasts, and he’s had Leon and I on many times to listen to critiques and feedback, and it’s been very, very helpful. Danny, we often start our podcast with asking for folks’ origin stories, like how did they get their cape and their superhero tights. What did you do to get you to this point in your life? And just tell us the background of what brought you here. Health Hats: Oh, thanks. So I’m a child of Holocaust survivors, and my parents– when I was young, my parents were active in the civil rights and fair housing movement in the ’60s. And when I was 16 and I was thinking about the war in Vietnam and worried about getting drafted, I wanted to learn what I could learn about the draft and how I could protect myself and manage. And I went to a church in downtown Detroit, and I went for a session of draft counseling as, you know, a little precocious at 16, and I found it fascinating, and they found me fascinating, and they encouraged me to become a draft counselor. And so I, uh, I actually took their course and became a draft counselor, and what I learned is that you change systems from the inside, not the outside. And I learned how the sausage was made, and that, uh, really pointed me in a direction. The way I got into nursing is really because I didn’t want to cut my hair I had an opportunity for a job at one point, and I could have read water meters or become an aide at the Detroit Psychiatric Institute. And reading water meters paid more, but I didn’t wanna cut my hair, so I got the job as, as nurse’s aide. And while I was there, they introduced me to the idea of going to nursing school, which was amazing. Steven Labkoff: It was more– You got paid more to read meters, water meters, than you did- Health Hats: Yes. Steven Labkoff: That’s unbelievable. Life gives you some real interesting turns and twists, doesn’t it? Health Hats: It does. And I was really fortunate because my first jobs in nursing were in physical rehabilitation and home care. I just happened to be in a place where the Holyoke Visiting Nurses was dying to hire a guy, and I was a brand-new nurse, and they ended up hiring me. And so my first introduction to nursing was not in acute care. It was in home care, and actually, I was the first male public health nurse in Western Massachusetts in 1976. And really, what I learned there was that most healthcare does not occur in the medical system. It occurs outside the medical system. And so when I ended up getting into medical care, it was always so interesting to me that everybody there thought this is where, you know, health happened, which it doesn’t. So over the 20 years of working as a nurse, I’ve worked in, other than the rehab and home care, I’ve worked in the emergency department, I’ve worked in ICU, I worked in pediatrics, behavioral health. And after about 15, 20 years, I shifted from becoming a student of individual health to a student o- of organizational health. And what I mean by that is I got into performance improvement. I led a couple of electronic health record implementations. I had a couple of gigs in the C-suite. I did some consulting. Now, in 2009, I was diagnosed with multiple sclerosis, and when I was diagnosed, I learned that I had had it for 25 years. And since my father died young, he died at 45 when I was 19 of his second heart attack, and so every time I would have some kind of episode, I would get a cardiac workup. And by the time the cardiac workup was done, you know, the episode was over, and this went on two, three, four times a year for a long time. And there was a pattern there, and nobody was connecting the dots for 25 years. That’s very important to me because the pattern of what was going on was in my records for 25 years, but nobody had synthesized it. Steven Labkoff: Yeah, they may have been biased, right? Because of your family history and having these episodes, you know, as a clinician, you get very biased by family history, and that can actually lead you down roads which may not be correct, and it sounds like that’s precisely what happened with you. Health Hats: So I’ve– I wanna bring in the caregiver role because I have been a caregiver for my grandmother, my mother, and a son in their end-of-life journeys. So I’ve been on many sides of very difficult decisions. As you said, that my shtick is health hats, and I’m health hats because I’m a patient, I’m a caregiver, I’m a nurse, I’m an advocate, I’m an informaticist, I’m a podcast host. I wear a lot of hats. And wearing many hats has gotten me a seat at many tables because they can check off boxes. When it was really different to be bringing patients o-on board, I was an easy choice. Uh, I was at the table for technical expert panels at CMS, at National Academy of Medicine, at AHRQ, National Quality Forum, PCORI, Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute. But really, I wasn’t really there in it for the seat itself. My goal was always to open seats for people who weren’t there yet Now let’s build the bridge, since this is a podcast about AI, let’s build that little bit of that bridge. So my first, like, serious experience with– Well, I don’t know about my first. I was involved in something that you probably are familiar with, which was the Blue Button Plus program, and my goal in that, I was there both as a patient and as somebody who was working with people with disabilities. I, I was VP of quality for an organization that supported about 40,000 people with disabilities. And my goal for that couple of years of weekly or every other week, I can’t remember, calls was, uh, to add a f- a caregiver field to the data set, and to also introduce the idea that what people needed was information that would be able to say what works for me when I’m in pain and what works for me when I’m afraid, which was an issue for me, and it was an issue for the organization that I was working with at the time. Now, I have to say that the caregiver field got added, so I felt some success in that. But as a nurse leader in the informatics group I was part of, really they were only interested in putting a name in the field, not doing anything with that information, which I- Just collecting, so just collecting the data. Steven Labkoff: They didn’t care what the data was used for? Is that what you’re saying? Health Hats: Correct. Yeah. And I couldn’t– got no traction on the pain and fear, which now that I’m older, I understand why, how difficult that is. Nevertheless, it’s something that’s important to patients and caregivers. So I think I would close this section with that I am both an early adopter of technology and a rapid skeptic, that I’m kinda making this number up, but I’ve probably tried over 100 health apps, and I would say that I’ve used five more than three times. And so I think there’s a gap between what’s promised with digital technology and what’s useful for people. So that’s really why I’m here and what’s guiding for me in this. Steven Labkoff: So let’s take it to the next step. In our prequel, I didn’t even know about your personal background to that degree. Mm-hmm. We can take that one offline later about the Holocaust survivor issues. We, we have family, I have family in that same situation, frankly. Let’s change gears and talk about the challenges that you’ve seen. You opened the door a little bit on that a few minutes ago- Yeah … in terms of people wanting to collect data but not necessarily doing much with the data, not being able to understand the true value of the data to some degree. And you said it yourself, people weren’t connecting the dots. Medical records have always been complicated. They’ve always been bulky. They’ve always been full of information, some of which is really relevant, a lot of which is not so relevant, and connecting the dots to making that a, uh, an important information source is not always an obvious task. So what, what was the particular angle on that challenge that you were trying to gun at? Health Hats: Well, I think we have to take a step back- and think about what is– Well, I’m just gonna speak for myself, okay? I know that I often, you know, as I said, I get asked to sit at the table because people can, you know, check boxes, like is that I’m a patient. I wanna be clear that I’m a privileged white old man with MS living in Boston, but I’m an N of one, and I don’t represent other patients. I’m representing myself here and my perspectives. My goal in terms of my health is best health, and what I mean by best health is optimal health and function, physical, mental, spiritual. Not a cure, but best health for where I am, what I have right now. And to get there, I need my own health data, not just what’s in my clinician’s chart, but what I know about myself, my circumstances, my environment, my history, my habits. Not just my medical history, my life history, my treatment responses. And so that’s like patient-reported data, and that’s stuff that’s only exists because I observe it and sometimes I record it And that’s where it falls apart right away. You were just alluding to some of it, that there’s all this medical data and what’s useful about that. I think Dave DeBronkart was a guest on your show. And when he launched his Gimme My Damn Data campaign, I responded to him with, “Watch what you wish for. You’ll be trying to drink dirty water from a fire hose.” And, and that was years ago, and it’s still true. So six months ago, I, I’d been on a mission to gather my medical data, and my– I’d been with my, uh, primary care practice since 2011, and I wanted all that data from 2011 to 2025. This was, like, in December I started on this crusade of trying to get my data. And actually, two months later, I got a box, a four-pound box of paper, and it was paper that was not in chronological order. And it’s just sitting right here. I’ve scanned it in. It’s not, um- Was it in– Steven Labkoff: Was it a printout of Epic or something, or was it actual- Health Hats: It’s a computer printout. It seems like it’s a vendor that they use to- Steven Labkoff: It wasn’t digital. They sent you, literally sent you a box of paper. Health Hats: Yeah, it was a box of paper. Oh. And then I use a lot the, the Beth Israel Lahey Mount Auburn system, and I asked for the last three months of my records, and I got 296 pages of redundant, non-searchable PDFs, and I got that in 15 minutes. Uh, I see a lot of doctors, so maybe I had seen Hmm. I think I had maybe eight or nine visits, and it just happened to be a three-month period that was busy for me, but I got s- 296 pages. And so that really adds to your comment, which is that access to data and access to usable data are really different. Steven Labkoff: Oh, absolutely. And yeah, I’ll tell you, in my world, I think you know that I’ve worked in the life sciences for many, many years, and we are consumers of healthcare data on many levels. We consume medical claims, we consume electronic medical records, and one of the hardest things about using medical records for research or for outcome studies and things like that is the very fact you’re describing, which is the data tends to be sparse, it tends to be poorly organized. It doesn’t always come in an encoded fashion. Thank God most of what we get these days is at least digital. No boxes of paper for us these days, but it wasn’t so long ago that when it was all paper, we couldn’t get that data in the first place. It just wasn’t even gettable. So at least you’ve made some progress. And- Yeah … yeah, I know that you sit on some national level boards, uh, around outcomes, and you can talk about that in a moment. But those are, you know, those boards are trying very hard to come up with outcome studies and ways of– Let me back that up. They’re coming up with ways of using data to perform outcome studies by harmonizing and, and distilling down to usable forms of this EHR data, which is so challenging. Health Hats: I think what’s key, I– like I, I think I w- I’d like to focus on my data. And so what I wanna do is I wanna see patterns. I wanna see patterns that takes my circumstances, my environment, my habits, my treatment over time, and because I think that these patterns are how I formulate the right questions, so the right questions before I go into a clinical encounter. They’re how I track when something is actually working, and it helps me to coordinate across care teams that don’t talk to each other and make decisions that I can live with that help me attain this goal of best health. So that’s the job, formulate better questions, g- seek better answers, make better decisions. And AI is the tool that I try to use to do it. Now, whether it’s up to the task or not is different. I wanna stick in the nursing angle, if you don’t mind- You know, one of the things that I learned the way I got started in nursing is that my goal as a nurse was to put myself out of a job. Steven Labkoff: So that sounds counterintuitive, but what I mean is from minute one with a patient and family, I’m planning my exit. Like, and to do that, I need maximum face time. I need real present, real conversation, real relationships, not less charting. I was gonna say not charting, not documentation, so that’s just ridiculous. Health Hats: But less, you know. The way you do that, I think, is, you know, less charting, less documentation, you know, not hunting through information you can’t find. And that’s where nursing, that’s a genuine promise. So pattern recognition across specific cohorts of patients. So as a nurse, even though I worked a lot of different places, in each place I worked, there was commonalities. In– When I lived in West Virginia and I was an ER nurse in a super rural hospital, if I had had more information about my patients, their families, I could get– an AI could help me surface those patterns that exist for the people that I’m taking care of, I think I could get time back as a nurse. And if the nurse gets time back, then the patient and family gets the presence of the clinician. So that’s the trade that I’m interested in I wanna go back to that thing about pain and fear. I wanna add what I’ve learned working on the blue button, plus I wanna add cognition. So when you think about it, the data almost never captures the variability of pain, fear, and cognition, and those things are really important because pain changes what you can do and what you can decide. Fear closes your heart. It closes your mind. And so when you’re scared in a clinical encounter, you’re not making good decisions. You’re just saying yes to end it. And cognition is, you know, it varies. Like I can absorb better at 10 in the morning on a good day compared to 3:00 in the afternoon when I’m spent. You know, you could extrapolate this to other people. They have their own particular patterns and circumstances. But I think What I’m trying to get at in all of this is it isn’t first about the data, it’s first about what about life and what about the things that are important to people, uh, patients, caregivers, and the clinicians that they partner with, and how can AI help them? Steven Labkoff: So you’ve explained to me in the pre-call that you’re doing some of this work, so maybe you can unpack a little bit about what it is you’re actually doing with it and how it’s helping or, in some cases, not helping those efforts. Health Hats: Well, what have I done? I, I’ve done different things. One of the things that, that I’ve done is to try to build my toolkit. You know? So when I say build my toolkit, I’m a, I’m a, a conglomeration of symptoms. I mean, you know, I’m, I’m not MS, I’m not my symptoms, but they’re big and they’re there, and I feel like I’m trying to, I’m trying to figure out for anything that I have to deal with, whether it’s any of the different kinds of pains I have, my, my anxiety, my bladder, you know, my mobility, I have challenges, and I, I need a toolbox. I need a toolbox, and the way I think is I need at least three things that will work so that when they happen, I got something I can go do, and pretty much the most common thing is drink water. Drink water is by far the most successful intervention across all of my symptoms. It’s kind of amazing. It’s so cheap, so easy. It isn’t the drugs. Okay, but so how do I do that? Well, for me, I’ve done that partially just in my head. Partially I’ve done that by keeping lists. Like, I keep track of the steps I take. I keep track of the amount of time I play music. I keep track of my falls. I keep track of my weight. And so I use digital tools to do that when I can. Steven Labkoff: I also record my clinician visits because- When you say record, do you mean like audio record or dig- Health Hats: Yeah. Yeah, audio record, right. And, uh, until recently I used Abridge, which is a company that, um- Steven Labkoff: How did you get to use Abridge? You– I thought Abridge was only selling basically into doctor’s offices, uh, from the clinician side. Do you- Health Hats: So I was before that. Ah. And they started as a patient-facing product, and actually they sponsored my podcast for three years. So I was pre that. So putting all that together, so I play with, you know, trying to put into Claude There’s nothing magic or special. You know, it’s me playing, just trying stuff. You know, some of it, you know, my wife will say, “Hey,” she sees a pattern. My kids will see a pattern, or I’ll- Steven Labkoff: Give, give, give us an example of what, of what this looks like. I mean, you’re saying you’re giving Claude or another LLM- Yeah … a series of symptoms, or you’re giving it a series of, plus your data. Like, unpack it and let us know. Yeah. What have you did- Okay, so what- … with the system, and how is it working for you? Health Hats: I’ve done a couple of different things. One is, you know, I have a spreadsheet, and I just put the spreadsheet in, you know, as a document or whatever you call it when you have a project and, you know, you load. I load my spreadsheet. I keep a annual summary, and I keep the year that I’m working on. And I will have fits of journaling. You know, I, this is not something that I am, like, super consistent on, but I’ll, especially when I’m struggling with something, if I’m struggling with my blood pressure or I’m struggling with my mood. I have a progressive mobility thing going on, and I’ll put that in and I’ll prompt. I’ll say, “Can you– do you see a pattern in this?” You know, and I’ve gotten, you know, that there’s- Steven Labkoff: Has it given you some insights? Is it… Like, give me an example of some of the insights it’s actually given you that you didn’t see yourself. Health Hats: Well, I’ve gotten, like, uh, it’s kind of humorous. But, but I’ve gotten, like, you know, “Have you thought about seeing a physical therapist?” And I, I have. You know, I have a physical therapist, uh, that I don’t go to very often. You know, my relationship with her is I go for a tune-up. But they’ll– I, I want– It’ll show, like, I’ll do my sort of things are clearly, you know, I’m not walking as far, I’ve fell on a few times, you know, and I’ll get this suggestion, you know. I also– What else have I done? Oh, oh, uh, once I had a medication that I was taking for neuropathy, and I was– my mood had, like, changed considerably and, you know, I got a thing on that might be a side effect. You know, “Have you talked to your doctor about this?” Steven Labkoff: And I- And you got that out of the LLM? You fed that to the LLM? Health Hats: I did. Yeah. Steven Labkoff: And it suggested it was a side effect, which you didn’t figure out. Health Hats: I didn’t. A neurologist said that he thought– He said, “It sounds like you have an allergy to it.” And, you know, he wanted it to be listed as an allergy because he thought it was very possible that he’s had people that have had a problem. Steven Labkoff: When you tell me that you’ve loaded your data, you give the LLM your signs, your symptoms, you give it your labs, you give it what’s in, in the system, and it comes up with a recommendation that you hadn’t thought– Now, you’re a clinician. You’re a nurse. Yeah. You’ve been a nurse for many, many decades. Health Hats: 50 years. Steven Labkoff: 50 years. And does it surprise you that it comes up with stuff that you didn’t see? Health Hats: No. Steven Labkoff: Cause I, to be honest with you- I- … if I, if I did what you just said and it came up with something completely radical that I’d never thought of and it was right- I would be scratching my head and thinking, “Okay, that’s in- that’s beyond interesting. I better pay more attention to this, and maybe I wanna use it differently.” Because not, it’s not just yous using it. Like, people around everywhere are starting to use it for the same, in the same sim- in the same exact way. So that’s the simplification of the medical system, right? Health Hats: It does. I mean, like when I tell my neurologist, he laughs, and he’s like a whatever works kinda guy, you know? That he feels like he doesn’t have all the answers, and that he likes- those stories. I feel like I’ve learned, I think you know Amy Price, right? Steven Labkoff: Yeah, very well. Health Hats: Yeah. We’re buddies. And so one of the things that I’ve learned from her is how to query and how to be skeptical and how to ask questions from different angles, from different perspectives so that you– And that’s why I think that’s where the unexpected comes up. Steven Labkoff: Well, you’re describing something that we did at the conference. I don’t know if you were in the room in the working group that we did this on, but you’re describing, and actually we’re submitting a paper on it very shortly, on AI literacy. Yeah. And you, you didn’t label it as such, but you’re describing yourself as being AI literate and understanding how to use the tools, most importantly, how to be skeptical of the answers, how to interpret the information that’s being presented to you. Health Hats: A- and that, those are all components of literacy, of AI literacy specifically. One of the things I’m finding in my world is that painfully few people are indeed AI literate. Even the folks in IT departments in large life science companies or hospitals who even work in the space and think that they’re good at it and are literate sometimes are not. That has other implications, which are if people are taking on these really impressively powerful tools and they don’t quite know how to use them as well as they should, and if they query them incorrectly, to your point earlier about making good queries, the responses that come out may or may not be the point. And if patients use that information inappropriately because they didn’t know how to ask the right questions to start with, that could have deep implications to the healthcare system. You could say that same thing about doctors. Steven Labkoff: I will say it about doctors. I mean, not about AI, about the advice that doctors give. Health Hats: There’s a, a tremendous variation, and it is very different. When I am feeling good enough to be organized and to be directive in the conversation with a clinician, I get a very different output than when I’m not. And I still have to be skeptical of what doctors tell me, and until I build some trust. And, and then I, you know, then there’s just too many decisions to make when you’re a person with chronic illness. It’s like putting in a kitchen. There’s so many decisions to make, and I’m happy for the doctors that I trust to make the decisions for me. But there are certain decisions I don’t want to give to the doctor or to AI, like I don’t wanna mess with my pathological optimism. I wanna progress as slowly as possible, and I wanna keep playing my horn. These are really important things to me, and I don’t give those decisions that affect that, I don’t give up. But all the rest of it I do, and, and I’ve worked really hard to build the team that I have that appreciates me and my strangeness and my assertiveness, and, you know, they’re not threatened by it. Steven Labkoff: Is your team AI literate? Do they also use the, these same tools in your care? Health Hats: Uh, like I don’t know. I mean, AI literate is like, is huge. You know? I mean, that’s just such a big thing. Do they use AI? Yes. Do I know how they use AI? Well, you know, they use what’s attached to Epic. I know that. Uh, I mean, look, my neurologist, who I just love, he thinks like he uses, he uses the portal well because he takes– he just keeps adding things to the end of the, a note. Yeah. And so he feels like… Well, I don’t find his notes at all useful, and I tell him that. I tell him, “What I really wanna know is, how am I doing? Am I getting better? Am I getting worse? Am I stable? What should I be paying attention to in the next six months till I see you again?” And I can’t find that in his note. That’s true. Yeah. Now, on the other hand, I’ve taken his note and asked Claude and say, “Here’s the note. How am I doing? You know, have I progressed? H-how is he measuring it?” Oh, well, then I find he’s using this scale, right? And it’ll come up with looking through this note, which is like 10 years running, and it’ll find, I can’t remember the name of it, but there’s a scale that he uses. And then we go back and I’ll say to him, “Oh, you’re using this scale.” And he goes, “Yeah.” And I say, “Well, why don’t you like put that at the top of your note?” You know, so that I can find it. You know, so we have that kind of conversation- Yeah … that AI has helped. Steven Labkoff: Well, that’s actually an interesting perspective that AI is helping to reorganize things, ’cause one of the use cases that has been discussed at, at length actually, and it was discussed at our conference, is using AI to digest medical records. Health Hats: And when I say digest, it’s not about like ingesting them, which is slightly different, but digesting, which means find all the different pieces, put them together, come up with a narrative that summarizes perhaps 300 pages of information which may be sparse and may be poorly organized, and bring it all together. And that’s actually a task that AI is actually turning out to be pretty darn good at. And that again changes the nature of the healthcare system and the healthcare journey. You know- And it does a fair job. You say it’s really good at it. So- It’s better than I could do. It’s better than I could do. Well, yes. Well, you’re not– First of all, that’s not your training, and you don’t have the time for it. And you still have to review it. Yeah, of course. Because I have never used AI that gave me a, “Oh, this is great.” I mean, the first time I read it pretty much every time I think it’s amazing. And then, you know, my rule is sleep on it and check it again. And then it’s like, oh my God, this, first of all, it either just said nothing very fancy or it got some very basic things wrong. And then I’ll say, “Oh, you know, you missed this and you missed that.” And it’ll go, “Oh, you’re right, I did.” You know? Steven Labkoff: Well, that also speaks to the concept of keeping a human in the loop- Yeah which is something that you espouse and many folks in the healthcare aisle- I do … espouse. Ironically, you know Adam Rodman, I think. He was at our conference, he spoke. Yeah. Uh, he’s done a study which shows actually having a human in the loop in some cases actually makes the conclusions worse, believe it or not. Ah. Which is w- a non-intuitive finding. You would think that the two together would be better than either one alone, but so that’s, that’s now relatively n- well, it’s not even that new anymore. That information came out about a year ago. So I, we gotta start wrapping up in a few minutes here. Yeah. You know, we didn’t cover the concept around outcomes around your three T’s and two C’s. Maybe we can cover that in the last bit here, and then we can get to closing. Health Hats: Okay. So I feel like one of the questions that you’ve asked is how AI helped, right? And so what I need to tell you is the framework that I’ve developed over the years, which I’ve actually shared in my AI Claude project that’s Danny’s Health, what I call the three T’s and the two C’s, and this is like the framework I use to evaluate any digital health technology. And so they are time, trust, talk, control, and connection. What I mean by that is time is, you know, you need time to learn, to plan, to talk, to build trust. So I say the clock isn’t the enemy, it’s the, the wrong things filling the time, so the, the time. The second is trust. You know, trust can take a really long time. It can happen really quickly. Sometimes you never have it, and you know in your gut when you don’t have it. And most digital health tools, AI, have a trust deficit, I think, not because they’re untru- untrustworthy, which maybe they are, but it’s really because the people who use them, use the tools, don’t, don’t trust them, and I think it’s really important. You c- you can’t shortcut trust in the use of any tool. I think talk is really important. It’s woven through all of it, real conversation. There is nothing like actual conversation that is making decisions together, which is a lot of what healthcare is about, is making decisions. AI can help you prepare for it, and it can help process it. And then control. I trust more when I have power in a situation. So if I’m feeling like an ant ready to be crushed, I’m not making good decisions. And finally, I would say connection is, it’s the human lifeline. You know, when somebody greets you when you cross a threshold, that’s a connection. When someone’s been where you’re going and they can say, “Oh, that helped me.” AI can extend that connection. They can help people find communities that are available at 3:00 in the morning, but you can’t manufacture it. I, I think that connection is really important, so that’s where I g- you know, time, talk, trust, control, and connection, and I use that framework when I’m evaluating. Steven Labkoff: And that framework gives you a better, you know, a how do I say this right? It gives you a, like a rubric, if you will, to go- Yes … through, uh, the information that’s coming out of it. Danny- Yeah … we’re gonna have to wrap up here in a second. Sure. Are there any last comments you wanna make that, that will, you know, help other patients in the, in the space in terms of how they might wanna think about adopting- an AI tool in their world? Health Hats: I think that I would say use it, use AI, keep using it, experiment with it. That, that i- i- just like anything else, it takes time to learn. It takes time to be comfortable with it. Use it. I would say advocate for humans in the loop. I don’t care what the study says. It’s about humans. We are human. Keep it humans in the loop. I would say find a buddy, you know. Do this with somebody else. Find a buddy- That’s good advice … and experiment. I would say, yeah, talk to your clinician about it. It’s a good barometer of a physician. If they don’t wanna talk or blow you off, that tells you something. Absolutely right. And I would say if you’re comfortable with it, mentor. You know- That’s a good idea … be the buddy. And for clinicians and for systems and developers, I would say you need to have patients, caregivers, and practicing partner clinicians in the design. They need to be there from the beginning. And, you know, so i- it solves the problems people have, not the problems that the developers think are there or the venture capitalists thinks are gonna make money. You know, y- and if you have an opportunity, join, you know, participate. Steven Labkoff: All good advice. Well, Danny, I wanna thank you very much for your participation in, in today’s discussion. Hopefully that there are other patients out there who listen to the podcast, they’ll take something away. For the clinicians out there who are listening, you know, you’ve heard it straight out from a patient who happens to be a healthcare provider himself, and he’s got very strong perspectives on how this can be used in a positive and productive way, and I think the framework that he’s put together is very useful. Danny, I wanna just say thank you for all the help that you’ve provided helping this podcast get off the ground. That’s been really incredibly generous of you and your friends who have helped us a lot, and a lot of the things that have happened on our podcast, uh, for improvement’s sake, have come directly from those conversations, so thank you for that. I wanna thank you for being a guest and sharing your journey and sharing your experiences here. And for the rest of us, I’m gonna say thank you for joining us, and we will see you again next time on another episode of Practical AI in Healthcare. Thank you for listening. Thank you for joining us this week on Practical AI in Healthcare. If you’re ready to go beyond buzzwords and hype and explore how AI is truly transforming healthcare, stay tuned for more conversations that get us to what works. Until next time, stay practical Reflection When Steve interviewed me, he didn't know that everything I told him is the origin story of TrustMyOwn.Health. The box of paper. The 296 pages that were technically my data and practically useless. Twenty-five years of a pattern that sat in my chart the whole time, that it took a person, my PCP, a year to put together. Could AI have done it in an afternoon?  I got tired of that being the normal experience instead of the exception. [Add: what specifically prompted starting TMOH, and when.] TMOH starts from a premise I didn't have language for until I said it out loud to Steve: trust isn't a feature you bolt onto a health platform after the engineering is done. It's the whole structure, or the whole thing fails. The three T's and two C's I use to size up any digital health tool turn out to be close to a design spec. Time, because a vault of your whole health history takes patience to build, not a single import. Trust, built into governance rather than promised in marketing; TMOH's Data Sovereignty Covenant binds the board and investors to the same terms as everyone else, which is the only version of trust I believe in. Talk, because the point was never to replace the conversation with my clinician, it was to walk in more prepared for it. Control, because I decide what goes in the vault and who sees it, the same way I decide which of my own decisions I hand to a doctor or an AI and which ones I keep for myself. Connection, which no vault can manufacture, but a good one can make room for. I told Steve that AI found a pattern in my chart that twenty-five years of clinicians missed. That's not really a story about AI being smart. It's a story about who owned the data long enough to ask the question. That's the whole bet behind TMOH: put the owner at the center, and let the rest of the ecosystem, the networks, the vendors, the AI, earn its place around that. See you around the block. Practical AI in Healthcare Episodes https://open.spotify.com/episode/4wA4ltjmZfIZ5VpmTeTTOF?si=KbEvc2_ERNWakJ3JeP2Ddg https://open.spotify.com/episode/0LDetUFJJrSV1cy6LtpGFx?si=qAqoqKBBSNm9PiwPjSIXYA https://open.spotify.com/episode/0wXEm1KnnGorOvTt9GTh7o?si=K_DKXzGyThusBPA6KoVkCg https://open.spotify.com/episode/6krV94ob6Lcv7VNo0qahZ5?si=B6lZDkvsQ9y2Z2FhkXzQGQ Referenced in episode Patient data access history: “Introducing Blue Button Plus: The Next Generation in PHRs” — HealthIT.gov (Office of the National Coordinator for Health IT) — https://www.healthit.gov/blog/consumer/introducing-blue-button/ The “Gimme My Damn Data” campaign Danny references: “Gimme My Damn Data (and Let Patients Help!): The #GimmeMyDamnData Manifesto” — Dave deBronkart, Journal of Medical Internet Research — https://www.jmir.org/2019/11/e17045/ Amy Price, mentioned as a mentor in questioning and skepticism: “Welcoming Dr. Amy Price as Editor-in-Chief” — Society for Participatory Medicine — https://participatorymedicine.org/2024/welcoming-dr-amy-price-dphil-as-the-editor-in-chief-for-the-journal-of-participatory-medicine/ AI literacy for patients, the concept Steve names in the episode: “Critical AI Health Literacy as Liberation Technology: A New Skill for Patient Empowerment” — National Academy of Medicine — https://nam.edu/perspectives/critical-ai-health-literacy-as-liberation-technology-a-new-skill-for-patient-empowerment/ Human-in-the-loop research Danny and Steve discuss (Adam Rodman): “AI and the Evolution of Medical Thought with Dr. Adam Rodman” — NEJM AI Grand Rounds (podcast) — https://ai-podcast.nejm.org/e/ai-and-the-evolution-of-medical-thought-with-dr-adam-rodman/ Abridge, the ambient AI scribe tool Danny mentions using: “Pioneers in Generative AI for Healthcare” — Abridge — https://www.abridge.com/about The DCI Network conference where Danny met the hosts: “About DCI Network” — DCI Network, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center — https://www.dcinetwork.org/about-us 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: 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 Claude, Perplexity, Auphonic, Descript, Grammarly, DaVinci Resolve, DaVinci AI Art Generator, OpenArt AI Creator Studio Inspired by and Grateful to: Steve Labkoff, Leon Rosenbilt, Amy Price, Leon and Oscar van Leeuwen, Laura Marcial 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)

Iedereen heeft het over AI. Maar volgens Martijn Aslander slaan veel organisaties een cruciale stap over. Voordat je kunstmatige intelligentie toevoegt, moet je eerst zorgen dat je informatie op orde is. In zijn nieuwe boek 'Informatieautonomie' laat hij zien waarom grip op informatie een strategische voorwaarde is voor organisaties die wendbaar, innovatief en onafhankelijk willen blijven.Bovendien is zijn oplossing verrassend eenvoudig: gebruik computeruitleesbare tekstbestanden (.txt, .md, .html, .json, .csv)In deze aflevering van De Boekenpraktijk spreekt Willem van Leeuwen met Martijn Aslander over de overgang van digitalisering naar informatisering, de kloof tussen bestuurders en IT, de beperkingen van veelgebruikte bestandsformaten en de afhankelijkheid van grote technologieplatforms. Waarom moet je eerst kritisch kijken naar de informatie die je bewaart, en hoe je dat doet, voordat je die massaal verhuist? En wat betekent informatieautonomie voor organisaties, overheden én individuele professionals?Een gesprek over kennis, technologie en leiderschap. Want volgens Aslander is AI niet de grootste uitdaging van deze tijd, maar de aanleiding om eindelijk serieus werk te maken van informatieautonomie.LinksAlle boeken van Martijn Aslander bestel je via Managementboek > https://www.managementboek.nl/auteur/13238/martijn-aslanderhttps://www.managementboek.nl/auteur/13238/martijn-aslanderMeer over zijn nieuwste boek en de bijbehorende pilot 'Informatieautonomie' vind je op https://informatieautonomie.nl/OverDe Boekenpraktijk is een podcast van online boekhandel Managementboek. Presentator Willem van Leeuwen onderzoekt elke twee weken samen met auteurs hoe de theorie van managementboeken aansluit bij de praktijk.

Het is even wennen dat we voor het eerst sinds de start van het WK Voetbal op 11 juni een voetballoze dag hebben. Het geeft ons wel de mogelijkheid om ons wat extra te verheugen op de eerste kwartfinale: Frankrijk-Marokko. Het is een affiche om je vingers bij af te likken, niet alleen vanwege de onderlinge koloniale verbanden, maar ook omdat het een herhaling is van de halve finale van het vorige WK in Qatar. Stuntploeg Marokko ging destijds met 2-0 onderuit tegen de uiteindelijk verliezend finalist. Kunnen de Leeuwen van de Atlas revanche halen op het sterrenensemble van Didier Deschamps? We blikten erop vooruit met Mounir El Kahtaoui, voormalig esporter namens NEC in de KPN eDivisie. Presentatie: Robert Denneman Foto: KPN eDivisie

In deze aflevering van De Naamloze Ochtendshow blikken Alex, Brian en Freddy terug op een avond waarop Marokko en Frankrijk hun ticket voor de kwartfinales veiligstelden, elk op hun eigen manier.Marokko kende een moeilijke eerste helft tegen Canada, maar na de rust schakelden de Leeuwen van de Atlas een versnelling hoger. Met een klinische tweede helft maakten ze het verschil en boekten ze een overtuigende 0-3 overwinning, waardoor ze zich plaatsen bij de laatste acht.Frankrijk had het een stuk lastiger tegen Paraguay. Les Bleus domineerden het balbezit, maar botsten voortdurend op een taaie Paraguayaanse organisatie. Uiteindelijk was het een strafschop van Kylian Mbappé die het verschil maakte en Frankrijk met een nipte 0-1 overwinning naar de kwartfinale stuurde.Zoals elke ochtend kiezen we ook onze MVP's van de speeldag, bespreken we de grootste conclusies van deze achtste finales en blikken we vooruit op twee absolute topaffiches: Brazilië tegen Noorwegen en Mexico tegen Engeland, twee duels die opnieuw spektakel beloven.__________________

The much-anticipated IUMI annual conference will be staged this year in Rotterdam 20-23 September. In this podcast we chat with Anneke Kooiman and Marko van Leeuwen representing the Dutch Association of Insurers; and Lars Lange, Secretary General at IUMI. DAI and IUMI are co-hosting the event and they give a unique preview of the conference and its surrounding social programme. They offer their thoughts on what speakers and delegates will be discussing, what's hot and what's not to be missed.

Waarom lopen samenwerking, verandering en goede ideeën zo vaak vast, terwijl iedereen hetzelfde doel lijkt te hebben? Volgens Genieke Hertoghs saboteren we onszelf én elkaar vaker dan we denken. Niet bewust, maar doordat ons onbewuste brein voortdurend de regie neemt.In haar nieuwe boek 'Van sabotage naar succes' laat Hertoghs zien hoe twee motivatiestijlen - plicht en wens - ons gedrag sturen. De één is gericht op verantwoordelijkheid, risico's voorkomen en uitvoeren, de ander op kansen, vernieuwing en mogelijkheden. Beide zijn onmisbaar, maar wanneer één stijl de overhand krijgt ontstaan misverstanden, polarisatie en stroperige samenwerking.In deze aflevering van De Boekenpraktijk spreekt host Willem van Leeuwen met Genieke Hertoghs over de werking van ons onbewuste brein, de invloed van Daniel Kahnemans systeem 1 en systeem 2, de kracht van pull in plaats van push en het formuleren van een bewust doel. Aan de hand van herkenbare voorbeelden uit organisaties, relaties en de maatschappij laat ze zien hoe verschillen juist de sleutel kunnen zijn tot betere besluiten en sterkere teams.Wil je beter begrijpen waarom mensen elkaar zo gemakkelijk kwijtraken én hoe je die beweging kunt ombuigen naar succesvolle samenwerking? Luister dan naar deze aflevering van De Boekenpraktijk.StellingenElke aflevering van De Boekenpraktijk legt host Willem van Leeuwen de gast een aantal stellingen voor. De stellingen bij deze aflevering zijn:De meeste conflicten in organisaties ontstaan niet door inhoudelijke verschillen, maar doordat ons onbewuste brein verschillen automatisch als bedreiging ziet.De leider van de toekomst overtuigt minder en stelt betere vragen.LinksAlle boeken van Genieke Hertoghs bestel je via Managementboek > https://www.managementboek.nl/auteur/82358/genieke-hertoghs Luister ook de eerdere afleveringen die we met haar opnemen:- over Daniel Kahneman > https://www.managementboek.nl/magazine/podcast/21215/genieke-hertoghs-kahneman-liet-zien-dat-wij-in-hoge-mate-onbewust-zijn - over 'Don't push me' > https://www.managementboek.nl/magazine/podcast/20203/genieke-hertoghs-iemand-in-beweging-brengen-doe-je-met-een-pull OverDe Boekenpraktijk is een podcast van online boekhandel Managementboek. Presentator Willem van Leeuwen onderzoekt elke twee weken samen met auteurs hoe de theorie van managementboeken aansluit bij de praktijk.

ALLsportsradio en VoetbalFlitsen slaan dit WK Voetbal de handen ineen. In aanloop naar elk duel van Oranje praten Robert Denneman en Abe Straatsma in Stupid Questions met Pieter de Jongh a.k.a. The Champ. De Nederlandse voetbaltrainer, die furore maakt in Afrika, heeft zijn mening altijd klaar. Hoe kijkt hij naar de verrichtingen van Ronald Koeman en het Nederlands Elftal? In deze vierde aflevering is helaas het doek voor Oranje gevallen. Slechts enkele uren voor de opname werd Oranje uitgeschakeld door Marokko na strafschoppen. Hoe kijkt The Champ aan tegen het eeuwen oude strafschoppentrauma van het Nederlands Elftal, wat vindt hij van het functioneren van Ronald Koeman als bondscoach, maar ook van KNVB-directeuren Nigel de Jong en Marianne van Leeuwen? Daarnaast kijkt hij ook naar de prestaties van de Afrikaanse landen en laat hij zijn voorspelling los. Wie wordt er wereldkampioen?

Nu de zestiende finales van het WK voetbal worden gespeeld is het tijd om een tussenbalans op te maken over de poulefase van Oranje. In de AD Voetbalpodcast schuift KNVB-directeur Marianne van Leeuwen aan in de AD Voetbalpodcast bij Etienne Verhoeff en Maarten Wijffels. Ze praten over Kansas City, de Oranje Fanwalk en ook de toekomst. Beluister de AD Voetbalpodcast via AD.nl, de AD App of jouw favoriete podcastplatform. Je kunt de podcast ook bekijken via YouTube.Student en gratis het AD lezen? https://abonnement.ad.nl/studenten/bestellen?productcode=digitaalstudent?utm_source=topics&utm_medium=web&utm_campaign=topics_introductie&utm_content=studenten&utm_term=short_url Bestel het boek De vraag van Vandaag hier: https://webwinkel.ad.nl/product/de-vraag-van-vandaag Support the show: https://krant.nl/See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Landbouwminister Jaimi van Essen, defensieminister Dilan Yesilgöz en NAVO-stafchef Geoffrey van Leeuwen schuiven aan in de laatste uitzending van Café Kockelmann dit seizoen. Café Kockelmann is een programma van Omroep WNL. Meer van WNL vind je op onze website en sociale media: ► Website: https://www.wnl.tv  ► Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/omroepwnl  ► Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/omroepwnl ► Twitter: https://www.twitter.com/wnlvandaag ► Steun WNL, word lid: https://www.steunwnl.tv ► Gratis Nieuwsbrief: https://www.wnl.tv/nieuwsbrief 

In Haarlem gaan op dit moment 31 kinderen niet naar school vanwege een vrijstelling van de leerplicht. Wethouder Bas van Leeuwen legt uit wat de uitspraak van de Hoge Raad betekent, waarom Haarlem geen nieuwe vrijstellingen meer afgeeft en hoe de gemeente gezinnen wil begeleiden richting school.

Het is woensdag 24 juni! Tina heeft het laatste medianieuws en de kijkcijfers. Opnieuw groot radionieuws; Mattie & Marieke stoppen hun ochtendschow. Wat is daarvan het effect op tv? Verder wordt het team van Goedeavond Nederland verder aangevuld met Frank van Leeuwen. Een goede zet? En wie is de beste voetbalcommentator van Nederland?

Een kleine maand geleden opende Beeld en Geluid het archief voor iedereen: in de schatkamer kan je thuis grasduinen door radio- en tv-geschiedenis. Maar nu mediagebruik meer en meer op het internet is, vroeg podcast De Dag zich af: wat wordt er bewaard van ons internet? Conservator Wytze Koppelman laat zien wat er al in het archief zit: een t-shirt van de bankzitters, Youtubevideo's van Monica Geuze en een jaren '90 game als A2-racer. Het opslaan van het internet is nog niet gemakkelijk: want hoe vang je dat het interactief is? René van Leeuwen maakt al ruim 12 jaar DumpertReeten en ziet elke dag veel van het internet. Wat moet wat hem betreft bewaard blijven? Reageren? Mail naar dedag@nos.nl (mailto:dedag@nos.nl) Presentatie & montage: Marco Geijtenbeek Redactie: Lisa Konings

Welkom bij de PrentenboekenCast. Een podcast over prenten- versjes én (geïllustreerde) voorleesboeken voor kinderen van 0 t/m 6 (+) jaar. We willen ouders, grootouders en beroepskrachten enthousiasmeren om voor te lezen door tips te geven over mooie, grappige, en vooral bruikbare voorleesboeken die passen bij de ontwikkelingsfasen van het jonge kind. Onze tips hebben altijd als doel het stimuleren van gezamenlijke voorleesplezier!Deze aflevering bespreken we het eerste half uur in totaal 10 grappige, herkenbare en mooie prenten-versjes en voorleesboeken voor de oudste peuters en kleuters, die allen handvatten bieden om interactief voor te lezen.Zes Prentenboeken:OPA! Van Monique Berndes met illustraties van Friederike Steil, uitgevrij De Vier Windstrekeken, 2026ALS IK EEN KROKODIL HAD van Gabby Dawnay met illustraties van Alex Barrow, vertaald Bette Westera, uitgeverij Boycott, 2026SIEMON PROEF MAAR van Nicole van Brummelen, Luitingh Sijthof, 2026VOLG MIJ! van Liset Celie, uitgeverij Gottmer, 2026DE KLEUR VAN DE PANDA van Annemarie van Haeringen, uitgeverij Leopold, 2026LIEVERIK van Marijke Keur met illustraties van Marijn van der Wateren, Uitgeverij Louise, 2026 Drie voorleesboeken:- HIER ZIJN ARI EN LOEK (deel 1) van Yvonne de Vries met illustraties van Jeska Verstegen, Uitgeverij Hoogland en van Klaveren, 2020- ARI EN LOEK KRIJGEN EEN WOLF (deel 2) van Yvonne de Vries met illustraties van Jeska Verstegen Uitgeverij Hoogland en van Klaveren, 2022- HELEMAAL ARI EN LOEK (deel 3) van Yvonne de Vries met illustraties van Harmen van Straaten Uitgeverij Hoogland en van Klaveren, 2024Één versjesboek:PARAPLUUTJES VAN GELUK! Annemarie van den Brink met illustraties van Marieke van Leeuwen, uitgeverij Ploegsma, 2026Aansluitend gaan we 40 minuten in gesprek met Eline Rottier. Zij geeft ons informatie over het platform BOEKWIJZER dat ouders, grootouders, scholen, kinderdagverblijven en bibliotheken via een lidmaatschap wil ontzorgen en tevens wil ondersteunen bij het creëren van een stimulerend leesklimaat. Iedereen die een lidmaatschap heeft van Boekwijzer kan ook boeken met aanvullende materialen bestellen. Voor meer informatie verwijzen we naar: www.boekwijzer.com.Prentenboeken waar we in het gesprek met Eline specifiek aandacht aan besteden, inclusief aanvullende materialen zijn: - WONDER van Mark Janssen, uitgeverij Lemniscaat, 2026 - GOUDVIS van Daan Remmerts de Vries met illustraties van Marije Tolman, uitgeverij Querido, 2025 - KAMPEREN BIJ BOER BORIS van Ted van Lieshout met illustraties van Philip Hopman, uitgeverij Gottmer, 2026Ook dit seizoen zijn we weer blij dat we samen mogen werken met Carolien van Silverster kinder- en jeugdboeken in Zoetermeer én vanzelfsprekend ook weer veel dank voor de muzikale intermezzo's van Erik van Os en Frans van der Meer. Heel veel luister- en aansluitend voorleesplezier gewenst!Volg ons ook via: https://www.instagram.com/prentenboekencast

Ego heeft vaak een slechte naam. We spreken over opgeblazen ego's, egoïstisch gedrag en leiders die vooral met zichzelf bezig zijn. Maar volgens leiderschapsadviseur, coach en auteur Bas Blekkingh kijken we daarmee naar de verkeerde kant van het verhaal. In zijn nieuwe boek 'Tuurlijk heb je een ego' laat hij zien dat ego geen probleem is, maar een natuurlijk mechanisme dat ons helpt om onze plek in een groep te vinden en te behouden.In deze aflevering van De Boekenpraktijk spreekt Willem van Leeuwen met Bas over de rol van ego in leiderschap, samenwerking en persoonlijke ontwikkeling. Waarom schieten we onder druk zo gemakkelijk in oud gedrag? Wat hebben angst en ego met elkaar te maken? En hoe zorg je ervoor dat je missie, kernwaarden en positieve intenties leidend blijven wanneer het spannend wordt?Bas deelt inzichten uit duizenden ego-scans en legt uit hoe verschillende egotypen zowel krachtig als destructief kunnen uitpakken. Ook gaat het gesprek over teamdynamiek, polarisatie, authenticiteit en de vraag waarom mensen vaak meer worden gestuurd door angst dan door hun diepere drijfveren. Zijn boodschap is helder: ego is niet iets wat je moet bestrijden, maar iets wat je moet leren begrijpen.Een aflevering over leiderschap, menselijk gedrag en de kunst om ook onder druk trouw te blijven aan wat je werkelijk wilt creëren.StellingenElke aflevering van De Boekenpraktijk legt host Willem van Leeuwen de gast een aantal stellingen voor. De stellingen in deze aflevering zijn:We overschatten de maakbaarheid van authenticiteit; onder druk vallen mensen niet terug op hun waarden, maar op hun overlevingsreflexen.Trump, Poetin en Wilders zijn geen uitzondering; ze laten zien dat kiezers vaker stemmen op angst en doorgeschoten ego's dan op missie en kernwaarden.Links'Tuurlijk heb je een ego', en eerdere boeken van Bas Blekkingh bestel je via managementboek.nl > https://www.managementboek.nl/auteur/9238/bas-blekkinghBas Blekkingh tipt twee boeken. Voor leiders die met verandering bezig zijn blijft 'Leading Change' van John Kotter volgens hem een onmisbare klassieker:Nederlands: https://www.managementboek.nl/boek/9789052612317/leiderschap-bij-verandering-john-kotterEngels: https://www.managementboek.nl/boek/9781422186435/leading-change-john-kotter Daarnaast noemt hij 'Eindeloos bewustzijn' van Pim van Lommel: https://www.managementboek.nl/boek/9789025906177/eindeloos-bewustzijn-pim-van-lommel  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.

Using AI to track symptoms, weigh medication options, and advocate. Not a cure, a toolkit. An honest, careful path without handing over the wheel. Summary Health Hats reviewed Melissa Reynolds' book on pregnancy in 2019, and they bonded over the fact that a man had blurbed it. Now she's on to something new: she’s been figuring out how to use AI to manage a body that’s been hard to live in for two decades. The turning point came in a diagnostic unit, alone in the dark with no idea what would happen next. She opened Claude and asked what the odds were. The answer was enough to let her breathe. What follows is one of the more grounded conversations you’ll hear about patients and AI. She tracks her symptoms in a spreadsheet and asks AI to surface what she’s missing, which is how she learned that her fatigue flares two days before her gut does. She brings research to her GP, who welcomes it and smiles. She nods at the gastroenterologist, who warns her off “that ChatGPT thing.” She’s careful about the politics, careful about the safeguards, and clear that this is for driving your own care, not replacing your clinicians. Her advice for anyone curious is refreshingly un-hyped: know what state you’re in, get a buddy if you’re vulnerable, and tell the tool what you actually need. She calls it a powerful toy, used well. Click here to view the printable newsletter. More readable than a transcript. Contents Podcast episode on YouTube Episode Proem Melissa Reynolds and I bonded when she invited me to review her book on pregnancy, fibromyalgia, and chronic fatigue syndrome in 2019. That still makes us both laugh: a man had written one of the blurbs on the back cover. I thought it was a riot. Melissa thought it made perfect sense because the people who most need to understand what a pregnant body is going through are often the ones standing next to it, trying to help but not quite getting there. Although we follow each other and frequently comment on each other’s posts, our last real conversation was in 2020 about a yoga program she was starting. A few small things from that conversation are still part of my every-other-day stretching and balance routine. I’m drawn to Melissa because she accepts what is, including that hard-to-live-with body, and creates and shares tools for those of us with the same or different diagnoses but similar lived experiences. All for best health. Our friendship has grown virtually, so we can pick up where we left off. This time, I reached out to Melissa after seeing her posts about her exploration of AI. Alone in the dark with a question Health Hats: What lessons are you learning as you use AI? Melissa: It’s funny to say you use AI because it’s hard not to use it now. But I’ve started exploring how AI can support me on my health journey. For a while, I was using it for bits and pieces. Then this gut issue came up. I don’t know if you’ve seen much of the journey, but I suddenly developed severe gut issues. They sent me for stool tests, which I’d never done before, and the results came back abnormally, astronomically high, so they sent me to the hospital. Melissa: They ran all sorts of tests. They rushed me through a colonoscopy, and then I was sitting there on my own in the dark in this hospital room. It’s an ADU unit, so it’s for diagnostic purposes. It’s not a ward. There was no TV, hardly anyone around, and I was quite alone, with no idea what could happen next. Melissa: So, I went into Claude and explained what had happened, and I said I needed to know, statistically, what was likely going on. It talked me through what it could be. That was enough for me to relax and go, okay, that’s cool. Health Hats: Where does it stand now? Melissa: Until a week ago, it looked very likely it was going to be one of those irritable bowel diseases. But right now, we’re completely unclear. I’ve got more specialists to see. But I realized the applications, so I started researching. Deciding to use every tool Melissa: Look, I’ve been sick for 20 years. I’ve been mistreated more than I’ve been well treated, and I’ve lost half my life. A lot of the doctors I saw were, meh. In the last 10 years, I’ve improved my life dramatically, but what upsets me is that I’m still nowhere near normal. That means I was very sick, and most of the doctors I saw were like, meh, even though there were concrete things to treat. They were misdiagnosing me. They were not treating me. Melissa: So I thought I was going to use every tool I had available. I actually told Claude, “Okay, you know my history. We’ve been chatting for a while. Tell me how I can use what you can do better.” The fatigue was signaling two days early Melissa: I do a lot of data analysis in my part-time job, so I thought, let’s get serious about my data analysis. I moved my symptom tracking from a physical book to a spreadsheet. Then I created a prompt where I upload it once a month and say, “Here’s my data. Tell me what you’re noticing that I’m not.” It notices things I don’t. Health Hats: Like what? Melissa: It was the post-exertion malaise flares that I wasn’t quite understanding. Health Hats: Post-exertion malaise. That’s the blowback from overdoing it, the hallmark of ME/CFS and other energy-limiting conditions? Melissa: Yes. It also picked up that when I was having my gut flares, my fatigue would signal a couple of days beforehand. Every time I had a gut flare, my fatigue would worsen beforehand. So, it’s now pretty clear that whatever’s going on with my gut is systemic. It’s part of a larger situation, not just related to my gut. Melissa: The data analysis and the research have been so helpful. I say, do some deep research, and I want you to talk to me about this topic, and it does. But you have to be very clear about what you want it to do. There’s a lot to learn about prompting. It’s very nuanced. Smiling, nodding, and using it anyway Health Hats: How do the clinicians you’re partnering with respond? Are they curious or suspicious? There must be a range of responses. Melissa: It depends. My gastroenterologist keeps saying, “Oh, I hope you’re not using that,” and they always say ChatGPT when they mean AI. So I’m smiling and nodding, but obviously I was. My GP, though, is fantastic. She loves it when I bring her research. She’s engaged. If you’re comfortable with people googling, then AI is just the next step. It’s more efficient than googling. Melissa: And I never go to her and say, “I’ve self-diagnosed myself with this.” It’s more like, “I’ve done some research.” Here’s a practical example. The gastroenterologist suggested a medication, and I don’t feel comfortable taking it. Even though they downplay the interaction with another medication I’m on, I don’t feel comfortable with the overall risk, especially when you’re playing with heart rate and blood pressure. I have low blood pressure and heart rate issues. Melissa: The wonderful thing about AI, compared to what I can do on a hard day, is that it can pull things together. We were talking about this medicine, and it found an alternative, a lower-risk medicine that also supports this other thing. The one thing I don’t want is to end up on loads of medicines and not be sure what’s working. A doctor is surely happy to have me as an informed participant in my care, especially when chronic conditions require patient buy-in. Where the records actually live Health Hats: You’re in New Zealand. I always wonder how the culture and politics around medicine and these tools differ from those here, where it’s a bit of a free-for-all and the guardrails are thin. Melissa: We’re in a very different situation. For a start, we’re a public system, but it’s crumbling. You have the people reliant on it, the people failed by it, and the few who can afford private insurance, which mostly just means you see the same people without being gatekept. We’re very segregated. Each specialty focuses on a single organ. As far as I know, we have one multidisciplinary clinic for long COVID, and it’s in the South Island, so I have no access to it, even though my ME/CFS came on after a viral illness and I’d benefit from exactly that. Melissa: What we do have is one public record that’s stayed with me, and a recent change that allows patients to request any information an organization holds about them. That’s actually how a lot of things changed for me. I got access to my patient portal at 32, and that’s how I found out I’d been diagnosed with chronic fatigue syndrome. No one had told me. They’d just written it in there. Health Hats: As opposed to all the times you were misdiagnosed, with both false positives and false negatives. And pulling it all together is the trick. I have a four-pound box of paper from one office, 500 pages, and 291 pages of PDF from another for three months of visits, all out of order and wildly redundant. So much of it is wrong. You start to realize that, at best, it’s grade-D information, and what I put in my journals and spreadsheets is probably the most accurate, which a doctor would never agree to. Melissa: It’s the same here. The onus is still on the patient to gather it all and then use it. That’s a whole other thing, and it’s something I’ve always struggled with. A very powerful toy Health Hats: What words of wisdom do you have for people who are using these tools? Do you want to encourage them or caution them? Melissa: First, think about what state you’re in. If you’re a bit vulnerable, don’t feel confident with technology, or are unsure about any of it, then seek guidance. Have a buddy or a mentor to do it with. Melissa: If you’re like me, data-oriented and logical, deep research is great. But if you’re someone who needs minimal information and more would fry your nervous system, then either don’t do it, ask someone to do it for you, or tell the AI, “I don’t need lots of detail; give me the three key points I can take away.” You can always guide it. Many people use it like they’re talking to someone, which can be useful when you’re working through things. But if you can prompt it well, you’ll get what you need. Melissa: That’s why I’m writing a series of articles. I want to guide people so they can focus on one thing, like how to use their data to get good analysis, because it’s a lot. First, you’ve got to learn how to prompt, then what to put in, then how it works. My articles are trying to make it more accessible. It’s always us, the people who are chronically ill, who are least able to jump on opportunities and make the most of them, and we’re the ones who need it most. But if you’re worried about it or opposed to it, leave it. Health Hats: I’m not a black-and-white person; I’m more nuanced. It helps with some things but not others. One thing I’m struggling with is that it gives me too much to share, and I want to share all that depth. Maybe it’s useful for me, but not for other people. So, I’m learning to set limits. My audience has three minutes or 500 words. Then I can ask more questions. It’s amazing. It’s a toy, in a way. A very powerful toy. Melissa: Thank you so much. I can’t believe it’s been so long. Health Hats: I know. Do we need to make an appointment for another four years? Melissa: No, let’s do six months. Health Hats: Sounds good. See you around the block. Reflection Neither of us is going to be cured, whatever that word even means. But I am living a good life. I am playing music, traveling, and in love. My grandson just turned eighteen and is graduating from high school. Life is good. That is the whole point, really. The point was never the technology. I know my enthusiasm for using Claude turns some people off. A number of you seriously distrust anything with AI in it, and I don’t dismiss that. I’m uneasy too, less about the tool in my hands than about the AI-industrial complex behind it, the money, power, and momentum, something like splitting the atom: enormous force, no guarantee of where it gets pointed. And yet here I am, using Claude and Claude Cowork to cut the forty to sixty hours I spend on each episode down to about twenty. I’ll share how in future episodes. I hold the worry and use the tools anyway. The point is deciding to drive our own train and being glad to have one more tool in the cab. A tool, a toy used best by someone who knows their own mind and keeps both hands on the wheel. Referenced in episode Melissa’s Substack Melissa’s book on pregnancy, fibromyalgia, and chronic fatigue syndrome Melissa’s yoga program Melissa’s book: Fibromyalgia Won’t Win: Learning, Loving and Living with Chronic Pain and Fatigue (Melissa vs Fibromyalgia The Collection), New Zealand’s Right to Records. 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:  Photo Credits  Related episodes from Health Hats https://health-hats.com/fibromyalgia-managing-pain-doing-the-work/ https://health-hats.com/fibro-mama-book-review/ https://health-hats.com/accessible-yoga-honor-your-body/ 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)

Met Joke van Leeuwen, de schrijver van het voorleeslunchverhaal 2026. Frank van Dijl is er over de taalschat “Zegt een man in zo'n geval” van Kees van Kooten. Wouter Monden is inwoner van de Digitaalstaat. Sander Donkers over zijn verzameling columns “De dikke Donkers”. En René Appel bespreekt de TNA van Virgil van Dijk.

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)

Wanneer de beroemde dj Rosa van Leeuwen ernstig wordt bedreigd, staat haar bruisende leven ineens op scherp. Ze heeft alleen geen idee wie het op haar heeft gemunt… Uitgegeven door Uitgeverij Marmer B.V. Spreker: Dafne Holtland

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.

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

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.

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.

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.

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.

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)

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

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:

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)

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.