Podcasts about london school

Get Howard's book here: https://a.co/d/dKN61sC   Tariffs are threatening, AI is replacing jobs, inflation is on the rise, and the word “recession” is being bandied about. The economy is on everyone's mind these days—because we're living it! But few people feel like they understand economics well enough to determine which policies would work best and champion those policies effectively.   Howard Yaruss can break down our economic system in a straightforward, nonpartisan way, avoiding jargon as he answers such questions as:   · Who pays for tariffs and how do they affect prices, jobs, and our economy? · Are the government's huge deficits and escalating national debt threats to our well-being? · What causes inflation, how big a problem is it, and how can we rein it in? · Could alternative currencies like Bitcoin replace the dollar? · What does the Fed do and how does it affect our lives? · Why is inequality soaring and what can we do about it? · Do tax cuts for the wealthy create jobs or just more inequality? · Why do so many people believe free trade is good if it causes some people to lose jobs? · Are we headed for a recession and, if so, what can be done to get the economy back on track?   HOWARD YARUSS is an economist, professor, attorney, businessman, and activist who has taught a variety of courses on economics and business and currently teaches at New York University. Prior to teaching, he served as Executive Vice President and General Counsel of Radian Group, one of the largest guarantors of debt in the world. Yaruss graduated from Brown University, studied at the London School of Economics, and earned a law degree from the University of Pennsylvania.   Check out our new bi-weekly series, "The Crisis Papers" here: https://www.patreon.com/bitterlakepresents/shop   Thank you guys again for taking the time to check this out. We appreciate each and everyone of you. If you have the means, and you feel so inclined, BECOME A PATRON! We're creating patron only programing, you'll get bonus content from many of the episodes, and you get MERCH!   Become a patron now https://www.patreon.com/join/BitterLakePresents?   Please also like, subscribe, and follow us on these platforms as well, (specially YouTube!)   THANKS Y'ALL   YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCG9WtLyoP9QU8sxuIfxk3eg Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/Thisisrevolutionpodcast/ Twitter: @TIRShowOakland Instagram: @thisisrevolutionoakland   Read Jason Myles in Sublation Magazine https://www.sublationmag.com/writers/jason-myles   Read Jason Myles in Damage Magazine https://damagemag.com/2023/11/07/the-man-who-sold-the-world/   Read Jason in Unaligned here: https://substack.com/home/post/p-161586946...   Read, "We're All Sellouts Now" here: https://benburgis.substack.com/.../all-we-ever-wanted-was...

We know that our 'democracy' is, in fact, a kleptocracy that is not fit for purpose IF that purpose is the continuation of complex life on earth. The sociopaths who have stolen control show no signs of shifting to something that works, so it's way past time that ordinary people across all walks of life embraced the tools of participatory democracy and wrought the new system that we need - a new House of the People which would, finally, accrue power to those with wisdom and enact governance of, for and by the people and the planet.  To do this, we need people who are intimately aquainted with these tools, who live them, breathe them, find joy and creativity in them and know how to share them in ways ordinary people understand.  Our House is a collective that exists to do exactly this and in today's episode, we're talking to Katy Rubin and Oli Whittington, two of its core team, to find out what it does and how and why - and, crucially, where it could take us if we all jump on board.  Katy Rubin is a Legislative Theatre practitioner and strategist based in the UK. She is founder of The People Act hub for creative civic practice. She works in partnership with local and national governments, advocacy organizations, and community groups to co-create equitable and innovative public policy through participatory processes that are joyful, creative, and inclusive. Katy is also a member of the Our House UK collective, a Senior Fellow with People Powered: Global Hub for Participatory Democracy, and a Senior Atlantic Fellow at London School of Economics, as well as former executive director of Theatre of the Oppressed NYC. Her Legislative Theatre work with the Greater Manchester Combined Authority was awarded the International Observatory of Participatory Democracy's 2022 award for Best Practice in Citizen Participation.Oli Whittington is the initiator and co-lead of Our House, drawing on his background in participatory design and democracy. Oli's work has focused on unpacking and addressing the concentration of power, including leading democratic innovation at Nesta, Shift Design's participation practice, and as a participatory designer in Arup's urban innovation studio.Together, they are working around all four nations of the UK to help bring the tools of participatory democracy to communities of place, purpose and passion.  They are helping to facilitate local participatory processes with a view to creating National Charters for each Nation and then bringing people together to decide whether we want a united Charter for the whole of the UK or remain separate.  To me, creating a governance system that is fit for purpose is absolutely essential to our moving forward through the pinch point of the Great Transition.  If we can't find coherent, constructive, compassionate, courageous ways to work together, we're sunk—and while there might be courageous, compassionate people within the current system, the overall system is not any of these.  So I dearly hope that by the end of this, you'll want to become involved. And if you're listening to this podcast as it goes out on the 16th of July 2025, you should know that there's an online event on the 18th which in an open invitation to anyone, anywhere who wants to start building an open democracy.  Please do sign up, there's a link in the show notes. Our House website https://ourhouseuk.org/Our House Event on 18th July 2025 https://www.eventbrite.com/e/power-to-the-people-shaping-a-peoples-charter-tickets-1415315900959 Movement Mapping https://movementecology.org.uk/2025/04/27/mapping-participatory-democracy-movement.htmlEast Marsh United https://eastmarshunited.org/Legislative Theatre Resource Hub https://www.thepeopleact.org/Charter 88 and the Constitutional Reform Movement https://academic.oup.com/pa/article-abstract/62/4/537/1538934?What we offer: Accidental Gods, Dreaming Awake and the Thrutopia Writing Masterclass If you'd like to join our next Open Gathering 'Dreaming Your Death Awake' (you don't have to be a member) it's on 2nd November - details are here.If you'd like to join us at Accidental Gods, this is the membership where we endeavour to help you to connect fully with the living web of life. If you'd like to train more deeply in the contemporary shamanic work at Dreaming Awake, you'll find us here. If you'd like to explore the recordings from our last Thrutopia Writing Masterclass, the details are here

Minister of Defense, Israel Katz has begun drawing up operative plans for the construction of the ‘humanitarian city' on the ruins of southern Gaza. This will initially house 600,000 people and eventually the entire Palestinian population.We discuss all this with Fawaz Gerges, Professor of International Relations at The London School of Economics and Political Science. Also speaking to Pat was Paul Kearns, Dublin born journalist living in Tel Aviv.

During the recent Dublin Tech Summit, I recorded a series of podcasts. In my second podcast I caught up with Oisin Hanrahan, the Co-founder and CEO of Keychain who I had interviewed the year before at last year's Dublin Tech Summit.Oisin talked about what has happened since we last spoke, AI, Trump's tariffs, his talk at this year's Dublin Tech Summit and more.More about Oisin:Oisin Hanrahan is the Cofounder and CEO of Keychain, a manufacturing platform for the packaged goods industry that is backed by $18 million from Lightspeed Venture Partners, BoxGroup, and SV Angel. Prior to founding Keychain, he served as the CEO of NASDAQ-listed Angi Inc. Before becoming CEO, he served as Chief Product Officer of Angi, where he was responsible for all product and technology strategy.He joined Angi in 2018 when Handy, the company he co-founded and led as CEO, was acquired by the company. Mr. Hanrahan built Handy to hundreds of millions of dollars of revenue, and raised over $100 million in institutional capital. Mr. Hanrahan served the US Commerce Secretary on the Digital Economy Board of Advisors from 2016 to 2017. While working on the issue of worker classification, he addressed unions, congressmen, and senators, including the US Senate Democratic Caucus.His work has been covered extensively by major media, including The Wall Street Journal, New York Times and Forbes. He has appeared frequently on CNBC, MSNBC, Fox and Bloomberg and has given talks at conferences, including Milken Institute and Web Summit. He is an active angel investor and advisor, with a portfolio of over 50 companies. Mr. Hanrahan studied for his MBA at Harvard Business School, earned a Masters in Finance from the London School of Economics, and a Business and Economics degree from Trinity College Dublin.

Accra's James Fort is an iconic monument for Ghana and modern Africa. This lecture explores the fort's evolution -from its role as a trading post in the early European-African encounters, through its significance during the trans-Atlantic trade and enslavement, to its later use as a modern colonial prison in the post-independence era. It also explores its connection to Ghana's liberation movement, particularly its role in imprisoning Dr. Kwame Nkrumah and other political leaders during their resistance to British rule. Today, this monument represents the resilience, talent and creative potential of a sustainable future for Ghana and its youthful population.This lecture was recorded by Elsie Owusu on the 27th of March 2025 at Barnard's Inn Hall, London.Elsie Owusu OBE is a Ghanaian-British architect and urban designer. She is principal of Elsie Owusu Architects, with projects in UK, Nigeria and Ghana.With an extensive portfolio of international projects, from transport and infrastructure and master planning, Elsie is a specialist conservation architect. She is currently designing rural community-led zero-carbon schemes and conservation projects in Ghana and developing eco-homes in Sussex. When a partner at Feilden+Mawson, she was co-lead architect for the UK Supreme Court and London's Green Park Station.Born in Ghana, Elsie was the founding chair of the Society of Black Architects. She is a trustee of UK Supreme Court Arts Trust and former member of Royal Institute of British Architects (RIBA) Council. Previous roles include the Founding Vice-Chair of the London School of Architecture, the London Mayor's Panel of Design Advocates and Board Member of the Commonwealth Heritage Forum. Elsie is a director of JustGhana Ltd which promotes education, architecture, arts and creative industries in Ghana and the UK.In 2003, she was honoured by The Queen for services to architecture. She was the runner-up for the Presidency of the Royal Institute of British Architects (RIBA) in 2018.The transcript of the lecture is available from the Gresham College website: https://www.gresham.ac.uk/watch-now/james-fortGresham College has offered free public lectures for over 400 years, thanks to the generosity of our supporters. There are currently over 2,500 lectures free to access. We believe that everyone should have the opportunity to learn from some of the greatest minds. To support Gresham's mission, please consider making a donation: https://www.gresham.ac.uk/get-involved/support-us/make-donation/donate-todayWebsite:  https://gresham.ac.ukTwitter:  https://twitter.com/greshamcollegeFacebook: https://facebook.com/greshamcollegeInstagram: https://instagram.com/greshamcollegeSupport Us: https://www.gresham.ac.uk/get-involved/support-us/make-donation/donate-todaySupport the show

During the recent Dublin Tech Summit, I recorded a series of podcasts. In my second podcast I caught up with Oisin Hanrahan, the Co-founder and CEO of Keychain who I had interviewed the year before at last year's Dublin Tech Summit. Oisin talked about what has happened since we last spoke, AI, Trump's tariffs, his talk at this year's Dublin Tech Summit and more. More about Oisin: Oisin Hanrahan is the Cofounder and CEO of Keychain, a manufacturing platform for the packaged goods industry that is backed by $18 million from Lightspeed Venture Partners, BoxGroup, and SV Angel. Prior to founding Keychain, he served as the CEO of NASDAQ-listed Angi Inc. Before becoming CEO, he served as Chief Product Officer of Angi, where he was responsible for all product and technology strategy. He joined Angi in 2018 when Handy, the company he co-founded and led as CEO, was acquired by the company. Mr. Hanrahan built Handy to hundreds of millions of dollars of revenue, and raised over $100 million in institutional capital. Mr. Hanrahan served the US Commerce Secretary on the Digital Economy Board of Advisors from 2016 to 2017. While working on the issue of worker classification, he addressed unions, congressmen, and senators, including the US Senate Democratic Caucus. His work has been covered extensively by major media, including The Wall Street Journal, New York Times and Forbes. He has appeared frequently on CNBC, MSNBC, Fox and Bloomberg and has given talks at conferences, including Milken Institute and Web Summit. He is an active angel investor and advisor, with a portfolio of over 50 companies. Mr. Hanrahan studied for his MBA at Harvard Business School, earned a Masters in Finance from the London School of Economics, and a Business and Economics degree from Trinity College Dublin. See more stories here. More about Irish Tech News Irish Tech News are Ireland's No. 1 Online Tech Publication and often Ireland's No.1 Tech Podcast too. You can find hundreds of fantastic previous episodes and subscribe using whatever platform you like via our Anchor.fm page here: https://anchor.fm/irish-tech-news If you'd like to be featured in an upcoming Podcast email us at Simon@IrishTechNews.ie now to discuss. Irish Tech News have a range of services available to help promote your business. Why not drop us a line at Info@IrishTechNews.ie now to find out more about how we can help you reach our audience. You can also find and follow us on Twitter, LinkedIn, Facebook, Instagram, TikTok and Snapchat.

Invitadas: Karen E. Smith, Profesora del departamento de Relaciones Internacionales de London School of Economics and Political Science y Directora del programa "Women in Diplomacy", y Marta Kozielska, Project Manager del programa Women in Diplomacy (LSE IDEAS).Conduce: Min. Lourdes Sosa Márquez, Ministra adscrita al Instituto Matías Romero.

Lord Alf Dubs is a Labour peer and former MP. He came to the UK from Prague in 1939 on one of the Kindertransport trains organised by Sir Nicholas Winton which rescued mostly Jewish children from Nazi-occupied Czechoslovakia.Alf was born in Prague in 1932. His father was from a Jewish background and was brought up in what was then Northern Bohemia while his mother came from Austria. His father left Prague for London as soon as the Nazis invaded Czechoslovakia in March 1939. In June, when he was six-years-old, Alf was put on a Kindertransport train, arriving at Liverpool Street station two days later where he was met by his father. His mother eventually joined them in London the day before war broke out. Alf studied Politics and Economics at the London School of Economics and was elected as the Member of Parliament for Battersea South in May 1979. He lost his seat in 1987 and the following year he was appointed director of the Refugee Council, becoming the first refugee to head up the charity.In March 2016 Alf tabled an amendment to the 2016 Immigration Act (known as the Dubs Amendment) which asked the Government to accept 3,000 unaccompanied refugee children into the UK. The amendment passed but the Government closed the scheme the following year after accepting 480 children.In 2016 Alf received the Humanist of the Year award by Humanists UK of which he is also a patron. In 2021 his Czech citizenship was restored making him the first Czech-British member of the House of Lords.DISC ONE: It's Easy To Remember (Take 4) - John Coltrane Quartet DISC TWO: Smetana: Má Vlast, JB1:112: 2. Vltava. Performed by Czech Philharmonic Orchestra, conducted by Jiří Bělohlávek DISC THREE: She's Leaving Home - The Beatles DISC FOUR: Bandiera Rossa - Canzoniere del Lame DISC FIVE: Mozart: Horn Concerto No. 1 in D Major, K. 412: I. Allegro. Performed by Barry Tuckwell (French horn), Academy of Saint Martin in the Fields, conducted by Neville Marriner DISC SIX: Danny Boy - Daniel O'Donnell DISC SEVEN: Take This Waltz - Leonard Cohen DISC EIGHT: Ode to Joy. Composed by Ludwig van Beethoven and performed by Gewandhausorchester Leipzig, conducted by Herbert BlomstedtBOOK CHOICE: Germinal by Émile Zola LUXURY ITEM: Walking boots CASTAWAY'S FAVOURITE: It's Easy To Remember (Take 4) - John Coltrane Quartet Presenter Lauren Laverne Producer Paula McGinley

【聊了什么】 在上一期的节目中，我们讨论了刚刚赢得民主党纽约市长初选的新生力量马姆达尼。我们在播客中也提到，如果马姆达尼能够在11月击败其他候选者，成为纽约市长的话，将不可避免地要和州长、市议会、州议会、NYPD等等多方势力和利益团体打交道，来实现自己的承诺，也不可避免的要进行妥协。马姆达尼在竞选中喊出了要实现纽约公交免费的目标，如果要实现这一目标，就需要和掌管纽约地铁、公交和通勤铁路的纽约大都会运输署，也就是MTA打交道。 纽约作为的全球最知名的大都会、全美最大城市，却承载着一套“老旧且脆弱”的公共交通基础设施。技术和资金壁垒固然是常见的制约因素，但这座城市独特的制度基因才是影响基建发展的关键。 在这期番外节目中，嘉宾罗雨翔就从纽约地铁为什么这么烂讲起，分析了纽约城市发展背后的政治与经济。这期番外播客剪辑于第214期纽约文化沙龙的录音，由罗雨翔于2025年4月13日主讲。罗雨翔此前也做过另一期和纽约相关的节目《纽约的房价到底为什么这么高？》，两期播客都发布在我们的友台《选修课》上，也欢迎大家前去收听，并关注这档播客。 如果你对这期节目内容感兴趣，请关注主讲人罗雨翔的新书《创造大都会——纽约空间与制度观察》！国内各大平台均有销售（淘宝、当当、京东），海外用户请使用这个链接购买。 【支持我们】 如果喜欢这期节目并希望支持我们将节目继续做下去： 也欢迎加入我们的会员计划： https://theamericanroulette.com/paid-membership/ 会员可以收到每周2-5封newsletter，可以加入会员社群，参加会员活动，并享受更多福利。 合作投稿邮箱：american.roulette.pod@gmail.com 【时间轴】 00:07:33 纽约房价数据及其成为社会和政治议题 00:11:23 纽约没有总体规划，而是通过分区（Zoning）来管理城市开发 00:18:02 90%的开发项目无需审批 00:26:19 通过Hudson Yards项目分析纽约政府在推动开发中的重要作用 00:34:44 经济适用房（Affordable Housing） 00:42:55 开发商建设经济适用房的盈利模式及其对整体房价的影响 【我们是谁】 选修课 Universus 是一档分享和探讨泛文化话题的中文播客，脱胎于2013年创办的纽约文化沙龙。 我们力求引发对学科方法和视角的认知和思考，而不仅仅是知识的传递。我们在组织活动的过程中积累了一些经验和人脉，尝试打造成年人的博雅教育，并在播客中拓展这样的探索。我们希望审视和反抗无意识的价值规训与随波逐流。我们希望冷酷地剖析自己的偏见，热忱地拥抱多元视角。我们希望去工具化，真诚地感知、理解、创造自己的生活和复杂的世界。我们追随原初的好奇而非代餐式的猎奇。话题可以轻松，方法力求严肃。在《选修课》里，我们互相映照，唤醒失落的维度。 主播： 老赵：理论物理学博士，软件工程师，纽约文化沙龙组织者。 主讲： 罗雨翔：美国注册城市规划师，哈佛大学与伦敦政治经济学院建筑与经济双硕士。现居纽约，参与以及主持北美20余地区的地产开发、区域经济政策与公共领域投资项目。 【 What We Talked About】 New York City's housing prices have long been a focal point of public attention. Over time, the rise in housing prices has become not just an economic phenomenon, but a complex and profound social issue involving multiple factors. As a global financial center and cultural hub, New York City has attracted a large influx of people and business activities, leading to a continuous increase in housing demand. Beyond the macroeconomics, New York's unique planning policies and land development rules have also had a profound impact on housing prices. At the same time, rising housing prices have led to changes in the city's social structure, challenging local residents with rising housing costs and deteriorating living conditions, sparking widespread discussions about social equity and economic development? How does the government negotiate with developers? Why does New York have a cityscape where skyscrapers coexist with old buildings? How is affordable housing developed in New York? What restrictions and subsidies does the government have for development projects? What impact do high housing prices have on social structure and cultural atmosphere? If you find this episode interesting, please check out our speaker Luo Yuxiang‘s new book 《创造大都会》! 【Support Us】 If you like our show and want to support us, please consider the following: Join our membership program: https://theamericanroulette.com/paid-membership/ Support us on Patreon: www.patreon.com/americanroulette Business Inquiries and fan mail: american.roulette.pod@gmail.com 【Timeline】 00:07:33 New York housing price data and its emergence as a social and political issue 00:11:23 New York has no overall plan, but manages urban development through zoning 00:18:02 90% of development projects require no approval 00:26:19 Analysis of the New York government's important role in promoting development through the Hudson Yards project 00:34:44 Affordable Housing 00:42:55 Developers' profit model for building affordable housing and its impact on overall housing prices 【Who We Are】 选修课 Universus is a Chinese-language podcast created by the same people who founded the New York Chinese Cultural Salon (纽约文化沙龙）in 2013. The past decade of organizing events and talks put us in a position of creating a sort of liberal arts education experience for those who have left school. We strive to go beyond merely transmitting knowledge to reflecting on complex topics using cross-disciplinary perspectives. We strive to resist conformity, to dissect our own biases, and to embrace diverse schools of thought. Our goal is to help professionals resist becoming just a tool of production, and to understand the world around us in earnest. We let our genuine curiosity be our guide. With a light-hearted tone, we approach each topic seriously. We hope that “选修课 Universus” creates a space to explore lost dimensions. Hosted by: Lao Zhao: PhD in Theoretical Physics, software engineer, and organizer of the New York Cultural Salon. Guest: Luo Yuxiang: U.S. Registered Urban Planner, holding dual master's degrees in Architecture and Economics from Harvard University and the London School of Economics. Currently residing in New York, he has participated in and led over 20 real estate development, regional economic policy, and public domain investment projects across North America.

Episode 64: Hacking Good Luck with Christian Busch We speak with Christian Busch about his work in the science of serendipity and how we can cultivate good luck in our own lives. We talk about his journey as a boy in Germany to his current role as an internationally best-selling author and professor at USC Marshall School of Business. Christian is author of the bestselling book, The Serendipity Mindset: The Art and Science of Creating Good Luck which has been translated into a dozen languages. He holds a Ph.D. from the London School of Economics, was former Director of NYU's Global Economy Program, and is a member of the WEF's Expert Forum. What Christian is Reading Right Now: Man's Search for Meaning by Viktor E. Frankl Christian's Music Recommendation: “Beautiful Day” by U2. Read More from Christian: LinkedIn, Serendipity Mindset Website   ___ Get updated when new episodes release by joining our list: https://bit.ly/4dwwTgD Connect with CFA Society Dallas/Fort Worth: LinkedIn | Instagram | www.cfasociety.org/dallasfortworth

'n Nuwe studie het bevind dat die ernstige Europese hittegolf van 23 Junie tot 2 Julie vanjaar na raming 2 300 sterftes in 12 stede veroorsaak het. Dit is volgens die studie deur Imperial College London en die London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine. Van die sterftes word sowat tweederdes toegeskryf aan aardverwarming, met 88 persent van die slagoffers ouer as 65. 'n Omgewingsepidemioloog, Pierre Masselot, het aan The Independent gesê die wêreld moet ophou om fossielbrandstowwe te verbrand:

Prof Tom Kirchmaier, London School of Economics

New guidelines that will lift restrictions on apartment sizes and the number of one-bedroom units allowed in a development have been before Cabinet this week, as the Irish government seeks to tackle the housing crisis.Ireland is by no means the only European Government struggling with this issue, but is lowering the cost for developers a good way to solve the problem, and why are we seeing housing crises across the western world? Tim White is Research fellow at Queen Mary University of London and the London School of Economics, and joins Seán to discuss.

Recorded on 10 July 2025 for ICMDA Webinars.Howard Lyons chairs a webinar with Prof Annelies Wilder-SmithThe COVID-19 pandemic taught us that global health is interconnected, and delayed action costs lives. Strong public health systems, early response, and equitable access to vaccines are critical. The rapid development of mRNA vaccines showed the power of well-funded, coordinated science.However, science must remain apolitical - when politicized, it erodes public trust and fuels misinformation. Clear communication, preparedness, and protecting vulnerable populations are essential. The pandemic revealed the fragility of health systems and the urgent need for resilience. As Scripture reminds us, pestilences are part of a broken world (Luke 21:11) - COVID-19 was not the first and will not be the last.Dr. Annelies Wilder-Smith has devoted her career to emerging infectious diseases, particularly those impacting low- and middle-income countries. Her path was shaped during two decades in Asia, where she was at the forefront of the SARS outbreak, and investigated the H5N1, dengue and Zika virus outbreaks. During the COVID-19 pandemic, she served as an external advisor to the World Health Organization, where she developed COVID-19 vaccine policies for the global use.Annelies is Honorary Professor of Emerging Infectious Diseases at the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, Past President of the International Society of Travel Medicine, and Editor-in-Chief of the Journal of Travel Medicine. Her academic career resulted in 380 publications and many research grants. She leads the Lancet Commission on Dengue and was Principal Investigator of EU-funded research consortia.Her awards include the Myron Levine Vaccinology Prize and the CDC Honor Group Award. Annelies is also the author of Travel Medicine: Tales Behind the Science and Grasping Heaven, a biography of Dr. Tami Fisk. She lives in Switzerland with her husband, a professor of neurology; both their children are physicians in training.⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠To listen live to future ICMDA webinars visit⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://icmda.net/resources/webinars/⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠

New guidelines that will lift restrictions on apartment sizes and the number of one-bedroom units allowed in a development have been before Cabinet this week, as the Irish government seeks to tackle the housing crisis.Ireland is by no means the only European Government struggling with this issue, but is lowering the cost for developers a good way to solve the problem, and why are we seeing housing crises across the western world? Tim White is Research fellow at Queen Mary University of London and the London School of Economics, and joins Seán to discuss.

durée : 00:58:55 - Entendez-vous l'éco ? - par : Aliette Hovine, Bruno Baradat - Appliquée pour la première fois en France en 1946, la planification économique est désormais plus indicative et dépendante des cycles électoraux. Au regard de son histoire et de ses difficultés actuelles, que reste-t-il de la planification française ? - réalisation : Françoise Le Floch - invités : Xavier Jaravel Economiste, professeur d'économie à la London School of Economics (LSE) et membre du Conseil d'Analyse Économique (CAE). Il a été lauréat de l'édition 2021 du Prix du meilleur jeune économiste.; Pierre Dockès Economiste, spécialisé en économie historique, professeur honoraire à l'Université de Lyon 2

From California to Australia, Wales to Bodmin Moor, news of wildfires has increasingly flickered across our screens. Not only do these fires dramatically change our landscapes, they also release huge amounts of carbon dioxide into our atmosphere. But what constitutes a wildfire? And how does it affect wildlife and humans? Dr Thomas Smith from the London School of Economics and Political Sciences visits Exeter to share his experience of chasing wildfires across four continents. Thomas is an environmental geographer who specialises in pyrogeography – the study of fire on earth. Together, we explore the science of wildfires, what they can tell us about the drivers, the impacts of environmental change, and the implications to our lives and broader society. THOMAS SMITH Associate Professor in Environmental Geography Department of Geography and Environment The London School of Economics and Political Sciences Dr Thomas Smith is a wildfire scientist who specialises in understanding wildfire behaviour and smoke emissions. He is an Associate Professor in Environmental Geography at the London School of Economics where he teaches courses on climate change and the relationship between science and society.

Dr. Luke Cooper is the deputy director of the Peace and Conflict Resolution Evidence Platform (PeaceRep) at the London School of Economics (LSE). He also heads the Ukraine program at PeaceRep. PeaceRep is a consortium of research institutions, non-governmental organizations, and local research teams led by the University of Edinburgh Law School focused on understanding peace and transition process dilemmas in countries and regions across the Middle East, North Africa, Asia and Eastern Europe. Its Ukraine program's research seeks to deepen the understanding of the Russian invasion against Ukraine and support ongoing responses to the conflict and is a collaboration with the Kyiv School of Economics (KSE) located in Kyiv, Ukraine. Dr. Cooper discusses PeaceRep and its Ukraine program and talks about its research and key findings. https://peacerep.org/about/countries/ukraine/

Luis Garicano is a former member of the European Parliament and a professor at the London School of Economics. In Luis's first appearance on the show he discusses his new book, Crisis Cycle: Challenges, Evolution, and the future of the Euro, the ever-changing landscape of digital money, his suggested reforms to the Euro, and much more. Check out the transcript for this week's episode, now with links. Recorded on June 18th, 2025 Subscribe to David's Substack: Macroeconomic Policy Nexus Follow David Beckworth on X: @DavidBeckworth Follow Luis on X: @lugaricano Follow the show on X: @Macro_Musings Check out our Macro Musings merch! Subscribe to David's new BTS YouTube Channel  Timestamps 00:00:00 - Intro 00:00:55 - Future of Money 00:08:46 - Bank Regulation 00:12:51 - Stablecoins 00:23:35 - Crisis Cycle 00:56:05 - Outro

How can we understand the decline of establishment political parties and the rise of new, successful challengers in Europe? Why are these new challengers predominantly right wing nationalist parties? How does their rise compare to the MAGA movement in the US? How is this new political landscape creating even greater challenges to attempts to solve cross-border problems with supranational cooperation? To help answer these questions and others, my guest for this episode is Professor Sara Hobolt, the Sutherland Chair in European Institutions and professor in the Department of Government at the London School of Economics. Previously, she has held posts at the University of Oxford and the University of Michigan. She is also the Chair of the European Election Studies (EES), an EU-wide project studying voters, parties, candidates and the media in European Parliamentary elections. Sara has written extensively on the emergence of challenger parties within Europe and approaches the issue by applying a framework from the business world: entrepreneurial startups challenging incumbent firms in an imperfect market. In addition to being a world renowned scholar in this field, Sara is one of TRIUM's most popular teachers. She has the rare combination of deep subject level expertise, sophisticated research methodology, and an ability to explain complex topics clearly and coherently. I hope you enjoy the conversation!CitationsDeVries, C. & Hobolt S. (2020) Political Entrepreneurs: The Rise of Challenger Parties in Europe. Princeton University Press.Borgen (2010-2022). [TV Series]. Netflix. Written and created by Adam Price. SAM Productions. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Tariffs and geopolitical conflicts have created uncertainty around the world. But how does the new trade environment affect inflation and the economy? How can central banks adapt? And what is the potential impact on the dominance of the US dollar ? In the third episode of our special Sintra series of the ECB Podcast, our host Paul Gordon talks to London School of Economics Professor Silvana Tenreyro. The views expressed are those of the speakers and not necessarily those of the European Central Bank. Published on 4 July 2025 and recorded on 1 July 2025. In this episode: 01:30 How is the world economy doing? What developments are having an impact on our economy today? And what uncertainties are arising from tariffs, trade fragmentation and armed conflicts in different parts of the world? 03:30 Tariffs, trade fragmentation and the economy How can trade tariffs and fragmentation affect economic growth and inflation in the euro area and beyond? 06:25 How are prices changing? How are prices changing in different countries? Will tariffs cause prices in the United States to rise, and those in Asia and Europe to fall? And why? 07:55 Lessons for central banks Given the extremely high level of uncertainty, what lessons from past shocks can central banks apply in the future? Why do we need clearly defined frameworks? And what role do governments play? 09:55 How can governments prepare for potential shocks? Investing in technologies that are difficult to substitute, diversifying energy sources and creating buffers for critical inputs – why it's crucial that governments have a strategy to withstand various shocks. 12:05 What is a dominant currency? When is a currency considered internationally “dominant”? And what dominant currencies have there been in the past? 13:40 Dollar dominance and monetary policy transmission Does dollar dominance in international trade transactions reduce the effectiveness of monetary policy? 17:30 The future of dollar dominance How will the dominance of the US dollar develop in the future? Is its role as a primary reserve currency at risk due to the Trump Administration's policies? 19:10 What keeps you up at night? What happens to our economy if there is a sudden shortage of a certain input? What impact will AI have if it remains largely unregulated? And what do stablecoins and digital currencies mean for our economy? 21:00 Our guest's hot tip Silvana shares her hot tip with our listeners. Further readings: Michael McLeay and Silvana Tenreyro: Dollar dominance and the transmission of monetary policy https://personal.lse.ac.uk/tenreyro/dominant_currency.pdf Sintra Series episode 1/4: Price stability in times of change https://www.ecb.europa.eu/press/tvservices/podcast/html/ecb.pod250702_episode110.en.html Sintra Series episode 2/4: Adapting to change: Ensuring price stability in a new geopolitical era https://www.ecb.europa.eu/press/tvservices/podcast/html/ecb.pod250625_episode109.en.html Silvana's hot tip I'm still here/Ainda estou aqui ECB Instagram https://www.instagram.com/europeancentralbank/

Rebecca is excited to speak with Pakistani-Canadian author Saad Omar Khan about his debut novel, Drinking the Ocean, published by Wolsak & Wynn in 2025. Saad was born in the United Arab Emirates to Pakistani parents and lived in the Philippines, Hong Kong, and South Korea before immigrating to Canada.  He is a graduate of the University of Toronto and the London School of Economics and has completed a certificate in Creative Writing from the School of Continuing Studies at the University of Toronto. His short fiction has appeared in Best Canadian Stories 2025 and other publications. Saad lives outside of Toronto and is currently working on his second novel. Books mentioned: Ley Lines by Tim Welsh Stella Maris; Blood Meridian; All the Pretty Horses by Cormac McCarthy In Other Rooms, Other Wonders by Daniyal Mueenuddin The Sheltering Sky; Travels: Collected Writing 1950-1993; The Stories of Paul Bowles by Paul Bowles Abdullah Ansari of Herat: An Early Sufi Master by A.G. Farhadi https://www.saadomarkhan.com/ https://www.instagram.com/s.omar.khan/ https://bookstore.wolsakandwynn.ca/collections/all/products/drinking-the-ocean https://www.biblioasis.com/shop/fiction/short-fiction/best-canadian-stories-2025/ https://augursociety.org/  

In the UK alone, around one in four adults are experiencing chronic pain. And nearly a quarter of the population live with some form of disability. Yet despite these numbers, pain and disability are still too often talked about in hushed tones, misunderstood, or entirely overlooked in public life. How do we talk about pain that doesn't go away? How do people live in bodies that society isn't built for? And how can we shift the narrative from individual burden to collective responsibility? Professor Tom Shakespeare helps us answer these questions in this episode of the We Society. His work challenges the assumptions we make about ability, autonomy, and what it means to live a fulfilling life.   As Professor of Disability Research in the medical faculty at the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, Tom is a leading sociologist, bioethicist and one of the UK's most influential voices in disability studies.   Join acclaimed journalist and Academy president Will Hutton, as he invites guests from the world of social science to explore the stories behind the news and hear their solutions to society's most pressing problems. Don't want to miss an episode? Follow the show on your favourite podcast platform and you can email us on wesociety@acss.org.uk and tell us who we should be speaking to.  The We Society podcast is brought to you by the Academy of Social Sciences in association with the Nuffield Foundation and the Leverhulme Trust.  Producer: Emily Uchida Finch Assistant Producer: Emily Gilbert A Whistledown Production 

Membership | Donations | Spotify | YouTube | Apple PodcastsThis week we speak with George Pór, mentee of Doug Englebart, Founder of Future HOW, Enlivening Edge, and Campus Co-Evolve, independent scholar with past academic posts at the London School of Economics, INSEAD, UC Berkeley, California Institute of Integral Studies, and Université de Paris, wisdom-guided AI advisor at River, and consultant who has worked with clients including the UN Development Programme, HP, Greenpeace, Intel, Ford, and the World Wildlife Foundation. George has played vital roles our emerging understanding of collective intelligence, knowledge gardening, and online community. In this episode we explore his latest iteration as a Metamodern AI Shaman — what that means, why he's promoting this approach for the cultivation of hybrid human-machine wisdom, and his theory of change for a reimagined human being in an age of collaborative planet-scale intelligence.Links• Hire me for speaking or consulting• Explore the Humans On The Loop archives• Dig into nine years of mind-expanding podcasts• Browse the books we discuss on the show at Bookshop.org• Explore the interactive knowledge garden grown from over 250 episodesDiscussedExtensive context and background summary provided by George hereRadio evolve #568 - Collective Wisdom and ChatGPT with George PórPrelude to the Rise of the Compassionate AI - George PórAI and Wisdom - George PórA Future of our Interactions with AI - George PórNobel Prize in economics awarded to trio for explaining why some nations are rich and others poor (CNN)Scaling of urban income inequality in the USA - Elisa Heinrich Mora, Cate Heine, Jacob J. Jackson, Geoffrey B. West, Vicky Chuqiao Yang, and Christopher P. KempesAI Attending Human Attending AIRelationality - David JaySeeing Like A State - James C. ScottMentioned People & EpisodesLayman PascalFrederic LalouxTimothy MortonAri KushnerStephanie LeppDavid SauvageRoss DawsonStephen ReidTurquoise SoundKate RaworthMatt SegallFrancisco Varela This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit michaelgarfield.substack.com/subscribe

Michael's background and transition to AI @ 13:38 Michael reveals his unexpected background in the arts and theatre, and how he later transitioned into finance before becoming interested in the implications of AI. He shares insights about the resistance to change and adoption of new technologies within the finance industry. Observations on AI adoption and impact @ 30:22 Michael shares two key observations about the adoption of AI: 1) Finance professionals initially dismissed the potential of machine learning, but then quickly embraced it for commercial reasons rather than scientific merit. 2) Highly experienced and successful finance professionals were often the most resistant to acknowledging the disruptive impact of AI on their industry. Episode Highlights: AI will be the next cautionary tale about companies and individuals who ignore new technology, rather than embrace it. (Think Kodak & Blockbuster.) Don't think of AI as exclusively a technology tool, think of it as a writing and development tool. Humans drive AI by desire, the "I want to..." AI doesn't create or change because it desires to do so. Quotes: "It's not 'how is AI going to change my industry', it's 'how am I going to use AI to change my industry?" On the difference between an AI and human approach: “It's not so much a skills question, it's a will or a desire question, that I want to do something is not within AI's remit..." Meet Michael Kollo: Michael Kollo is a finance professional turned AI strategist with a PhD in Finance from the London School of Economics. With over 15 years of experience at the intersection of quantitative finance and technology, he has held roles at BlackRock, Fidelity, AXA, and HESTA. AI represents the most significant shift in financial services since the rise of algorithmic trading. However, the real challenge lies in deploying AI to create tangible value. Through Evolved AI, Michael works directly with financial firms to ensure AI adoption is practical, secure, and aligned with industry needs. Whether through executive training or micro-automations, he focuses on bridging the gap between AI capability and financial business objectives. Committed to making AI an augmentative tool rather than a black box, he helps firms navigate this transformation with clarity, strategy, and execution. Follow Michael on Instagram and Connect with him on LinkedIn. About Sarah "Uncovering the right stories for the right audiences so executives, leaders, public speakers, and job seekers can clearly and actively demonstrate their character, values, and vision." In my work with coaching clients, I guide people to improve their communication using storytelling as the foundation of our work together. What I've realized over years of coaching and podcasting is that the majority of people don't realize the impact of the stories they share - on their internal messages, and on the people they're sharing them with. My work with leaders and people who aspire to be leaders follows a similar path to the interviews on my podcast, uncovering pivotal moments in their lives and learning how to share them to connect more authentically with others, to make their presentations and speaking more engaging, to reveal patterns that have kept them stuck or moved them forward, and to improve their relationships at work and at home. The audiobook, Your Stories Don't Define You, How You Tell Them Will is now available! Included with your purchase are two bonus tracks, songs recorded by Sarah's band, Spare Change, in her living room in Montana. Be sure to check out my Storytelling For Professionals Course as well to make sure you nail that next interview!

Hoy nos acompaña Jacqueline Bern de Mena, una líder panameña que conquistó hitos históricos y redefinió el liderazgo femenino en la región. Como CEO de Bern Holdings, dirige una firma familiar con cuatro décadas de trayectoria en desarrollo inmobiliario, construcción y turismo. A su vez, recientemente se convirtió en la primera mujer presidenta de la Junta Directiva de Cable & Wireless Panamá, representando un cambio de paradigma en las telecomunicaciones Apasionada por el arte, la educación y la igualdad de género, Jacqueline ha impulsado también la responsabilidad social corporativa de su grupo empresarial, participando activamente en la Fundación Bern, el Museo de Arte Contemporáneo de Panamá y movimientos como Mujer + PanamáSu perfil educacional —dos licenciaturas de Emory, estudios en la London School of Economics y certificaciones en RSE— demuestran la fuerza de una visión integral y estratégicaEn este episodio, exploraremos su camino como mujer a la cabeza de grandes corporaciones, cómo integra propósito en sus negocios y las claves para liderar con impacto y conciencia.

What is the difference between patriotism and nationalism? Is one of them acceptable (even desirable) from a Christian point of view? In this episode we interview James Walters, Professor at the London School of Economics. As an ordained priest in the Church of England, he is the first person we've interviewed who belongs to an established state church. This gives him a perspective somewhat different from the American one in which separation of church and state is the assumed norm.

“To navigate proof, we must reach into a thicket of errors and biases. We must confront monsters and embrace uncertainty, balancing — and rebalancing —our beliefs. We must seek out every useful fragment of data, gather every relevant tool, searching wider and climbing further. Finding the good foundations among the bad. Dodging dogma and falsehoods. Questioning. Measuring. Triangulating. Convincing. Then perhaps, just perhaps, we'll reach the truth in time.”—Adam KucharskiMy conversation with Professor Kucharski on what constitutes certainty and proof in science (and other domains), with emphasis on many of the learnings from Covid. Given the politicization of science and A.I.'s deepfakes and power for blurring of truth, it's hard to think of a topic more important right now.Audio file (Ground Truths can also be downloaded on Apple Podcasts and Spotify)Eric Topol (00:06):Hello, it's Eric Topol from Ground Truths and I am really delighted to welcome Adam Kucharski, who is the author of a new book, Proof: The Art and Science of Certainty. He's a distinguished mathematician, by the way, the first mathematician we've had on Ground Truths and a person who I had the real privilege of getting to know a bit through the Covid pandemic. So welcome, Adam.Adam Kucharski (00:28):Thanks for having me.Eric Topol (00:30):Yeah, I mean, I think just to let everybody know, you're a Professor at London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine and also noteworthy you won the Adams Prize, which is one of the most impressive recognitions in the field of mathematics. This is the book, it's a winner, Proof and there's so much to talk about. So Adam, maybe what I'd start off is the quote in the book that captivates in the beginning, “life is full of situations that can reveal remarkably large gaps in our understanding of what is true and why it's true. This is a book about those gaps.” So what was the motivation when you undertook this very big endeavor?Adam Kucharski (01:17):I think a lot of it comes to the work I do at my day job where we have to deal with a lot of evidence under pressure, particularly if you work in outbreaks or emerging health concerns. And often it really pushes the limits, our methodology and how we converge on what's true subject to potential revision in the future. I think particularly having a background in math's, I think you kind of grow up with this idea that you can get to these concrete, almost immovable truths and then even just looking through the history, realizing that often isn't the case, that there's these kind of very human dynamics that play out around them. And it's something I think that everyone in science can reflect on that sometimes what convinces us doesn't convince other people, and particularly when you have that kind of urgency of time pressure, working out how to navigate that.Eric Topol (02:05):Yeah. Well, I mean I think these times of course have really gotten us to appreciate, particularly during Covid, the importance of understanding uncertainty. And I think one of the ways that we can dispel what people assume they know is the famous Monty Hall, which you get into a bit in the book. So I think everybody here is familiar with that show, Let's Make a Deal and maybe you can just take us through what happens with one of the doors are unveiled and how that changes the mathematics.Adam Kucharski (02:50):Yeah, sure. So I think it is a problem that's been around for a while and it's based on this game show. So you've got three doors that are closed. Behind two of the doors there is a goat and behind one of the doors is a luxury car. So obviously, you want to win the car. The host asks you to pick a door, so you point to one, maybe door number two, then the host who knows what's behind the doors opens another door to reveal a goat and then ask you, do you want to change your mind? Do you want to switch doors? And a lot of the, I think intuition people have, and certainly when I first came across this problem many years ago is well, you've got two doors left, right? You've picked one, there's another one, it's 50-50. And even some quite well-respected mathematicians.Adam Kucharski (03:27):People like Paul Erdős who was really published more papers than almost anyone else, that was their initial gut reaction. But if you work through all of the combinations, if you pick this door and then the host does this, and you switch or not switch and work through all of those options. You actually double your chances if you switch versus sticking with the door. So something that's counterintuitive, but I think one of the things that really struck me and even over the years trying to explain it is convincing myself of the answer, which was when I first came across it as a teenager, I did quite quickly is very different to convincing someone else. And even actually Paul Erdős, one of his colleagues showed him what I call proof by exhaustion. So go through every combination and that didn't really convince him. So then he started to simulate and said, well, let's do a computer simulation of the game a hundred thousand times. And again, switching was this optimal strategy, but Erdős wasn't really convinced because I accept that this is the case, but I'm not really satisfied with it. And I think that encapsulates for a lot of people, their experience of proof and evidence. It's a fact and you have to take it as given, but there's actually quite a big bridge often to really understanding why it's true and feeling convinced by it.Eric Topol (04:41):Yeah, I think it's a fabulous example because I think everyone would naturally assume it's 50-50 and it isn't. And I think that gets us to the topic at hand. What I love, there's many things I love about this book. One is that you don't just get into science and medicine, but you cut across all the domains, law, mathematics, AI. So it's a very comprehensive sweep of everything about proof and truth, and it couldn't come at a better time as we'll get into. Maybe just starting off with math, the term I love mathematical monsters. Can you tell us a little bit more about that?Adam Kucharski (05:25):Yeah, this was a fascinating situation that emerged in the late 19th century where a lot of math's, certainly in Europe had been derived from geometry because a lot of the ancient Greek influence on how we shaped things and then Newton and his work on rates of change and calculus, it was really the natural world that provided a lot of inspiration, these kind of tangible objects, tangible movements. And as mathematicians started to build out the theory around rates of change and how we tackle these kinds of situations, they sometimes took that intuition a bit too seriously. And there was some theorems that they said were intuitively obvious, some of these French mathematicians. And so, one for example is this idea of you how things change smoothly over time and how you do those calculations. But what happened was some mathematicians came along and showed that when you have things that can be infinitely small, that intuition didn't necessarily hold in the same way.Adam Kucharski (06:26):And they came up with these examples that broke a lot of these theorems and a lot of the establishments at the time called these things monsters. They called them these aberrations against common sense and this idea that if Newton had known about them, he never would've done all of his discovery because they're just nuisances and we just need to get rid of them. And there's this real tension at the core of mathematics in the late 1800s where some people just wanted to disregard this and say, look, it works for most of the time, that's good enough. And then others really weren't happy with this quite vague logic. They wanted to put it on much sturdier ground. And what was remarkable actually is if you trace this then into the 20th century, a lot of these monsters and these particularly in some cases functions which could almost move constantly, this constant motion rather than our intuitive concept of movement as something that's smooth, if you drop an apple, it accelerates at a very smooth rate, would become foundational in our understanding of things like probability, Einstein's work on atomic theory. A lot of these concepts where geometry breaks down would be really important in relativity. So actually, these things that we thought were monsters actually were all around us all the time, and science couldn't advance without them. So I think it's just this remarkable example of this tension within a field that supposedly concrete and the things that were going to be shunned actually turn out to be quite important.Eric Topol (07:53):It's great how you convey how nature isn't so neat and tidy and things like Brownian motion, understanding that, I mean, just so many things that I think fit into that general category. In the legal, we won't get into too much because that's not so much the audience of Ground Truths, but the classic things about innocent and until proven guilty and proof beyond reasonable doubt, I mean these are obviously really important parts of that overall sense of proof and truth. We're going to get into one thing I'm fascinated about related to that subsequently and then in science. So before we get into the different types of proof, obviously the pandemic is still fresh in our minds and we're an endemic with Covid now, and there are so many things we got wrong along the way of uncertainty and didn't convey that science isn't always evolving search for what is the truth. There's plenty no shortage of uncertainty at any moment. So can you recap some of the, you did so much work during the pandemic and obviously some of it's in the book. What were some of the major things that you took out of proof and truth from the pandemic?Adam Kucharski (09:14):I think it was almost this story of two hearts because on the one hand, science was the thing that got us where we are today. The reason that so much normality could resume and so much risk was reduced was development of vaccines and the understanding of treatments and the understanding of variants as they came to their characteristics. So it was kind of this amazing opportunity to see this happen faster than it ever happened in history. And I think ever in science, it certainly shifted a lot of my thinking about what's possible and even how we should think about these kinds of problems. But also on the other hand, I think where people might have been more familiar with seeing science progress a bit more slowly and reach consensus around some of these health issues, having that emerge very rapidly can present challenges even we found with some of the work we did on Alpha and then the Delta variants, and it was the early quantification of these.Adam Kucharski (10:08):So really the big question is, is this thing more transmissible? Because at the time countries were thinking about control measures, thinking about relaxing things, and you've got this just enormous social economic health decision-making based around essentially is it a lot more spreadable or is it not? And you only had these fragments of evidence. So I think for me, that was really an illustration of the sharp end. And I think what we ended up doing with some of those was rather than arguing over a precise number, something like Delta, instead we kind of looked at, well, what's the range that matters? So in the sense of arguing over whether it's 40% or 50% or 30% more transmissible is perhaps less important than being, it's substantially more transmissible and it's going to start going up. Is it going to go up extremely fast or just very fast?Adam Kucharski (10:59):That's still a very useful conclusion. I think what often created some of the more challenges, I think the things that on reflection people looking back pick up on are where there was probably overstated certainty. We saw that around some of the airborne spread, for example, stated as a fact by in some cases some organizations, I think in some situations as well, governments had a constraint and presented it as scientific. So the UK, for example, would say testing isn't useful. And what was happening at the time was there wasn't enough tests. So it was more a case of they can't test at that volume. But I think blowing between what the science was saying and what the decision-making, and I think also one thing we found in the UK was we made a lot of the epidemiological evidence available. I think that was really, I think something that was important.Adam Kucharski (11:51):I found it a lot easier to communicate if talking to the media to be able to say, look, this is the paper that's out, this is what it means, this is the evidence. I always found it quite uncomfortable having to communicate things where you knew there were reports behind the scenes, but you couldn't actually articulate. But I think what that did is it created this impression that particularly epidemiology was driving the decision-making a lot more than it perhaps was in reality because so much of that was being made public and a lot more of the evidence around education or economics was being done behind the scenes. I think that created this kind of asymmetry in public perception about how that was feeding in. And so, I think there was always that, and it happens, it is really hard as well as a scientist when you've got journalists asking you how to run the country to work out those steps of am I describing the evidence behind what we're seeing? Am I describing the evidence about different interventions or am I proposing to some extent my value system on what we do? And I think all of that in very intense times can be very easy to get blurred together in public communication. I think we saw a few examples of that where things were being the follow the science on policy type angle where actually once you get into what you're prioritizing within a society, quite rightly, you've got other things beyond just the epidemiology driving that.Eric Topol (13:09):Yeah, I mean that term that you just use follow the science is such an important term because it tells us about the dynamic aspect. It isn't just a snapshot, it's constantly being revised. But during the pandemic we had things like the six-foot rule that was never supported by data, but yet still today, if I walk around my hospital and there's still the footprints of the six-foot rule and not paying attention to the fact that this was airborne and took years before some of these things were accepted. The flatten the curve stuff with lockdowns, which I never was supportive of that, but perhaps at the worst point, the idea that hospitals would get overrun was an issue, but it got carried away with school shutdowns for prolonged periods and in some parts of the world, especially very stringent lockdowns. But anyway, we learned a lot.Eric Topol (14:10):But perhaps one of the greatest lessons is that people's expectations about science is that it's absolute and somehow you have this truth that's not there. I mean, it's getting revised. It's kind of on the job training, it's on this case on the pandemic revision. But very interesting. And that gets us to, I think the next topic, which I think is a fundamental part of the book distributed throughout the book, which is the different types of proof in biomedicine and of course across all these domains. And so, you take us through things like randomized trials, p-values, 95 percent confidence intervals, counterfactuals, causation and correlation, peer review, the works, which is great because a lot of people have misconceptions of these things. So for example, randomized trials, which is the temple of the randomized trials, they're not as great as a lot of people think, yes, they can help us establish cause and effect, but they're skewed because of the people who come into the trial. So they may not at all be a representative sample. What are your thoughts about over deference to randomized trials?Adam Kucharski (15:31):Yeah, I think that the story of how we rank evidence in medicines a fascinating one. I mean even just how long it took for people to think about these elements of randomization. Fundamentally, what we're trying to do when we have evidence here in medicine or science is prevent ourselves from confusing randomness for a signal. I mean, that's fundamentally, we don't want to mistake something, we think it's going on and it's not. And the challenge, particularly with any intervention is you only get to see one version of reality. You can't give someone a drug, follow them, rewind history, not give them the drug and then follow them again. So one of the things that essentially randomization allows us to do is, if you have two groups, one that's been randomized, one that hasn't on average, the difference in outcomes between those groups is going to be down to the treatment effect.Adam Kucharski (16:20):So it doesn't necessarily mean in reality that'd be the case, but on average that's the expectation that you'd have. And it's kind of interesting actually that the first modern randomized control trial (RCT) in medicine in 1947, this is for TB and streptomycin. The randomization element actually, it wasn't so much statistical as behavioral, that if you have people coming to hospital, you could to some extent just say, we'll just alternate. We're not going to randomize. We're just going to first patient we'll say is a control, second patient a treatment. But what they found in a lot of previous studies was doctors have bias. Maybe that patient looks a little bit ill or that one maybe is on borderline for eligibility. And often you got these quite striking imbalances when you allowed it for human judgment. So it was really about shielding against those behavioral elements. But I think there's a few situations, it's a really powerful tool for a lot of these questions, but as you mentioned, one is this issue of you have the population you study on and then perhaps in reality how that translates elsewhere.Adam Kucharski (17:17):And we see, I mean things like flu vaccines are a good example, which are very dependent on immunity and evolution and what goes on in different populations. Sometimes you've had a result on a vaccine in one place and then the effectiveness doesn't translate in the same way to somewhere else. I think the other really important thing to bear in mind is, as I said, it's the averaging that you're getting an average effect between two different groups. And I think we see certainly a lot of development around things like personalized medicine where actually you're much more interested in the outcome for the individual. And so, what a trial can give you evidence is on average across a group, this is the effect that I can expect this intervention to have. But we've now seen more of the emergence things like N=1 studies where you can actually over the same individual, particularly for chronic conditions, look at those kind of interventions.Adam Kucharski (18:05):And also there's just these extreme examples where you're ethically not going to run a trial, there's never been a trial of whether it's a good idea to have intensive care units in hospitals or there's a lot of these kind of historical treatments which are just so overwhelmingly effective that we're not going to run trial. So almost this hierarchy over time, you can see it getting shifted because actually you do have these situations where other forms of evidence can get you either closer to what you need or just more feasibly an answer where it's just not ethical or practical to do an RCT.Eric Topol (18:37):And that brings us to the natural experiments I just wrote about recently, the one with shingles, which there's two big natural experiments to suggest that shingles vaccine might reduce the risk of Alzheimer's, an added benefit beyond the shingles that was not anticipated. Your thoughts about natural experiments, because here you're getting a much different type of population assessment, again, not at the individual level, but not necessarily restricted by some potentially skewed enrollment criteria.Adam Kucharski (19:14):I think this is as emerged as a really valuable tool. It's kind of interesting, in the book you're talking to economists like Josh Angrist, that a lot of these ideas emerge in epidemiology, but I think were really then taken up by economists, particularly as they wanted to add more credibility to a lot of these policy questions. And ultimately, it comes down to this issue that for a lot of problems, we can't necessarily intervene and randomize, but there might be a situation that's done it to some extent for us, so the classic example is the Vietnam draft where it was kind of random birthdays with drawn out of lottery. And so, there's been a lot of studies subsequently about the effect of serving in the military on different subsequent lifetime outcomes because broadly those people have been randomized. It was for a different reason. But you've got that element of randomization driving that.Adam Kucharski (20:02):And so again, with some of the recent shingles data and other studies, you might have a situation for example, where there's been an intervention that's somewhat arbitrary in terms of time. It's a cutoff on a birth date, for example. And under certain assumptions you could think, well, actually there's no real reason for the person on this day and this day to be fundamentally different. I mean, perhaps there might be effects of cohorts if it's school years or this sort of thing. But generally, this isn't the same as having people who are very, very different ages and very different characteristics. It's just nature, or in this case, just a policy intervention for a different reason has given you that randomization, which allows you or pseudo randomization, which allows you to then look at something about the effect of an intervention that you wouldn't as reliably if you were just digging into the data of yes, no who's received a vaccine.Eric Topol (20:52):Yeah, no, I think it's really valuable. And now I think increasingly given priority, if you can find these natural experiments and they're not always so abundant to use to extrapolate from, but when they are, they're phenomenal. The causation correlation is so big. The issue there, I mean Judea Pearl's, the Book of Why, and you give so many great examples throughout the book in Proof. I wonder if you could comment that on that a bit more because this is where associations are confused somehow or other with a direct effect. And we unfortunately make these jumps all too frequently. Perhaps it's the most common problem that's occurring in the way we interpret medical research data.Adam Kucharski (21:52):Yeah, I think it's an issue that I think a lot of people get drilled into in their training just because a correlation between things doesn't mean that that thing causes this thing. But it really struck me as I talked to people, researching the book, in practice in research, there's actually a bit more to it in how it's played out. So first of all, if there's a correlation between things, it doesn't tell you much generally that's useful for intervention. If two things are correlated, it doesn't mean that changing that thing's going to have an effect on that thing. There might be something that's influencing both of them. If you have more ice cream sales, it will lead to more heat stroke cases. It doesn't mean that changing ice cream sales is going to have that effect, but it does allow you to make predictions potentially because if you can identify consistent patterns, you can say, okay, if this thing going up, I'm going to make a prediction that this thing's going up.Adam Kucharski (22:37):So one thing I found quite striking, actually talking to research in different fields is how many fields choose to focus on prediction because it kind of avoids having to deal with this cause and effect problem. And even in fields like psychology, it was kind of interesting that there's a lot of focus on predicting things like relationship outcomes, but actually for people, you don't want a prediction about your relationship. You want to know, well, how can I do something about it? You don't just want someone to sell you your relationship's going to go downhill. So there's almost part of the challenge is people just got stuck on prediction because it's an easier field of work, whereas actually some of those problems will involve intervention. I think the other thing that really stood out for me is in epidemiology and a lot of other fields, rightly, people are very cautious to not get that mixed up.Adam Kucharski (23:24):They don't want to mix up correlations or associations with causation, but you've kind of got this weird situation where a lot of papers go out of their way to not use causal language and say it's an association, it's just an association. It's just an association. You can't say anything about causality. And then the end of the paper, they'll say, well, we should think about introducing more of this thing or restricting this thing. So really the whole paper and its purpose is framed around a causal intervention, but it's extremely careful throughout the paper to not frame it as a causal claim. So I think we almost by skirting that too much, we actually avoid the problems that people sometimes care about. And I think a lot of the nice work that's been going on in causal inference is trying to get people to confront this more head on rather than say, okay, you can just stay in this prediction world and that's fine. And then just later maybe make a policy suggestion off the back of it.Eric Topol (24:20):Yeah, I think this is cause and effect is a very alluring concept to support proof as you so nicely go through in the book. But of course, one of the things that we use to help us is the biological mechanism. So here you have, let's say for example, you're trying to get a new drug approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), and the request is, well, we want two trials, randomized trials, independent. We want to have p-values that are significant, and we want to know the biological mechanism ideally with the dose response of the drug. But there are many drugs as you review that have no biological mechanism established. And even when the tobacco problems were mounting, the actual mechanism of how tobacco use caused cancer wasn't known. So how important is the biological mechanism, especially now that we're well into the AI world where explainability is demanded. And so, we don't know the mechanism, but we also don't know the mechanism and lots of things in medicine too, like anesthetics and even things as simple as aspirin, how it works and many others. So how do we deal with this quest for the biological mechanism?Adam Kucharski (25:42):I think that's a really good point. It shows almost a lot of the transition I think we're going through currently. I think particularly for things like smoking cancer where it's very hard to run a trial. You can't make people randomly take up smoking. Having those additional pieces of evidence, whether it's an analogy with a similar carcinogen, whether it's a biological mechanism, can help almost give you more supports for that argument that there's a cause and effect going on. But I think what I found quite striking, and I realized actually that it's something that had kind of bothered me a bit and I'd be interested to hear whether it bothers you, but with the emergence of AI, it's almost a bit of the loss of scientific satisfaction. I think you grow up with learning about how the world works and why this is doing what it's doing.Adam Kucharski (26:26):And I talked for example of some of the people involved with AlphaFold and some of the subsequent work in installing those predictions about structures. And they'd almost made peace with it, which I found interesting because I think they started off being a bit uncomfortable with like, yeah, you've got these remarkable AI models making these predictions, but we don't understand still biologically what's happening here. But I think they're just settled in saying, well, biology is really complex on some of these problems, and if we can have a tool that can give us this extremely valuable information, maybe that's okay. And it was just interesting that they'd really kind of gone through that kind process, which I think a lot of people are still grappling with and that almost that discomfort of using AI and what's going to convince you that that's a useful reliable prediction whether it's something like predicting protein folding or getting in a self-driving car. What's the evidence you need to convince you that's reliable?Eric Topol (27:26):Yeah, no, I'm so glad you brought that up because when Demis Hassabis and John Jumper won the Nobel Prize, the point I made was maybe there should be an asterisk with AI because they don't know how it works. I mean, they had all the rich data from the protein data bank, and they got the transformer model to do it for 200 million protein structure prediction, but they still to this day don't fully understand how the model really was working. So it reinforces what you're just saying. And of course, it cuts across so many types of AI. It's just that we tend to hold different standards in medicine not realizing that there's lots of lack of explainability for routine medical treatments today. Now one of the things that I found fascinating in your book, because there's different levels of proof, different types of proof, but solid logical systems.Eric Topol (28:26):And on page 60 of the book, especially pertinent to the US right now, there is a bit about Kurt Gödel and what he did there was he basically, there was a question about dictatorship in the US could it ever occur? And Gödel says, “oh, yes, I can prove it.” And he's using the constitution itself to prove it, which I found fascinating because of course we're seeing that emerge right now. Can you give us a little bit more about this, because this is fascinating about the Fifth Amendment, and I mean I never thought that the Constitution would allow for a dictatorship to emerge.Adam Kucharski (29:23):And this was a fascinating story, Kurt Gödel who is one of the greatest logical minds of the 20th century and did a lot of work, particularly in the early 20th century around system of rules, particularly things like mathematics and whether they can ever be really fully satisfying. So particularly in mathematics, he showed that there were this problem that is very hard to have a set of rules for something like arithmetic that was both complete and covered every situation, but also had no contradictions. And I think a lot of countries, if you go back, things like Napoleonic code and these attempts to almost write down every possible legal situation that could be imaginable, always just ascended into either they needed amendments or they had contradictions. I think Gödel's work really summed it up, and there's a story, this is in the late forties when he had his citizenship interview and Einstein and Oskar Morgenstern went along as witnesses for him.Adam Kucharski (30:17):And it's always told as kind of a lighthearted story as this logical mind, this academic just saying something silly in front of the judge. And actually, to my own admission, I've in the past given talks and mentioned it in this slightly kind of lighthearted way, but for the book I got talking to a few people who'd taken it more seriously. I realized actually he's this extremely logically focused mind at the time, and maybe there should have been something more to it. And people who have kind of dug more into possibilities was saying, well, what could he have spotted that bothered him? And a lot of his work that he did about consistency in mass was around particularly self-referential statements. So if I say this sentence is false, it's self-referential and if it is false, then it's true, but if it's true, then it's false and you get this kind of weird self-referential contradictions.Adam Kucharski (31:13):And so, one of the theories about Gödel was that in the Constitution, it wasn't that there was a kind of rule for someone can become a dictator, but rather people can use the mechanisms within the Constitution to make it easier to make further amendments. And he kind of downward cycle of amendment that he had seen happening in Europe and the run up to the war, and again, because this is never fully documented exactly what he thought, but it's one of the theories that it wouldn't just be outright that it would just be this cycle process of weakening and weakening and weakening and making it easier to add. And actually, when I wrote that, it was all the earlier bits of the book that I drafted, I did sort of debate whether including it I thought, is this actually just a bit in the weeds of American history? And here we are. Yeah, it's remarkable.Eric Topol (32:00):Yeah, yeah. No, I mean I found, it struck me when I was reading this because here back in 1947, there was somebody predicting that this could happen based on some, if you want to call it loopholes if you will, or the ability to change things, even though you would've thought otherwise that there wasn't any possible capability for that to happen. Now, one of the things I thought was a bit contradictory is two parts here. One is from Angus Deaton, he wrote, “Gold standard thinking is magical thinking.” And then the other is what you basically are concluding in many respects. “To navigate proof, we must reach into a thicket of errors and biases. We must confront monsters and embrace uncertainty, balancing — and rebalancing —our beliefs. We must seek out every useful fragment of data, gather every relevant tool, searching wider and climbing further. Finding the good foundations among the bad. Dodging dogma and falsehoods. Questioning. Measuring. Triangulating. Convincing. Then perhaps, just perhaps, we'll reach the truth in time.” So here you have on the one hand your search for the truth, proof, which I think that little paragraph says it all. In many respects, it sums up somewhat to the work that you review here and on the other you have this Nobel laureate saying, you don't have to go to extremes here. The enemy of good is perfect, perhaps. I mean, how do you reconcile this sense that you shouldn't go so far? Don't search for absolute perfection of proof.Adam Kucharski (33:58):Yeah, I think that encapsulates a lot of what the book is about, is that search for certainty and how far do you have to go. I think one of the things, there's a lot of interesting discussion, some fascinating papers around at what point do you use these studies? What are their flaws? But I think one of the things that does stand out is across fields, across science, medicine, even if you going to cover law, AI, having these kind of cookie cutter, this is the definitive way of doing it. And if you just follow this simple rule, if you do your p-value, you'll get there and you'll be fine. And I think that's where a lot of the danger is. And I think that's what we've seen over time. Certain science people chasing certain targets and all the behaviors that come around that or in certain situations disregarding valuable evidence because you've got this kind of gold standard and nothing else will do.Adam Kucharski (34:56):And I think particularly in a crisis, it's very dangerous to have that because you might have a low level of evidence that demands a certain action and you almost bias yourself towards inaction if you have these kind of very simple thresholds. So I think for me, across all of these stories and across the whole book, I mean William Gosset who did a lot of pioneering work on statistical experiments at Guinness in the early 20th century, he had this nice question he sort of framed is, how much do we lose? And if we're thinking about the problems, there's always more studies we can do, there's always more confidence we can have, but whether it's a patient we want to treat or crisis we need to deal with, we need to work out actually getting that level of proof that's really appropriate for where we are currently.Eric Topol (35:49):I think exceptionally important that there's this kind of spectrum or continuum in following science and search for truth and that distinction, I think really nails it. Now, one of the things that's unique in the book is you don't just go through all the different types of how you would get to proof, but you also talk about how the evidence is acted on. And for example, you quote, “they spent a lot of time misinforming themselves.” This is the whole idea of taking data and torturing it or using it, dredging it however way you want to support either conspiracy theories or alternative facts. Basically, manipulating sometimes even emasculating what evidence and data we have. And one of the sentences, or I guess this is from Sir Francis Bacon, “truth is a daughter of time”, but the added part is not authority. So here we have our president here that repeats things that are wrong, fabricated or wrong, and he keeps repeating to the point that people believe it's true. But on the other hand, you could say truth is a daughter of time because you like to not accept any truth immediately. You like to see it get replicated and further supported, backed up. So in that one sentence, truth is a daughter of time not authority, there's the whole ball of wax here. Can you take us through that? Because I just think that people don't understand that truth being tested over time, but also manipulated by its repetition. This is a part of the big problem that we live in right now.Adam Kucharski (37:51):And I think it's something that writing the book and actually just reflecting on it subsequently has made me think about a lot in just how people approach these kinds of problems. I think that there's an idea that conspiracy theorists are just lazy and have maybe just fallen for a random thing, but talking to people, you really think about these things a lot more in the field. And actually, the more I've ended up engaging with people who believe things that are just outright unevidenced around vaccines, around health issues, they often have this mountain of papers and data to hand and a lot of it, often they will be peer reviewed papers. It won't necessarily be supporting the point that they think it's supports.Adam Kucharski (38:35):But it's not something that you can just say everything you're saying is false, that there's actually often a lot of things that have been put together and it's just that leap to that conclusion. I think you also see a lot of scientific language borrowed. So I gave a talker early this year and it got posted on YouTube. It had conspiracy theories it, and there was a lot of conspiracy theory supporters who piled in the comments and one of the points they made is skepticism is good. It's the kind of law society, take no one's word for it, you need this. We are the ones that are kind of doing science and people who just assume that science is settled are in the wrong. And again, you also mentioned that repetition. There's this phenomenon, it's the illusory truth problem that if you repeatedly tell someone someone's something's false, it'll increase their belief in it even if it's something quite outrageous.Adam Kucharski (39:27):And that mimics that scientific repetition because people kind of say, okay, well if I've heard it again and again, it's almost like if you tweak these as mini experiments, I'm just accumulating evidence that this thing is true. So it made me think a lot about how you've got essentially a lot of mimicry of the scientific method, amount of data and how you present it and this kind of skepticism being good, but I think a lot of it comes down to as well as just looking at theological flaws, but also ability to be wrong in not actually seeking out things that confirm. I think all of us, it's something that I've certainly tried to do a lot working on emergencies, and one of the scientific advisory groups that I worked on almost it became a catchphrase whenever someone presented something, they finished by saying, tell me why I'm wrong.Adam Kucharski (40:14):And if you've got a variant that's more transmissible, I don't want to be right about that really. And it is something that is quite hard to do and I found it is particularly for something that's quite high pressure, trying to get a policymaker or someone to write even just non-publicly by themselves, write down what you think's going to happen or write down what would convince you that you are wrong about something. I think particularly on contentious issues where someone's got perhaps a lot of public persona wrapped up in something that's really hard to do, but I think it's those kind of elements that distinguish between getting sucked into a conspiracy theory and really seeking out evidence that supports it and trying to just get your theory stronger and stronger and actually seeking out things that might overturn your belief about the world. And it's often those things that we don't want overturned. I think those are the views that we all have politically or in other ways, and that's often where the problems lie.Eric Topol (41:11):Yeah, I think this is perhaps one of, if not the most essential part here is that to try to deal with the different views. We have biases as you emphasized throughout, but if you can use these different types of proof to have a sound discussion, conversation, refutation whereby you don't summarily dismiss another view which may be skewed and maybe spurious or just absolutely wrong, maybe fabricated whatever, but did you can engage and say, here's why these are my proof points, or this is why there's some extent of certainty you can have regarding this view of the data. I think this is so fundamental because unfortunately as we saw during the pandemic, the strident minority, which were the anti-science, anti-vaxxers, they were summarily dismissed as being kooks and adopting conspiracy theories without the right engagement and the right debates. And I think this might've helped along the way, no less the fact that a lot of scientists didn't really want to engage in the first place and adopt this methodical proof that you've advocated in the book so many different ways to support a hypothesis or an assertion. Now, we've covered a lot here, Adam. Have I missed some central parts of the book and the effort because it's really quite extraordinary. I know it's your third book, but it's certainly a standout and it certainly it's a standout not just for your books, but books on this topic.Adam Kucharski (43:13):Thanks. And it's much appreciated. It was not an easy book to write. I think at times, I kind of wondered if I should have taken on the topic and I think a core thing, your last point speaks to that. I think a core thing is that gap often between what convinces us and what convinces someone else. I think it's often very tempting as a scientist to say the evidence is clear or the science has proved this. But even on something like the vaccines, you do get the loud minority who perhaps think they're putting microchips in people and outlandish views, but you actually get a lot more people who might just have some skepticism of pharmaceutical companies or they might have, my wife was pregnant actually at the time during Covid and we waited up because there wasn't much data on pregnancy and the vaccine. And I think it's just finding what is convincing. Is it having more studies from other countries? Is it understanding more about the biology? Is it understanding how you evaluate some of those safety signals? And I think that's just really important to not just think what convinces us and it's going to be obvious to other people, but actually think where are they coming from? Because ultimately having proof isn't that good unless it leads to the action that can make lives better.Eric Topol (44:24):Yeah. Well, look, you've inculcated my mind with this book, Adam, called Proof. Anytime I think of the word proof, I'm going to be thinking about you. So thank you. Thanks for taking the time to have a conversation about your book, your work, and I know we're going to count on you for the astute mathematics and analysis of outbreaks in the future, which we will see unfortunately. We are seeing now, in fact already in this country with measles and whatnot. So thank you and we'll continue to follow your great work.**************************************Thanks for listening, watching or reading this Ground Truths podcast/post.If you found this interesting please share it!That makes the work involved in putting these together especially worthwhile.I'm also appreciative for your subscribing to Ground Truths. All content —its newsletters, analyses, and podcasts—is free, open-access. I'm fortunate to get help from my producer Jessica Nguyen and Sinjun Balabanoff for audio/video tech support to pull these podcasts together for Scripps Research.Paid subscriptions are voluntary and all proceeds from them go to support Scripps Research. They do allow for posting comments and questions, which I do my best to respond to. Please don't hesitate to post comments and give me feedback. Many thanks to those who have contributed—they have greatly helped fund our summer internship programs for the past two years.A bit of an update on SUPER AGERSMy book has been selected as a Next Big Idea Club winner for Season 26 by Adam Grant, Malcolm Gladwell, Susan Cain, and Daniel Pink. This club has spotlighted the most groundbreaking nonfiction books for over a decade. As a winning title, my book will be shipped to thousands of thoughtful readers like you, featured alongside a reading guide, a "Book Bite," Next Big Idea Podcast episode as well as a live virtual Q&A with me in the club's vibrant online community. If you're interested in joining the club, here's a promo code SEASON26 for 20% off at the website. SUPER AGERS reached #3 for all books on Amazon this week. This was in part related to the segment on the book on the TODAY SHOW which you can see here. Also at Amazon there is a remarkable sale on the hardcover book for $10.l0 at the moment for up to 4 copies. Not sure how long it will last or what prompted it.The journalist Paul von Zielbauer has a Substack “Aging With Strength” and did an extensive interview with me on the biology of aging and how we can prevent the major age-related diseases. Here's the link. Get full access to Ground Truths at erictopol.substack.com/subscribe

There is a shift happening in the complex world of proof. Simulation and probabilistic approaches are increasingly accepted as ‘good enough' in areas traditionally dominated by exact proofs. Persuasion depends on the degree of certainty needed.Adam Kucharski is a professor at the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, and also the author of three books, Proof: The Art and Science of Certainty, The Rules of Contagion: Why Things Spread--And Why They Stop, and The Perfect Bet: How Science and Math Are Taking the Luck Out of Gambling.Greg and Adam discuss the versatile concept of 'proof', examining how it applies differently across mathematics, law, medicine, and practical decision-making. Adam discusses the challenges of proving concepts under uncertainty, particularly during the COVID-19 pandemic, and the role of intuition versus formal modeling in various fields. They also explore the crossover of epidemiological principles into finance, marketing, cybersecurity, and online content dynamics, illustrating the universal relevance of contagion theories. The episode highlights how simulation and probabilistic approaches are increasingly accepted in areas traditionally dominated by exact proofs.*unSILOed Podcast is produced by University FM.*Episode Quotes:The gap between science and policy09:25: One of the challenges we had in COVID is this dimension of a problem where all directions had a lot of enormous downsides, and countries were having to make that under pressure. And even one of the things that I think I did not really appreciate at the time was, even later in the year, when a lot of these questions about the severity, a lot of these questions about transmission, had really been resolved because we had much better data. We still had a lot of this tension demanding, "Oh, we cannot be sure about something," or "You know, we need much, much higher evidence." And I think that is the gap between where kind of science lies and where policy lies.It's not the content, it's the contagion37:59: I think a lot of people think about the content, but obviously it is not just, "It is something goes viral." It is not just about the content. It is not about what you have written; it is about the network through which it is spreading. It is about the susceptibility of that network. It is about the medium you use. Do you have it that lingers somewhere? Is it just something you stick on the feed and it kind of vanishes? So, there is a direct analogy there with the different elements and how they trade off in ultimately what you see in terms of spread.What human networks can't teach us about machines46:35: One thing that is really interesting about computer systems is the variation in contacts you see in the network is enormous. You basically get some hubs that are just connected to a huge number of computers, and some are connected to very few at all. So that makes the transmission much burster.It is not like—so humans have some variation in their contacts—but most people have about 10 contacts a day, in terms of conversations or people they exchange words with. Some more, some less, but you do not have people generally have like 10,000 contacts in a day, whereas in computers you can have that. So it makes the potential for some things to actually persist at quite low levels for quite a long time because it will kind of hit this application and then simmer along, and then hit another one and simmer along.Show Links:Recommended Resources:EuclidGeorge E. P. BoxWilliam Sealy GossetP-valueRonald RossJonah PerettiDuncan J. WattsAmazon Web ServicesMonty HallGuest Profile:AdamKucharski.ioFaculty Profile at London School of Hygiene & Tropical MedicineSocial Profile on BlueSkyGuest Work:Amazon Author PageProof: The Art and Science of CertaintyThe Rules of Contagion: Why Things Spread--And Why They StopThe Perfect Bet: How Science and Math Are Taking the Luck Out of GamblingSubstack NewsletterGoogle Scholar PageTED Talks

Today we're talking with health and nutrition expert Dr. Stuart Gillespie, author of a new book entitled Food Fight: from Plunder and Profit to People and Planet. Using decades of research and insight gathered from around the world, Dr. Gillespie wants to reimagine our global food system and plot a way forward to a sustainable, equitable, and healthy food future - one where our food system isn't making us sick. Certainly not the case now. Over the course of his career, Dr. Gillespie has worked with the UN Standing Committee on Nutrition in Geneva with UNICEF in India and with the International Food Policy Research Institute, known as IFPRI, where he's led initiatives tackling the double burden of malnutrition and agriculture and health research. He holds a PhD in human nutrition from the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine. Interview Summary So, you've really had a global view of the agriculture system, and this is captured in your book. And to give some context to our listeners, in your book, you describe the history of the global food system, how it's evolved into this system, sort of warped, if you will, into a mechanism that creates harm and it destroys more than it produces. That's a pretty bold statement. That it destroys more than it produces, given how much the agriculture around the world does produce. Tell us a bit more if you would. Yes, that statement actually emerged from recent work by the Food Systems Economic Commission. And they costed out the damage or the downstream harms generated by the global food system at around $15 trillion per year, which is 12% of GDP. And that manifests in various ways. Health harms or chronic disease. It also manifests in terms of climate crisis and risks and environmental harms, but also. Poverty of food system workers at the front line, if you like. And it's largely because we have a system that's anachronistic. It's a system that was built in a different time, in a different century for a different purpose. It was really started to come together after the second World War. To mass produce cheap calories to prevent famine, but also through the Green Revolution, as that was picking up with the overproduction of staples to use that strategically through food aid to buffer the West to certain extent from the spread of communism. And over time and over the last 50 years of neoliberal policies we've got a situation where food is less and less viewed as a human right, or a basic need. It's seen as a commodity and the system has become increasingly financialized. And there's a lot of evidence captured by a handful of transnationals, different ones at different points in the system from production to consumption. But in each case, they wield huge amounts of power. And that manifests in various ways. We have, I think a system that's anachronistic The point about it, and the problem we have, is that it's a system revolves around maximizing profit and the most profitable foods and products of those, which are actually the least healthy for us as individuals. And it's not a system that's designed to nourish us. It's a system designed to maximize profit. And we don't have a system that really aims to produce whole foods for people. We have a system that produces raw ingredients for industrial formulations to end up as ultra processed foods. We have a system that produces cattle feed and, and biofuels, and some whole foods. But it, you know, that it's so skewed now, and we see the evidence all around us that it manifests in all sorts of different ways. One in three people on the planet in some way malnourished. We have around 12 million adult deaths a year due to diet related chronic disease. And I followed that from colonial times that, that evolution and the way it operates and the way it moves across the world. And what is especially frightening, I think, is the speed at which this so-called nutrition transition or dietary transition is happening in lower income or middle income countries. We saw this happening over in the US and we saw it happening in the UK where I am. And then in Latin America, and then more Southeast Asia, then South Asia. Now, very much so in Sub-Saharan Africa where there is no regulation really, apart from perhaps South Africa. So that's long answer to your intro question. Let's dive into a couple of things that you brought up. First, the Green Revolution. So that's a term that many of our listeners will know and they'll understand what the Green Revolution is, but not everybody. Would you explain what that was and how it's had these effects throughout the food systems around the world? Yes, I mean around the, let's see, about 1950s, Norman Borlag, who was a crop breeder and his colleagues in Mexico discovered through crop breeding trials, a high yielding dwarf variety. But over time and working with different partners, including well in India as well, with the Swaminathan Foundation. And Swaminathan, for example, managed to perfect these new strains. High yielding varieties that doubled yields for a given acreage of land in terms of staples. And over time, this started to work with rice, with wheat, maize and corn. Very dependent on fertilizers, very dependent on pesticides, herbicides, which we now realize had significant downstream effects in terms of environmental harms. But also, diminishing returns in as much as, you know, that went through its trajectory in terms of maximizing productivity. So, all the Malthusian predictions of population growth out running our ability to feed the planet were shown to not to be true. But it also generated inequity that the richest farmers got very rich, very quickly, the poorer farmers got slightly richer, but that there was this large gap. So, inequity was never really properly dealt with through the Green Revolution in its early days. And that overproduction and the various institutions that were set in place, the manner in which governments backed off any form of regulation for overproduction. They continued to subsidize over production with these very large subsidies upstream, meant that we are in the situation we are now with regard to different products are being used to deal with that excess over production. So, that idea of using petroleum-based inputs to create the foods in the first place. And the large production of single crops has a lot to do with that Green Revolution that goes way back to the 1950s. It's interesting to see what it's become today. It's sort of that original vision multiplied by a billion. And boy, it really does continue to have impacts. You know, it probably was the forerunner to genetically modified foods as well, which I'd like to ask you about in a little bit. But before I do that, you said that much of the world's food supply is governed by a pretty small number of players. So who are these players? If you look at the downstream retail side, you have Nestle, PepsiCo, Coca-Cola, General Mills, Unilever. Collectively around 70% of retail is governed by those companies. If you look upstream in terms of agricultural and agribusiness, you have Cargill, ADM, Louis Dreyfus, and Bunge. These change to a certain extent. What doesn't change very much are the numbers involved that are very, very small and that the size of these corporations is so large that they have immense power. And, so those are the companies that we could talk about what that power looks like and why it's problematic. But the other side of it's here where I am in the UK, we have a similar thing playing out with regard to store bought. Food or products, supermarkets that control 80% as Tesco in the UK, Asta, Sainsbury's, and Morrisons just control. You have Walmart, you have others, and that gives them immense power to drive down the costs that they will pay to producers and also potentially increase the cost that they charge as prices of the products that are sold in these supermarkets. So that profit markup, profit margins are in increased in their favor. They can also move around their tax liabilities around the world because they're transnational. And that's just the economic market and financial side on top of that. And as you know, there's a whole raft of political ways in which they use this power to infiltrate policy, influence policy through what I've called in Chapter 13, the Dark Arts of Policy Interference. Your previous speaker, Murray Carpenter, talked about that with regard to Coca-Cola and that was a very, yeah, great example. But there are many others. In many ways these companies have been brilliant at adapting to the regulatory landscape, to the financial incentives, to the way the agriculture system has become warped. I mean, in some ways they've done the warping, but in a lot of ways, they're adapting to the conditions that allow warping to occur. And because they've invested so heavily, like in manufacturing plants to make high fructose corn syrup or to make biofuels or things like that. It'd be pretty hard for them to undo things, and that's why they lobby so strongly in favor of keeping the status quo. Let me ask you about the issue of power because you write about this in a very compelling way. And you talk about power imbalances in the food system. What does that look like in your mind, and why is it such a big part of the problem? Well, yes. And power manifests in different ways. It operates sometimes covertly, sometimes overtly. It manifests at different levels from, you know, grassroots level, right up to national and international in terms of international trade. But what I've described is the way markets are captured or hyper concentrated. That power that comes with these companies operating almost like a cartel, can be used to affect political or to dampen down, block governments from regulating them through what I call a five deadly Ds: dispute or dispute or doubt, distort, distract, disguise, and dodge. And you've written very well Kelly, with I think Kenneth Warner about the links between big food and big tobacco and the playbook and the realization on the part of Big Tobacco back in the '50s, I think, that they couldn't compete with the emerging evidence of the harms of smoking. They had to secure the science. And that involved effectively buying research or paying for researchers to generate a raft of study shown that smoking wasn't a big deal or problem. And also, public relations committees, et cetera, et cetera. And we see the same happening with big food. Conflicts of interest is a big deal. It needs to be avoided. It can't be managed. And I think a lot of people think it is just a question of disclosure. Disclosure is never enough of conflict of interest, almost never enough. We have, in the UK, we have nine regulatory bodies. Every one of them has been significantly infiltrated by big food, including the most recent one, which has just been designated to help develop a national food stretch in the UK. We've had a new government here and we thought things were changing, beginning to wonder now because big food is on that board or on that committee. And it shouldn't be, you know. It shouldn't be anywhere near the policy table anyway. That's so it's one side is conflict of interest. Distraction: I talk about corporate social responsibility initiatives and the way that they're designed to distract. On the one hand, if you think of a person on a left hand is doing these wonderful small-scale projects, which are high visibility and they're doing good. In and off themselves they're doing good. But they're small scale. Whereas the right hand is a core business, which is generating harm at a much larger scale. And the left hand is designed to distract you from the right hand. So that distraction, those sort of corporate CSR initiatives are a big part of the problem. And then 'Disguise' is, as you know, with the various trade associations and front groups, which acted almost like Trojan horses, in many ways. Because the big food companies are paying up as members of these committees, but they don't get on the program of these international conferences. But the front groups do and the front groups act on in their interests. So that's former disguise or camouflage. The World Business Council on Sustainable Development is in the last few years, has been very active in the space. And they have Philip Morris on there as members, McDonald's and Nestle, Coke, everybody, you know. And they deliberately actually say It's all fine. That we have an open door, which I, I just can't. I don't buy it. And there are others. So, you know, I think these can be really problematic. The other thing I should mention about power and as what we've learned more about, if you go even upstream from the big food companies, and you look at the hedge funds and the asset management firms like Vanguard, state Capital, BlackRock, and the way they've been buying up shares of big food companies and blocking any moves in annual general meetings to increase or improve the healthiness of portfolios. Because they're so powerful in terms of the number of shares they hold to maximize profit for pension funds. So, we started to see the pressure that is being put on big food upstream by the nature of the system, that being financialized, even beyond the companies themselves, you know? You were mentioning that these companies, either directly themselves or through their front organizations or the trade association block important things that might be done in agriculture. Can you think of an example of that? Yes, well actually I did, with some colleagues here in the UK, the Food Foundation, an investigation into corporate lobbying during the previous conservative government. And basically, in the five years after the pandemic, we logged around 1,400 meetings between government ministers and big food. Then we looked at the public interest NGOs and the number of meetings they had over that same period, and it was 35, so it was a 40-fold difference. Oh goodness. Which I was actually surprised because I thought they didn't have to do much because the Tory government was never going to really regulate them anyway. And you look in the register, there is meant to be transparency. There are rules about disclosure of what these lobbying meetings were meant to be for, with whom, for what purpose, what outcome. That's just simply not followed. You get these crazy things being written into the those logs like, 'oh, we had a meeting to discuss business, and that's it.' And we know that at least what happened in the UK, which I'm more familiar with. We had a situation where constantly any small piecemeal attempt to regulate, for example, having a watershed at 9:00 PM so that kids could not see junk food advertised on their screens before 9:00 PM. That simple regulation was delayed, delayed. So, delay is actually another D you know. It is part of it. And that's an example of that. That's a really good example. And you've reminded me of an example where Marian Nestle and I wrote an op-ed piece in the New York Times, many years ago, on an effort by the WHO, the World Health Organization to establish a quite reasonable guideline for how much added sugar people should have in their diet. And the sugar industry stepped in in the biggest way possible. And there was a congressional caucus on sugar or something like that in our US Congress and the sugar industry and the other players in the food industry started interacting with them. They put big pressure on the highest levels of the US government to pressure the WHO away from this really quite moderate reasonable sugar standard. And the US ultimately threatened the World Health Organization with taking away its funding just on one thing - sugar. Now, thankfully the WHO didn't back down and ultimately came out with some pretty good guidelines on sugar that have been even stronger over the years. But it was pretty disgraceful. That's in the book that, that story is in the book. I think it was 2004 with the strategy on diet, physical activity. And Tommy Thompson was a health secretary and there were all sorts of shenanigans and stories around that. Yes, that is a very powerful example. It was a crazy power play and disgraceful how our government acted and how the companies acted and all the sort of deceitful ways they did things. And of course, that's happened a million times. And you gave the example of all the discussions in the UK between the food industry and the government people. So, let's get on to something more positive. What can be done? You can see these massive corporate influences, revolving doors in government, a lot of things that would argue for keeping the status quo. So how in the world do you turn things around? Yeah, good question. I really believe, I've talked about a lot of people. I've looked a lot of the evidence. I really believe that we need a systemic sort of structural change and understanding that's not going to happen overnight. But ultimately, I think there's a role for a government, citizens civil society, media, academics, food industry, obviously. And again, it's different between the UK and US and elsewhere in terms of the ability and the potential for change. But governments have to step in and govern. They have to set the guardrails and the parameters. And I talk in the book about four key INs. So, the first one is institutions in which, for example, there's a power to procure healthy food for schools, for hospitals, clinics that is being underutilized. And there's some great stories of individuals. One woman from Kenya who did this on her own and managed to get the government to back it and to scale it up, which is an incredible story. That's institutions. The second IN is incentives, and that's whereby sugar taxes, or even potentially junk food taxes as they have in Columbia now. And reforming the upstream subsidies on production is basically downregulating the harmful side, if you like, of the food system, but also using the potential tax dividend from that side to upregulate benefits via subsidies for low-income families. Rebalancing the system. That's the incentive side. The other side is information, and that involves labeling, maybe following the examples from Latin America with regard to black octagons in Chile and Mexico and Brazil. And dietary guidelines not being conflicted, in terms of conflicts of interest. And actually, that's the fourth IN: interests. So ridding government advisory bodies, guideline committees, of conflicts of interests. Cleaning up lobbying. Great examples in a way that can be done are from Canada and Ireland that we found. That's government. Citizens, and civil society, they can be involved in various ways exposing, opposing malpractice if you like, or harmful action on the part of industry or whoever else, or the non-action on the part of the government. Informing, advocating, building social movements. Lots I think can be learned through activist group in other domains or in other disciplines like HIV, climate. I think we need to make those connections much more. Media. I mean, the other thought is that the media have great, I mean in this country at least, you know, politicians tend to follow the media, or they're frightened of the media. And if the media turned and started doing deep dive stories of corporate shenanigans and you know, stuff that is under the radar, that would make a difference, I think. And then ultimately, I think then our industry starts to respond to different signals or should do or would do. So that in innovation is not just purely technological aimed at maximizing profit. It may be actually social. We need social innovation as well. There's a handful of things. But ultimately, I actually don't think the food system is broken because it is doing the wrong thing for the wrong reason. I think we need to change the system, and I'll say that will take time. It needs a real transformation. One, one last thing to say about that word transformation. Where in meetings I've been in over the last 10 years, so many people invoke food system transformation when they're not really talking about it. They're just talking about tweaking the margins or small, piecemeal ad hoc changes or interventions when we need to kind of press all the buttons or pull all the levers to get the kind of change that we need. And again, as I say, it was going to take some time, but we have to start moving that direction. Do you think there's reason to be hopeful and are there success stories you can point to, to make us feel a little bit better? Yeah, and I like that word, hope. I've just been reading a lot of essays from, actually, Rebecca Solnit has been writing a lot about hope as a warrior emotion. Radical hope, which it's different to optimism. Optimism went, oh, you know, things probably will be okay, but hope you make it. It's like a springboard for action. So I, yes, I'm hopeful and I think there are plenty of examples. Actually, a lot of examples from Latin America of things changing, and I think that's because they've been hit so fast, so hard. And I write in the book about what's happened in the US and UK it's happened over a period of, I don't know, 50, 60 years. But what's happened and is happening in Latin America has happened in just like 15 years. You know, it's so rapid that they've had to respond fast or get their act together quickly. And that's an interesting breed of activist scholars. You know, I think there's an interesting group, and again, if we connect across national boundaries across the world, we can learn a lot from that. There are great success stories coming out Chile from the past that we've seen what's happening in Mexico. Mexico was in a terrible situation after Vicente Fox came in, in the early 2000s when he brought all his Coca-Cola pals in, you know, the classic revolving door. And Mexico's obesity and diabetes went off to scale very quickly. But they're the first country with the sugar tax in 2014. And you see the pressure that was used to build the momentum behind that. Chile, Guido Girardi and the Black Octagon labels with other interventions. Rarely is it just one thing. It has to be a comprehensive across the board as far as possible. So, in Brazil, I think we will see things happening more in, in Thailand and Southeast Asia. We see things beginning to happen in India, South Africa. The obesity in Ghana, for example, changed so rapidly. There are some good people working in Ghana. So, you know, I think a good part of this is actually documenting those kind of stories as, and when they happen and publicizing them, you know. The way you portrayed the concept of hope, I think is a really good one. And when I asked you for some examples of success, what I was expecting you, you might say, well, there was this program and this part of a one country in Africa where they did something. But you're talking about entire countries making changes like Chile and Brazil and Mexico. That makes me very hopeful about the future when you get governments casting aside the influence of industry. At least long enough to enact some of these things that are definitely not in the best interest of industry, these traditional food companies. And that's all, I think, a very positive sign about big scale change. And hopefully what happens in these countries will become contagious in other countries will adopt them and then, you know, eventually they'll find their way to countries like yours and mine. Yes, I agree. That's how I see it. I used to do a lot of work on single, small interventions and do their work do they not work in this small environment. The problem we have is large scale, so we have to be large scale as well. BIO Dr. Stuart Gillespie has been fighting to transform our broken food system for the past 40 years. Stuart is a Non-Resident Senior Fellow in Nutrition, Diets and Health at theInternational Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI). He has been at the helm of the IFPRI's Regional Network on AIDs, Livelihoods and Food Security, has led the flagship Agriculture for Nutrition and Health research program, was director of the Transform Nutrition program, and founded the Stories of Change initiative, amongst a host of other interventions into public food policy. His work – the ‘food fight' he has been waging – has driven change across all frontiers, from the grassroots (mothers in markets, village revolutionaries) to the political (corporate behemoths, governance). He holds a PhD in Human Nutrition from the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine. 

Daniel Lacalle es profesor en IE Business School y en IEB Business School.El 30 de enero, fue mencionado en la Cámara de Representantes de los Estados Unidos por el congresista Joe Wilson, de Carolina del Sur, quien citó su artículo No se olviden de Cuba.Ha participado como ponente y conferencista principal en los foros más prestigiosos a nivel mundial, incluyendo la Reserva Federal en Houston, la Fundación Heritage en Washington, la London School of Economics, el Funds Society Forum en Miami, el Foro Económico Mundial, el Forecast Summit en Perú, el Mining Show en Dubái, Our Crowd en Jerusalén, la Cumbre de Inversores de Nordea en Oslo, entre muchos otros.----Youtube: https://www.youtube.com/@UCoA66gIqiExUIjwyw1cB9Dw X: twitter.com/dlacalle----

For today's episode, host Josh Sidman sat down with Willem Buiter to discuss the dynamics of monetary systems. Our conversation was held and recorded in June of 2025.Dr. Buiter is an economist, commentator, author, and consultant. Formerly, he was Chief Economist and Special Counsel to the President of the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development, a European multilateral development institution similar to the World Bank. Dr. Buiter also served as an External Member of the Bank of England's Monetary Policy Committee. From 2010 to 2018, he was the Chief Global Economist at Citigroup, and remained an economic advisor until 2019. Being an expert in Economics, he has held numerous teaching positions at esteemed universities, such as Yale and the London School of Economics. He briefly served as a consultant for the IMF's Research Department in the 70s, and has written extensively on economic issues for publications such as the Center for Economic Policy Research, Project Syndicate, Jackson Hole Economics, as well as his books and blogs. I'd love to cover more of his impressive positions, but there are too many for this introduction alone. Dr. Buiter earned his bachelor's from the University of Cambridge, and his master's and Ph.D. from Yale, all in economics. Together, we discussed Dr. Buiter's critique of fiat currencies, his thoughts on Central Bank Digital Currencies, and why monetary policy is so important to maintaining economic stability.To check out more of our content, including our research and policy tools, visit our website: https://www.hgsss.org/

Tom Bodrovics welcomes back Adrian Day, CEO of Adrian Day Asset Management and Manager of the Euro Pacific Gold Fund, to discuss the economic and monetary landscape under President Trump's second term, the implications of tariffs, and the outlook for gold and other commodities. Adrian begins by addressing the potential impact of Trump's trade policies, particularly tariffs, on inflation and the global financial system. He argues that while tariffs are often seen as inflationary, they can be deflationary by reducing demand for certain goods. However, he warns that a weakening U.S. dollar and a potential loss of its reserve currency status could lead to higher inflation domestically, as dollars previously held abroad return to the U.S. Adrian emphasizes that while the U.S. dollar's dominance is not immediately threatened, Trump's policies could accelerate its decline, with significant consequences for the economy. The conversation then shifts to the U.S. debt market, where Adrian highlights the challenges of financing the growing deficit. He notes that major buyers of U.S. Treasuries, such as China and Japan, are reducing their holdings, and domestic buyers like regional banks and the Federal Reserve are also pulling back. This could lead to higher interest rates and increased pressure on the U.S. economy. Adrian predicts that the Federal Reserve may eventually return to quantitative easing (QE) to support the bond market, which would be bullish for gold. He also discusses the disconnect between gold prices and gold mining stocks, attributing it to the lack of participation from North American investors. However, he believes this is changing as economic conditions shift, with gold stocks offering significant value and expanding margins. Adrian also touches on other commodities, particularly copper and uranium, which he sees as critical for the global energy transition. He concludes by advising investors to focus on value rather than price, emphasizing that the gold market is still in its early stages of a bull run. Timestamps:0:00:00 - Introduction00:01:22 - Trump & U.S. Trade Policy00:06:30 - Multi Res. Currency World00:09:13 - A Bretton Woods Event?00:13:42 - Cad. Dairy & Tariffs00:15:57 - U.S. Economic Concerns?00:22:12 - U.S. Debt Global Outlook00:34:26 - Fed Rates & Q.E.00:40:20 - Gold & Market Participants00:45:28 - Gold Sentiment00:48:28 - Gold & Geopolitical Risk00:51:58 - Monetary Response & Gold00:54:39 - Gold Price & Mining Equities01:00:29 - GSR, Silver, & Cycles01:05:02 - Royalty Companies & Value01:07:30 - Capital & Explorers01:10:42 - Other Sectors/Countries01:16:12 - Concluding Thoughts Guest Links:Website: https://adrianday.com/ Adrian Day is considered a pioneer in promoting the benefits of global investing in the United Kingdom. A native of London, after graduating with honors from the London School of Economics, Mr. Day spent many years as a financial investment writer, where he gained a large following for his expertise in searching out unusual investment opportunities around the world. He has also authored two books on the subject of global investing: International Investment Opportunities: How and Where to Invest Overseas Successfully and Investing Without Borders. His latest book, widely praised by readers, is Investing in Resources: How to Profit from the Outsized Potential and Avoid the Risks (Wiley, 2010). Mr. Day is a recognized authority in both global and resource investing. He is frequently interviewed by the press, domestically and abroad. He is a popular speaker and is frequently invited to lecture at financial conferences and seminars around the world. His pleasures include fine dining, reading (especially history), and the opera.

In this episode, we're diving deep into the latest breakthroughs in integrative mental health and wellness with special guest Kirkland Newman, founder of the Mind Health 360. Kirkland is an Anglo-American journalist, philanthropist, and Founder of MindHealth360, a global platform dedicated to integrative mental health and functional medicine psychiatry. 

Today's episode focuses on the mid-term elections in the Philippines which were held in May of this year, including all local elected positions, all seats in the House of Representatives, and twelve of the twenty-four seats in the Senate. The elections have been viewed as a reflection on the administration of President Ferdinand ‘Bongbong' Marcos, Jr. and as especially consequential for the future of Vice-President Sara Duterte. She was impeached by the House of Representatives in February 2025, setting the stage for a trial by the Senate, but with her continuing popularity making her a serious contender for the presidency in 2028. To interpret the mid-term elections, Dialogues on Southeast Asia has turned to Dr. Sharmila Parmanand, an Assistant Professor in Gender, Development and Globalisation in the Department of Gender Studies at the London School of Economics and Political Science (LSE) and also an Associate and member of the Management Committee of the LSE's Saw Swee Hock Southeast Asia Centre. Dr. Parmanand's research focuses on the intersection of gender and politics in the Philippines, ranging from sex work and migration policies to the connections between gender, nationalism, and democracy. She is currently working on her first book, titled Saving Our Sisters: The Politics of Anti-Trafficking and Sex Work in the Philippines, but she is also busy conducting research, writing, and publishing on other fronts, including a new collaborative project on queer activism across Southeast Asia. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/new-books-network

Today's episode focuses on the mid-term elections in the Philippines which were held in May of this year, including all local elected positions, all seats in the House of Representatives, and twelve of the twenty-four seats in the Senate. The elections have been viewed as a reflection on the administration of President Ferdinand ‘Bongbong' Marcos, Jr. and as especially consequential for the future of Vice-President Sara Duterte. She was impeached by the House of Representatives in February 2025, setting the stage for a trial by the Senate, but with her continuing popularity making her a serious contender for the presidency in 2028. To interpret the mid-term elections, Dialogues on Southeast Asia has turned to Dr. Sharmila Parmanand, an Assistant Professor in Gender, Development and Globalisation in the Department of Gender Studies at the London School of Economics and Political Science (LSE) and also an Associate and member of the Management Committee of the LSE's Saw Swee Hock Southeast Asia Centre. Dr. Parmanand's research focuses on the intersection of gender and politics in the Philippines, ranging from sex work and migration policies to the connections between gender, nationalism, and democracy. She is currently working on her first book, titled Saving Our Sisters: The Politics of Anti-Trafficking and Sex Work in the Philippines, but she is also busy conducting research, writing, and publishing on other fronts, including a new collaborative project on queer activism across Southeast Asia. Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/southeast-asian-studies

Today's episode focuses on the mid-term elections in the Philippines which were held in May of this year, including all local elected positions, all seats in the House of Representatives, and twelve of the twenty-four seats in the Senate. The elections have been viewed as a reflection on the administration of President Ferdinand ‘Bongbong' Marcos, Jr. and as especially consequential for the future of Vice-President Sara Duterte. She was impeached by the House of Representatives in February 2025, setting the stage for a trial by the Senate, but with her continuing popularity making her a serious contender for the presidency in 2028. To interpret the mid-term elections, Dialogues on Southeast Asia has turned to Dr. Sharmila Parmanand, an Assistant Professor in Gender, Development and Globalisation in the Department of Gender Studies at the London School of Economics and Political Science (LSE) and also an Associate and member of the Management Committee of the LSE's Saw Swee Hock Southeast Asia Centre. Dr. Parmanand's research focuses on the intersection of gender and politics in the Philippines, ranging from sex work and migration policies to the connections between gender, nationalism, and democracy. She is currently working on her first book, titled Saving Our Sisters: The Politics of Anti-Trafficking and Sex Work in the Philippines, but she is also busy conducting research, writing, and publishing on other fronts, including a new collaborative project on queer activism across Southeast Asia. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/political-science

In this episode of the Leadership Insights I Wish I Had Known at the Start series, Julia speaks with Falak Madhani, a health systems leader working in Pakistan, where she leads research and programmes focused on primary care, mental health, and suicide prevention in low-resource settings. Falak shares two hard-earned insights she wishes she'd known earlier. The first: stepping back as a leader too soon, even with the best intentions, can leave your team without the support and skill set only you can offer. Her second insight explores the complexity of leading with a deep sense of social justice. Falak speaks about the emotional cost of navigating injustice, whether it's systemic inequality, condescension in global health settings, or being overlooked despite expertise. She explains how leaders must balance their moral clarity with strategic patience choosing which fights to pick, and when. Listen to this episode to explore what it means to lead when you're tired, tested, and deeply committed to change. About the Guest: Falak Madhani is a health systems leader who works on the development and evaluation of healthcare approaches geared towards equity and social justice. Falak is passionate about enabling – through working closely with communities, patients, and healthcare providers – the creation of home-grown solutions that can make holistic primary care equitably available in low-resource settings. Falak's research portfolio is focused on primary care, mental healthcare and suicide prevention in Northern Pakistan. She holds an MSc Public Health in Developing Countries (now called the Public Health for Development program) from the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine and a liberal arts degree from Bennington College, in Vermont, USA. Falak is also trained in humanistic integrative therapy. As a part of the AKU Brain and Mind Institute, Falak leads the establishment of a Living Labs framework in Northern Pakistan for brain and mind research and programme development. She is concurrently Head of Research at Aga Khan Health Service, Pakistan.

In episode 13 of this season we are joined by the Food Foundation's Rebecca Tobi, and Plant-Based Health Professionals UK's founder, Dr Shireen Kassam to discuss the latest Food Foundation report 'Meat Facts'.  Rebecca is a Registered Nutritionist (RNutr), has a masters in Nutrition for Global Health from the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, and is the Food Foundation's Senior Business and Investor Engagement manager.Rebecca's in-depth knowledge of the report, combined with Shireen's expertise on the health implications of eating red, processed, and other meats, ensure this is a really rich discussion. The UK may continue to ignore the health warnings that are associated with meat consumption but hopefully anyone who is listening to this episode will take action to curb their own consumption for individual and planetary health.Find the full report  here: https://foodfoundation.org.uk/publication/meat-factsThe latest UK National Diet and Nutrition Survey:https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/national-diet-and-nutrition-survey-2019-to-2023/national-diet-and-nutrition-survey-2019-to-2023-reportThe excellent Food Foundation Podcast, Pod Bites: https://foodfoundation.org.uk/podcasts

Thank you Leeshai Lemish for joining me on the Born To Talk Radio Show Podcast. Meet Leeshai. Leeshai has been with Shen Yun Performing Arts for 19 years. He earned his bachelor's degree in Chinese history and language from Pomona College, in California. Then he received his master's in International Relations from the London School...

Paul Kearns, Irish journalist living in Tel Aviv / Nabih Bulos, Middle East Bureau Chief for the LA Times / Fawaz Gerges, Professor of International Relations at The London School of Economics

Ce vendredi 20 juin, le conclave sur les retraites et les moyens qui permettront de compenser les dépenses publiques ont été abordés par Stéphane Carcillo, responsable de la division revenu/travail de l'OCDE et professeur à Sciences Po, Xavier Jaravel, professeur à la London School of Economics, et Jean-Marc Vittori, éditorialiste aux Échos, dans l'émission Les Experts, présentée par Nicolas Doze sur BFM Business. Retrouvez l'émission du lundi au vendredi et réécoutez la en podcast.

Ce vendredi 20 juin, la difficulté de fixer des niveaux de salaires équitables, la juste balance entre la tentative d'augmenter les primes d'activité au risque de gonfler les cotisations sociales et celle de les diminuer pour alléger les prélèvements sociaux au détriment de la main-d'œuvre qualifiée, ont été abordées par Stéphane Carcillo, responsable de la division revenu/travail de l'OCDE et professeur à Sciences Po, Xavier Jaravel, professeur à la London School of Economics, et Jean-Marc Vittori, éditorialiste aux Échos, dans l'émission Les Experts, présentée par Nicolas Doze sur BFM Business. Retrouvez l'émission du lundi au vendredi et réécoutez la en podcast.

Ce vendredi 20 juin, Nicolas Doze a reçu Stéphane Carcillo, responsable de la division revenu/travail de l'OCDE et professeur à Sciences Po, Xavier Jaravel, professeur à la London School of Economics, et Jean-Marc Vittori, éditorialiste aux Échos, dans l'émission Les Experts sur BFM Business. Retrouvez l'émission du lundi au vendredi et réécoutez la en podcast.

Since Israel launched air strikes on Iran last Friday, the two states have traded missiles with mounting casualties on both sides.Iranian military leaders have been killed as have some of its nuclear scientists but the country's citizens have borne the brunt of the air attacks.Israel has said its rationale for the middle-of-the-night attack that sparked the war was its need to ensure, for its own protection, that Iran's nuclear programme is halted.How close Iran is to actually having a nuclear bomb is unclear but for Israel to obliterate entirely the nuclear threat it needs the US to join the war, to send its “bunker buster” mega bomb to destroy the Fordo uranium enrichment facility buried deep in the mountains.But if the US does enter the war, what will that mean for the region? And what is Donald Trump's position on entering the war?Is there any chance that Iran, whose military capabilities have been weakened, will surrender?Faraz Gergez, Professor of International Relations at the London School of Economics and Political Science. He is the author of several books on the Middle East including The Great Betrayal: The Struggle for Freedom and Democracy in the Middle East.Presented by Bernice Harrison. Produced by Declan Conlon. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Crisis Cycle: Challenges, Evolution, and Future of the Euro (Princeton UP, 2025) John Cochrane Luis Garicano Klaus Masuch PRINCETON UNIVERSITY PRESS, 2025 Launched 26 years ago, the euro was never expected to have an easy life but it wasn't supposed to be this hard. A three-year solvency crisis, a string of bailouts, and a rescue by the European Central Bank (ECB) was followed by threats of deflation, negative interest rates, massive purchases of government debt, a global pandemic, a European land war, and an inflation surge. The euro area emerged from these tests but may not survive the next without reforms during this period of relative calm. In Crisis Cycle, economists John Cochrane, Luis Garicano, and Klaus Masuch call for critical reforms to rebuild the system's incentive structure and stop the ECB's unsought mission creep. "A beautiful ship was constructed," they write. "Out at sea, it ran into severe storms. Its captain and crew patched the holes as best they could. Now though it is time to return to the dry dock and fix the ship properly". John Cochrane is a professor of economics at Stanford University, best-known for his work on asset prices and the fiscal theory of the price level. Luis Garicano is an economics professor at the London School of Economics and former vice-chair of the Renew group in the European Parliament. Klaus Masuch recently retired from the ECB, where he was head of the monetary policy strategy department and a negotiator for the "Troika" of official creditors during the sovereign-debt crisis. To see the authors' own book recommendations, click here. Tim Gwynn Jones is an economic and political-risk analyst at Medley Advisors, who also writes 242.news on Substack. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/new-books-network

In this episode I talk with Dr. Cornelis Bennema, professor of New Testament at the London School of Theology. He has written several books, including his brand-new Imitation in Early Christianity: Mimesis and Religious-Ethical Formation, out now on Eerdmans. In this book he explores the concept of mimesis or imitation in early Christianity and how imitation is central to Christian ethics and discipleship. We discuss the prevalence of the concept in the New Testament, its Greco-Roman and Jewish backgrounds, how the gospels and Paul represent imitation, whether “What Would Jesus Do” is an accurate phrase, and how Christians should imitate Jesus today. Media Referenced:Imitation in Early Christianity: https://a.co/d/3OpJFPUAmazon Author Page: https://www.amazon.com/stores/Cornelis-Bennema/author/B001ICN4JS?ref=ap_rdr&isDramIntegrated=true&shoppingPortalEnabled=true&ccs_id=fe5ed7ca-b153-43bb-a092-835bc042579e The Protestant Libertarian Podcast is a project of the Libertarian Christian Institute and a part of the Christians For Liberty Network. The Libertarian Christian Institute can be found at www.libertarianchristians.com.Questions, comments, suggestions? Please reach out to me at theprotestantlibertarian@gmail.com.  You can also follow the podcast on Twitter: @prolibertypod, and YouTube, @ProLibertyPod, where you will get shorts and other exclusive video content. For more about the show, you can go to theprotestantlibertarianpodcast.com. If you like the show and want to support it, you can! Go to libertarianchristians.com, where you can donate to LCI and buy The Protestant Libertarian Podcast Merch! Also, please consider giving me a star rating and leaving me a review, it really helps expand the show's profile! Thanks!

Perfectionism is on the rise among young people. This hour, we look at the impact of perfectionism on mental health and how to deal with perfectionist tendencies. Plus: what the self-help industry can tell us about our interest in perfection. GUESTS: Thomas Curran: Assistant professor of psychological and behavioral science at the London School of Economics and Political Science and author of The Perfection Trap: Embracing the Power of Good Enough Tamar Gendler: Professor of philosophy, psychology, and cognitive science and Dean of the Faculty of Arts and Sciences at Yale University Kristen Meinzer: Co-host of the How to Be Fine and By the Book podcasts, among others, and author of How to Be Fine: What We Learned from Living by the Rules of 50 Self-Help Books The Colin McEnroe Show is available as a podcast on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, Amazon Music, TuneIn, Listen Notes, or wherever you get your podcasts. Subscribe and never miss an episode! Subscribe to The Noseletter, an email compendium of merriment, secrets, and ancient wisdom brought to you by The Colin McEnroe Show. Join the conversation on Facebook and Twitter. Colin McEnroe, Jonathan McNicol, and Cat Pastor contributed to this show, which originally aired April 13, 2022. Our programming is made possible thanks to listeners like you. Please consider supporting this show and Connecticut Public with a donation today.Support the show: http://www.wnpr.org/donateSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

For decades, the great fear was overpopulation. Now it's the opposite. How did this happen — and what's being done about it? (Part one of a three-part series, “Cradle to Grave.”) SOURCES:Matthias Doepke, professor of economics at the London School of Economics.Amy Froide, professor of history at the University of Maryland, Baltimore County.Diana Laird, professor of obstetrics and gynecology at the University of California, San Francisco.Catherine Pakaluk, professor of economics at The Catholic University of America. RESOURCES:"Fertility Rate, Total for the United States," (Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis, 2025)."Global fertility in 204 countries and territories, 1950–2021, with forecasts to 2100: a comprehensive demographic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2021," (The Lancet, 2024)."Suddenly There Aren't Enough Babies. The Whole World Is Alarmed." by Greg Ip and Janet Adamy (The Wall Street Journal, 2024)."Taxing bachelors and proposing marriage lotteries – how superpowers addressed declining birthrates in the past," by Amy Froide (University of Maryland, 2021)."Is Fertility a Leading Economic Indicator?" by Kasey Buckles, Daniel Hungerman, and Steven Lugauer (National Bureau of Economic Research, 2018).The King's Midwife: A History and Mystery of Madame du Coudray, by Nina Rattner Gelbart (1999).The Population Bomb, by Paul Ehrlich (1970)."An Economic Analysis of Fertility," by Gary Becker (National Bureau of Economic Research, 1960). EXTRAS:"What Will Be the Consequences of the Latest Prenatal-Testing Technologies?" by Freakonomics Radio (2011).

Day 1,202.Today, we assess the overall strategic picture as Russia sets its sights on one of the regions not illegally annexed after one the most furious, but failed, aerial bombardments of the war. Then we hear more from the fallout of German Chancellor Friedrich Merz's meeting with Donald Trump and from the Polish Presidential election last week, before hearing from a historian of the Cold War about the right, and wrong, lessons we take from that era.Contributors:Francis Dearnley (Executive Editor for Audio). @FrancisDearnley on X.Memphis Barker (Senior foreign correspondent). @memphisbarker on X.James Rothwell (Berlin Correspondent). @JamesERothwell on X.With thanks to Vladislav Zubok (Historian of international relations, London School of Economics). @VladislavZubok1 on X.SIGN UP TO THE NEW ‘UKRAINE: THE LATEST' WEEKLY NEWSLETTER:https://secure.telegraph.co.uk/customer/secure/newsletter/ukraine/ Each week, Dom Nicholls and Francis Dearnley answer your questions, provide recommended reading, and give exclusive analysis and behind-the-scenes insights – plus maps of the frontlines and diagrams of weapons to complement our daily reporting. It's free for everyone, including non-subscribers.Content Referenced:‘The World of the Cold War' by Vladislav Zubok:https://www.penguin.co.uk/books/303799/the-world-of-the-cold-war-by-zubok-vladislav/9780241696149 Ukraine's race to recovery after Russian devastation (Memphis Barker in The Telegraph):https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2025/06/07/ukraines-race-to-rebuild-power-plants-russian-bombardment/ How Merz plans to avoid an Oval Office pasting (James Rothwell in The Telegraph):https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2025/06/05/german-chancellor-merz-plan-avoid-oval-office-pasting/ Watch: New footage of Ukraine's daring drone raid on Russian planes (The Telegraph):https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2025/06/08/watch-new-footage-ukraine-drone-attack-russia-planes/ Putin unleashes a summer offensive to break Ukraine (The Economist):https://www.economist.com/europe/2025/06/08/putin-unleashes-a-summer-offensive-to-break-ukraine President Zelensky's Interview with ABC News:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d7gSoZ0_M8E Subscribe: telegraph.co.uk/ukrainethelatestEmail: ukrainepod@telegraph.co.uk Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.