Organ for breathing air
Dr. Martin answers questions sent in by our listeners. Some of today's topics include: Lung infection & probiotics Thyroid Support Formula Wet macular degeneration Fibromyalgia & immuno-compromised conditions Upper limit for vitamin D Salt & blood pressure Serotonin roll-on for anxiety Coffee beans Eating liver Urinary problems & swollen prostate Petechiae red spots
Diane, at the age of 78 and a half, hails from Jersey City, New Jersey, where she grew up as an only child. She lived most of her adult life in Jersey before moving to Northeast Pennsylvania. In this serene setting, she leads a fulfilling life on a semi-homestead, cultivating her garden and caring for her chickens. Her companions include her Great Dane, Lola, and a variety of other pets. In her personal life, Diane celebrates a remarkable 50-year marriage with her husband Richard, and together they raised five children. She is a cherished grandmother to seven grandchildren and a great-grandmother to two. Professionally, Diane devoted her career to nursing, serving in diverse roles including wound care, renal/dialysis, and geriatric care. Prior to her retirement, she worked as a nurse practitioner, providing psychiatric care to male inmates at the Pennsylvania State Department of Corrections. Diane's life has been marked by a struggle with what is now known as Binge Eating Disorder, a condition she describes as "food addiction." This disorder led to significant weight fluctuations, with her weight varying by 50 to 100 pounds over several years. She found partial success in weight management through her involvement in 12-step programs addressing food addiction, though she continued to experience bouts of uncontrolled food binges. Despite these challenges, Diane's health was largely uneventful until her later years. In 2017, she was diagnosed and treated for colon cancer, undergoing surgeries, chemotherapy, and radiation. It was during this period that she adopted a keto diet, eventually transitioning to a carnivore diet in January 2020. This dietary shift resulted in an 80-pound weight loss and enabled her to maintain a consistent weight for almost three years, a new achievement in her life. Diane also faced additional health issues, including a second battle with cancer in her lung in 2022 and a significant cardiac procedure to replace an aortic valve. She has successfully recovered from these health challenges and now relishes her retirement, energetically managing her homestead. Diane has a history of depression and anxiety dating back to early adolescence. She was previously treated with various SSRIs and medications but has since ceased using psychiatric drugs. Currently, she enjoys a more stable mood than in the past. Timestamps: 00:00 Trailer and introduction. 02:48 Childhood food addiction led to weight problems. 05:58 Eating disorders and addiction, recent battle with colon cancer and treatment. 10:00 Two surgeries, chemo, radiation, keto, recovery. 13:25 Lung surgery caused neuropathy, essential oil helped. 17:20 Carnivore lifestyle eliminates addiction and anxiety. 21:33 Colon cancer: surgery successful, no recurrence. 24:14 Humans don't need colons for nutrition. 27:37 Carnivore diet: simple, easy, suits laziness. 30:58 Vigor and exercise key to healthy aging. 33:19 Expressive aphasia, COVID pneumonia, brain improvement. 38:17 Enjoying morning coffee without dairy or sugar. 42:01 Favorite rant, regretful about past choices. 44:07 Healthcare broken, Rivero offers alternative solution. 50:18 Support during challenging times, lonely road, indulging in desserts, outlook on life, future plans, having fun. 52:17 Gave up control and stress for peace. 54:17 Hens bring joy and benefits to us. See open positions at Revero: https://jobs.lever.co/Revero/ Join Carnivore Diet for a free 30 day trial: https://carnivore.diet/join/ Carnivore Shirts: https://merch.carnivore.diet Subscribe to our Newsletter: https://carnivore.diet/subscribe/ . #revero #shawnbaker #Carnivorediet #MeatHeals #HealthCreation #humanfood #AnimalBased #ZeroCarb #DietCoach #FatAdapted #Carnivore #sugarfree
In this episode of the Progressive Dairy Podcast, host Kimmi Devaney visits with Kiley Heim from Heim's Hillcrest Dairy in Wisconsin. As the next generation on her family's dairy farm in Wisconsin, Heim manages their calves and has taken on a few additional responsibilities from her grandma, including preparing meals for employees during the workday and accounting. Here's a breakdown of the episode: About Heim and her family's dairy farm [~0:45]Warming and cooling rooms for their newborn calves [~2:10]Managing calves in their new calf barn [~3:40]Lung ultrasounds [~4:15]Beef on dairy [~6:10]Calf management in hutches and in the calf barn [~6:40]The most important thing Heim has learned since she started managing the calves a few years ago [~7:55]Building a network of helpful people [~9:15]Providing meals for employees [~10:30]New office with a kitchen [~12:30]Meal planning [~13:15]Why Heim decided to come back to the farm as the next generation [~14:15]Heim's favorite part of being back on the farm [~15:25]Future goals [~15:50]Rapid-fire questions [~16:20]
Event Objectives:Become familiar with new evidence for the management of community acquired pneumonia.Understand how to improve your antimicrobial stewardship in management of community pneumonia by decreasing unnecessary use of broad spectrum antibiotics and prescribing antibiotics for the shortest effective duration.Learn about free Connecticut Children's resources available to outpatient pediatric providers to keep up to date with the management of community acquired pneumonia and other infectious diseases.Resources:https://www.connecticutchildrens.org/clinical-pathways/https://app.firstline.org/en/clients/187-connecticut-childrensClaim CME Credit Here!
Keegan served in the Marine Corps and deployed to South American and Iraq. He's an Appleton Firefighter/Paramedic. Keegan has also fought and beat stage 4 Lung cancer. Keegan's story is hard to quantify in words. He changed his diet, workout, and lifestyle to beat cancer. There's many people who look up to him and respect him. One of the strongest and bravest men I know. I want to thank him for spending 2.5 hours with me just sharing stories and his journey. Happy 248th Birthday to the United States Marine Corps
Please be patient at the start as we had a couple of drop outs during the recording but it all resolves very quickly. David Thrussell is a composer, musician, performer, writer, film maker, lecturer. researcher & all-round sweet family man that's looks & lives like a hillbilly. He headlines the bands Snog & Black Lung. His OMNI Recording company specialises in rare lost recording of which “The Ballad of J.F.K “A musical history of the John F Kennedy assassination (1963-68) is just one of many releases. Yet a very special one indeed. On this the 60th anniversary year of the murder of J.F.K, Jay Katz & Aspasia thought it most important to discuss with David the reasons behind constructing this incredible compilation album & his astounding research literally at ground zero (many times musically) into this continuing mystery.This show is part of the Spreaker Prime Network, if you are interested in advertising on this podcast, contact us at https://www.spreaker.com/show/4602609/advertisement
Episode 155: Diabetic Foot Infection GuidelinesFuture Dr. Perez presents the updates on lung cancer screening by the American Cancer Society. Future Dr. Danusantoso explains the classification, diagnosis, and treatment of diabetic foot infections according to the guidelines published by the International Working Group on the Diabetic Foot (IWGDF). Dr. Arreaza adds comments and anecdotes. You are listening to Rio Bravo qWeek Podcast, your weekly dose of knowledge brought to you by the Rio Bravo Family Medicine Residency Program from Bakersfield, California, a UCLA-affiliated program sponsored by Clinica Sierra Vista, Let Us Be Your Healthcare Home. This podcast was created for educational purposes only. Visit your primary care provider for additional medical advice.Intro: Lung cancer screening update.Written by Luz Perez, MSIII, Ross University School of Medicine. Editing by Hector Arreaza, MD.Hello, my name is Luz Perez and today I will talk about lung cancer screening.As a reminder, lung cancer is the top cause of cancer-related death in men and women worldwide. In the United States, lung cancer causes the death of about 154,000 people each year. Smoking is the most significant risk factor for developing lung cancer, a risk that directly correlates to how much and how long a person has smoked. Despite the efforts to decrease lung cancer-related deaths, which include screening of patients at risk and counseling on smoking cessation, many patients go undiagnosed in part because lung cancer can be asymptomatic but also because many people at risk did not meet the criteria for screening, according to previous guidelines… BUT On November 1, 2023, the American Cancer Society updated its guidelines for lung cancer screening to decrease mortality by lung cancer in the US. The updated lung cancer screening guidelines were published in November, which is Lung Cancer Awareness Month. This guideline aims to expand eligibility criteria for lung cancer screening. Previously, the guidelines covered people only between the ages of 55-74 who were current smokers or had quit within the past 15 years and had a 30 or more pack-year smoking history.The new guidelines recommend annual screening with low-dose CT (LDCT) scan for people who are 50-80 years old who are current or former smokers and who have a 20 or more pack-year of smoking history . This change means that about 5 million people who would previously not qualify for screening are now eligible for this potentially lifesaving screening exam.Additionally, the American Cancer Society emphasizes the significance of shared decision-making between patients and healthcare providers on lung cancer screening and smoking cessation. This includes ways to help patients stop smoking by providing counseling and interventions including medications. For patients who are eligible for screening, having a full discussion of the lung cancer screening process including the purpose of the procedure, risks and benefits of low-dose CT, and recommendations from other organizations, is key in the shared decision-making process. Perhaps, the most important step in the implementation of these new guidelines is ensuring that medical professionals talk to their patients about them and make them aware of the importance of screening for lung cancer. In this way, we can reduce mortality and other consequences of this devastating disease. Written by Maria Danusantoso, MSIV, Ross University School of Medicine. Editing by Hector Arreaza, MD.Update to Guidelines for Treatment of Diabetic Foot InfectionsIntroductionIn October 2023, the International Working Group on the Diabetic Foot (IWGDF) and the Infectious Disease Society of America (IDSA) collaborated and published an update to the 2019 guideline on the diagnosis and management of infections of the foot in persons with diabetes mellitus.The present guidelines include a list of 25 recommendations for diagnosis and management and clinically useful figures and tables including a treatment algorithm, a classification system for defining diabetic foot infections, and empirical antibiotic therapy according to clinical presentation and microbiological data.The goal of this episode is not to provide an exhaustive review of the updated guidelines and algorithms but to highlight what I believe are the most important recommendations. I hope this brief presentation is viewed as an introduction and that this encourages you, the listener, to independently read the guidelines in full and implement them into your own clinical practice.Wound Colonization Versus Wound InfectionBefore jumping into some of the recommendations, I want to take some time to discuss briefly how to classify diabetic foot infections. Most clinicians, including myself, will see a patient with diabetes with a foot ulcer or wound and want to treat it with antibiotics or admit the patient to the hospital. However, the updated guidelines propose that antibiotics and/or admission are not always indicated. For clinicians, there needs to be an awareness that wound colonization and wound infection are not the same. Wound colonization by bacteria is defined by the presence of bacteria on a wound surface without evidence of invasion of the host tissues. Colonization, then, can be considered a constant phenomenon as we live in a bacteria-filled world. Comment: If we culture our intact skin, we may find pathogens, that's why wound cultures even if they are positive, do not indicate there is infection. Tell us about infection.In contrast, wound infection is a disease state caused by the invasion and multiplication of microorganisms in host tissues that induce an inflammatory response in the host, usually followed by tissue damage. Therefore, since all wounds are colonized – often with potentially pathogenic microorganisms – we cannot define wound infection using only the results of wound cultures. Instead, diabetic foot infections are a clinical diagnosis based on the presence of manifestations of an inflammatory process involving a foot wound located below the malleoli. These signs and symptoms of inflammation may be masked in persons with diabetes especially if they have some level of baseline peripheral neuropathy, peripheral artery disease, or immune dysfunction.Classification of Diabetic Foot Infections.To assist with the classification of diabetic foot infections, the updated guidelines include a table for defining the presence and severity of an infection of the foot in a person with diabetes. Again, diabetic foot infections are a clinical diagnosis, and the clinical classification of infection can be described as: 1) uninfected, 2) mild, 3) moderate +/- O if osteomyelitis is present, 4) severe +/- O if osteomyelitis is present. Uninfected has no systemic or local symptoms or signs of infection. Mild infection is when at least two of the following are present: local swelling or induration, erythema between 0.5-2 cm around the wound in any direction, local tenderness or pain, local increased warmth, purulent discharge, and there is no other cause of an inflammatory response of the skin present (e.g., trauma, gout, acute Charcot neuro-arthropathy, fracture, thrombosis, or venous stasis).Moderate infection is without systemic manifestations and involves erythema extending 2 cm or more from the wound margin and/or involves tissue deeper than skin and subcutaneous tissues (e.g., tendon, muscle, joint, and bone) +/- the presence of osteomyelitis. The surrounding erythema and the depth of wound are key element in the classification of the wounds. Severe infection is associated with systemic manifestations and meets systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS) criteria as manifested by 2 or more of the following: temperature below 36°C or above 38°C, heart rate greater than 90 beats per minute, respiratory rate greater than 20 breaths per minute, white blood cell count greater than 12,000/mm3 or greater than 10% immature (band) forms +/- presence of osteomyelitis. Features of Osteomyelitis on Plain X-RayWe have mentioned osteomyelitis quite a few times in this episode, so what are some ways we can diagnose osteomyelitis? Most commonly, osteomyelitis is diagnosed via imaging either with plain X-rays or MRI. When looking at plain X-rays, there are a few features that are characteristic of diabetes-related osteomyelitis of the foot of which we should be aware regardless of our status as radiologists. Some of these features include bone sclerosis with or without erosion, abnormal soft tissue density or gas density in the subcutaneous fat, or new or evolving radiographic features on serial images spaced several weeks apart such as loss of bone cortex, focal demineralization, periosteal reaction or elevation. Changes in x-ray may be a late finding and indicate that the osteomyelitis is established.General Treatment Recommendations for Diabetic Foot InfectionsIn the updated guidelines, recommendation 11 states to not treat clinically uninfected foot ulcers with systemic or local antibiotic therapy when the goal is to reduce the risk of new infection or to promote ulcer healing. As previously said, diabetic foot infections are a clinical diagnosis. So if clinically the wound does not meet criteria to be classified as a mild, moderate, or severe infection, this recommendation proposes that no antibiotic treatment is the best treatment so as not to expose patients to potentially unnecessary and harmful treatment and to not promote antibiotic resistance in patients, which would potentially make treating diabetic foot infections more challenging in the future. We still want to very closely monitor the wound every 2-7 days and promote wound healing with pressure offloading, keeping the wound and the surrounding skin clean and dry, and other non-antibiotic management for local wound care.What are some common bacteria?.When it is indicated to treat diabetic foot infections per the guidelines, recommendation 14 states to target aerobic gram positive pathogens only for people with a mild diabetes related foot infection. These pathogens include beta hemolytic streptococci and Staphylococcus aureus including methicillin-resistant strains if indicated. Additionally, recommendation 15 advises not to empirically target antibiotic therapy against Pseudomonas aeruginosa in cases of diabetes-related foot infection in temperate climates. However, it is appropriate to use empirical treatment of P. aeruginosa if it has been isolated from cultures of the affected site within the previous few weeks or in a person with moderate or severe infection who resides in tropical/subtropical climates.Antibiotic Treatment Duration RecommendationThe final recommendation we have time to discuss in this episode is regarding antibiotic treatment duration. For mild infections, oral antibiotics (such as cephalexin or Bactrim) for a duration of 1-2 weeks is appropriate. However, if the infection is improving but is extensive and is resolving slower than expected or if the patient has severe peripheral artery disease, it is reasonable to consider extending treatment for up to 3-4 weeks.For moderate or severe infections without osteomyelitis, a total treatment duration of 2-4 weeks is recommended starting initially with IV antibiotics before transitioning to oral antibiotics. Antibiotic selection will depend on multiple factors, such as recent antibiotic use, or MRSA risk factors. For example, if the patient took antibiotics recently, they could receive Zosyn® and ceftriaxone. If osteomyelitis is present, antibiotic treatment duration can be anywhere from 2 days to 6 weeks depending on the amount of source control achieved. Ideally, we should wait to have bone resection before giving antibiotics, but we know that antibiotics are given promptly in the ER.In the cases of a resected infected bone or joint (when complete source control is achieved), a duration of 2-5 days is recommended, starting with IV antibiotics before transitioning to oral antibiotics. If there is minor amputation of the infected foot but there remains a positive wound culture or positive margins are seen on pathology (inflammatory cells are seen at the proximal margin of the amputated section), a 3-week antibiotic treatment duration is recommended, again starting with IV before transitioning to oral antibiotics.For diabetes-related foot osteomyelitis without bone resection or amputation, a 6-week course of antibiotics is recommended, again initially with IV antibiotics before transitioning to oral. In all the situations where there is a transition from IV to oral antibiotics, this transition may only occur once there are clinical signs of improvement, for example, improving erythema surrounding the wound, resolution of tenderness or purulent drainage, or SIRS criteria is no longer met.Summary: For more details regarding the 2023 update to the guidelines on the diagnosis and treatment of foot infection in persons with diabetes, please refer to the complete guidelines which can be accessed on the IWGDF Guidelines website and via the citations listed in the References. As a reminder, this podcast episode is not an exhaustive review of the guidelines, but, instead, a brief introduction to some of the recommendations. Thank you for listening and I hope you learned something new!_____________________________Conclusion: Now we conclude episode number 155 “Diabetic foot guidelines.” Future Dr. Perez started this episode with an introduction about the new guidelines to screen for lung cancer, then future Dr. Danusantoso gave an excellent summary about the classification and treatment of diabetic foot infections. Our patients with diabetes must have foot self-awareness and report any concerns to their family physicians or podiatrists so they can get prompt treatment.This week we thank Hector Arreaza, Luz Perez, and Maria Danusantoso. Audio editing by Adrianne Silva.Even without trying, every night you go to bed a little wiser. Thanks for listening to Rio Bravo qWeek Podcast. We want to hear from you, send us an email at RioBravoqWeek@clinicasierravista.org, or visit our website riobravofmrp.org/qweek. See you next week! _____________________References:McDowell, Sandy, New Lung Cancer Screening Guideline Increases Eligibility. American Cancer Society, published on November 1, 2023, Cancer.org. https://www.cancer.org/research/acs-research-news/new-lung-cancer-screening-guidelines-urge-more-to-get-ldct.htmlWolf AMD, Oeffinger KC, Shih TY, et al. Screening for lung cancer: 2023 guideline update from the American Cancer Society [published online ahead of print, 2023 Nov 1]. CA Cancer J Clin. 2023;10.3322/caac.21811. doi:10.3322/caac.21811. Link: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/37909877/Moniuszko, Sara. Lung cancer screening guidelines updates by American Cancer Society to include more people. CBS News, updated on November 3, 2023. https://www.cbsnews.com/news/lung-cancer-screening-guideline-american-cancer-society-update/Deffebach, M. E., & Humphrey, L. (2023). Screening for lung cancer. UpToDate. Retrieved November 6, 2023, UpToDate. https://www.uptodate.com/contents/screening-for-lung-cancerÉric Senneville, Zaina Albalawi, Suzanne A van Asten, Zulfiqarali G Abbas, Geneve Allison, Javier Aragón-Sánchez, John M Embil, Lawrence A Lavery, Majdi Alhasan, Orhan Oz, Ilker Uçkay, Vilma Urbančič-Rovan, Zhang-Rong Xu, Edgar J G Peters, IWGDF/IDSA Guidelines on the Diagnosis and Treatment of Diabetes-related Foot Infections (IWGDF/IDSA 2023), Clinical Infectious Diseases, 2023; ciad527, https://doi.org/10.1093/cid/ciad527Senneville, Éric et al. 2023. “IWGDF/IDSA Guidelines on the Diagnosis and Treatment of Foot Infection in Persons with Diabetes.” IWGDF Guidelines. Retrieved November 6, 2023 (https://iwgdfguidelines.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/07/IWGDF-2023-04-Infection-Guideline.pdf). Royalty-free music used for this episode: Gushito, “Gista Mista”, downloaded on November 16th, 2023, from https://www.videvo.net/
Lung cancer is the No. 1 cancer killer in the United States every year. And while smoking rates across the country are on a downward trend, the effects from smoking can linger for years. The American Cancer Society suggests there are over 5 million smokers or previous smokers who should undergo annual screenings for lung cancer – with early detection being the best shot at beating the deadly disease. Guests: Jonathan Fialkow, M.D., Chief of Cardiology at Baptist Hospital and Chief Population Health Officer at Baptist Health. Mark Dylewski, M.D., Thoracic and Robotic Surgeon, Miami Cancer Institute
TWiM provides thoughts on providing better training for a non-academic career, and help celebrate Black in Microbiology Week with a 2023 paper by Ari Kozik, a co-founder of Black Microbiologists Association and Assistant Professor at the University of Michigan Hosts: Vincent Racaniello, Michael Schmidt, Michele Swanson, Petra Levin, Become a patron of TWiM. Links for this episode Better training for a non-academic career (Nat Micro) Nature career site ASM career site Prosper - Unlocking postdoc career potential Airway microbiota in obesity and asthma (J Allerg Clin Immunol) A vision for human microbiome research (mSphere) Microbes in Models (ASM) Climate change and microbes (ASM) Take the TWiM Listener survey! Send your microbiology questions and comments (email or recorded audio) to firstname.lastname@example.org
Lead singer Tom Templar of Green Lung is always exploring different worlds within his creative journey. He talks with The Hook Rocks about the band finding its voice through this exploration both musically and lyrically on their latest record "This Heathen Land". Please enjoy the episode! Green Lung https://greenlung.co.uk/ https://www.facebook.com/greenlungband/ https://www.instagram.com/greenlungband/ The Hook Rocks https://www.facebook.com/TheHookRocks/ https://www.instagram.com/thehookrocks/ https://twitter.com/TheHookRocks Pantheon Podcasts http://pantheonpodcasts.com/ https://www.facebook.com/PantheonPodcasts https://www.instagram.com/pantheonpods/ https://twitter.com/pantheonpods Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices
Pulmonologist and integrative medicine practitioner, Dr. Ni-Cheng Liang, discusses various lung issues such as asthma, COPD, lung cancer, and what to eat & drink to improve respiratory function, including for Covid and flu. She explains current medical literature about integrative lung care, and also shares her personal cancer journey and how she found mindfulness to be a powerful tool in her healing process. Dr. Liang leads a guided mindfulness practice and 4-7-8 breathing exercise for listeners towards the end of the episode. In this episode you'll hear:2:00 - What is a pulmonologist?2:30 - Difference between complementary v. integrative medicine3:45 - Integrative medicine for the lungs.7:45 - Medical literature about integrative lung care.9:00 - Mindfulness, yoga, breath work, acupressure.14:10 - Food as medicine for lung conditions.17:45 - What to eat & drink to improve respiratory function, including for Covid and flu.24:10 - Dairy and the lungs.26:15 - Gut-lung microbiome.29:00 - Group visits in pulmonary care.31:00 - Impact of Dr. Liang's personal cancer experience on her present day practice.34:50 - Benefits of mindfulness practice for lung cancer.36:20 – Short mindfulness practice with 4-7-8 breathing.42:10 - Vaping, joints and e-cigarettes - is there one that's safer for lungs?Referenced in the episode:https://awakenbreath.org/https://www.mindfulhealthcarecollective.com/https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/28569578/https://www.thoracic.org/patients/patient-resources/resources/mindfulness.pdfhttps://www.mindful.org/a-12-minute-4-7-8-breathing-meditation/https://www.thoracic.org/patients/patient-resources/resources/integrative-medicine.pdfCredits:Host - Dr. Sabrina Falquier, MD, CCMS, DipABLMSound and Editing - Will CrannExecutive Producer - Esther Garfin©2023 Alternative Food Network Inc.
On today's episode, meet Dr. Robert Van Haren. Dr. Van Haren is a thoracic surgeon at the University of Cincinnati UC Health. He received his Bachelor's Degree from the University of Michigan and his Medical Degree from Michigan State. He completed his surgical training at the University of Miami Jackson Memorial, followed by a thoracic surgery fellowship at MD Anderson Cancer Center. His training was focused on minimally invasive techniques such as robotic surgery and comprehensive multidisciplinary care for complex cancers, and while in training he completed a clinical research fellowship and obtained a Master's Degree in public health at the University of Miami. His current clinical and research efforts focus on improving outcomes after surgery for lung and esophageal diseases.
If you've been diagnosed with COPD (chronic obstructive pulmonary disease) and are looking for ways to manage the disease and improve your life quality, you should read Senior Health Care Hub's latest guide "Coping With COPD: Lifestyle Tips And Treatments."Learn more at https://seniorhealthcarehub.com/coping-with-copd-lifestyle-tips-and-treatments/ Senior Health Care Hub City: New York Address: 60 W 23rd St Website https://seniorhealthcarehub.com/ Phone +1 877 675 4340 Email email@example.com
In this compelling episode, we welcome Dr. Holt, a board-certified Pulmonary and Critical Care physician, associate professor at the University of Miami, and a key member of the Miami VA Healthcare System. Dr. Holt leads a highly successful lung cancer screening program, showcasing his commitment to veteran care through early detection and advanced treatment methods.Key Highlights: Lung Precision Oncology Program (LPOP) Overview: Dr. Holt dives into the core mission of LPOP – identifying and examining lung tumors in their earliest stages, crucial for effective treatment. With lung cancer being a significant threat to veterans, LPOP's targeted approach is a game-changer in cancer care. Innovative Diagnostic Techniques: Discover how navigational bronchoscopy and CT scans are transforming lung cancer detection, offering non-invasive, precise tumor mapping. These technologies enable personalized treatments tailored to the patient's specific needs and the molecular profile of the tumor. Advancing Lung Cancer Treatment: Learn about the latest advancements in lung cancer therapy, focusing on targeted treatments with fewer side effects. Dr. Holt emphasizes the importance of early screening and the role of LPOP in driving scientific research and medical breakthroughs. Nationwide Impact of LPOP: Explore how LPOP, with its network of hubs across the country, is making advanced lung cancer screening and treatment accessible to veterans nationwide, contributing significantly to cancer research. Veteran Involvement and Advocacy: Understand how veterans are at the heart of LPOP, not only benefiting from cutting-edge treatments but also participating in the progress of scientific research. Resources and Events: Visit Lung Cancer Kilts Research Cures for more information on lung cancer advocacy and research. The Great American Smokeout: A reminder of the importance of smoking cessation in preventing lung cancer and supporting overall health. Tune in to this episode for an in-depth look at how Dr. Holt and the LPOP initiative are reshaping lung cancer care for veterans, offering hope and cutting-edge treatment options.
Show Notes and Transcript Dr Pierre Kory is a doctor who saw the COVID narrative unfold in front of his very eyes as he worked in his hospital. He was one of the very first voices recommending the use of Ivermectin which is the subject of his book that was published earlier this year. But he joins Hearts of Oak today to discuss shedding. Dr Kory has just written a nine part Substack on whether shedding has been the greatest scandal of the jabs. In it he shows how everything we were told was in fact wrong regarding the mRNA shots. Not only do the spike proteins and LNP's not stay in one place in the recipients body, but they can be transferred, from the jabbed to the un-jabbed. We look into the evidence for this and question if this means that the harms and adverse effects can be passed on to those who refused the shot? Pierre Kory, MD, MPA is a Pulmonary and Critical Care Specialist. Co-Developer of effective, evidence/expertise-based COVID Treatment protocols with the medical professionals and science giants of the Front-Line COVID-19 Critical Care Alliance Connect with Pierre... X https://x.com/PierreKory?s=20 SUBSTACK https://substack.com/@pierrekory WEB https://drpierrekory.com/ War on Ivermectin: The Medicine that Saved Millions and Could Have Ended the Pandemic (Hardback, e-book, audio-book)https://amzn.eu/d/9vEv1QV Interview recorded 10.11.23 *Special thanks to Bosch Fawstin for recording our intro/outro on this podcast. Check out his art https://theboschfawstinstore.blogspot.com/ and follow him on GETTR https://gettr.com/user/BoschFawstin and Twitter https://twitter.com/TheBoschFawstin?s=20 To sign up for our weekly email, find our social media, podcasts, video, livestreaming platforms and more... https://heartsofoak.org/connect/ Support Hearts of Oak by purchasing one of our fancy T-Shirts.... https://heartsofoak.org/shop/ Transcript (Hearts of Oak) Dr. Pierre Kory, it is wonderful to have you with us today. Thanks so much for your time. (Pierre Kory MD) Great. Thanks, Peter. Good to join you. Great to have you. And of course, people can follow you @PierreKory is your Twitter handle and of course, your Substack Pierre Kory Medical Musings dot com. That is in the description for those watching and also any of the podcast listening on the go that is all available. And before we kick in, just for the viewers, Pierre is ICU in Lung, specialist, highly published expert in treating COVID -19, all its phases. And I remember you highlighting the benefits of ivermectin really early on. You're also the president and chief medical officer of the non-profit organization, Frontline COVID -19 Medical Care Analysis. And your latest book, War on Ivermectin, The Medicine That Saved Millions and Could Have Ended the Pandemic was published just earlier this year. And that is available again, all the links are in the description. Pierre, I want to get into your sub -stack, Shedding. Is Shedding the Greatest Scandal of the Job? But I think I've come across you quite a bit. I possibly was back whenever you did that interview with Joe Rogan and with Bret Weinstein. And that was probably, what, first half of 2021, wasn't it? It was actually June of 2021. They were pretty close together, yeah. And how, the thing, because I've talked to Robert Malone about how things changed for him slightly after doing Joe Rogan. I guess it was a similar experience for yourself. Yeah, I don't know, maybe in good and bad ways. I mean, it was, my career hadn't ended yet, but I don't know if that was one of the triggers for it. was going to happen anyway. But I should say my former career didn't end yet. But, you know, from my standpoint, I think it brought the knowledge of the efficacy of ivermectin to, you know, a significant portion of, I guess you could say, the world. Absolutely. And before we jump in, obviously people can watch you, you'll be speaking at the International COVID Summit over in Bucharest and we will certainly be putting out the links for that and people can watch the live stream. So the viewers want to find a little bit more, just days later you'll be there in Romania. But if I did, on Substack, the issue on shedding, something that's come up a lot. And you've, I think you've done nine different parts of it, different articles on shedding. Maybe I could start just by asking you why you believe this is such an important topic, because you put a lot of time, a lot of research, it's all there with the references. There is a lot of information. I'm wondering why you felt it was so important to focus on this topic at this time. That's a good question. I mean, I would say is two -fold. Number one is, you know, I have a private practice which specializes in the treatment of long COVID and long VAX, which is essentially a severe chronic fatigue syndrome, been around for decades, but, and it's typically caused by infections. But with SARS -CoV -2 or COVID -19, it's occurring at a very high rate. And in our practice of over a thousand patients, I mean, we have maybe a couple of dozen patients where they know that their chronic symptoms will flare or worse, or they'll kind of relapse and go backwards. And they report repeatedly around exposures to vaccinated people. And so we saw the phenomenon occurring clinically. And you know, it's always been talked about because people kind of was like, is shedding possible? I don't think people ever really looked into it. But when I travel and I speak and I go to conferences or lectures, I will tell you the first question at every Q and A is, is shedding real? Is it happening? And, you know, there was, there's bits and pieces of evidence that we had to suggest that it could happen. I think my clinical anecdotes are somewhat unconvincing because people don't have the science for why it would happen. And so, you know, I finally decided to say, you know, what is known? What can we find out? And I was absolutely shocked, just shocked at what I discovered. You know, I work largely off of a paper written by Helene Banoun from a very prominent institute in France, but she did this work independently. And she covered, you know, the history of regulatory standards for gene therapy products. So kind of the first points I make in that series is that number one, the COVID mRNA vaccines meet the definition, the FDA's definition of a gene therapy product, right? Which is anytime you inject genetic material into someone which is then transcribed into a protein, that's gene therapy. And gene therapies are proliferating. It's not just the vaccines. And if you look back into the history of gene therapies, You know, the regulatory standards are that shedding can happen with these things. They define shedding as the excretion of any bacterial or viral product of the vaccine and or protein of the vaccine. So whatever the protein is, is doing, can that product be, be excreted, right, or shed. And the FDA has clear statements in regulatory documents from 2015 that all gene therapy products must undergo not only animal but human shedding studies. So the fact that our regulators knew that this was required had essentially mandated it. And then to find out somewhat unsurprisingly at this point that those studies were not done because there's many types of studies that weren't done, right, we were doing science at warp speed. And so I'm finding that, you know, the first thing I found is really concerning emphasis that these things should be studied. And then actually a colleague of mine, Sasha Latypova, I was talking to her about shedding a few weeks ago. And she said, you know, I came across a gene therapy product where in its insert, it clearly warns that the gene therapy can be excreted. It was for an eye disease. It can be excreted in tears and secretions and dressings and that you should take special care. They said for seven days and that's an issue we can talk about later is how long can the shedding go on? But clearly it's a risk. It's a known risk of gene therapy products. And here we go. We launch a global genetic therapy vaccine campaign without doing shedding studies. And that's kind of like the first thing that I found. And I was like, whoa, this isn't just hearsay or social media inventions. I mean, this is really coming out of the regulators framework. But of course, the passing on of something wouldn't be an issue if it was absolutely safe. So they're separate to find out whether shedding happens or not, but it wouldn't be an issue. But yet right at the beginning of, I think, the first article, you highlight that the manufacturers, the regulatory authorities would have seen the the excess deaths and the vaccine injuries from VAERS. That data was there early on. They've ignored this. I mean, I mean, let's put this all into context. Right. So the lack of sufficient safety studies is should be unsurprising when you see how this campaign was conducted. Right. So they were rushed to production and, you know, disseminated and championed across the world. But you know, the only way and along with that, we saw those of us COVID scientists, we saw unending censorship and propaganda. So the censorship started very early, right? You start talking badly about the vaccines, you got de-platformed off of Twitter off of any social media. So there's like no tolerance for anyone questioning or bringing up concerns. The vaccine injured were not only getting pulled down off social media, but then they were getting attacked by others, right? Because of this, this propaganda campaign that they're safe, effective, do it for grandma, save all of us. And then they kind of presented the unvaccinated as these villains, right, that there was a scourge causing all of this. I mean, it was absurd what they were doing. But the censorship and propaganda has been absolutely shocking to me. And it's on every facet of this vaccine. And, you know, let's put shedding in the context of all that we've learned about the vaccine. It's just the latest. I mean, if the story can't get worse, or actually, I should say, I can't imagine how could get worse, because to me, the shedding should also be thought about in terms of what we recently discovered, which is that all the Moderna and Pfizer vials were contaminated with DNA fragments and DNA plasmids, you know, with very scary promoter sequence in there that we know promote cancer and integration into the genome. So if those can be excreted, and transmitted and absorbed by someone, you know, I have worries, right? I'm not vaccinated, but you know, I live in a world I travel, I circulate, I meet around 1000s of unvaccinated people a month. What is the risk to me? Now, I'm not someone who gets symptomatic from being exposed to vaccinated people. I think that's a small proportion. And I don't know how big or small that proportion is. I think it's a minority. But it really is quite troubling. All that we're finding out about the vaccines, you know, the life insurance industry exploding with, you know, huge spikes in the healthiest members of society. You know, the death claims being paid out going into the billions. And, you know, the life insurance industry is weird. And put that in the context, right, whereas literally, our public health authorities are saying nothing to see here safe and effective. And those of us are screaming, look at the life insurance industry data. And, and that that's only some parts of the data, the disability roles, right? Government data showing an explosion of people landing on disability who were employed, right? They were employed. These weren't people who were unemployed and disabled and finally got disability. They went from full employment to disability. And we saw that all temporarily related to the proliferation of mandates. So, so that seems really bad, but to go back to shedding, Peter, you know, so the two things, right, is that there are regulatory standards. The shedding should be done because they are a possibility. They're in inserts of similar products. But how do these things shed and the, you know, although I've said, you know, these should be understood as a gene therapy product, I think it's much more important to categorize them for what they are, which is they're a nanoparticle technology. So nanoparticles are these tiny little sacks with a fatty membrane, the lipid nanoparticle, and they enclose the mRNA. And when you inject those lipid nanoparticles, they're supposed to be able to enter the cell and then deliver the genetic instructions to the cell to make the protein. The problem is they don't stay locally in the arm, right? So in order to shed from someone, you'd have to get it to distribute to either other organs, tissues, or fluids in the body. And all of the nanoparticle technology or the review papers, and, you know, it's probably 10 or 15 years now that nanoparticles have been studied as a therapeutic delivery mechanism, all of the papers say over and over more studies need to be done to ensure safety or to evaluate the potential toxicity because the nanoparticles disseminate widely throughout the body. We already know that with these COVID mRNA vaccines. We have FOIA documents that we've discovered where regulators flat out said that they knew that the lipid nanoparticles were distributing, but once it enters the body, it starts to produce spike. Now spike protein can also be taken up by the natural counterpart of the synthetic lipid nanoparticles, which we use two different terms. So the LNP or the lipid nanoparticles is a synthetic thing. That's how they enclose the mRNA. But in our bodies, we also have nanoparticles, which are called exosomes, which are essentially the kind of function as hormones. They direct cellular activities and function. and so they circulate widely in our body and exosomes can enclose the spike. So what's injected into us distributes widely, the product spike protein also distributes widely and can be enclosed in exosomes. And then when you talk about these exosomes or LMPs, essentially these nanoparticles, the most salient thing to know about them is that they literally can pass through almost any physiologic barrier. So they can cross into breast milk, they can cross the placenta, they can be inhaled into the lungs and exhaled in the breath. They can enter through skin, through skin follicles, excreted into sweat. So they're literally almost... I wouldn't say that they can. Yeah, I guess I would say they literally can distribute and disseminate widely. And so so the picture gets worse. It just gets worse and worse. The science is absolutely shocking that we're using nanoparticle technology, where when you look at, you know, kind of landmark papers in the field, they're all crying out for more studies. And actually, one of the most shocking things I discovered in one review paper, they literally state that currently there's 1 ,814 consumer products using nanoparticle technology. So this is an example of the human race proliferating a technology where they don't even know the short term or the long term risks. In fact, in these vaccines, they're purposely not looking for those short term and you can bet they're not looking for long term risks. There's a lot to unpack there, the passing over from blood, placenta, I think it was I first came across that name, Naomi Wolf, I think it was Dr. Thorpe had done it and others have have highlighted this. The information is out there and yet it's just business as usual. I thought whenever it came out that it was passing over breast milk, passing over through placenta, passing over to the unborn child, then suddenly there'll be a wake -up. And that really has shocked me that that hasn't woken up people. No, I think the waking up, although we're all trying to do it, we're censored either overtly in terms of major media, mass media ignoring us, with exceptions. I would say conservative or right -of -centre media, at least in the US, seems much more open to discussing all of these issues, but it's what we call the mainstream or corporate controlled media, which definitely has a liberal tend, but they tend to support the government, the agencies, and these prevailing narratives. So it's very hard for us to get our word out to the masses. So one of the things that myself and a colleague would talk about is that, you know, the group of scientific experts that have really studied COVID openly, objectively, debated, brought forth the data, you know, we're still a small circle of the population. And so that all of this knowledge resides in what we call private knowledge. And our entire efforts are trying to bring this private knowledge to common knowledge. It's impossible. Because you have this iron dome of the media sphere, which doesn't allow anything adverse to be disseminated. And in return, you know, shoots at us nothing but disinformation, right? which is information, it's basically propaganda, which is, you know, a story or a message to get you to think or act in a certain way. And you're seeing these constant messages of safety and efficacy, and the need to get more and more of them. And we're sitting there screaming, looking at the toxicity and lethality data. And it, it's very difficult, but I do think that there might be a shift going on. I do think the answer is in independent and alternative media that are not influenced by, you know, the pharmaceutical industry and their advertisers. And that's really where I think the truth can be found. But you're not going to find it in major newspapers. You're not going to find it in high impact medical journals. They will not publish this stuff. So it's a really strange world we live in. I mean, it's quite dystopian, to be honest, especially when you're aware of everything that we're aware of and that we've deeply studied, and no one will listen, I won't say no one, we do reach a certain portion of the population, I don't know what number that is, but we want that number to grow. We're really just trying to do the right thing here. We want the average citizen to be fed accurate information upon which to make decisions, and instead they're being fed with truly manipulated and propagandized information that's trying to direct their actions. A lot of the terms you've mentioned have become more and more discussed, shedding or gene therapy or ivermectin. There are lots of terms that we've come across and I think for me as just a non -medical person, member of the public, it is shocking to hear that these have been talked about. There have been papers on these. It's not as if this has just appeared, these concepts have just come up with a group of people who are speaking misinformation, which is the term used. These are part and parcel, these terms are part and parcel of medical understanding. Yeah, and you're right, so you brought up misinformation because that was actually the point I wanted to make, is that not only is the censorship overt in which, you know, they don't interview us, they don't give us a platform, they don't give us an opportunity to even debate on a show or bring forth our evidence. So that's like literal censorship. But the other form of censorship is the labelling and attacking of our credibility, right? So they dismiss us as misinformation, as disinformation, as un-credible. You see all these whenever I'm mentioned in the media, you see all of these descriptors like controversial fringe, I've heard quack, right wing, which I didn't used to be. I am now but I don't want to get into politics. But um, you know, and it's always attacking our credibility. And that is a form of censorship, because as soon as they make you appear un-credible to the public, guess what, the public doesn't want to listen to, who wants to listen to some controversial doctor who is a misinformation is whose papers have been retracted, you know, all of the things that they've done to us, formerly highly credible academics, like, if you look at my non-profit, right, the FLCCC, you know, I should say the flcc .net. That's our website, if you look at us, in In our specialty, we're five of the most highly published, highly respected experts in our specialty. Paul Marek, who helped found the organization, is the most published practicing intensivist in the history of our specialty. So you look at the five of us who've published, cumulatively, I think something around 1 ,500 peer -reviewed articles throughout our careers. We have a cumulative 120 years in academic medicine, and suddenly we're fringe, quack, right -wing anti -vaxxers? I mean, it truly was shocking. And all of our careers, academic careers, have ended. We're not employable in the system anymore. I'm just trying to describe just how bad the state of science is. And science is still science. Science is good, but it's the influences and the corruption of science. The power of the pharmaceutical industry is absolutely immense. And of course, you're on the front line. I've talked to many who are academics, who are researchers who look at this, but you were there. I don't know whether you still, I've read about you being punished for speaking up, but you would have obviously seen things happening as this progressed through your own eyes, through your own practice. And it wasn't just what you were hearing, it was what you were witnessing. Oh, yeah. I mean, we've we knew things. And that's that's been maybe it's been so chronic now that I'm sort of used to it. But I can go back to those first few months and the things that we knew when I say we, meaning the group of us five, right? Because when we first started the organization and started our work building protocols, we really focus on the ICU phase of the disease or the hospital phase of the disease. We weren't focused on early treatment. We were buried in ICUs, drowning in COVID patients, reading papers incessantly, talking to doctors who had survived the New York wave, that first surge in New York, which I was part of. I landed there April. I did five weeks in my old ICU in Manhattan. We talked to doctors in China and Italy. We learned things so quickly about steroids, hydroxychloroquine, any number, you know, use of anticoagulation. So our protocol from early on was not only mature, but there's not one element that we put on back in March of 2020 that we've taken off. All of them have stood the test of time, but we knew that clinically just based on our experience, expertise, knowledge of pathophysiology, and treating patients. And I want to bring that up because, you know, I listened to an interview with Bobby Kennedy maybe like a month or two ago. And one of the things he said, because I think someone asked the question, you know, what would you have done differently? And one of the things he said is he says, I would have immediately brought together a forum for clinicians, community physicians to share insights, develop, and that's real medicine, right? Especially in emergency, you want to know what people are doing. Is it working? Is it not? and we can share your experience. You know, we'll say, you know, we tried this, doesn't seem to have an effect. This seems to be really important. You can figure things out without these ridiculous randomized controlled trials, especially in a severe acute illness. I mean, it's pretty easy to tell when something's having a positive impact. So, you know, when I look back to those times, and that's just continued, the knowledge that we have gained, we're always in front of the system. And another reason why we're always in front of the system, not because we just have direct experience and observations, but we're doing research that they're not doing. They're wilfully not doing. I mean, like for instance, the shedding studies. I do wanna make one thing before I forget, Peter, that... And I kind of get uncomfortable talking about it because I don't want to betray my colleagues, but I know a group, a team of researchers who actually did do a shedding study. It's very close to publication. They didn't want to share it with us. But from what I understand is they took 100 unvaccinated women and exposed them to other vaccinated women. And then they look for the outcome of reports of abnormal menses. Right. And so apparently they were blinded. They didn't know, you know, exactly who they were up against. And I'm not even sure. Again, I haven't read the actual methods of the paper, but I do know that they're reporting highly positive findings. Meaning positive, meaning they are seeing and measuring a correlation between exposures to the vaccinated and then the development of abnormal menses in the unvaccinated. And that study, I would argue, should be done. And I think it's important you do it in a controlled fashion, but it does not advance our knowledge. We already know, and that was known within weeks of the rollout. You know what's happened on social media. Women all over the country reporting sudden, really disturbing changes in their menstrual cycles, many of whom did not get vaccinated. It was just as their colleagues and other people in their orbits were getting vaccinated. These women said, you know, I've been regular with uncomplicated menses for decades, and suddenly I'm having, you know, cramping, strange blood clots, heavy bleeding, irregular bleeding, long periods, you know, so many different disturbances were happening. And I'm going to tell you that has to be the nanoparticles that are getting absorbed. Either they're containing spike or the mRNA, which, and those things are inflammatory. They're disturbing something in the female body. So, but at least here we have a controlled study or will have a controlled study showing definitively cause and effect. Because it is a requirement for the FDA to have those studies on shedding from gene therapy. I think in one of your Substack you mentioned Pfizer did a study on some rats, but it never was published. They literally haven't followed what they're supposed to follow. No, and there's, you know, maybe this is another good thing we can talk about because, you know, for a long time in COVID, I couldn't understand why the government and its health agencies were behaving in the way I mean, pretty quickly figured out that obviously, they're under regulatory capture, the pharmaceutical companies are directing their behaviours. I mean, if you look at the policies that are being issued, every single one benefited a pharmaceutical industry interest. But what I couldn't understand was what was happening in society, which was the disappearance of biomedical ethics, respect for bodily autonomy, on putting a supreme emphasis on fully informed consent, right, you know, the famous pictures of the, the insert for one of the vaccines that it's blank, right. And so like, we're literally, you know, injecting people with things that we don't even know what the risks are. And, and then the disappearance of natural immunity. And I saw all of these strange things that I thought were bedrock principles, which guided our behaviour, especially as a medical system, they just disappeared. And it finally clicked to me why that happened. And what I discovered was based on the work of Todd Calendar, Sasha Latypova, Catherine Watts, right, they did this kind of legal investigatory work, where they look back over like a century of public health laws, other legislative laws around research. And they discovered that what these vaccines are labelled under or categorized under legally, is that they are a countermeasure. And I'm going to put the word military countermeasure in front of it. Because if you look at Operation Warp Speed, the COO in charge of Operation Warp Speed was a general from the military. We know that, number two, the pharmaceutical companies were all under contract with the Department of Defense, they didn't just bring their own, you know, come up with their own mRNA product, say, hey, we figured out a vaccine, and we're going to produce it and sell it. No, that the military contracted them to do it. And then, you know, when was the last time you've heard of two different pharmaceutical companies coming out with the same product at the same time, right Pfizer, Moderna, same exact time, they suddenly produce these barely tested products. And so you have to understand it as a military exercise. That's the only way I can understand all the behaviours and that's why we like... That's why the ethics of everything that happened change is because it was, I believe, it was a wartime mentality that we there was a perceived or actual attack by a bioweapon. And this was a countermeasure. And this is how you counteract a bioweapon is that you disseminate and launch this countermeasure in order, purportedly in order to save the population. Now, that's a whole other discussion with which is what they knew, did they make mistakes? Like, was this humanitarian catastrophe that they unleashed with the dissemination of a toxic medical product, was that an accident or was it wilful? And that those are discussions that it's very hard to get to but the results are the same. There's a humanitarian catastrophe. No it's huge and we're actually seeing a lot of stuff on AstraZeneca here in the UK which is a whole other issue but doesn't fit into this and I don't want to get side tracked. One of the other headings, one of your other articles was can you absorb lipid nanoparticles from being exposed? And I get, it's a question you said you got asked about the spike proteins, about the LNPs, about the mRNA passed over, does it stay in the body? Does everything get passed over? Does it still have the same potency, the same danger when it gets passed over? How have you answered some of those questions? Yeah, but I think your question is a bit more specific because, So we definitely know that the lipid nanoparticles can be absorbed in any number of routes, right? And the reason why we know this is because there are numbers of studies of biomedical or biopharmaceutical companies developing these nanoparticles and delivering them through those routes. So there's one company developing a product that they're trying to deliver a gene gene therapy to a foetus and then so they're actually delivering it so it crosses the placenta. So we know it crosses the placenta because they've successfully done it. We know that there's a number of these products that can be administered to the skin, nebulized through the lungs, and so all of the routes can be done. Now here's the difference. When you're doing it as a therapy, right, there's probably an increased dose concentration, you know, instilled into the nebulizer, delivered as vapor, or administered as a cream. So those are probably high doses. So can just ambient exposure to the shedding of a vaccinated human, is there enough dose there to exert biological effects on the recipient? And we know that from all of those products, all of those delivery routes did lead to measured biologic changes in the body. That's how those therapies are working. And this whole area of nanoparticle therapeutics is expanding and exploding. And so we know that they can do it therapeutically and now can it happen accidentally and the evidence that I'll put for that is the many dozens of clinical anecdotes which again are these are just like very specific ones and if you look at the clinical anecdotes they're really interesting because the first part that I presented were ones that Scott, my partner in our practice, we observe, you know, just in taking histories and following our patients and caring for our patients. And we have a small cohort of patients who really had to make changes in how they're living their lives. They avoid big crowds. They avoid having people in their home who are vaccinated. And because each time they get ill, and some of them, the descriptions are just outlandish. I mean, And there's one woman who wrote to me from Australia who was probably the worst case. She is so physiologically sensitive that she put a whole list of insights, like of things that who sheds more, who shed less. There's also secondary shedding. Now, if you don't know what that means, secondary shedding is someone who gets exposed to a vaccinated, develop symptoms, and then is around like their partner, wife, or a family member, and then they get symptoms. And so there's a number of reports of even, so it's literally can go from a vaccinated to one and then to the other and both getting ill. And so the possibilities are limitless, but we started with our own clinical observations, very detailed from case notes and histories. And then I also had a couple of early treatment experiences with, I'm gonna call them shedding victims. Back in like March of 2021, two different women came to me after encounters with a practitioner. I think one had seen a massage therapist, the other one had seen an acupuncturist, and they had highly abnormal changes in their menstrual cycles. And they were really concerned, and they were convinced it was shedding. And in those two cases, they both actually normalized with treatment of ivermectin. There's very good reasons why ivermectin would do that. Basically, because it binds to spike protein. It's one of the most tightly binding medicines to spike protein. So, I think it mitigated those effects. It's also very anti -inflammatory. And so, you know, we know, and you can see it in a lot of the anecdotes that were submitted as many people report relief with taking ivermectin either singly or in frequent dosing. But the other thing about those clinical anecdotes that are submitted, many are submitted by physicians, microbiologists, different scientists. And so when you see their descriptions, I mean, it's very serious objective, they put in all of like the relevant variables that you'd want. And when you take a history to kind of rule in or rule other causes for the phenomenon and so when you read the Sontoli anecdotes it's overwhelmingly, if not compelling, it's convincing. I mean this is a real phenomenon that's happening. But again... What proportion of the population is capable of becoming symptomatic from being exposed to a vaccinated person. I think it's a small proportion that are physiologically sensitive, you know, like as a physician, you know, there's kind of three types of patients that you see, which is there are some which are like, you can call them almost like an ox or a bear, like nothing hurts them. Like, you can give them any pharmaceutical at any dose and they don't ever get side effects, they don't complain, and they just seem very resistant to, you know, outside exposures, pharmaceuticals, environmental. And then there's the great middle, which is, you know, variable sensitivities to environmental exposures. And then, you know, there's a distinct set of patients that I've had challenges treating with a cure because you have to use such low doses, you have to change doses slowly, you have to choose medicines carefully because they're so sensitive. And I think the vast majority of shedding victims, as it were, are the physiologically sensitive, but there are exceptions to that. There are definitely exceptions. I definitely have clinical anecdotes of people who got sick after close exposures who don't have that history of sensitivity. So I don't know what the true numbers are. And of course, it's difficult to get the data, I assume, because people have been told safe and effective, therefore it can't be the jab I had. But then similar, if they even share that with the doctor, then the doctor has to listen and be respectful of that concern and not just shut it down. So even if those concerns are there, even if they're being raised, it's a big step to actually that data coming together and getting out and being open to the world to see? Yeah, I would say, you know, I don't know if you've seen some of these, you know, Rasmussen, the polling group, right? They're very highly respected as some of the top pollsters in the business. And, you know, their polls and surveys of the American population have been pretty astounding, right? They've asked certain questions, like most recently, you know, they asked a 1100 sample, do you know anyone who you think died as a result of the vaccine? And it was shocking. 25 % of the country said they did. And that number was evenly split between Republicans and Democrats. So the Republicans was 25%, Democrats were 24%. So it wasn't like a political bias against the vaccines. It's literally on an average sample, it was that many people thought someone died. Now I would love to see a survey because that's the only way we would know how many people truly are effected. I mean, you'd have to ask the question, like, do you believe you've ever gotten ill as a result of being exposed to either a vaccinated or recently vaccinated person? And I would love to know what that number is. I'm not affected. I mean, I'm around hundreds of unvaccinated all the time, I get nothing. I mean, actually, by the way, I'm one of those first categories, I'm pretty resistant to pharmaceuticals, even intoxicants, like, it's very hard to get me drunk and all that stuff. So I'm not kind of surprised that, you know, a spike protein, you know, it doesn't bother me. But, but you know, that DNA plasmid thing is what worries me, because that can be asymptomatic and subclinical. And if those lipid nanoparticles containing DNA plasmids with those promoters are capable, I'm capable of absorbing them, and they theoretically have the capacity to maybe integrate into my genome. Now, I'm getting some really uncomfortable areas, Peter, right? Because this affects everyone on earth. And we don't know the long term effects. And that's why I don't even know what to say about these vaccines anymore. It's dystopian. It is and I guess the industry does not want the information to get out that because people were told you get a jab in the arm and it stays there and suddenly if this is getting passed on it's moved from the arm and that changes a lot of the conversations and all the information that we're given to the public. 100 % and I don't know when or how that's going to change but I guess my hope and belief is that the data on the toxicity and lethality is so immense that I don't know that they keep this under wraps forever, you know, and you are seeing cracks in this wall of censorship, you know, and this suppression of all this adverse information, I think you're seeing cracks, I think you can see more cracks with all the legal efforts that are happening, some of the discoveries around those legal cases. But again, even when you find something, it doesn't make headlines, it doesn't make the news, no one's, you know, no one's disseminating these new troubling discoveries that we're making. You know, it's funny, like, if you look, you know, I'll tell you about my experience that since I posted those sub stacks, I wasn't surprised, because I kind of knew that shedding was a real void of information. And like I said, a common question, so I knew there was general interest in it. But after I posted, I mean, who's reached out to me to learn more? It's folks like you, it's independent podcasters without financial conflicts of interest towards the information that they want to present. And so I'm in the usual media sphere that they've assigned us to, right, which is kind of walled off from the rest of society. But it's okay. I mean, I think there's a large audience that are in, you know, this sphere of, you know, listening to independent podcasters, deeply studied people, who like nuanced discussions, where you can ask questions, you can challenge me, you can say, well, how do you, why do you say that? What's your evidence for that? And like, so we can have these just, I think, really good scientific discussions. But yeah, but you know, Washington Post didn't come call me, New York Times didn't come calling, you know, you know, the big television stations didn't. And so it's not surprising. I guess talking about shedding is, that really does rubber stamp your misinformation to that group of society. You could have gone down a different avenue, but you went for, you've written on Ivermectin, you go for shedding. You go for those important issues. I'm wondering as you were looking through, putting this together, were there surprises? Did you see things you didn't expect? or were there any specific things that stuck out with you? Yeah, I would say the FOIA discovered reports of, events that happened to breastfeeding infants that you like, I already knew that there were studies finding mRNA and spike protein in breast milk. I knew in a general sense that there had been breastfeeding reports, but when you actually find the document describing what happened to some of these infants, things like strokes, paralysis, respiratory arrest, seizures, you know, after a breastfeeding of a recently vaccinated mom, I mean, it was truly shocking. And then we have published papers showing that mRNA is present in breast milk for up to 48 hours. Where's the recommendation to breastfeeding women to not breastfeed for 48 hours after the vaccine? You know, not that that's an easy thing to do, but I mean, there's published evidence that they are ignoring. But yeah, I think it was the descriptions of the breastfeeding events. You know, the pregnancy data I'm already quite familiar with. The problem with the pregnancy data that I presented is that although we know that these vaccines are extremely dangerous for pregnant women and their foetuses because of the overwhelming, reports, and we have sudden increases now in maternal mortality, infant mortality, dropping birth rates, massive explosions, reports of miscarriages, stillbirths, you know, to VAERS. So we know it's a catastrophe, but I can't prove that it's directly a result from the passage of an LNP to the baby, because there's a lot of other things that the vaccine causes in the mother that could explain some of those phenomenon. But it truly is alarming, because it's in what we call the differential diagnosis of all those events happening to pregnant women. Is it because, or the loss of the baby, is it because those LNPs are getting to the baby and making them sick in some way? Or the spike protein is. My guess is that it's spike protein from the mom that's being shed or, you know, the word shed, you could also use the word transmitted or passed. I do think it's a spike protein being passed to the child that's causing a lot of the things that's being measured. Just can I finish off by asking you about the response? I think the latest part on your part nine, I think, is the response that you've had, cases coming forward. Can we just maybe touch on that? And then if there are people watching, listening to this, and they realize, actually, I've experienced this, is there a way for them to pass on that information to you? Yeah, I would say you can make a comment on my sub stack. And I actually, I'm wondering, Peter, how much value it is for me to keep collecting the comments and then making new posts. because like each one of my posts in the series, if you look at the comment section, and that's what I did. So for my last two posts, I just pulled the most compelling and convincing descriptions that different subscribers or readers of mine posted. And, you know, to your question, what I found interesting about the post is that a few sentiments were expressed by the readers and subscribers. One, the one most satisfying was one of extreme gratitude for the work that I did, and the way I explained and presented all the science and evidence, people were just saying over and over, you know, how much they appreciate that work, so that they because they've always wondered about this, right. And I think I presented it in a rather, you know, somewhat succinct, although people could argue about that with nine posts on it. But in a clear, logical, marshalling and presentation of the evidence, I think people really felt grateful that they where, they felt themselves educated. That's one. The second sentiment I saw is the kind of what you kind of mentioned is that people after reading that, they started thinking of different symptoms and events and illnesses that happened to them. They said, you know what, now I realized I was shed upon. Now, there could be some recall bias, and those aren't the most compelling because the other parts of the comments, the ones that I know is that the people that read it, and they were like, yeah, not news. I knew this was real, because and then they would relate events that they have, they'd already made the diagnosis of shedding already. So these people already knew that it was real. And I think they just appreciated that I marshalled the science that supported what they were claiming was their reality, right? So it's now it's not an invention that you're making up, hey, I think I was shed upon and there's no science to support shedding. And so it was really just, you know, repeated, sort of thanks, appreciation and gratitude for me bringing up the topic. Researching the topic and supporting, you know, what they've found. And, and then the other is the anecdotes, which describe people who've had to under undertake rather dramatic changes to how they're living their lives. Right. Avoiding grocery, you know, some of the more sensitive ones, avoid grocery stores and crowds and try not to bring unvaccinated into their homes. And, you know, that's, shocking, right. And it's really impacting the lives of some of the population in that now they can't circulate in a general population. I mean, that that's coming at like out of a movie, right? Like, I don't want to bring up like the zombie movies or anything, but literally if you, you're, literally suddenly now you feel yourself at risk of getting sick by being around others in our society. I mean, I don't even know how to describe that. You're completely right. Let me just remind the viewers again, it is PierreKoryMedicalMusings.com, the Substack, the links are in the description. And again, his latest book, War on Ivermectin, The Medicine That Saved Millions and Could Have Ended the Pandemic. And of course, everything is on his Twitter link there. Dr. Pierre Kory, I appreciate you coming on. I've thoroughly enjoyed reading through that substack and following you over the last two, two and a bit years, I think. So thanks so much for giving us your time today. Pleasure to meet you and look forward to Romania next week. Absolutely. Thank you. See you then. Awesome.
Less than a year after launching his record label, Dreaming Forever, Jozef K introduces the talented Berlin-based DJ and producer Marie Lung with her eagerly awaited debut EP, "Ivy Blues." This exceptional release features a dynamic blend of house music, with two original tracks and two striking remixes by VRIL and Mathias Reiling. "Ivy Blues" explores the full spectrum of the genre, seamlessly transitioning from classic to minimal, jazzy to deep, and venturing into the realms of leftfield and lo-fi. Today, we unveil "Could Be Us," a mesmerizing deep house track enchants with its warm, rhythmic stabs, infectious percussion, and an irresistible groove that unfolds with each passing moment. Lung's deft use of percussion elements ensures a seamless and organic flow, making this track an absolute standout. Originally featured in Marie's remarkable "Delayed with..." mix a few months ago, "Could Be Us" now basks in the spotlight it truly deserves. "Ivy Blues" EP is slated for a vinyl release on November 10 via Dreaming Forever. https://soundcloud.com/marie_thessa https://www.instagram.com/marie__lung/ www.itsdelayed.com www.instagram.com/_____delayed/ www.facebook.com/itsdelayed
Carla Kim, Ph.D., explains how aging impacts lung cell biology and its potential to reshape our understanding of diseases, including lung cancer. Series: "Stem Cell Channel" [Health and Medicine] [Science] [Show ID: 39254]
Carla Kim, Ph.D., explains how aging impacts lung cell biology and its potential to reshape our understanding of diseases, including lung cancer. Series: "Stem Cell Channel" [Health and Medicine] [Science] [Show ID: 39254]
Alzheimer's sufferers have lower plasmalogen levels than healthy people. Plasmalogen is a phospholipid essential to brain, lung, and heart function. Neuro-biochemical researcher Dr. Dayan Goodenowe identifies low plasmalogen as the cause of Alzheimer's disease. What happens when plasmalogen levels are restored in dementia and Alzheimer's dementia sufferers? On Vital Signs, host Brendon Fallon presents stories of people with severe dementia now receiving Dr. Goodenowe's plasmalogen treatment, along with other essential nutrients. These patients include Carolyn, in her 70s and Helen, who's in her 80s. Both women have suffered a severe loss of mobility and cognition, including the ability to communicate, through dementia. In 2007, Dr. Goodenowe patented a mass-spectrometry technology that identified low plasmalogen levels in the blood of Alzheimer's sufferers. The results he has seen in restoring plasmalogen to Alzheimer's patients support his conviction that low plasmalogen is the essential cause of Alzheimer's. The benefits of plasmalogen restoration relate to how our neurons (nerve cells) connect and transmit information to each other, as Dr. Goodowe explains: “The fundamental operating system of the brain is synaptic transmission, fueled by vesicular release of neurotransmitters. That is ground zero of all human neurological function.” And, he says, "that vesicular transport process is entirely dependent on plamalogen levels in the synapse.” How are the faculties of memory and cognition created in the brain? What shuts those nerve connections down? And how does plasmalogen restoration work bring them back online? ⭕️ Watch in-depth videos based on Truth & Tradition at Epoch TV
Carla Kim, Ph.D., explains how aging impacts lung cell biology and its potential to reshape our understanding of diseases, including lung cancer. Series: "Stem Cell Channel" [Health and Medicine] [Science] [Show ID: 39254]
Lung cancer is the second most common cancer in the United States. An estimated 238,340 people in the U.S. will be diagnosed with lung cancer in 2023, and 64% of lung cancers are diagnosed at stage III or IV. With all of these facts, it's surprising that lung cancer screening, a tool that could save lives, is rarely used. Why is that? Who does that impact the most? And what changes can be made? We spoke with Jeff Yang, MD, a thoracic surgeon at Massachusetts General Hospital and founder of the American Lung Cancer Screening Initiative, about symptoms, recommended lung cancer screenings, and available treatment options. We then spoke with Narjust Florez, MD, associate director of the Cancer Care Equity Program and a thoracic medical oncologist at Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, about the stigma and lung cancer patients experience and how patients can better advocate for themselves. Read WebMD Centerpiece: Catching A Killer
Các nhà khoa học vừa công bố những bức ảnh đầu tiên được chụp bởi kính viễn vọng không gian Euclid của châu Âu khi nó được phóng từ Cape Canaveral sau bốn tháng. Kính viễn vọng sẽ được sử dụng trong sáu năm tới để xây dựng bức tranh 3D toàn diện nhất về vũ trụ.
What will the Pelicans do without CJ McCollum, who has a collapsed lung!? Plus James Harden is making his Clippers debut, the Clips make a signing, we take a look at the current NBA standings and more with Trevor Lane and Keith Smith.... Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices
Meet Dr. Ulka Vaishampayan* – an oncologist and leading expert in treating people with kidney cancer, including renal cell carcinoma (RCC) which is the most common type of kidney cancer in adults. She understands all too well how scary and overwhelming hearing the words “you have cancer” can be for anyone – especially when facing an advanced diagnosis in RCC. In these cases, Dr. Vaishampayan believes that information is power and people can feel better prepared to move forward if they have a support system and strong patient-doctor communication. On today's episode of the Cancer Horizons podcast, Dr. Vaishampayan shares information that's important to understand about RCC and navigating a diagnosis, key questions patients and caregivers should ask their doctor, and insights into a potential dual immunotherapy treatment option for certain patients. When it comes to making a treatment plan, Dr. Vaishampayan believes in involving her patients closely in the process. “In my practice I tend to explain what options are available to someone, including the pros and cons of each, and I sometimes make a recommendation about a treatment approach if I feel that's appropriate in their case,” she explains. “I would still explain the reasons for my choice. My intention is that either way it's a discussion, as it should be a joint or shared decision-making process.” Terry Broussard**, a man who was diagnosed with advanced RCC, also shares advice from his experience. In Terry's case, his doctor recommended the dual immunotherapy treatment combination Opdivo® (nivolumab) plus Yervoy® (ipilimumab), which is approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration for certain newly diagnosed adults whose kidney cancer has spread (advanced renal cell carcinoma) and have not already had treatment for advanced RCC. It is the first and only combination of two immunotherapies of its kind approved to treat advanced kidney cancer, or RCC. To learn more, listen to the podcast, visit www.Opdivo.com and see below for Important Safety Information. *Dr. Vaishampayan is a paid consultant of Bristol Myers Squibb. Dr. Vaishampayan's statements/opinions are those solely of Dr. Vaishampayan and are not necessarily those of Bristol Myers Squibb. Individual results/experiences may vary. **Terry is an actual patient who has been compensated by Bristol Myers Squibb. Terry's results may not be typical. Medication may not work for everyone. Indication OPDIVO® (nivolumab) is a prescription medicine used in combination with YERVOY® (ipilimumab) to treat adults with kidney cancer in certain people when your cancer has spread (advanced renal cell carcinoma) and you have not already had treatment for your advanced RCC. It is not known if OPDIVO is safe and effective in children younger than 12 years of age with melanoma or MSI-H or dMMR metastatic colorectal cancer. It is not known if OPDIVO is safe and effective in children for the treatment of any other cancers. OPDIVO (10 mg/mL) and YERVOY (5 mg/mL) are injections for intravenous (IV) use. Important Safety Information for OPDIVO® (nivolumab) + YERVOY® (ipilimumab) What is the most important information I should know about OPDIVO + YERVOY? OPDIVO and YERVOY are medicines that may treat certain cancers by working with your immune system. OPDIVO and YERVOY can cause your immune system to attack normal organs and tissues in any area of your body and can affect the way they work. These problems can sometimes become severe or life-threatening and can lead to death. These problems may happen anytime during treatment or even after your treatment has ended. You may have more than one of these problems at the same time. Some of these problems may happen more often when OPDIVO is used in combination with another therapy. Call or see your healthcare provider right away if you develop any new or worse signs or symptoms, including: Lung problems: new or worsening cough; shortness of breath; chest pain Intestinal problems: diarrhea (loose stools) or more frequent bowel movements than usual; stools that are black, tarry, sticky, or have blood or mucus; severe stomach-area (abdominal) pain or tenderness Liver problems: yellowing of your skin or the whites of your eyes; severe nausea or vomiting; pain on the right side of your stomach area (abdomen); dark urine (tea colored); bleeding or bruising more easily than normal Hormone gland problems: headaches that will not go away or unusual headaches; eye sensitivity to light; eye problems; rapid heart beat; increased sweating; extreme tiredness; weight gain or weight loss; feeling more hungry or thirsty than usual; urinating more often than usual; hair loss; feeling cold; constipation; your voice gets deeper; dizziness or fainting; changes in mood or behavior, such as decreased sex drive, irritability, or forgetfulness Kidney problems: decrease in your amount of urine; blood in your urine; swelling in your ankles; loss of appetite Skin problems: rash; itching; skin blistering or peeling; painful sores or ulcers in the mouth or nose, throat, or genital area Eye problems: blurry vision, double vision, or other vision problems; eye pain or redness. Problems can also happen in other organs and tissues. These are not all of the signs and symptoms of immune system problems that can happen with OPDIVO and YERVOY. Call or see your healthcare provider right away for any new or worsening signs or symptoms, which may include: Chest pain; irregular heartbeat; shortness of breath; swelling of ankles Confusion; sleepiness; memory problems; changes in mood or behavior; stiff neck; balance problems; tingling or numbness of the arms or legs Double vision; blurry vision; sensitivity to light; eye pain; changes in eye sight Persistent or severe muscle pain or weakness; muscle cramps Low red blood cells; bruising Getting medical help right away may help keep these problems from becoming more serious. Your healthcare team will check you for these problems during treatment and may treat you with corticosteroid or hormone replacement medicines. Your healthcare team may also need to delay or completely stop your treatment if you have severe side effects. Possible side effects of OPDIVO + YERVOY OPDIVO and OPDIVO + YERVOY can cause serious side effects, including: See “What is the most important information I should know about OPDIVO + YERVOY?” Severe infusion reactions. Tell your healthcare team right away if you get these symptoms during an infusion of OPDIVO or YERVOY: chills or shaking; itching or rash; flushing; shortness of breath or wheezing; dizziness; feel like passing out; fever; back or neck pain Complications, including graft-versus-host disease (GVHD), of bone marrow (stem cell) transplant that uses donor stem cells (allogeneic). These complications can be severe and can lead to death. These complications may happen if you underwent transplantation either before or after being treated with OPDIVO or YERVOY. Your healthcare provider will monitor you for these complications. The most common side effects of OPDIVO, when used in combination with YERVOY, include: feeling tired; diarrhea; rash; itching; nausea; pain in muscles, bones, and joints; fever; cough; decreased appetite; vomiting; stomach-area (abdominal) pain; shortness of breath; upper respiratory tract infection; headache; low thyroid hormone levels (hypothyroidism); constipation; decreased weight; and dizziness. These are not all the possible side effects. For more information, ask your healthcare provider or pharmacist. You are encouraged to report side effects of prescription drugs to the FDA. Call 1-800-FDA-1088. Before receiving OPDIVO or YERVOY, tell your healthcare provider about all of your medical conditions, including if you: have immune system problems such as Crohn's disease, ulcerative colitis, or lupus have received an organ transplant have received or plan to receive a stem cell transplant that uses donor stem cells (allogeneic) have received radiation treatment to your chest area in the past and have received other medicines that are like OPDIVO have a condition that affects your nervous system, such as myasthenia gravis or Guillain-Barré syndrome are pregnant or plan to become pregnant. OPDIVO and YERVOY can harm your unborn baby. are breastfeeding or plan to breastfeed. It is not known if OPDIVO or YERVOY passes into your breast milk. Do not breastfeed during treatment with OPDIVO or YERVOY and for 5 months after the last dose of OPDIVO or YERVOY. Females who are able to become pregnant: Your healthcare provider should do a pregnancy test before you start receiving OPDIVO or YERVOY. You should use an effective method of birth control during your treatment and for 5 months after the last dose of OPDIVO or YERVOY. Talk to your healthcare provider about birth control methods that you can use during this time. Tell your healthcare provider right away if you become pregnant or think you may be pregnant during treatment with OPDIVO or YERVOY. You or your healthcare provider should contact Bristol-Myers Squibb at 1- 844-593-7869 as soon as you become aware of a pregnancy. Tell your healthcare provider about all the medicines you take, including prescription and over-the- counter medicines, vitamins, and herbal supplements. Please see U.S. Full Prescribing Information and Medication Guide for OPDIVO and YERVOY.
Host Roz is joined by Ramsey Hachem, MD (Washington University School of Medicine in Saint Louis) and AJT Editorial Fellow Helen Tsai, MD (Montefiore Medical Center) [03:30] Disseminated vaccine-induced varicella infection in a kidney transplant recipient [06:50] Safety and Immunogenicity of the Live-Attenuated Varicella Vaccine in Pediatric Solid Organ Transplant Recipients: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis [10:34] (Editorial) Balancing the live virus vaccine scales: protection vs risk [14:22] Outcomes after flow cytometry crossmatch-positive lung transplants managed with perioperative desensitization [19:25] Lung transplantation despite preformed donor-specific anti-HLA antibodies: 9-year single-center experience [23:00] (Editorial) What is a Clinically Significant Donor-Specific Antibody Before Lung Transplantation? [25:38] Deceased Donor Kidneys from Higher Distressed Communities are Significantly Less Likely to be Utilized for Transplantation [35:11] (Editorial) Understanding the mechanisms and implications of the association between community distress and organ non-utilization [37:18] Sex as a Biological Variable: Mechanistic Insights and Clinical Relevance in Solid Organ Transplantation
Missy Elliott talks historic induction to Rock & Roll Hall of Fame; Race to escape Gaza as fierce fighting rages; Lung cancer screening guidelines updated for former, current smokers Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices
Lung cancer is the leading cause of cancer-related deaths worldwide – but it doesn't affect everyone equally. Data shows wide regional variation of lung cancer diagnoses, as well as huge differentials linked to socio-economic factors and class. In this episode Becky Slack is joined by a panel including a leading clinical expert, Professor David Baldwin, Lorraine Dallas from the Roy Castle Lung Cancer Foundation, as well as David Long from the leading pharmaceuticals company and our sponsor for this episode, MSD. They discuss the root of lung cancer inequalities and how they can be mitigated. This episode has been fully funded by MSD, one of the world's leading pharmaceutical companies active in several key areas of global health, including immunisation and oncology. Learn more about the work they do following the science to tackle some of the world's greatest health threats at www.msd.com Listen to all our Spotlight on Policy episodes here: https://podfollow.com/spotlight-on-policy-from-the-new-statesman Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
References J Zhejiang Univ Sci B. 2022 Jul 15; 23(7): 607–612 Biomaterials. 2020 Apr; 238: 119836. Int J Nanomedicine. 2023;18:5265-5287 Child Ballad 100. 1775. Pentangle. 1972.Willie O' Winsbury https://youtu.be/nwqP_yoszCE?si=C0NH51euOOTlPYn9 --- Send in a voice message: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/dr-daniel-j-guerra/message Support this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/dr-daniel-j-guerra/support
Conditions that are either directly or indirectly related to arthritis can be surprising, because they may not seem to have anything to do with arthritis. For example, inflammatory forms of arthritis can affect many parts of the body beyond the joints, including the heart, lungs, skin, eyes and brain. In this episode, our experts explain what a comorbidity is, what conditions are likely to occur with arthritis, tips on what to watch for, when to tell your health care provider and how comorbidities are treated. This episode was brought to you in part by Boehringer Ingelheim. *Visit the Live Yes! With Arthritis Podcast episode page get show notes, additional resources and read the full transcript: https://bit.ly/LiveYes_Ep90 * We want to hear from you. Tell us what you think about the Live Yes! With Arthritis Podcast. Get started by emailing firstname.lastname@example.org. Special Guest: Ashira Blazer, MD, MSCI.
In this week's episode, we discuss the findings from a phase 2 study of lenalinomide plus rituximab in elderly frail patients with DLBCL, learn more about platelet GP6-mediated neutrophil recruitment in early stages of acute lung injury, and discuss a newly identified isoform of the tyrosine kinase AXL, termed AXL3, in mantle cell lymphoma.
A wave of pneumonia infections is hitting children in China. Many of them are displaying so-called white lung symptoms. What's behind the outbreak? California Gov. Gavin Newsom was greeted by Chinese leader Xi Jinping in Beijing. We examine California's role in shaping U.S. foreign policy. A gas pipeline and telecom cables took damage in Finland, while an ongoing investigation points to one Chinese vessel that it says came a little too close. Pressure grows on Taiwan's presidential election. With one candidate facing a Chinese probe, concerns are rising that Beijing could be trying to squeeze the island's politics. ⭕️ Watch in-depth videos based on Truth & Tradition at Epoch TV
In this adrenaline-fueled episode, we're taking a close look at the epic rematch between Jeff Adler and Roman Khrennikov, two titans of CrossFit. If you thought their last encounter was intense, you won't want to miss this one! But the excitement doesn't stop there. We'll also dissect the performance of Pat Vellner, who came in 3rd at the CrossFit Games and narrowly missed victory at the Rogue Invitational last year. Is this his year to claim the top spot? And then there's the comeback story of Ricky Garard, who missed the Games due to injury but is back and hungrier than ever. What can we expect from this determined athlete in the Rogue Invitational? Tune in to uncover: The dynamic between Adler and Khrennikov – who will come out on top? Pat Vellner's quest for redemption and the Rogue Invitational title. Ricky Garard's triumphant return and his fight for victory. Whether you're a CrossFit fanatic or just curious about the action-packed world of fitness and competition, our podcast is your go-to source for in-depth analysis and expert insights. Join us for a riveting conversation that will keep you on the edge of your seat! Mix up your favorite cocktail, settle in, and let's explore the Rogue Invitational together.
Get ready for some high-octane CrossFit chatter in our latest episode of "Kettlebells & Cocktails"! This time, we've got a special guest who's no stranger to the CrossFit world – Dave Charlton, the CrossFit Games analyst from "Fran Lung Analytics," joins us for an epic discussion. In this episode, we dive deep into the much-anticipated return of CrossFit legend Tia-Clair Toomey-Orr and her face-off against the reigning CrossFit Games Champion, Laura Horvath. The stakes are high, and the competition is fierce! But that's not all – we also take on the challenge of stack ranking the top 10 female athletes who we believe stand the best chance in the upcoming CrossFit Games. It's a showdown of CrossFit knowledge and predictions you won't want to miss! Whether you're a seasoned CrossFit enthusiast or a newbie to the sport, our podcast is your ultimate source for the latest insights, athlete profiles, and game-changing predictions. Join us for an engaging conversation that's bound to fuel your passion for CrossFit! Grab your favorite cocktail, pull up a chair, and let's lift some knowledge together. https://www.franlung.com/ https://www.instagram.com/franlunganalytics/
"Harriet the Spy," chapter 13. Harriet has entered Gremlin Sociopath mode and we are here for it. Jody and Alison discuss this wild and weird 1964 kid lit classic by Louise Fitzhugh, and can't get over our heroine's descent into sadistic nihilism. To keep things light, Jody presents a Special Report on cancer fighting pigeons. And of course there's lots of dramatic reading and the usual Cocoon shenanigans. It's a (sometimes) Judy Blume book club. Join us (almost) every week!This show is part of the Spreaker Prime Network, if you are interested in advertising on this podcast, contact us at https://www.spreaker.com/show/3248789/advertisement
I have Tom Templar (Vocals) from Green Lung on this episode of the podcast. We chat about the forthcoming album ‘This Heathen Land'. (3rd November via Nuclear Blast Records), UK Folklore, and more. Enjoy! ————— DJ Force X Socials: SUBSCRIBE ►► https://www.youtube.com/@djforcex WEBSITE ►► https://www.djforcex.com FOLLOW: INSTAGRAM ►► https://www.instagram.com/djforcex X ►► https://www.twitter.com/djforcex FACEBOOK ►► https://www.facebook.com/djforcex TIKTOK ►► https://www.tiktok.com/@djforcex THREADS ►► https://www.threads.com/@djforcex
Saron chats with Judith Lung, Software Engineer at LinkedIn. Judith shares how she found herself in tech after initially getting her masters in Clinical Rehabilitation and Mental Health Counseling. Judith talks about her experience learning to code as someone who is blind and the changes she aims to make in the tech space to aid in the progression of tech accessibility. Show Links Compiler (sponsor) Judith's GitHub Judith's LinkedIn edX Edge freeCodeCamp Assistive Technology Department of Rehabilitation IDE Screen Reader