Podcasts about national academies

In this age of rapidly advancing AI and robotic technology, do we still need to send humans into space? The argument has long been that people can do things better and faster off-Earth, but the changing face of robotic tech has some feeling otherwise. This week's guest is a returning friend of the show, Dr. Pascal Lee, who has thoughts on how and when robots may perform better--and more safely--than humans in space, and then, of course, Tariq and I worry about how our mechanical masters might take our place in the cosmos. Pascal also reports on his recent experience with the National Academies' report on the human exploration of Mars. Join us! Headlines: NASA Unveils Major Overhaul to Artemis Lunar Program, With Arrtemis II & II Facing Delays and A Shift in the Lunar Landing Timeline. Mike Fincke Revealed as Astronaut Medically Evacuated from ISS Main Topic: First Steps for Human Exploration of Mars National Academies Report Identifies Top Mars Science Priorities for Astronauts, With the Search for Life on Mars Ranked as the Highest Scientific Priority Strategies Debated: Shorter Missions vs. Building Lasting Mars Infrastructure Call for Focused Mars Surface Lab to Maximize Science Returns Discussion of Sample Return, Planetary Protection, and Evolving AI-Robotics Partnerships Debate Over Long-Term Human Settlement on Mars Versus Robotic and Cyborg Exploration Implications of Rapid Progress in Humanoid Robotics and AI for the Future of Space Exploration Hosts: Rod Pyle and Tariq Malik Guest: Pascal Lee Download or subscribe to This Week in Space at https://twit.tv/shows/this-week-in-space. Join Club TWiT for Ad-Free Podcasts! Support what you love and get ad-free audio and video feeds, a members-only Discord, and exclusive content. Join today: https://twit.tv/clubtwit

In this age of rapidly advancing AI and robotic technology, do we still need to send humans into space? The argument has long been that people can do things better and faster off-Earth, but the changing face of robotic tech has some feeling otherwise. This week's guest is a returning friend of the show, Dr. Pascal Lee, who has thoughts on how and when robots may perform better--and more safely--than humans in space, and then, of course, Tariq and I worry about how our mechanical masters might take our place in the cosmos. Pascal also reports on his recent experience with the National Academies' report on the human exploration of Mars. Join us! Headlines: NASA Unveils Major Overhaul to Artemis Lunar Program, With Arrtemis II & III Facing Delays and a Shift in the Lunar Landing Timeline. Mike Fincke Revealed as Astronaut Medically Evacuated from ISS Main Topic: First Steps for the Human Exploration of Mars National Academies Report Identifies Top Mars Science Priorities for Astronauts, With the Search for Life on Mars Ranked as the Highest Scientific Priority Strategies Debated: Shorter Missions vs. Building Lasting Mars Infrastructure Call for Focused Mars Surface Lab to Maximize Science Returns Discussion of Sample Return, Planetary Protection, and Evolving AI/Robotics/Human Partnerships Debate Over Long-Term Human Settlement on Mars Versus Robotic and Cyborg Exploration Implications of Rapid Progress in Humanoid Robotics and AI for the Future of Space Exploration Also, Rod and Tariq are celebrating their 200th episode of This Week in Space and are hosting an Ask Us Anything (AUA) episode! Get your questions ready and send them to twis@twit.tv for Rod and Tariq to answer them! Hosts: Rod Pyle and Tariq Malik Guest: Pascal Lee Download or subscribe to This Week in Space at https://twit.tv/shows/this-week-in-space. Join Club TWiT for Ad-Free Podcasts! Support what you love and get ad-free audio and video feeds, a members-only Discord, and exclusive content. Join today: https://twit.tv/clubtwit

In this age of rapidly advancing AI and robotic technology, do we still need to send humans into space? The argument has long been that people can do things better and faster off-Earth, but the changing face of robotic tech has some feeling otherwise. This week's guest is a returning friend of the show, Dr. Pascal Lee, who has thoughts on how and when robots may perform better--and more safely--than humans in space, and then, of course, Tariq and I worry about how our mechanical masters might take our place in the cosmos. Pascal also reports on his recent experience with the National Academies' report on the human exploration of Mars. Join us! Headlines: NASA Unveils Major Overhaul to Artemis Lunar Program, With Arrtemis II & III Facing Delays and a Shift in the Lunar Landing Timeline. Mike Fincke Revealed as Astronaut Medically Evacuated from ISS Main Topic: First Steps for the Human Exploration of Mars National Academies Report Identifies Top Mars Science Priorities for Astronauts, With the Search for Life on Mars Ranked as the Highest Scientific Priority Strategies Debated: Shorter Missions vs. Building Lasting Mars Infrastructure Call for Focused Mars Surface Lab to Maximize Science Returns Discussion of Sample Return, Planetary Protection, and Evolving AI/Robotics/Human Partnerships Debate Over Long-Term Human Settlement on Mars Versus Robotic and Cyborg Exploration Implications of Rapid Progress in Humanoid Robotics and AI for the Future of Space Exploration Also, Rod and Tariq are celebrating their 200th episode of This Week in Space and are hosting an Ask Us Anything (AUA) episode! Get your questions ready and send them to twis@twit.tv for Rod and Tariq to answer them! Hosts: Rod Pyle and Tariq Malik Guest: Pascal Lee Download or subscribe to This Week in Space at https://twit.tv/shows/this-week-in-space. Join Club TWiT for Ad-Free Podcasts! Support what you love and get ad-free audio and video feeds, a members-only Discord, and exclusive content. Join today: https://twit.tv/clubtwit

In this age of rapidly advancing AI and robotic technology, do we still need to send humans into space? The argument has long been that people can do things better and faster off-Earth, but the changing face of robotic tech has some feeling otherwise. This week's guest is a returning friend of the show, Dr. Pascal Lee, who has thoughts on how and when robots may perform better--and more safely--than humans in space, and then, of course, Tariq and I worry about how our mechanical masters might take our place in the cosmos. Pascal also reports on his recent experience with the National Academies' report on the human exploration of Mars. Join us! Headlines: NASA Unveils Major Overhaul to Artemis Lunar Program, With Arrtemis II & III Facing Delays and a Shift in the Lunar Landing Timeline. Mike Fincke Revealed as Astronaut Medically Evacuated from ISS Main Topic: First Steps for the Human Exploration of Mars National Academies Report Identifies Top Mars Science Priorities for Astronauts, With the Search for Life on Mars Ranked as the Highest Scientific Priority Strategies Debated: Shorter Missions vs. Building Lasting Mars Infrastructure Call for Focused Mars Surface Lab to Maximize Science Returns Discussion of Sample Return, Planetary Protection, and Evolving AI/Robotics/Human Partnerships Debate Over Long-Term Human Settlement on Mars Versus Robotic and Cyborg Exploration Implications of Rapid Progress in Humanoid Robotics and AI for the Future of Space Exploration Also, Rod and Tariq are celebrating their 200th episode of This Week in Space and are hosting an Ask Us Anything (AUA) episode! Get your questions ready and send them to twis@twit.tv for Rod and Tariq to answer them! Hosts: Rod Pyle and Tariq Malik Guest: Pascal Lee Download or subscribe to This Week in Space at https://twit.tv/shows/this-week-in-space. Join Club TWiT for Ad-Free Podcasts! Support what you love and get ad-free audio and video feeds, a members-only Discord, and exclusive content. Join today: https://twit.tv/clubtwit

According to the World Bank, some 3.5 billion people live on less than $7 a day. That's more than 40% of the global population. Almost 700 million of those individuals live in extreme poverty, getting by on less than $2.15 a day. In the US in 2024, almost 40 million Americans were living in poverty, according to the U.S. Census. But what do all these numbers mean? How do the people researching income inequality measure poverty, and how reliable are those measurements? That's the focus of this episode of Stats and Stories with guest David Johnson. David Johnson is the executive director of the International Association for Research in Income and Wealth. Prior to that, he served as a study director for the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and medicine, for a report called, "Creating an integrated system of data and statistics on household income, consumption and wealth.". Johnson also served for 25 years in the Federal Statistical system, where he was the only senior executive to have leadership roles at the Bureau of Labor Statistics, the Bureau of Economic Analysis and the US Census Bureau. At the Census, he led the implementation of the supplemental poverty measure and the reengineering of the Survey of Income and Program Participation.

Join us in Vegas for Podjam 3! Subscribe and Watch Interviews LIVE : On YOUTUBE.com/StandUpWithPete ON SubstackStandUpWithPete Stand Up is a daily podcast. I book,host,edit, post and promote new episodes with brilliant guests every day. This show is Ad free and fully supported by listeners like you! Please subscribe now for as little as 5$ and gain access to a community of over 750 awesome, curious, kind, funny, brilliant, generous soul Peter J. Hotez, MD, PhD, is the founding dean of The National School of Tropical Medicine at Baylor College of Medicine in Houston, Texas, as well as director of the Texas Children's Hospital Center for Vaccine Development. He is an elected member of the Institute of Medicine of National Academies as well as the American Academy of Arts and Sciences. A pediatrician and an expert in vaccinology and tropical disease, Hotez has authored hundreds of peer-reviewed articles and editorials as well dozens of textbook chapters. www.peterhotez.org On YOUTUBE.com/StandUpWithPete ON SubstackStandUpWithPete Listen rate and review on Apple Podcasts Listen rate and review on Spotify Pete On Instagram Pete on Blue Sky Pete on Threads Pete on Tik Tok Pete on Twitter Pete Personal FB page Stand Up with Pete FB page

In this investigative solo deep dive, Darin exposes the ongoing PFAS contamination crisis, the "forever chemicals" found in drinking water, clothing, carpets, cookware, cosmetics, food packaging, and even firefighting foam. Sparked by a Frontline investigation into the carpet industry in Dalton, Georgia, this episode expands far beyond one region and reveals a global supply chain problem affecting nearly every American. This episode is urgent. With 99% of people showing measurable PFAS levels in their blood, this is not about fear. It's about sovereignty. It's about awareness. It's about eliminating silent accumulation and reclaiming control over your environment. This is not luxury health. This is foundational freedom.     In This Episode What PFAS are and why they're called "forever chemicals" The Dalton, Georgia carpet industry case and wastewater contamination Internal corporate knowledge from 3M and DuPont decades ago Why PFAS contamination is global, not regional Everyday exposure: waterproof clothing, yoga pants, school uniforms, outdoor gear Nonstick cookware and safer alternatives Microwave popcorn bags and grease-resistant packaging Cosmetics, mascara, and fluorinated compounds Firefighting foam contamination at airports and military bases Health impacts: immune suppression, thyroid disruption, cancer risk Why water filtration is your first line of defense Emerging detox strategies: fiber, blood donation, microbiome support The role of regulation rollbacks and corporate accountability Algae-based PFAS alternatives already entering the market     Chapters 00:00:00 – Welcome to SuperLife: sovereignty, health, and responsibility 00:00:33 – Sponsor: Truniagen NAD supplement 00:02:17 – Why this PFAS episode is urgent and investigative 00:03:07 – The Frontline documentary: Dalton, Georgia & carpet contamination 00:04:31 – What PFAS / PFOA actually do and why they were adopted 00:05:45 – "Miracle chemistry" without proper safety testing 00:06:07 – Persistence: PFAS do not break down in the environment 00:06:38 – Wastewater discharge & farmland contamination 00:07:50 – Dead livestock, contaminated groundwater & generational impact 00:08:23 – 3M, DuPont, internal documents & decades of corporate knowledge 00:08:52 – Long-chain vs short-chain PFAS replacements 00:09:20 – Clothing exposure: waterproof jackets, yoga pants, uniforms 00:10:24 – Cookware exposure & safer alternatives 00:10:57 – Cosmetics & Environmental Working Group resources 00:11:17 – Sponsor: Shakeology & seven layers of quality testing 00:13:03 – Lack of labeling transparency 00:13:20 – Firefighting foam & military base contamination 00:14:05 – Health risks: immune suppression, thyroid, cholesterol, cancer 00:14:35 – 99% of Americans have PFAS in their blood 00:15:01 – Erin Brockovich & environmental legal activism 00:15:33 – Personal action step #1: Reverse osmosis water filtration 00:16:04 – Testing well water & municipal pressure 00:16:28 – Personal action step #2: Eliminating household exposures 00:17:25 – Emerging research: oat beta glucan fiber 00:18:03 – Firefighter study: blood donation lowering PFAS levels 00:18:32 – Microbiome & mycelium detox research 00:18:56 – Moving beyond fear into empowered action 00:19:23 – Phasing out toxic clothing & upgrading environment gradually 00:20:15 – Stockholm Convention & global treaties 00:20:52 – EPA regulations & rollback frustrations 00:21:19 – Innovation outrunning safety 00:21:50 – Share this episode & create consumer pressure 00:22:28 – Clean water, clean soil, clean products as human rights 00:22:54 – Terem Labs & algae-based PFAS alternatives 00:23:27 – Building a safe home environment as first step 00:24:15 – Final call to action: demand transparency & push reform     Thank You to Our Sponsors Shakeology: Get 15% off with code DARINO1BODI at Shakeology.com. Truniagen: Go to www.truniagen.com and use code DARIN20 at checkout for 20% off     Join the SuperLife Community Get Darin's deeper wellness breakdowns, beyond social media restrictions: Weekly voice notes Ingredient deep dives Wellness challenges Energy + consciousness tools Community accountability Extended episodes Join for $7.49/month → https://patreon.com/darinolien     Find More from Darin Olien: Instagram: @darinolien Podcast: SuperLife Podcast Website: superlife.com Book: Fatal Conveniences     Key Takeaway PFAS shows us what happens when innovation outruns safety. This is not about panic. It's about power. Clean water, clean soil, clean products; these are not luxuries. They are the foundation of sovereignty, freedom, and long-term health. Awareness is rising. Alternatives are emerging. Industry shifts when consumers shift. Make one change today. Then another. That's how we win.     Bibliography/Sources Australian Red Cross Lifeblood / University of New England. (2022). Effect of Plasma and Blood Donations on Levels of Perfluoroalkyl and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances in Firefighters in Australia: A Randomized Clinical Trial. https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamanetworkopen/fullarticle/2791196 Boston University / University of Massachusetts Lowell. (2024). An oat fiber intervention for reducing PFAS body burden: A pilot study. (Published in Toxicology and Applied Pharmacology). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.taap.2024.117163 National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. (2022). Guidance on PFAS Exposure, Testing, and Clinical Follow-Up. https://nap.nationalacademies.org/catalog/26156/guidance-on-pfas-exposure-testing-and-clinical-follow-up Environmental Health Perspectives. (2021). Per- and Polyfluoroalkyl Substance Toxicity and Human Health Review: Current State of Knowledge and Strategies for Informing Future Research. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7906952/ New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM) / IARC. (2024). Carcinogenicity of Perfluorooctanoic Acid (PFOA) and Perfluorooctanesulfonic Acid (PFOS). https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMc2401611 FRONTLINE. (2024). Contaminated: The Carpet Industry's Toxic Legacy. (Investigative Documentary). https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J_j66vAunXk United States Environmental Protection Agency. (2024). Final PFAS National Primary Drinking Water Regulation. https://www.epa.gov/sdwa/and-polyfluoroalkyl-substances-pfas

In this episode, Peter Swartz, Co-Founder and Chief Science Officer at Altana, reveals how the company's AI-powered supply chain knowledge graph has helped stop hundreds of millions of dollars in forced labor goods from crossing borders and contributed to some of the largest counter-narcotics seizures in investigators' careers. Peter shares the real-world impact Altana is making across both the public and private sectors.Peter breaks down how Altana's multi-tier supply chain visibility works to trace forced labor cotton through global networks, how dual-use chemicals are being diverted into fentanyl production, and how the platform helps governments and enterprises collaborate to avoid billions of dollars in trade disruptions while saving hundreds of millions in tariff fees.Key Topics Covered- How Altana blocked hundreds of millions of dollars in forced labor goods at U.S. borders- The role of AI knowledge graphs in mapping multi-tier global supply chains- How Altana supports CBP enforcement of the Uyghur Forced Labor Prevention Act- Product passports and how they expedite legitimate goods through customs- The difference between forced labor entering legit supply chains vs. legit goods entering illicit ones- How logistics companies use Altana to prevent their networks from being misused- Proactive vs. reactive approaches to supply chain risk using probabilistic AI models- Scenario modeling for geopolitical disruptions including Taiwan and global conflicts- Saving billions in supply chain disruptions and hundreds of millions in tariff feesEpisode Timestamps00:00 - Introduction and overview of Altana's real-world impact00:41 - Understanding forced labor as a multi-tier supply chain problem03:09 - Hundreds of millions in forced labor goods stopped at borders03:45 - How the AI knowledge graph maps global supply chain connections04:15 - Working with CBP on the Uyghur Forced Labor Prevention Act04:35 - Product passports and expediting goods through customs04:51 - Counter-narcotics and the dual-use chemical problem05:45 - Helping logistics companies stop network misuse06:27 - From alert to action and the system handoff process06:49 - Responsible AI and the role of human-in-the-loop decisions07:33 - Proactive vs. reactive supply chain intelligence08:08 - Scenario modeling for geopolitical disruptions and resiliencyAbout Peter SwartzPeter Swartz is Co-Founder and Chief Science Officer at Altana. He has spoken on global trade, supply chains, and machine learning at the World Trade Organization, the World Customs Organization, the U.S. Court of International Trade, and the National Academies of Medicine. Previously, Peter was Head of Data Science at Panjiva, listed as one of Fast Company's most innovative data science companies in 2018 and later acquired by S&P Global. He holds patents in machine learning and global trade, and completed his education at Yale, MIT, and EPFL.About AltanaAltana is the world's first Value Chain Management System, providing AI-powered supply chain intelligence to governments, enterprises, and logistics providers. The platform is built on a proprietary knowledge graph comprising more than 2.8 billion shipments, tracking over 500 million companies and 850 million facilities globally. Altana covers more than 50% of global trade, making it the most comprehensive and accurate supply chain map available.Resources Mentioned- Altana Atlas platform and AI knowledge graph- U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP)- Uyghur Forced Labor Prevention Act (UFLPA)- Product passports for cross-border compliance- Altana's disruption and tariff scenario modeling toolsPeter's Socials:LinkedIn — https://www.linkedin.com/in/pgswartz/Partner LinksBook Enterprise Training — https://www.upscaile.com/

Plan Dulce Hosts Michelle E.  Zuñiga, PhD, AICP (she/her/hers) and Vidal F. Márquez (he/him) are joined by Michael Méndez, Ph.D., MCP (he/him) and Deyanira Nevárez Martínez Ph.D.(she/her), educators, researchers and planning practitioners to discuss Latino Urbanism, environmentalism and the hottest topic of the year, Bad Bunny. Join us for this tag-team conversation as we learn and reflect on their upbringing in Latino neighborhoods, unravel what is Latino Urbanism, cover ‘gentefication' and more as we make the connections to this year's Bad Bunny performance on the world's largest stage. Bio and Links:Dr. Michael Méndez is an Associate Professor of Environmental Planning/Policy and Chancellor's Fellow at the University of California, Irvine. He is currently an Andrew Carnegie Fellow and a Visiting Scientist at the National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR). Michael has over a decade of senior-level experience in both the public and private sectors, where he has consulted and actively engaged in the policymaking process. In 2023, he was appointed by Deanne Crisell, the Administrator of the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), to serve on their National Advisory Council.  In this capacity, council members advised the Administrator on all aspects of emergency management, including preparedness, protection, response, recovery, and mitigation for natural disasters, acts of terrorism, and other manmade disasters. Dr. Méndez's award-winning book, “Climate Change from the Streets,” published by Yale University Press, provides an urgent and timely analysis of the contentious politics of incorporating environmental justice into global climate change policy.  Dr. Méndez's new research focuses on climate-induced disasters and social vulnerability.  In 2021, he became the first Latinx scholar to receive the National Academies of Sciences' Henry and Bryna David Endowment Award for his research on wildfires and migrants.Deyanira Nevárez Martínez completed her Ph.D. in Urban and Environmental Planning and Policy at the University of California, Irvine in 2021. She is currently a faculty member in the Department of Urban and Regional Planning in the School of Planning, Design and Construction at Michigan State University. She has a Master's of Science in Planning from the College of Architecture, Planning, and Landscape Architecture at the University of Arizona and a Master's of Science in Geographic Information Systems Technology from the Department of Geography also at the University of Arizona.She has worked for the public and non-profit sectors. Her research focuses on the role of the state in homelessness and housing precarity. A major theme in her work is the criminalization of poverty in the United States. Additionally, her work has looked at issues of gentrification, racial equity in land-use and transportation, racial segregation, and bail reform.Links and Resourceshttp://www.michaelanthonymendez.com/http://dnmartinez.com/ --------------------------------------Plan Dulce is a podcast by members of the ⁠⁠Latinos and Planning Division⁠ of the American Planning Association⁠. The information, opinions, and recommendations presented in this Podcast are for general information only. Want to recommend our next great guests and stay updated on the latest episodes? We want to hear from you! Follow, rate, and subscribe! Your support and feedback helps us continue to amplify insightful and inspiring stories from our wonderfully culturally and professionally diverse community.This episode was conceived, written, hosted and produced by Michelle E.  Zuñiga, PhD, AICP (she/her/hers) and co-produced and hosted by Vidal F. Márquez (he/him).Connect:Instagram:https://www.instagram.com/plandulcepodcast/ Facebook:⁠https://www.facebook.com/LatinosandPlanning/⁠Youtube:Subscribe to Plan Dulce on Youtube LinkedIn:⁠https://www.linkedin.com/groups/4294535/⁠X/ Twitter:⁠https://twitter.com/latinosplanapa?lang=en⁠—----

Charles Duhigg: Supercommunicators Charles Duhigg is a Pulitzer Prize–winning investigative journalist and the author of The Power of Habit and Smarter Faster Better. He is a winner of the National Academies of Sciences, National Journalism, and George Polk awards. He writes for The New Yorker and other publications and is the author of Supercommunicators: How to Unlock the Secret Language of Connection (Amazon, Bookshop)*. A lot of us grew up in a world where most of our relationships started in person. That means many of us are beautifully equipped for a world that no longer exists. In this conversation, Charles and I discuss how to get better at connecting in a remote-first world. Key Points When the telephone first became popular, people had to learn how to communicate with it. We're at a similar inflection point with digital communication. We all have three kinds of conversations: (1) What's this really about? (practical/decision-making), (2) How do we feel? (emotional), and (3) Who are we? (identity). Many of us tend to default to practical/decision-making conversations online and miss conversations about emotion and identity. Ask questions that invite an emotional or identity response. Instead of, “Where do you live?” consider a shift like, “What do you love about where you live?” Notice when people bring elements into a conversation that aren't related to the topic. These clues, especially online, can point to entry points for emotional connection. Supercommunicators pay just a bit more attention to how people communicate than the rest of us. A slight shift can make a big difference. Resources Mentioned Supercommunicators: How to Unlock the Secret Language of Connection by Charles Duhigg (Amazon, Bookshop)* Interview Notes Download my interview notes in PDF format (free membership required). Related Episodes The Way to Get People Talking, with Andrew Warner (episode 560) How to Lead Engaging Meetings, with Jess Britt (episode 721) How to Show Up Authentically in Tough Situations, with Andrew Brodsky (episode 727) Discover More Activate your free membership for full access to the entire library of interviews since 2011, searchable by topic. To accelerate your learning, uncover more inside Coaching for Leaders Plus.

Disproving the popular narrative that shootings are the calculated acts of malicious or desperate people, Ludwig shows how most shootings actually grow out of a more fleeting source: interpersonal conflict, especially arguments. By examining why some arguments turn tragic while others don't, Ludwig shows gun violence to be more circumstantial—and more solvable—than our traditional approaches lead us to believe.Drawing on decades of research and Ludwig's immersive fieldwork in Chicago, including “countless hours spent in schools, parks, playgrounds, housing developments, courtrooms, jails, police stations, police cars, and lots and lots of McDonald's,” Unforgiving Places: The Unexpected Origins of American Gun Violence (University of Chicago Press, 2025) is a breakthrough work at the cutting edge of behavioral economics. As Ludwig shows, progress on gun violence doesn't require America to solve every other social problem first; it only requires that we find ways to intervene in the places and the ten-minute windows where human behaviors predictably go haywire. Jens Ludwig is the Edwin A. and Betty L. Bergman Distinguished Service Professor at the University of Chicago Harris School of Public Policy. He is the Pritzker Director of the University of Chicago's Crime Lab, codirector of the National Bureau of Economic Research's working group on the economics of crime, elected member of the National Academy of Medicine, and a member of the Committee on Law and Justice of the National Academies of Science. Alfred Marcus is the Edson Spencer Professor at the Carlson School, University of Minnesota. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/new-books-network

Disproving the popular narrative that shootings are the calculated acts of malicious or desperate people, Ludwig shows how most shootings actually grow out of a more fleeting source: interpersonal conflict, especially arguments. By examining why some arguments turn tragic while others don't, Ludwig shows gun violence to be more circumstantial—and more solvable—than our traditional approaches lead us to believe.Drawing on decades of research and Ludwig's immersive fieldwork in Chicago, including “countless hours spent in schools, parks, playgrounds, housing developments, courtrooms, jails, police stations, police cars, and lots and lots of McDonald's,” Unforgiving Places: The Unexpected Origins of American Gun Violence (University of Chicago Press, 2025) is a breakthrough work at the cutting edge of behavioral economics. As Ludwig shows, progress on gun violence doesn't require America to solve every other social problem first; it only requires that we find ways to intervene in the places and the ten-minute windows where human behaviors predictably go haywire. Jens Ludwig is the Edwin A. and Betty L. Bergman Distinguished Service Professor at the University of Chicago Harris School of Public Policy. He is the Pritzker Director of the University of Chicago's Crime Lab, codirector of the National Bureau of Economic Research's working group on the economics of crime, elected member of the National Academy of Medicine, and a member of the Committee on Law and Justice of the National Academies of Science. Alfred Marcus is the Edson Spencer Professor at the Carlson School, University of Minnesota. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/political-science

Disproving the popular narrative that shootings are the calculated acts of malicious or desperate people, Ludwig shows how most shootings actually grow out of a more fleeting source: interpersonal conflict, especially arguments. By examining why some arguments turn tragic while others don't, Ludwig shows gun violence to be more circumstantial—and more solvable—than our traditional approaches lead us to believe.Drawing on decades of research and Ludwig's immersive fieldwork in Chicago, including “countless hours spent in schools, parks, playgrounds, housing developments, courtrooms, jails, police stations, police cars, and lots and lots of McDonald's,” Unforgiving Places: The Unexpected Origins of American Gun Violence (University of Chicago Press, 2025) is a breakthrough work at the cutting edge of behavioral economics. As Ludwig shows, progress on gun violence doesn't require America to solve every other social problem first; it only requires that we find ways to intervene in the places and the ten-minute windows where human behaviors predictably go haywire. Jens Ludwig is the Edwin A. and Betty L. Bergman Distinguished Service Professor at the University of Chicago Harris School of Public Policy. He is the Pritzker Director of the University of Chicago's Crime Lab, codirector of the National Bureau of Economic Research's working group on the economics of crime, elected member of the National Academy of Medicine, and a member of the Committee on Law and Justice of the National Academies of Science. Alfred Marcus is the Edson Spencer Professor at the Carlson School, University of Minnesota. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/american-studies

Disproving the popular narrative that shootings are the calculated acts of malicious or desperate people, Ludwig shows how most shootings actually grow out of a more fleeting source: interpersonal conflict, especially arguments. By examining why some arguments turn tragic while others don't, Ludwig shows gun violence to be more circumstantial—and more solvable—than our traditional approaches lead us to believe.Drawing on decades of research and Ludwig's immersive fieldwork in Chicago, including “countless hours spent in schools, parks, playgrounds, housing developments, courtrooms, jails, police stations, police cars, and lots and lots of McDonald's,” Unforgiving Places: The Unexpected Origins of American Gun Violence (University of Chicago Press, 2025) is a breakthrough work at the cutting edge of behavioral economics. As Ludwig shows, progress on gun violence doesn't require America to solve every other social problem first; it only requires that we find ways to intervene in the places and the ten-minute windows where human behaviors predictably go haywire. Jens Ludwig is the Edwin A. and Betty L. Bergman Distinguished Service Professor at the University of Chicago Harris School of Public Policy. He is the Pritzker Director of the University of Chicago's Crime Lab, codirector of the National Bureau of Economic Research's working group on the economics of crime, elected member of the National Academy of Medicine, and a member of the Committee on Law and Justice of the National Academies of Science. Alfred Marcus is the Edson Spencer Professor at the Carlson School, University of Minnesota. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/public-policy

Disproving the popular narrative that shootings are the calculated acts of malicious or desperate people, Ludwig shows how most shootings actually grow out of a more fleeting source: interpersonal conflict, especially arguments. By examining why some arguments turn tragic while others don't, Ludwig shows gun violence to be more circumstantial—and more solvable—than our traditional approaches lead us to believe.Drawing on decades of research and Ludwig's immersive fieldwork in Chicago, including “countless hours spent in schools, parks, playgrounds, housing developments, courtrooms, jails, police stations, police cars, and lots and lots of McDonald's,” Unforgiving Places: The Unexpected Origins of American Gun Violence (University of Chicago Press, 2025) is a breakthrough work at the cutting edge of behavioral economics. As Ludwig shows, progress on gun violence doesn't require America to solve every other social problem first; it only requires that we find ways to intervene in the places and the ten-minute windows where human behaviors predictably go haywire. Jens Ludwig is the Edwin A. and Betty L. Bergman Distinguished Service Professor at the University of Chicago Harris School of Public Policy. He is the Pritzker Director of the University of Chicago's Crime Lab, codirector of the National Bureau of Economic Research's working group on the economics of crime, elected member of the National Academy of Medicine, and a member of the Committee on Law and Justice of the National Academies of Science. Alfred Marcus is the Edson Spencer Professor at the Carlson School, University of Minnesota. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Disproving the popular narrative that shootings are the calculated acts of malicious or desperate people, Ludwig shows how most shootings actually grow out of a more fleeting source: interpersonal conflict, especially arguments. By examining why some arguments turn tragic while others don't, Ludwig shows gun violence to be more circumstantial—and more solvable—than our traditional approaches lead us to believe.Drawing on decades of research and Ludwig's immersive fieldwork in Chicago, including “countless hours spent in schools, parks, playgrounds, housing developments, courtrooms, jails, police stations, police cars, and lots and lots of McDonald's,” Unforgiving Places: The Unexpected Origins of American Gun Violence (University of Chicago Press, 2025) is a breakthrough work at the cutting edge of behavioral economics. As Ludwig shows, progress on gun violence doesn't require America to solve every other social problem first; it only requires that we find ways to intervene in the places and the ten-minute windows where human behaviors predictably go haywire. Jens Ludwig is the Edwin A. and Betty L. Bergman Distinguished Service Professor at the University of Chicago Harris School of Public Policy. He is the Pritzker Director of the University of Chicago's Crime Lab, codirector of the National Bureau of Economic Research's working group on the economics of crime, elected member of the National Academy of Medicine, and a member of the Committee on Law and Justice of the National Academies of Science. Alfred Marcus is the Edson Spencer Professor at the Carlson School, University of Minnesota. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

How can we truly trust technology in a world powered by AI and emerging tech? What exactly is medical identity theft, and why should we all be worried about it? And how is the Global Partnership on Artificial Intelligence (GPAI) helping make AI more responsible and fairer?In this episode, Punit Bhatia sits down with Pam Dixon, founder and executive director of the World Privacy Forum, to talk about how we can build trust and protect our privacy in a rapidly changing digital world. They dive into real issues like data misuse, identity theft, and the global efforts shaping stronger privacy and governance standards.

How can we truly trust technology in a world powered by AI and emerging tech? What exactly is medical identity theft, and why should we all be worried about it? And how is the Global Partnership on Artificial Intelligence (GPAI) helping make AI more responsible and fairer?In this episode, Punit Bhatia sits down with Pam Dixon, founder and executive director of the World Privacy Forum, to talk about how we can build trust and protect our privacy in a rapidly changing digital world. They dive into real issues like data misuse, identity theft, and the global efforts shaping stronger privacy and governance standards.

For as long as people have speculated about the development of artificial intelligence, they have debated its potential impacts on the labor market. Today, several years into widespread use of large language models, those questions are more urgent, but the answers are less clear. Is AI already taking jobs away? Could human beings flourish in a world in which they no longer have to perform economically valuable work?On this episode, Massachusetts Institute of Technology labor economist David Autor joins host Sara Frueh to discuss the possible impacts of AI on the future of work, what that means on an economic and human level, and what policies may be able to shape AI in a way that works for humans.ResourcesRead the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine's 2024 consensus study, “Artificial Intelligence and the Future of Work.”Check out Autor's book, The Work of the Future.Could AI help rebuild the middle class? Autor explores in an essay for Noema Magazine.Read Frueh's interview with economist Anne Case mentioned in this episode.More on this topic from Issues: “A Vision for Centering Workers in Technology Development” by Amanda Ballantyne, Jodi Forlizzi, and Crystal Weise.

When humans finally land on Mars, what should they do? A new report from the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine lays out the science objectives for a crewed Mars mission. Planetary scientist Lindy Elkins-Tanton, who co-chaired the report committee, joins Host Flora Lichtman to talk about the plans to send people to Mars.We'll also get an update on the mission to survey the asteroid Psyche. Elkins-Tanton tells us how she managed the team that made the Psyche mission possible, and what she learned from her mistakes.  Guest: Dr. Lindy Elkins-Tanton is a planetary scientist.  She's the head of NASA's Psyche mission and director of UC Berkeley's Space Sciences Laboratory. Transcripts for each episode are available within 1-3 days at sciencefriday.com. Subscribe to this podcast. Plus, to stay updated on all things science, sign up for Science Friday's newsletters.

AABP Executive Director Dr. Fred Gingrich is joined by Dr. Bob Van Saun, professor and extension veterinarian at Penn State University. He is also a member of the AABP Nutrition Committee. If you are interested in beef or dairy nutrition, consider joining the committee by visiting this page.  Van Saun starts by reviewing why mineral and vitamin transfer are important beyond their biological role in fetal development and reminds us that milk does not have a significant quantity of trace elements and some vitamins. It is important to provide a diet that is adequate in vitamins and minerals to the dam to ensure the developing fetus is not deficient and that the newborn calf is very dependent on what we feed the dam. Van Saun reviews how minerals and vitamins are regulated in the body and what we know about the placental transfer of minerals and vitamins to the fetus during gestation. He offers suggestions for practicing veterinarians for evaluating the nutritional status of dams. He suggests starting by evaluating the ration that has been formulated to ensure it is consistent with recommendations from NASEUM 2021 (dairy) and NASEM 2016 (beef). The veterinarians can then submit biologic samples for vitamin and mineral analysis which can be done via liver biopsy or blood testing as well as when each test is applicable. In addition, liver samples from stillborn fetuses can be submitted to develop a database for clients mineral and vitamin programs and to determine if stillbirths are due to deficiencies.  Links:Hostetler CE, Kincaid RL, Mirando MA. The role of essential trace elements in embryonic and fetal development in livestock. Vet J. 2003;166(2):125-39. https://doi.org/10.1016/s1090-0233(02)00310-6. PMID: 12902178  National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine (NASEM) 2021. Nutrient Requirements of Dairy Cattle: Eighth Revised Edition. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/25806 National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2016. Nutrient Requirements of Beef Cattle: Eighth Revised Edition. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/19014

Honesty, humility, respect. Just a few of the essential qualities scientists need to do good science. Today, host Andrew McDiarmid concludes a conversation with engineer, inventor, writer, and self-taught scientist Forrest Mims about the role of integrity and humility in science, as well as the importance of solid data and good old-fashioned persistence. Should scientists be required to hide their personal values or religious convictions or check them at the door before conducting research? Mims says no and explains. What about humility? McDiarmid quotes from an older edition of On Being a Scientist, an educational booklet for young researchers published by the National Academies of Science. Highlighting the importance of scientific humility, the publication acknowledges that "science offers only one window on human experience. While upholding the honor of their profession, scientists must seek to avoid putting scientific knowledge on a pedestal above knowledge obtained through other means.” Thirty years later, is the scientific enterprise still as humble? Mims shares his thoughts. This is Part 2 of a two-part conversation. Source

Dr. Avi Loeb visits for the 4th time -- this time around the sun to discuss 3I/Atlas, the 3rd, and most notable interstellar object observed in our galaxy. Anomaly, "Dark Comet", or Alien Intelligence? The World is watching. You decide!In addition to audio, you can now watch the episode on The Signal Network channel on Youtube.BIOAbraham (Avi) Loeb is the Frank B. Baird, Jr., Professor of Science at Harvard University and a bestselling author (featured in the New York Times, Wall Street Journal, Publishers Weekly, Die Zeit, Der Spiegel, L'Express, and more). He earned his PhD in Physics from the Hebrew University of Jerusalem at age 24, led the first international project supported by the Strategic Defense Initiative, and was a long-term member of the Institute for Advanced Study at Princeton. Dr. Loeb has written 9 books, including Extraterrestrial and Interstellar, and published over a thousand papers on black holes, the first stars, extraterrestrial life, and the future of the Universe. Loeb directs the Institute for Theory and Computation at the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics and heads the Galileo Project. He was the longest-serving Chair of Harvard's Astronomy Department and founding director of the Black Hole Initiative. Loeb is a fellow of the American Academy of Arts & Sciences, the American Physical Society, and the International Academy of Astronautics. He has served on the President's Council of Advisors on Science and Technology, chaired the Board on Physics and Astronomy of the National Academies, and currently advises “Einstein: Visualize the Impossible” at the Hebrew University. He also chaired the Breakthrough Starshot Initiative and directed theory for the Breakthrough Prize Foundation. His latest TED talk ranked among the ten most popular of 2024.Professional website: https://www.cfa.harvard.edu/~loeb/$10 Afraid of Nothing merch - and more - at the Afraid of Nothing Shopify store. Visit afraidofnothingpodcast.com or use this url:https://www.afraidofnothingpodcast.com/p/shopify-store/Never be afraid to look good and have cool merch! Support the showSUPPORT THE PODCAST NEW: SHOP OUR STORE ON SHOPIFY!Never Be Afraid to Look Good at https://383e86-d1.myshopify.com/.FOLLOW/SUBSCRIBE/REVIEW...On our website at afraidofnothingpodcast.com.SUBSCRIBE...Your gracious donation here helps defray production costs. Beyond my undying gratitude, you will also will be shouted out in an upcoming episode.WATCH ON YOUTUBE...We are uploading past episodes on our Youtube channel. WATCH THE DOC… VIMEO ON DEMAND: Rent the Afraid of Nothing documentary here: https://vimeo.com/ondemand/aondoc. TUBI: watch for free with ads on tubitv.com. REVIEW OUR FILM ON ROTTEN TOMATOES...Write your five-star review here.

Beating the Loneliness Epidemic: How ACE's Dr. Cedric Bryant and Dr. Sabrena Jo Help Us Add People to Our Years Live Long Better: Not Old Better and American Council on Exercise Today's show is brought to you by Aura Frames. Aura Frames: the gift that brings your favorite holiday traditions and memories to life every day. If I told you there was a health risk that could quietly raise your chances of early death by roughly 25 to 30 percent… and it wasn't diabetes, blood pressure, or cholesterol… you'd probably lean in. According to the U.S. Surgeon General, loneliness and social isolation increase the risk of premature death by 26% and 29%, and lacking social connection can be as dangerous as smoking up to 15 cigarettes a day. HHS+1 So here's the question for all of us over 60: we count our steps, we count our meds… who's helping us count our people? Welcome to Live Long Better. I'm your host, and today we're tackling the loneliness epidemic head‑on—with movement and community as the prescription Joining us are two leaders from the American Council on Exercise, or ACE. First, our ongoing member of the team, Dr. Sabrena Jo, Senior Director of Science and Education, whose work focuses on how pro‑aging, inclusive fitness and community‑based movement can turn a lonely workout into a welcoming social circle. And we're also joined by Dr. Cedric Bryant, Chief Executive Officer at ACE. Cedric spends his days at the table with organizations like the World Health Organization, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and the National Academies of Science, Engineering and Medicine, championing physical activity as essential public health. ACE Fitness He's authored more than 300 articles and over 40 books, holds a doctorate in physiology from Penn State—where he received the university's Distinguished Alumni Award—and he lives the ACE mission personally with regular exercise, pickleball, golf, and even coaching youth sports. ACE Fitness Cedric often says, "Some activity is better than none, and more is better than some. Every little bit counts." ACE Fitness+1 We'll talk about how that simple idea scales up—from one older adult taking a short walk with a neighbor, to ACE's 40 Forward initiative, a 40th‑anniversary effort to "shape the future of fitness together" by building more inclusive, community‑driven opportunities to move in every kind of neighborhood. ACE Fitness+2ACE Fitness+2 If your contact list has gotten smaller while your pill organizer has gotten bigger, this episode is for you. Because today, we're not just talking about adding years to your life… we're talking about adding people to your years. Stay with us—Dr. Sabrena Jo and Dr. Cedric Bryant are coming up next.

When most people hear the word policy, they immediately picture Washington, D.C., marble hallways, and people in suits arguing on TV. But as my guest today so brilliantly reminds us, policy is simply how decisions get made - and you don't need to be a political insider to influence it.In this episode, I talk with Dr. Deborah Stine, founder of the Science and Technology Policy Academy, former Executive Director of the President's Council of Advisors on Science and Technology in the Obama White House, and someone who has spent her career helping scientists, engineers, and health professionals turn their expertise into impact.And yes, her résumé reads like a Washington fairytale, but what makes Debbie extraordinary is how down-to-earth and practical she is. She's spent decades working at the national level and then chose to move back to the “ground floor” of change—state and local work—where impact shows up fast and in real lives.Debbie and I talk about:Why most experts accidentally sabotage their own influenceHer 4E Framework for better decision-makingHow to translate complex, jargon-heavy research into something the public—and policymakers—actually understandWhy state and local advocacy can be even more powerful than federal workHow to work with people who disagree with youA surprising turn into AI—and how Debbie used my Automate & Amplify program to keep her content going while traveling the worldThis conversation is a powerful reminder that your voice matters, especially when you pair your expertise with a compelling story and a clear message.About My Guest: Dr. Deborah Stine is the founder of the Science and Technology Policy Academy, where she helps scientists, engineers, and health professionals translate what they know into policies that improve people's lives. Deborah has worked with the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine, at the Congressional Research Service, and was the Executive Director of the President's Council of Advisors on Science and Technology in the Obama White House. She was also Professor of the Practice, Engineering and Public Policy at Carnegie Mellon University. Deborah is also the author of From Expertise to Impact, which is all about how experts can communicate in a way that truly influences public decision-making. About Us: The Speaking Your Brand podcast is hosted by Carol Cox. At Speaking Your Brand, we help women entrepreneurs and professionals clarify their brand message and story, create their signature talks, and develop their thought leadership platforms. Our mission is to get more women in positions of influence and power because it's through women's stories, voices, and visibility that we challenge the status quo and change existing systems. Check out our coaching programs at https://www.speakingyourbrand.com. Links:Show notes at https://www.speakingyourbrand.com/454/ Deborah's website: https://scitechpolicyacademy.com/ Listen to my Confident Speaker companion podcast = https://confidentspeaker.transistor.fm/ Discover your Speaker Archetype by taking our free quiz at https://www.speakingyourbrand.com/quiz/Enroll in the Automate & Amplify with AI course: https://www.speakingyourbrand.com/ai/ Apply for our Thought Leader Academy = https://www.speakingyourbrand.com/academy/ Attend our 1-day in-person Speaking Accelerator workshop in Orlando: https://www.speakingyourbrand.com/orlando/ Connect on LinkedIn:Carol Cox = https://www.linkedin.com/in/carolcoxDeborah Stine = https://www.linkedin.com/in/deborah-stine/ Related Podcast Episodes:Episode 411: Reframing Public Speaking: From Elite Skill to Everyday Power with Dr. Karen CorbinEpisode 406: Authenticity and Owning Your Story as Women with a Public Voice with Jennifer Adams and Sarah HenryEpisode 384: How to Tackle a Big Global Issue in Your Thought Leadership and Talks with Dr. Neha Pathak

In this episode, Dr Elle Wadsworth talks to Dr Myfanwy Graham, a Postgraduate Scholar at Monash University funded by the Australian Government's National Health and Medical Research Council. The interview covers Myfanwy's data insight paper examining differences in the measurement of medical cannabis use. Why definitions and contexts matter with regards to medical cannabis use [01:05]Four measures of medical cannabis use that Myfanwy explored in the study [02:05]The medical cannabis policy contexts of the US, Australia, and Canada [03:30]The importance of using standardised questions across different countries [05:18]The main findings of the data insight [05:48]Interpretations of medical cannabis use [07:49]The implications of the findings for policy and practice [08:23]Myfanwy's preferred measure of medical cannabis use [09:30]Self perceptions of being a medical cannabis consumer [10:34]The take-home messages of the study [11:56]About Elle Wadsworth: Elle is an academic fellow with the Society for the Study of Addiction. She is based at the University of Bath with the Addiction and Mental Health Group and her research interests include drug policy, cannabis legalisation, and public health.About Myfanwy Graham: Myfanwy is a Postgraduate Scholar funded by the Australian Government's National Health and Medical Research Council and a Monash Research Excellence Scholar at the Monash Addiction Research Centre, Monash University. Her research examines the intersection between drug policy and health outcomes with psychoactive medicines (e.g. medical cannabis, psychedelics). She is also a current Fellow at the Schaeffer Center for Health Policy and Economics at the University of Southern California and is a Fulbright Scholar Alumna in public health policy. Myfanwy has completed consultancy work for the Australian Government Department of Health, Disability and Ageing, World Health Organization, the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime and the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. She is also a registered pharmacist.Authors have no conflicts of interest to declare.Original article: Understanding medical cannabis use internationally: Why definitions and context matter https://doi.org/10.1111/add.70117The opinions expressed in this podcast reflect the views of the host and interviewees and do not necessarily represent the opinions or official positions of the SSA or Addiction journal.The SSA does not endorse or guarantee the accuracy of the information in external sources or links and accepts no responsibility or liability for any consequences arising from the use of such information. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

In this episode, Levy Research Scholar Aashima Sinha sits down with University of Massachusetts Amherst Professor Emerita and Levy Senior Scholar Nancy Folbre to discuss how feminist economics is reshaping our understanding of well-being, care, and inequality—from new measures that value household production to the challenges of integrating gender and care work into macroeconomics. They discuss fiscal and political barriers to gender-equitable policy, major data gaps (and efforts to fix them), and how patriarchy and capitalism reinforce each other across global contexts. Further reading:  Integrating Nonmarket Consumption into the Bureau of Labor Statistics Consumer Expenditure Survey, by A. Zacharias, F. Rios-Avila, N. Folbre, and T. Masterson The Care Board, University of Kansas A Data Infrastructure for Measuring the Care Economy, National Academies of Science, Engineering, and Medicine "Unmasking Hidden Poverty in America: The Role of Time Deficits," by A. Zacharias, F. Rios-Avila, T. Masterson, and A. Sinha "Measuring Care: Gender, Empowerment, and the Care Economy," by N. Folbre   Applications for the Levy Institute Graduate Programs in Economic Theory and Policy are open. For more information and to start your application, please visit: https://www.bard.edu/levygrad/. The early decision deadline to apply is January 15, 2026. The regular decision deadline is April 15, 2026. *International Student should apply by March 15th to allow time for securing a visa.* All applicants are eligible for financial aid. Financial aid is awarded based on each individual's merits and accomplishments both inside and outside the classroom.  

In this episode, we are joined by Dr. Charles Hillman, a Professor in the Department of Psychology and the Department of Physical Therapy, Movement, and Rehabilitation Sciences at Northeastern University in Boston, Massachusetts. Dr. Hillman is also the co-director of the Center for Cognitive and Brain Health, which focuses on understanding how lifestyle choices and behaviors impact brain health and cognition. Throughout his career, Dr. Hillman has published over 300 articles and co-edited a text on Functional Neuroimaging in Exercise and Sport Sciences. He has also served on numerous committees, including the Institute of Medicine of the National Academies and the Health and Human Services Physical Activity Guidelines for American's Scientific Advisory Committee. In this conversation, we delve into Dr. Hillman's research on how lifestyle choices such as physical activity and diet impact brain health and cognitive function. We also discuss the mission of the Center for Cognitive and Brain Health and its research on how to maximize health and well-being and promote effective functioning for individuals across the lifespan. Join us as we explore the fascinating research of Dr. Charles Hillman and his team at the Center for Cognitive and Brain Health. -------- This podcast episode is sponsored by Fibion Inc. | Better Sleep, Sedentary Behaviour and Physical Activity Research with Less Hassle --- Collect, store and manage SB and PA data easily and remotely - Discover ground-breaking Fibion SENS --- SB and PA measurements, analysis, and feedback made easy.  Learn more about Fibion Research --- Learn more about Fibion Sleep and Fibion Circadian Rhythm Solutions. --- Fibion Kids - Activity tracking designed for children. --- Collect self-report physical activity data easily and cost-effectively with Mimove. --- Explore our Wearables,  Experience sampling method (ESM), Sleep,  Heart rate variability (HRV), Sedentary Behavior and Physical Activity article collections for insights on related articles. --- Refer to our article "Physical Activity and Sedentary Behavior Measurements" for an exploration of active and sedentary lifestyle assessment methods. --- Learn about actigraphy in our guide: Exploring Actigraphy in Scientific Research: A Comprehensive Guide. --- Gain foundational ESM insights with "Introduction to Experience Sampling Method (ESM)" for a comprehensive overview. --- Explore accelerometer use in health research with our article "Measuring Physical Activity and Sedentary Behavior with Accelerometers ". --- For an introduction to the fundamental aspects of HRV, consider revisiting our Ultimate Guide to Heart Rate Variability. --- Follow the podcast on Twitter https://twitter.com/PA_Researcher Follow host Dr Olli Tikkanen on Twitter https://twitter.com/ollitikkanen Follow Fibion on Twitter https://twitter.com/fibion https://www.youtube.com/@PA_Researcher

In this episode, we are joined by Dr. Charles Hillman, a Professor in the Department of Psychology and the Department of Physical Therapy, Movement, and Rehabilitation Sciences at Northeastern University in Boston, Massachusetts. Dr. Hillman is also the co-director of the Center for Cognitive and Brain Health, which focuses on understanding how lifestyle choices and behaviors impact brain health and cognition. Throughout his career, Dr. Hillman has published over 300 articles and co-edited a text on Functional Neuroimaging in Exercise and Sport Sciences. He has also served on numerous committees, including the Institute of Medicine of the National Academies and the Health and Human Services Physical Activity Guidelines for American's Scientific Advisory Committee. In this conversation, we delve into Dr. Hillman's research on how lifestyle choices such as physical activity and diet impact brain health and cognitive function. We also discuss the mission of the Center for Cognitive and Brain Health and its research on how to maximize health and well-being and promote effective functioning for individuals across the lifespan. Join us as we explore the fascinating research of Dr. Charles Hillman and his team at the Center for Cognitive and Brain Health. ----------- This podcast episode is sponsored by Fibion Inc. | Better Sleep, Sedentary Behaviour and Physical Activity Research with Less Hassle --- Collect, store and manage SB and PA data easily and remotely - Discover ground-breaking Fibion SENS --- SB and PA measurements, analysis, and feedback made easy.  Learn more about Fibion Research --- Learn more about Fibion Sleep and Fibion Circadian Rhythm Solutions. --- Fibion Kids - Activity tracking designed for children. --- Collect self-report physical activity data easily and cost-effectively with Mimove. --- Explore our Wearables,  Experience sampling method (ESM), Sleep,  Heart rate variability (HRV), Sedentary Behavior and Physical Activity article collections for insights on related articles. --- Refer to our article "Physical Activity and Sedentary Behavior Measurements" for an exploration of active and sedentary lifestyle assessment methods. --- Learn about actigraphy in our guide: Exploring Actigraphy in Scientific Research: A Comprehensive Guide. --- Gain foundational ESM insights with "Introduction to Experience Sampling Method (ESM)" for a comprehensive overview. --- Explore accelerometer use in health research with our article "Measuring Physical Activity and Sedentary Behavior with Accelerometers ". --- For an introduction to the fundamental aspects of HRV, consider revisiting our Ultimate Guide to Heart Rate Variability. --- Follow the podcast on Twitter https://twitter.com/PA_Researcher Follow host Dr Olli Tikkanen on Twitter https://twitter.com/ollitikkanen Follow Fibion on Twitter https://twitter.com/fibion https://www.youtube.com/@PA_Researcher

Dr. Rosensweet graduated from the University of Michigan Medical School in 1968. Since 1971, he has been in private medical practice, with offices in Florida, New Mexico, California, and Colorado. Early in his career, Dr. Rosensweet trained the first nurse practitioners in the United States and was in charge of health promotion for the State of New Mexico.He is a nationally known lecturer and presenter at The American Academy of Anti-Aging Medicine (A4M), The American College for Advancement in Medicine (ACAM), The Age Management Medicine Group (AMMG), and more. In 2019, he was called to Washington to speak in front of The National Academies of Science Engineering and Medicine (NASEM) on “The Safety and Efficacy of Bioidentical Hormones.”Dr. R is the Founder of The Menopause Method and The Institute of BioIdentical Medicine, where he has been training medical professionals to master cBHRT using the most advanced and modern tools. His protocol has been used to treat more than 12,000 women. More about Dr. Rosensweet:* Was recently named one of “The Biggest Names in Anti-Aging Medicine” by The American Academy of Anti-Aging Medicine (A4M)* Author of the books, Menopause and Natural Hormones and Happy Healthy Hormones: How to Thrive in Menopause* Founder of Brite (www.brite.live) and I Wonder, Doctor… (www.iwonderdoctor.com)* Founder and co-chair of the Coalition to Protect Compounded Bioidentical Hormones (cbhrtcoalition.org)*Organizer of a National Summit Committee on the Treatment of Women in Menopause with Bioidentical Hormones* Principal Investigator for a scientific study of female hormones.https://brite.live/       https://iobim.org       https://www.davedrosensweetmd.comhttps://www.facebook.com/share/g/1CEpiqShxB/https://www.instagram.com/menopausedoctor?utm_source=ig_web_button_share_sheet&i“I recommend this product to my clients for hemorrhoids, fissures, itching, irritation, dryness and for any kind of butt drama. I like it because it's all-natural, soothing, effective, multi-purpose and female founded. It's made with healing ingredients such as arnica, vitamin e oil, organic aloe and the branding speaks for itself.” Use code VAGINACOACH to save 20% at www.anythingbrands.comThank you so much for listening! I use fitness and movement to help women prevent and overcome pelvic floor challenges like incontinence and organ prolapse. There is help for women in all life stages! Every Woman Needs A Vagina Coach! Please make sure to LEAVE A REVIEW and SUBSCRIBE to the show for the best fitness and wellness advice south of your belly button. *******************I recommend checking out my comprehensive pelvic health education and fitness programs on my Buff Muff AppYou can also join my next 28 Day Buff Muff Challenge https://www.vaginacoach.com/buffmuffIf you are feeling social you can connect with me… On Facebook https://www.facebook.com/VagCoachOn Instagram https://www.instagram.com/vaginacoach/On Twitter https://twitter.com/VaginaCoachOn The Web www.vaginacoach.comGet your Feel Amazing Vaginal Moisturizer Here

In October, stakeholders representing an unusual combination of sectors — public, private, academic, non-profit and journalism — gathered with insurance industry experts at the 10X Convergence in Jacksonville, Florida, to explore solutions to unsustainable insurance and disaster recovery costs throughout the Interstate 10 region.Insurers continue to cancel homeowners policies across California, Texas, Louisiana, and Florida as exposure to accelerating billion-dollar disasters undermines carriers' ability to pay out claims while remaining solvent. The industry crisis has begun to spread northward, where a widening Tornado Alley sees growing impacts from property-damaging storms.  This is a complex, all-hands-on-deck issue. Insurance practices and building standards have not adapted to the realities of climate change, and have neglected potential to be of powerful mutual support to one another. On the whole, 10X Convergence participants were clear that viable solutions will require a combination of applied climate and economic research with proactive governance and communications strategies, and that this must be matched by industry willingness to innovate its systems of underwriting and community development.  In this podcast, Ten Across journalists Maya Chari and Taylor Griffith take you through the problems and potential solutions discussed by the diverse group of experts at the 10X Convergence.  Relevant Articles and Resources  VIDEO: 10X Convergence Event Wrap Up  “It's harder to get home insurance. That's changing communities across the U.S.” (NPR, November 2025)  “They survived the hurricane. Their insurance company didn't.” (Grist, November 2025)  “Insurance for Physical Climate Risk Management: Lessons from History” (Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, August 2025)  “Next to Fall: The Climate-Driven Insurance Crisis is Here—And Getting Worse” (Senate Budget Committee, December 2024)  Relevant Ten Across Conversations Podcasts  The Future of Insurability: New Approaches and Mindsets Carolyn Kousky on Using Insurance Models to Drive Positive Change  Checking in with Dave Jones on California's Insurance Outlook  CreditsHosts: Maya Chari and Taylor GriffithProducer and editor: Taylor GriffithMusic by: Out To The World, Marten Moses, Lennon Hutton, and Pearce RoswellResearch and support provided by: Duke Reiter, Kate Carefoot, Rae Ulrich, and Sabine Butler  Guest Bios (in order of appearance):  Steve Bowen is the Chief Science Officer and meteorologist at Gallagher Re.  Adam Reeder is a civil-structural engineer and principal investigator at CDM Smith.  Juliet Rogers is the president of Blue Cottage at CannonDesign.  Laura Phillips-Edgecombe is the duPont Fund principal for public spaces and executive on loan to the City of Jacksonville, Florida.  Clint Noble is a member of the City of Jacksonville Environmental Protection Board and professional geologist with CDM Smith.  Dr. Quinton White is founding executive director of the Marine Science Research Institute and professor emeritus at Jacksonville University.  Alex Harris is the lead climate reporter for the Miami Herald.  Pete Nelson is the communications director for the Gulf Research Program at the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine.  Dave Hondula is the director of the Office of Heat Response and Mitigation at the City of Phoenix.  Casi Callaway is the founder and president of Activate Build Connect.  Eric Corey Freed is the director of sustainability at CannonDesign.  Sarina Beges is the associate director of philanthropy and social innovation at the Aspen Institute.  Ashantae Green is the sustainability manager for the City of Jacksonville, Florida.

When the 1952 London fog killed people in large numbers, it became a wake-up call that air pollution could be deadly—inspiring a young medical student named Jon Samet to dedicate 40+ years to understanding how the air we breathe affects our health. Now a leading authority who has shaped EPA policy and US Surgeon General reports since 1984, Dr. Samet reveals how tobacco industry fraud tactics resurfaced in air pollution debates, why COVID taught us that we humans are powerful infectious sources in small particles suspended for hours, how radon is the one carcinogen you can measure yourself for $30-50 and actually fix, and why MERV-A filter ratings matter more than standard MERV for real-world efficiency.Plus the critical reminder that indoor spaces where we spend most of our time are places where we inhale dangerous things. THINGS WE SPOKE ABOUTTobacco industry fraud tactics mirror air pollution industry science denialCOVID taught us people are powerful infectious sources needing controlRadon is measurable carcinogen you can test and mitigate yourselfAir filtration reduces infectious load; MERV-A ratings show real-world efficiencyIndoor air quality improves productivity, reduces absenteeism, attracts talented employeesGUEST DETAILS Dr. Jon Samet is a leading authority in environmental health who has dedicated over 40 years to understanding how inhaled pollutants affect public health. Former Dean and current Professor of Epidemiology, Dr. Samet has chaired key advisory committees for the EPA (Clean Air Scientific Advisory Committee) and FDA, fundamentally shaping environmental health policy. Since 1984, he has been a crucial contributor to multiple US Surgeon General reports on smoking, documenting the health impacts of active and secondhand smoke. His work exposed tobacco industry campaigns of fraud and deception that attempted to undermine scientific evidence—tactics later replicated by air pollution industries.During COVID, he chaired a National Academies of Sciences committee developing frameworks for providing respiratory protection for the nation—recommendations that unfortunately never gained traction despite demonstrating critical needs. Dr. Samet earned membership in the National Academy of Medicine and continues advancing indoor air quality science, particularly post-COVID focus on controlling pathogen transmission in buildings. Based in Denver, he consults with building owners, school districts, and policymakers on implementing evidence-based air quality improvements. His expertise bridges epidemiology, aerosol science, regulatory policy, and practical building management—making him uniquely qualified to translate decades of public health research into actionable indoor air quality strategies.MORE INFORMATIONThere is also a wealth of industry information on air quality and how to improve it on our website at camfil.comLet's Talk Clean Air is produced for Camfil by DustPod.ioQUOTESYou know, when people ask me about radon, it is a carcinogen, but somebody can go buy a test kit, get back a result. How many carcinogens are there that you could measure yourself and do something about it? - Dr. Jon SametAirborne pathogens have always been with us and will remain with us. I think what COVID did is it taught us just what powerful sources of infection we people can be - Dr. Jon SametA couple of nights ago, I got on the train, and there's somebody with a very wet cough, coughing right in the middle of a very small space. And I'm thinking he should be wearing at the least a mask to prevent droplets from flying around, and in that small space probably I should have had on an N95. - Dr. Jon SametKEYWORDS#indoorairquality #radontest ing #airbornepathogens #secondhandsmoke #respiratoryprotection

What if your brain's health in retirement depended as much on who you see as on what you eat or how you move? Neuroscientist Dr. Ben Rein, author of  the new book Why Brains Need Friends: The Neuroscience of Social Connection, joins us to reveal how social connection shapes your brain. He explains why isolation is as toxic as chronic stress, how friendship fuels brain resilience, and why your dog might be one of your best wellness allies. In this e, ye-opening conversation, you'll learn how staying socially engaged literally protects your brain from decline, the science behind “nature's medicine” — oxytocin — and practical ways to rewire your social habits for longevity, joy, and emotional well-being. If you've ever wondered why friendships matter more than ever in retirement, this episode will change the way you think about your brain — and your calendar. You'll learn: Why social interaction is a fundamental pillar of brain health, as critical as sleep and nutrition - and what happens when we don't get enough of it The invisible pattern of retirement isolation: how time spent alone steadily increases while connections with coworkers, friends, and family decline simultaneously Why text-based communication doesn't satisfy your brain's need for connection (and what to do instead to restore the social cues your brain craves) The surprising neuroscience behind why dogs are so good for us—and how they activate the same brain reward systems as human connection Two scientifically-proven exercises you can start today to train your empathy and strengthen the brain regions associated with compassion and social connection Ben Rein joins us from Buffalo, New York. ____________________________ Bio Ben Rein, PhD, is an award-winning neuroscientist, chief science officer of the Mind Science Foundation, adjunct lecturer at Stanford University, clinical assistant professor at SUNY Buffalo, and a renowned science educator. Dr. Rein's research focuses on the neuroscience of social interactions, and outside of the lab he teaches neuroscience to an audience of more than one million social media followers. Dr. Rein and his research have been featured on major media outlets including Entertainment Tonight and Good Morning America, and he has received awards from the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine; the Society for Neuroscience; and elsewhere. _____________________________ For More on Ben Rein Why Brains Need Friends: The Neuroscience of Social Connection Website You Tube Channel ______________________________ Mentioned in this Podcast Loving Kindness Meditation Affect Dyad excercise ______________________________ Podcast Conversations You May Like Our New Social Life – Natalie Kerr & Jaime Kurtz The Laws of Connection – David Robson The Self-Healing Mind – Gregory Scott Brown, M.D _______________________________ About The Retirement Wisdom Podcast There are many podcasts on retirement, often hosted by financial advisors with their own financial motives, that cover the money side of the street. This podcast is different. You'll get smarter about the investment decisions you'll make about the most important asset you'll have in retirement: your time. About Retirement Wisdom I help people who are retiring, but aren't quite done yet, discover what's next and build their custom version of their next life. A meaningful retirement doesn't just happen by accident. Schedule a call today to discuss how the Designing Your Life process created by Bill Burnett & Dave Evans can help you make your life in retirement a great one — on your own terms. About Your Podcast Host Joe Casey is an executive coach who helps people design their next life after their primary career and create their version of The Multipurpose Retirement.™ He created his own next chapter after a 26-year career at Merrill Lynch, where he was Senior Vice President and Head of HR ...

Two distinguished leaders in federal statistics—Nancy Potok, former chief statistician of the United States and CEO of NAPx Consulting, and Connie Citro, senior scholar at the National Academies' Committee on National Statistics, join hosts Donna LaLonde and Ron Wasserstein this month. Together, they discuss how the ASA is working collaboratively with other organizations to identify ongoing […]

A new report from the National Academies claims that greenhouse gases are “threatening human health” — but is that really the strongest evidence to date, or another case of politicized science?In this episode, Dr. David Legates examines the EPA's 2009 Endangerment Finding, contrasts it with a more recent Department of Energy report, and explains why the so-called “climate consensus” is far less certain than we've been led to believe. He unpacks the data behind carbon dioxide, climate models, and extreme weather — and makes the case that adaptation, not fear-driven regulation, is the wiser path forward.Visit our podcast resource page: https://cornwallalliance.org/listen%20to%20our%20podcast%20created%20to%20reign/Our work is entirely supported by donations from people like you. If you benefit from our work and would like to partner with us, please visit www.cornwallalliance.org/donate.

What happens when organizations racing to survive suddenly scrub "equity" and "justice" from their websites—without asking the communities they serve? Dr. Philip Alberti, founding director of the AAMC Center for Health Justice, joins host Corey Dion Lewis for a powerful conversation about the real cost of changing language without changing process.In this episode, Philip breaks down why speed matters, how community engagement isn't optional, and what it really means to build health equity for ALL communities—yes, including white ones. From navigating existential threats to imagining cross-racial movements for justice, this conversation challenges health equity professionals to hold the line on values while adapting to a hostile landscape.Whether you're a health equity champion feeling the squeeze, a leader struggling with messaging, or someone who believes thriving communities are possible for everyone, this episode offers both validation and a roadmap forward.Show NotesIn This Episode:[00:00] Introduction - The LinkedIn post that started it all: "The more our organizations change their language, the less their communities trust them"[03:10] The real existential threats facing health equity work—and the hidden cost of quick compliance[05:29] Why the speed of institutional language changes sent the wrong message to communities[08:18] The "health equity tourists" who jumped ship—and why that might not be all bad[09:09] If health equity benefits everyone, why is it so divisive in 2025? Where did we lose the thread?[11:25] Addressing the elephant in the room: health equity for ALL communities, including white ones[13:10] Unpacking the false narrative that health equity creates winners and losers[16:30] Why Black and Brown champions shouldn't have to build bridges—and Philip's fantasy nonprofit "The Daves"[18:09] What's truly non-negotiable when it comes to language and messaging[19:00] The 10 core principles of authentic community engagement from the National Academies model[22:01] How to actually start building community partnerships (spoiler: just listen first)[24:43] The organizational infrastructure changes that make community engagement possible[27:57] What gives Philip hope: surprising public opinion data showing cross-ideological agreement[31:49] Real-world example: Community Works and building relationships across political divides[32:14] Health justice as both aspiration and operational framework—making the process the productKey Resources Mentioned:AAMC Center for Health Justice: AAMCHealthJustice.orgAAMC Principles of Trustworthiness ToolkitAAMC CHARGE (Collaborative for Health Equity Act Research Generate Evidence) - free to join, 1,800+ membersDr. Philip Alberti's article: "Health Equity Benefits All Communities" National Academies model of assessing meaningful engagementDr. Sarah Gollust's communication research on population health equityCommunity Works organization featured in The NationThe Vital Conditions for Health and Well-beingGuest Bio:Dr. Philip Alberti is the founding director of the AAMC Center for Health Justice, where he leads work at the intersection of community engagement, health equity research, and policy change. A community-engaged scientist and practitioner by training, Philip brings experience from public health departments and a commitment to building trustworthy partnerships that center community wisdom. As a gay white man, he entered this work thinking about class-based and LGBTQ+ inequities, and now champions a tent big enough for all communities to thrive.Connect with Dr. Philip Alberti:AAMC Center for Health Justice: AAMCHealthJustice.orgJoin AAMC CHARGE (free membership): Visit website for detailsStay Connected & Support the Show:Want to keep up with conversations like this that challenge the status quo and center community voices? Sign up for The Healthy Project newsletter at www.healthyproject.co for exclusive insights, resources, and updates you won't want to miss.Love what you're hearing? Support independent podcasting that prioritizes truth over trends. Join THP+ for just $5/month and get bonus content, early access to episodes, and the satisfaction of knowing you're fueling more conversations that matter.Visit www.healthyproject.co to subscribe and support today. ★ Support this podcast ★

In schools across the United States, active shooter drills have been common for years and yet we don't know all that we could about the effect of such drills on students and educators. On this episode, we talk with two members of a National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine Consensus Study focused on this phenomenon: Melissa Brymer of the UCLA–Duke National Center for Child Traumatic Stress and Sonali Rajan of Columbia University.

We live in an age where truth twists into confusion, opinion drowns out data, and it's increasingly difficult to figure out whose expertise we can trust.Where did our mistrust in expertise come from? Its roots stretch back to deliberate misinformation campaigns beginning in the 1950s spread by the likes of Big Tobacco, Big Oil, and conservative church movements. Then social media poured gasoline on the fire, accelerating the spread of misinformation and making sowing division highly profitable.Misinformation campaigns take advantage of our brains' natural tendency to protect the familiar and mistrust outgroups. And they capitalize on the very real betrayals people have experienced at the hands of corporations, governments, schools, and healthcare systems.Our challenge now isn't just knowing the facts, it's interrogating our own beliefs, asking where our evidence comes from, and resisting the pull of certainty. As leaders, we need to discern who we give our attention to, practice critical thinking, resist manufactured controversy, and platform voices committed to both truth and connection.Today's guest is a neuroscientist and author of Why Brains Need Friends, who works to make science accessible, relational, and rooted in respect. He doesn't focus on winning arguments or shaming people into submission. He focuses on bridging divides, building trust, and reminding us that our brains–and our lives–are wired for connection.Ben Rein, PhD is an award-winning neuroscientist and science communicator. He serves as the Chief Science Officer of the Mind Science Foundation, an Adjunct Lecturer at Stanford University, and a Clinical Assistant Professor at SUNY Buffalo. He has published over 20 peer-reviewed papers on the neuroscience of social behavior, and is the author of Why Brains Need Friends: The Neuroscience of Social Connection. In addition, Rein educates an audience of more than 1 million social media followers and has been featured on outlets including Entertainment Tonight, Good Morning America and StarTalk with Neil DeGrasse Tyson. He has received awards for his science communication from the National Academies of Science, Engineering, and Medicine, the Society for Neuroscience, and elsewhere.Listen to the full episode to hear:How an especially vivid nightmare redirected Ben's path to neuroscienceWhy the division and isolation of modern life is so bad for our brains and overall healthHow engaging with strangers isn't as awkward as we often think it is, and why we should do it moreHow small social interactions build our sense of belonging, community, and wellbeingWhy we need to recognize and then override our gut reactions to those we perceive as belonging to outgroupsHow social media sound bites vastly oversimplify the complex and unknown systems in our brainsWhy Ben's primary mission to to help people understand the value of looking to data and evidence rather than personalities and experiencesWhy we all have to get better at fact-checking and questioning why we're ready to believe somethingLearn more about Dr. Ben Rein:WebsiteInstagram: @dr.benreinWhy Brains Need Friends: The Neuroscience of Social ConnectionLearn more about Rebecca:rebeccaching.comWork With RebeccaThe Unburdened Leader on SubstackSign up for the weekly Unburdened Leader EmailResources:Golden Holocaust: Origins of the Cigarette Catastrophe and the Case for Abolition, Robert N Proctor"Assessing ExxonMobil's climate change communications (1977–2014),” Geoffrey Supran and Naomi Oreskes, 2017 Environmental Research Letters 12 084019The Creationists: From Scientific Creationism to Intelligent Design, Ronald L. Numbers"Misinformation and Its Correction Continued Influence and Successful Debiasing,” Stephan Lewandowsky et al., 2012 Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 13(3)The Logic of Scientific Discovery, Karl PopperSciSpaceSapiens: A Brief History of Humankind, Yuval Noah HarariDune, Frank HerbertThe Poisoner's Handbook: Murder and the Birth of Forensic Medicine in Jazz Age New York, Deborah BlumTory Lanez - Gangland x Fargentina 4EVR (feat. Wolfgang Peterson & Kai)Hard Knocks: Training CampCourage the Cowardly Dog

EELP's Hannah Perls speaks with environmental justice pioneer Charles Lee, former director of EPA's Office of Environmental Justice and principal author of the landmark 1987 report, Toxic Wastes and Race in the United States, and now a visiting scholar at Howard University School of Law, and Sean Moriarty, former deputy commissioner with the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection. They discuss the growing field of cumulative impacts analysis and how states are increasingly using this tool in permitting and other programs to advance meaningful protections for overburdened communities across the country. Transcript: https://eelp.law.harvard.edu/wp-content/uploads/2025/10/CleanLaw_EP109-Transcript.pdf Toxic Wastes and Race in the United States: https://www.ucc.org/what-we-do/justice-local-church-ministries/efam/environmental-justice/environmental-ministries_toxic-waste-20/ New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection's Environmental Justice Archives: https://dep.nj.gov/ej/archive/#meeting-20210624 EELP's EJ Tracker page on EPA's cumulative impacts efforts: https://eelp.law.harvard.edu/tracker/epa-released-interim-framework-for-advancing-consideration-of-cumulative-impacts/ National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine's State-of-the-Science and the Future of Cumulative Impact Assessment report: https://www.nationalacademies.org/our-work/state-of-the-science-and-the-future-of-cumulative-impact-assessment The New School Tishman Environment and Design Center's Cumulative Impacts Dashboard map of EJ laws: https://www.tishmancenter.org/cumulativeimpacts

In this episode of The VetMed Mind, Bob Murtaugh joins Shawn McVey and Rachel Teichberg to reflect on his remarkable 40+ year journey in veterinary medicine. From academic leadership to executive positions, he shares the pivotal moments, hard-earned lessons, and shifting perspectives that have defined his impactful career and lasting contributions to the field.Bob Murtaugh, DVM, MS, DACVIM, DACVECC, FCCM, has over 40 years of experience in veterinary medicine, with leadership roles at Tufts University, VCA Animal Hospitals, and Thrive Pet Healthcare. He has played a key role in expanding veterinary services nationwide and currently serves as Chair of Veterinary Medicine at the National Academies of Practice. A passionate advocate for accessible care, Bob is committed to advancing the profession through innovation, collaboration, and bold systemic change.To learn more about Bob Murtaugh's passions in life and work:Follow on LinkedIn - https://www.linkedin.com/in/drbobmurtaugh/Follow on FaceBook - https://www.facebook.com/murtdvmFollow on Twitter - https://twitter.com/MurtDVMCheck out his website - https://www.murtdvm.com/The VetMed Mind is a podcast project about sharing inspirational stories, lessons, and successes from the fantastic people of the veterinary industry.

An avalanche of information besets us on what to eat. It comes from the news, from influencers of every ilk, from scientists, from government, and of course from the food companies. Super foods? Ultra-processed foods? How does one find a source of trust and make intelligent choices for both us as individuals and for the society as a whole. A new book helps in this quest, a book entitled Food Intelligence: the Science of How Food Both Nourishes and Harms Us. It is written by two highly credible and thoughtful people who join us today.Julia Belluz is a journalist and a contributing opinion writer for the New York Times. She reports on medicine, nutrition, and public health. She's been a Knight Science Journalism Fellow at MIT and holds a master's in science degree from the London School of Economics and Political Science. Dr. Kevin Hall trained as a physicist as best known for pioneering work on nutrition, including research he did as senior investigator and section chief at the National Institutes of Health. His work is highly regarded. He's won awards from the NIH, from the American Society of Nutrition, the Obesity Society and the American Physiological Society. Interview Transcript Thank you both very much for being with us. And not only for being with us, but writing such an interesting book. I was really eager to read it and there's a lot in there that people don't usually come across in their normal journeys through the nutrition world. So, Julia, start off if you wouldn't mind telling us what the impetus was for you and Kevin to do this book with everything else that's out there. Yes, so there's just, I think, an absolute avalanche of information as you say about nutrition and people making claims about how to optimize diet and how best to lose or manage weight. And I think what we both felt was missing from that conversation was a real examination of how do we know what we know and kind of foundational ideas in this space. You hear a lot about how to boost or speed up your metabolism, but people don't know what metabolism is anyway. You hear a lot about how you need to maximize your protein, but what is protein doing in the body and where did that idea come from? And so, we were trying to really pair back. And I think this is where Kevin's physics training was so wonderful. We were trying to look at like what are these fundamental laws and truths. Things that we know about food and nutrition and how it works in us, and what can we tell people about them. And as we kind of went through that journey it very quickly ended up in an argument about the food environment, which I know we're going to get to. We will. It's really interesting. This idea of how do we know what we know is really fascinating because when you go out there, people kind of tell us what we know. Or at least what they think what we know. But very few people go through that journey of how did we get there. And so people can decide on their own is this a credible form of knowledge that I'm being told to pursue. So Kevin, what do you mean by food intelligence? Coming from a completely different background in physics where even as we learn about the fundamental laws of physics, it's always in this historical context about how we know what we know and what were the kind of key experiments along the way. And even with that sort of background, I had almost no idea about what happened to food once we ate it inside our bodies. I only got into this field by a happenstance series of events, which is probably too long to talk about this podcast. But to get people to have an appreciation from the basic science about what is going on inside our bodies when we eat. What is food made out of? As best as we can understand at this current time, how does our body deal with. Our food and with that sort of basic knowledge about how we know what we know. How to not be fooled by these various sound bites that we'll hear from social media influencers telling you that everything that you knew about nutrition is wrong. And they've been hiding this one secret from you that's been keeping you sick for so long to basically be able to see through those kinds of claims and have a bedrock of knowledge upon which to kind of evaluate those things. That's what we mean by food intelligence. It makes sense. Now, I'm assuming that food intelligence is sort of psychological and biological at the same time, isn't it? Because that there's what you're being told and how do you process that information and make wise choices. But there's also an intelligence the body has and how to deal with the food that it's receiving. And that can get fooled too by different things that are coming at it from different types of foods and stuff. We'll get to that in a minute, but it's a very interesting concept you have, and wouldn't it be great if we could all make intelligent choices? Julia, you mentioned the food environment. How would you describe the modern food environment and how does it shape the choices we make? It's almost embarrassing to have this question coming from you because so much of our understanding and thinking about this idea came from you. So, thank you for your work. I feel like you should be answering this question. But I think one of the big aha moments I had in the book research was talking to a neuroscientist, who said the problem in and of itself isn't like the brownies and the pizza and the chips. It's the ubiquity of them. It's that they're most of what's available, along with other less nutritious ultra-processed foods. They're the most accessible. They're the cheapest. They're kind of heavily marketed. They're in our face and the stuff that we really ought to be eating more of, we all know we ought to be eating more of, the fruits and vegetables, fresh or frozen. The legumes, whole grains. They're the least available. They're the hardest to come by. They're the least accessible. They're the most expensive. And so that I think kind of sums up what it means to live in the modern food environment. The deck is stacked against most of us. The least healthy options are the ones that we're inundated by. And to kind of navigate that, you need a lot of resources, wherewithal, a lot of thought, a lot of time. And I think that's kind of where we came out thinking about it. But if anyone is interested in knowing more, they need to read your book Food Fight, because I think that's a great encapsulation of where we still are basically. Well, Julie, it's nice of you to say that. You know what you reminded me one time I was on a panel and a speaker asks the audience, how many minutes do you live from a Dunkin Donuts? And people sort of thought about it and nobody was more than about five minutes from a Dunkin Donuts. And if I think about where I live in North Carolina, a typical place to live, I'm assuming in America. And boy, within about five minutes, 10 minutes from my house, there's so many fast-food places. And then if you add to that the gas stations that have foods and the drug store that has foods. Not to mention the supermarkets. It's just a remarkable environment out there. And boy, you have to have kind of iron willpower to not stop and want that food. And then once it hits your body, then all heck breaks loose. It's a crazy, crazy environment, isn't it? Kevin, talk to us, if you will, about when this food environment collides with human biology. And what happens to normal biological processes that tell us how much we should eat, when we should stop, what we should eat, and things like that. I think that that is one of the newer pieces that we're really just getting a handle on some of the science. It's been observed for long periods of time that if you change a rat's food environment like Tony Sclafani did many, many years ago. That rats aren't trying to maintain their weight. They're not trying to do anything other than eat whatever they feel like. And, he was having a hard time getting rats to fatten up on a high fat diet. And he gave them this so-called supermarket diet or cafeteria diet composed of mainly human foods. And they gained a ton of weight. And I think that pointed to the fact that it's not that these rats lacked willpower or something like that. That they weren't making these conscious choices in the same way that we often think humans are entirely under their conscious control about what we're doing when we make our food choices. And therefore, we criticize people as having weak willpower when they're not able to choose a healthier diet in the face of the food environment. I think the newer piece that we're sort of only beginning to understand is how is it that that food environment and the foods that we eat might be changing this internal symphony of signals that's coming from our guts, from the hormones in our blood, to our brains and the understanding that of food intake. While you might have control over an individual meal and how much you eat in that individual meal is under biological control. And what are the neural systems and how do they work inside our brains in communicating with our bodies and our environment as a whole to shift the sort of balance point where body weight is being regulated. To try to better understand this really intricate interconnection or interaction between our genes, which are very different between people. And thousands of different genes contributing to determining heritability of body size in a given environment and how those genes are making us more or less susceptible to these differences in the food environment. And what's the underlying biology? I'd be lying to say if that we have that worked out. I think we're really beginning to understand that, but I hope what the book can give people is an appreciation for the complexity of those internal signals and that they exist. And that food intake isn't entirely under our control. And that we're beginning to unpack the science of how those interactions work. It's incredibly interesting. I agree with you on that. I have a slide that I bet I've shown a thousand times in talks that I think Tony Sclafani gave me decades ago that shows laboratory rats standing in front of a pile of these supermarket foods. And people would say, well, of course you're going to get overweight if that's all you eat. But animals would eat a healthy diet if access to it. But what they did was they had the pellets of the healthy rat chow sitting right in that pile. Exactly. And the animals ignore that and overeat the unhealthy food. And then you have this metabolic havoc occur. So, it seems like the biology we've all inherited works pretty well if you have foods that we've inherited from the natural environment. But when things become pretty unnatural and we have all these concoctions and chemicals that comprise the modern food environment the system really breaks down, doesn't it? Yeah. And I think that a lot of people are often swayed by the idea as well. Those foods just taste better and that might be part of it. But I think that what we've come to realize, even in our human experiments where we change people's food environments... not to the same extent that Tony Sclafani did with his rats, but for a month at a time where we ask people to not be trying to gain or lose weight. And we match certain food environments for various nutrients of concern. You know, they overeat diets that are higher in these so-called ultra-processed foods and they'd spontaneously lose weight when we remove those from the diet. And they're not saying that the foods are any more or less pleasant to eat. There's this underlying sort of the liking of foods is somewhat separate from the wanting of foods as neuroscientists are beginning to understand the different neural pathways that are involved in motivation and reward as opposed to the sort of just the hedonic liking of foods. Even the simple explanation of 'oh yeah, the rats just like the food more' that doesn't seem to be fully explaining why we have these behaviors. Why it's more complicated than a lot of people make out. Let's talk about ultra-processed foods and boy, I've got two wonderful people to talk to about that topic. Julia, let's start with your opinion on this. So tell us about ultra-processed foods and how much of the modern diet do they occupy? So ultra-processed foods. Obviously there's an academic definition and there's a lot of debate about defining this category of foods, including in the US by the Health and Human Services. But the way I think about it is like, these are foods that contain ingredients that you don't use in your home kitchen. They're typically cooked. Concocted in factories. And they now make up, I think it's like 60% of the calories that are consumed in America and in other similar high-income countries. And a lot of these foods are what researchers would also call hyper palatable. They're crossing these pairs of nutrient thresholds like carbohydrate, salt, sugar, fat. These pairs that don't typically exist in nature. So, for the reasons you were just discussing they seem to be particularly alluring to people. They're again just like absolutely ubiquitous and in these more developed contexts, like in the US and in the UK in particular. They've displaced a lot of what we would think of as more traditional food ways or ways that people were eating. So that's sort of how I think about them. You know, if you go to a supermarket these days, it's pretty hard to find a part of the supermarket that doesn't have these foods. You know, whole entire aisles of processed cereals and candies and chips and soft drinks and yogurts, frozen foods, yogurts. I mean, it's just, it's all over the place. And you know, given that if the average is 60% of calories, and there are plenty of people out there who aren't eating any of that stuff at all. For the other people who are, the number is way higher. And that, of course, is of great concern. So there have been hundreds of studies now on ultra-processed foods. It was a concept born not that long ago. And there's been an explosion of science and that's all for the good, I think, on these ultra-processed foods. And perhaps of all those studies, the one discussed most is one that you did, Kevin. And because it was exquisitely controlled and it also produced pretty striking findings. Would you describe that original study you did and what you found? Sure. So, the basic idea was one of the challenges that we have in nutrition science is accurately measuring how many calories people eat. And the best way to do that is to basically bring people into a laboratory and measure. Give them a test meal and measure how many calories they eat. Most studies of that sort last for maybe a day or two. But I always suspected that people could game the system if for a day or two, it's probably not that hard to behave the way that the researcher wants, or the subject wants to deceive the researcher. We decided that what we wanted to do was bring people into the NIH Clinical Center. Live with us for a month. And in two two-week blocks, we decided that we would present them with two different food environments essentially that both provided double the number of calories that they would require to maintain their body weight. Give them very simple instructions. Eat as much or as little as you'd like. Don't be trying to change your weight. We're not going to tell you necessarily what the study's about. We're going to measure lots of different things. And they're blinded to their weight measurements and they're wearing loose fitting scrubs and things like that, so they can't tell if their clothes are getting tighter or looser. And so, what we did is in for one two-week block, we presented people with the same number of calories, the same amount of sugar and fat and carbs and fiber. And we gave them a diet that was composed of 80% of calories coming from these ultra-processed foods. And the other case, we gave them a diet that was composed of 0% of calories from ultra-processed food and 80% of the so-called minimally processed food group. And what we then did was just measured people's leftovers essentially. And I say we, it was really the chefs and the dieticians at the clinical center who are doing all the legwork on this. But what we found was pretty striking, which was that when people were exposed to this highly ultra-processed food environment, despite being matched for these various nutrients of concern, they overate calories. Eating about 500 calories per day on average, more than the same people in the minimally processed diet condition. And they gained weight and gained body fat. And, when they were in the minimally processed diet condition, they spontaneously lost weight and lost body fat without trying in either case, right? They're just eating to the same level of hunger and fullness and overall appetite. And not reporting liking the meals any more or less in one diet versus the other. Something kind of more fundamental seemed to have been going on that we didn't fully understand at the time. What was it about these ultra-processed foods? And we were clearly getting rid of many of the things that promote their intake in the real world, which is that they're convenient, they're cheap, they're easy to obtain, they're heavily marketed. None of that was at work here. It was something really about the meals themselves that we were providing to people. And our subsequent research has been trying to figure out, okay, well what were the properties of those meals that we were giving to these folks that were composed primarily of ultra-processed foods that were driving people to consume excess calories? You know, I've presented your study a lot when I give talks. It's nice hearing it coming from you rather than me. But a couple of things that interest me here. You use people as their own controls. Each person had two weeks of one diet and two weeks of another. That's a pretty powerful way of providing experimental control. Could you say just a little bit more about that? Yeah, sure. So, when you design a study, you're trying to maximize the efficiency of the study to get the answers that you want with the least number of participants while still having good control and being able to design the study that's robust enough to detect a meaningful effect if it exists. One of the things that you do when you analyze studies like that or design studies like that, you could just randomize people to two different groups. But given how noisy and how different between people the measurement of food intake is we would've required hundreds of people in each group to detect an effect like the one that we discovered using the same person acting as their own control. We would still be doing the study 10 years later as opposed to what we were able to do in this particular case, which is completed in a year or so for that first study. And so, yeah, when you kind of design a study that way it's not always the case that you get that kind of improvement in statistical power. But for a measurement like food intake, it really is necessary to kind of do these sorts of crossover type studies where each person acts as their own control. So put the 500 calorie increment in context. Using the old fashioned numbers, 3,500 calories equals a pound. That'd be about a pound a week or a lot of pounds over a year. But of course, you don't know what would happen if people were followed chronically and all that. But still 500 calories is a whopping increase, it seems to me. It sure is. And there's no way that we would expect it to stay at that constant level for many, many weeks on end. And I think that's one of the key questions going forward is how persistent is that change. And how does something that we've known about and we discuss in our books the basic physiology of how both energy expenditure changes as people gain and lose weight, as well as how does appetite change in a given environment when they gain and lose weight? And how do those two processes eventually equate at a new sort of stable body weight in this case. Either higher or lower than when people started the program of this diet manipulation. And so, it's really hard to make those kinds of extrapolations. And that's of course, the need for further research where you have longer periods of time and you, probably have an even better control over their food environment as a result. I was surprised when I first read your study that you were able to detect a difference in percent body fat in such a short study. Did that surprise you as well? Certainly the study was not powered to detect body fat changes. In other words, we didn't know even if there were real body fat changes whether or not we would have the statistical capabilities to do that. We did use a method, DXA, which is probably one of the most precise and therefore, if we had a chance to measure it, we had the ability to detect it as opposed to other methods. There are other methods that are even more precise, but much more expensive. So, we thought that we had a chance to detect differences there. Other things that we use that we also didn't think that we necessarily would have a chance to detect were things like liver fat or something like that. Those have a much less of an ability. It's something that we're exploring now with our current study. But, again, it's all exploratory at that point. So what can you tell us about your current study? We just wrapped it up, thankfully. What we were doing was basically re-engineering two new ultra-processed diets along parameters that we think are most likely the mechanisms by which ultra-processed meals drove increased energy intake in that study. One was the non-beverage energy density. In other words, how many calories per gram of food on the plate, not counting the beverages. Something that we noticed in the first study was that ultra-processed foods, because they're essentially dried out in the processing for reasons of food safety to prevent bacterial growth and increased shelf life, they end up concentrating the foods. They're disrupting the natural food matrix. They last a lot longer, but as a result, they're a more concentrated form of calories. Despite being, by design, we chose the overall macronutrients to be the same. They weren't necessarily higher fat as we often think of as higher energy density. What we did was we designed an ultra-processed diet that was low in energy density to kind of match the minimally processed diet. And then we also varied the number of individual foods that were deemed hyper palatable according to kind of what Julia said that crossed these pairs of thresholds for fat and sugar or fat and salt or carbs and salt. What we noticed in the first study was that we presented people with more individual foods on the plate that had these hyper palatable combinations. And I wrestle with the term terminology a little bit because I don't necessarily think that they're working through the normal palatability that they necessarily like these foods anymore because again, we asked people to rate the meals and they didn't report differences. But something about those combinations, regardless of what you call them, seemed to be driving that in our exploratory analysis of the first study. We designed a diet that was high in energy density, but low in hyper palatable foods, similar to the minimally processed. And then their fourth diet is with basically low in energy density and hyper palatable foods. And so, we presented some preliminary results last year and what we were able to show is that when we reduced both energy density and the number of hyper palatable foods, but still had 80% of calories from ultra-processed foods, that people more or less ate the same number of calories now as they did when they were the same people were exposed to the minimally processed diet. In fact they lost weight, to a similar extent as the minimally processed diet. And that suggests to me that we can really understand mechanisms at least when it comes to calorie intake in these foods. And that might give regulators, policy makers, the sort of information that they need in order to target which ultra-processed foods and what context are they really problematic. It might give manufacturers if they have the desire to kind of reformulate these foods to understand which ones are more or less likely to cause over consumption. So, who knows? We'll see how people respond to that and we'll see what the final results are with the entire study group that, like I said, just finished, weeks ago. I respond very positively to the idea of the study. The fact that if people assume ultra-processed foods are bad actors, then trying to find out what it is about them that's making the bad actors becomes really important. And you're exactly right, there's a lot of pressure on the food companies now. Some coming from public opinion, some coming from parts of the political world. Some from the scientific world. And my guess is that litigation is going to become a real actor here too. And the question is, what do you want the food industry to do differently? And your study can really help inform that question. So incredibly valuable research. I can't wait to see the final study, and I'm really delighted that you did that. Let's turn our attention for a minute to food marketing. Julia, where does food marketing fit in all this? Julia - What I was very surprised to find while we were researching the book was this deep, long history of calls against marketing junk food in particular to kids. I think from like the 1950s, you have pediatrician groups and other public health professionals saying, stop this. And anyone who has spent any time around small children knows that it works. We covered just like a little, it was from an advocacy group in the UK that exposed aid adolescents to something called Triple Dip Chicken. And then asked them later, pick off of this menu, I think it was like 50 items, which food you want to order. And they all chose Triple Dip chicken, which is, as the name suggests, wasn't the healthiest thing to choose on the menu. I think we know obviously that it works. Companies invest a huge amount of money in marketing. It works even in ways like these subliminal ways that you can't fully appreciate to guide our food choices. Kevin raised something really interesting was that in his studies it was the foods. So, it's a tricky one because it's the food environment, but it's also the properties of the foods themselves beyond just the marketing. Kevin, how do you think about that piece? I'm curious like. Kevin - I think that even if our first study and our second study had turned out there's no real difference between these artificial environments that we've put together where highly ultra-processed diets lead to excess calorie intake. If that doesn't happen, if it was just the same, it wouldn't rule out the fact that because these foods are so heavily marketed, because they're so ubiquitous. They're cheap and convenient. And you know, they're engineered for many people to incorporate into their day-to-day life that could still promote over consumption of calories. We just remove those aspects in our very artificial food environment. But of course, the real food environment, we're bombarded by these advertisements and the ubiquity of the food in every place that you sort of turn. And how they've displaced healthy alternatives, which is another mechanism by which they could cause harm, right? It doesn't even have to be the foods themselves that are harmful. What do they displace? Right? We only have a certain amount the marketers called stomach share, right? And so, your harm might not be necessarily the foods that you're eating, but the foods that they displaced. So even if our experimental studies about the ultra-processed meals themselves didn't show excess calorie intake, which they clearly did, there's still all these other mechanisms to explore about how they might play a part in the real world. You know, the food industry will say that they're agnostic about what foods they sell. They just respond to demand. That seems utter nonsense to me because people don't overconsume healthy foods, but they do overconsume the unhealthy ones. And you've shown that to be the case. So, it seems to me that idea that they can just switch from this portfolio of highly processed foods to more healthy foods just doesn't work out for them financially. Do you think that's right? I honestly don't have that same sort of knee jerk reaction. Or at least I perceive it as a knee jerk reaction, kind of attributing malice in some sense to the food industry. I think that they'd be equally happy if they could get you to buy a lot and have the same sort of profit margins, a lot of a group of foods that was just as just as cheap to produce and they could market. I think that you could kind of turn the levers in a way that that would be beneficial. I mean, setting aside for example, that diet soda beverages are probably from every randomized control trial that we've seen, they don't lead to the same amount of weight gain as the sugar sweetened alternatives. They're just as profitable to the beverage manufacturers. They sell just as many of them. Now they might have other deleterious consequences, but I don't think that it's necessarily the case that food manufacturers have to have these deleterious or unhealthy foods as their sole means of attaining profit. Thanks for that. So, Julia, back to you. You and Kevin point out in your book some of the biggest myths about nutrition. What would you say some of them are? I think one big, fundamental, overarching myth is this idea that the problem is in us. That this rise of diet related diseases, this explosion that we've seen is either because of a lack of willpower. Which you have some very elegant research on this that we cite in the book showing willpower did not collapse in the last 30, 40 years of this epidemic of diet related disease. But it's even broader than that. It's a slow metabolism. It's our genes. Like we put the problem on ourselves, and we don't look at the way that the environment has changed enough. And I think as individuals we don't do that. And so much of the messaging is about what you Kevin, or you Kelly, or you Julia, could be doing better. you know, do resistance training. Like that's the big thing, like if you open any social media feed, it's like, do more resistance training, eat more protein, cut out the ultra-processed foods. What about the food environment? What about the leaders that should be held accountable for helping to perpetuate these toxic food environments? I think that that's this kind of overarching, this pegging it and also the rise of personalized nutrition. This like pegging it to individual biology instead of for whatever the claim is, instead of thinking about how did environments and don't want to have as part of our lives. So that's kind of a big overarching thing that I think about. It makes sense. So, let's end on a positive note. There's a lot of reason to be concerned about the modern food environment. Do you see a helpful way forward and what might be done about this? Julia, let's stay with you. What do you think? I think so. We spent a lot of time researching history for this book. And a lot of things that seem impossible are suddenly possible when you have enough public demand and enough political will and pressure. There are so many instances and even in the history of food. We spend time with this character Harvey Wiley, who around the turn of the century, his research was one of the reasons we have something like the FDA protecting the food supply. That gives me a lot of hope. And we are in this moment where a lot of awareness is being raised about the toxic food environment and all these negative attributes of food that people are surrounded by. I think with enough organization and enough pressure, we can see change. And we can see this kind of flip in the food environment that I think we all want to see where healthier foods become more accessible, available, affordable, and the rest of it. Sounds good. Kevin, what are your thoughts? Yes, I just extend that to saying that for the first time in history, we sort of know what the population of the planet is going to be that we have to feed in the future. We're not under this sort of Malthusian threat of not being able to know where the population growth is going to go. We know it's going to be roughly 10 billion people within the next century. And we know we've got to change the way that we produce and grow food for the planet as well as for the health of people. We know we've got to make changes anyway. And we're starting from a position where per capita, we're producing more protein and calories than any other time in human history, and we're wasting more food. We actually know we're in a position of strength. We don't have to worry so acutely that we won't be able to provide enough food for everybody. It's what kind of food are we going to produce? How are we going to produce it in the way that's sustainable for both people and the planet? We have to tackle that anyway. And for the folks who had experienced the obesity epidemic or finally have drugs to help them and other kinds of interventions to help them. That absolve them from this idea that it's just a matter of weak willpower if we finally have some pharmaceutical interventions that are useful. So, I do see a path forward. Whether or not we take that is another question. Bios Dr. Kevin Hall is the section chief of Integrative Physiology Section in the Laboratory of Biological Modeling at the NIH National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases. Kevin's laboratory investigates the integrative physiology of macronutrient metabolism, body composition, energy expenditure, and control of food intake. His main goal is to better understand how the food environment affects what we eat and how what we eat affects our physiology. He performs clinical research studies as well as developing mathematical models and computer simulations to better understand physiology, integrate data, and make predictions. In recent years, he has conducted randomized clinical trials to study how diets high in ultra-processed food may cause obesity and other chronic diseases. He holds a Ph.D. from McGill University. Julia Belluz is a Paris-based journalist and a contributing opinion writer to the New York Times, she has reported extensively on medicine, nutrition, and global public health from Canada, the US, and Europe. Previously, Julia was Vox's senior health correspondent in Washington, DC, a Knight Science Journalism fellow at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology in Cambridge, and she worked as a reporter in Toronto and London. Her writing has appeared in a range of international publications, including the BMJ, the Chicago Tribune, the Economist, the Globe and Mail, Maclean's, the New York Times, ProPublica, and the Times of London. Her work has also had an impact, helping improve policies on maternal health and mental healthcare for first responders at the hospital- and state-level, as well as inspiring everything from scientific studies to an opera. Julia has been honored with numerous journalism awards, including the 2016 Balles Prize in Critical Thinking, the 2017 American Society of Nutrition Journalism Award, and three Canadian National Magazine Awards (in 2007 and 2013). In 2019, she was a National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine Communications Award finalist. She contributed chapters on public health journalism in the Tactical Guide to Science Journalism, To Save Humanity: What Matters Most for a Healthy Future, and was a commissioner for the Global Commission on Evidence to Address Societal Challenges.

My Conversation with Mann and Hotez begins at 36 mins Stand Up is a daily podcast. I book,host,edit, post and promote new episodes with brilliant guests every day. This show is Ad free and fully supported by listeners like you! Please subscribe now for as little as 5$ and gain access to a community of over 750 awesome, curious, kind, funny, brilliant, generous souls In this “well-researched guide,” two of the world's most respected scientists reveal the forces behind the dangerous anti-science movement—and offer “powerful ideas about how to fight back” (Bill McKibben, author of Here Comes the Sun) “Science is indeed under siege, and that's not good for any of us. Here, Peter Hotez and Michael Mann name names...It's not too late to do something; it's time to get things done. Read on” (Bill Nye, science educator) From pandemics to the climate crisis, humanity faces tougher challenges than ever. Whether it's the health of our people or the health of our planet, we know we are on an unsustainable path. But our efforts to effectively tackle these existential crises are now hampered by a common threat: politically and ideologically motivated opposition to science. Michael E. Mann and Peter J. Hotez are two of the most respected and well-known scientists in the world and have spent the last twenty years on the front lines of the battle to convey accurate, reliable, and trustworthy information about science in the face of determined and nihilistic opposition. In this powerful manifesto, they reveal the five main forces threatening science: plutocrats, pros, petrostates, phonies, and the press. It is a call to arms and a road map for dismantling the forces of anti-science. Armed with the information in this book, we can be empowered to promote scientific truths, shine light on channels of dark money, dismantle the corporations poisoning the planet, and ultimately avert disaster. Peter J. Hotez, MD, PhD, is the founding dean of The National School of Tropical Medicine at Baylor College of Medicine in Houston, Texas, as well as director of the Texas Children's Hospital Center for Vaccine Development. He is an elected member of the Institute of Medicine of National Academies as well as the American Academy of Arts and Sciences. A pediatrician and an expert in vaccinology and tropical disease, Hotez has authored hundreds of peer-reviewed articles and editorials as well dozens of textbook chapters. www.peterhotez.org Dr. Michael E. Mann is Presidential Distinguished Professor in the Department of Earth and Environmental Science at the University of Pennsylvania, with a secondary appointment in the Annenberg School for Communication. He is director of the Penn Center for Science, Sustainability, and the Media (PCSSM). Dr. Mann received his undergraduate degrees in Physics and Applied Math from the University of California at Berkeley, an M.S. degree in Physics from Yale University, and a Ph.D. in Geology & Geophysics from Yale University. His research involves the use of theoretical models and observational data to better understand Earth's climate system. Dr. Mann was a Lead Author on the Observed Climate Variability and Change chapter of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) Third Scientific Assessment Report in 2001 and was organizing committee chair for the National Academy of Sciences Frontiers of Science in 2003. He has received a number of honors and awards including NOAA's outstanding publication award in 2002 and selection by Scientific American as one of the fifty leading visionaries in science and technology in 2002. He contributed, with other IPCC authors, to the award of the 2007 Nobel Peace Prize. He was awarded the Hans Oeschger Medal of the European Geosciences Union in 2012 and was awarded the National Conservation Achievement Award for science by the National Wildlife Federation in 2013. He made Bloomberg News' list of fifty most influential people in 2013. In 2014, he was named Highly Cited Researcher by the Institute for Scientific Information (ISI) and received the Friend of the Planet Award from the National Center for Science Education. He received the Stephen H. Schneider Award for Outstanding Climate Science Communication from Climate One in 2017, the Award for Public Engagement with Science from the American Association for the Advancement of Science in 2018 and the Climate Communication Prize from the American Geophysical Union in 2018. In 2019 he received the Tyler Prize for Environmental Achievement and in 2020 he received the World Sustainability Award of the MDPI Sustainability Foundation. He was elected to the U.S. National Academy of Sciences in 2020. He is a Fellow of the American Geophysical Union, the American Meteorological Society, the Geological Society of America, the American Association for the Advancement of Science, and the Committee for Skeptical Inquiry. He is also a co-founder of the award-winning science website RealClimate.org. Dr. Mann is author of more than 200 peer-reviewed and edited publications, numerous op-eds and commentaries, and five books including Dire Predictions: Understanding Climate Change, The Hockey Stick and the Climate Wars: Dispatches from the Front Lines, The Madhouse Effect: How Climate Change Denial is Threatening our Planet, Destroying Our Politics, and Driving Us Crazy, The Tantrum that Saved the World and The New Climate War: The Fight to Take Back Our Planet. Pete on Blue Sky Pete on Threads Pete on Tik Tok Pete on YouTube  Pete on Twitter Pete On Instagram Pete Personal FB page Stand Up with Pete FB page All things Jon Carroll  Follow and Support Pete Coe Buy Ava's Art  Hire DJ Monzyk to build your website or help you with Marketing Gift a Subscription https://www.patreon.com/PeteDominick/gift

This week, we zoom out to the broader intellectual themes that shaped Decouple's origins five years ago. I'm joined by Jesse Ausubel, a visionary in sustainability and biodiversity research and the Director of the Program for the Human Environment at The Rockefeller University in New York City. In his long career, Ausubel pioneered the modern study of decarbonization and dematerialization in the late 1980s and early 1990s. He helped organize the first UN World Climate Conference in 1979 and spent the 1980s at the National Academies formulating U.S. and global climate research programs. In parallel, he has led major biodiversity initiatives including the decade-long Census of Marine Life, the DNA Barcode of Life project, and continues surveying ocean biodiversity using environmental DNA.In this conversation, Ausubel shows how the simple framework of logistic S-curves can illuminate fundamental trends across complex systems, including energy systems. Through this lens, we discuss the “environmental trifecta” of land-sparing, decarbonization, and dematerialization, and we explore whether apparent counter-trends challenge Ausubel's framework. Suffusing the interview is Ausubel's belief in the wisdom of long-term thinking and objectivity: simple, insightful frameworks are a starting point for admitting much-needed complexity into our worldviews. Join us in this rare examination of the mental models that claim to predict our environmental future.

In this special Tick Boot Camp Podcast episode recorded live at Project Lab Coat during New York Fashion Week (NYFW), we sit down with Colonel Nicole Malachowski, USAF (Ret.). Col. Malachowski, the first female pilot of the USAF Thunderbirds and a Lyme patient advocate, walked the runway with us at Project Lab Coat and served as the sole patient representative on the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine committee that authored the landmark report on Lyme infection-associated chronic illness (Lyme IACI). She shares her perspective on why this recognition is a historic milestone for the Lyme community. What You'll Learn in This Episode Why the term Lyme IACI (infection-associated chronic illness) matters and how it creates an inclusive umbrella for persistent symptoms after Lyme infection. How the National Academies report represents the first time the U.S. government has officially recognized Lyme IACI. What it was like for Col. Malachowski to serve as the sole patient representative on the committee alongside scientists and clinicians. Why the report calls for running treatment trials in parallel with biomarker discovery so patients are not left waiting. How collaboration with long COVID and ME/CFS communities can accelerate solutions and strengthen advocacy. The role of AI and machine learning in analyzing patient data, biobanks, and surveys to identify new diagnostics and repurposed therapies. Why visibility at NYFW Project Lab Coat signals growing mainstream recognition of Lyme disease. About Col. Nicole Malachowski Col. Malachowski is a retired U.S. Air Force fighter pilot, the first woman selected to fly with the USAF Thunderbirds, and a National Women's Hall of Fame inductee. After contracting a tick-borne illness and being medically retired, she became a nationally recognized speaker and advocate for Lyme patients. She served as the sole patient voice on the National Academies committee that authored the landmark report on Lyme IACI, commissioned with support from the Steven & Alexandra Cohen Foundation. About Project Lab Coat at New York Fashion Week Project Lab Coat was a groundbreaking event held on September 13, 2025, during New York Fashion Week (NYFW). The show brought together prominent celebrities, researchers, doctors, and advocates who were invited to walk the runway to spotlight Lyme disease and raise funds for Lyme disease research. For the first time, the global visibility of NYFW was used to highlight one of the fastest-growing infectious diseases in the world. Tick Boot Camp co-founders Matt Sabatello and Rich Johannesen, together with Dr. Tal, walked the runway at Project Lab Coat, joining leaders from medicine, science, entertainment, and advocacy. Project Lab Coat demonstrated the power of mainstream platforms to bring awareness, credibility, and resources to the fight against Lyme disease. Key Takeaways Federal recognition matters – Lyme IACI in a National Academies report marks a turning point in credibility and urgency. Patients at the center – clinical trials must include patients from design through reporting. Collaboration is key – linking Lyme, long COVID, ME/CFS, and other infection-associated conditions strengthens progress. Do both now – pursue biomarkers and cures while also running treatment studies to help patients immediately. Technology accelerates hope – AI and machine learning can unlock insights from existing patient data. Resources and Links Read the full National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine report on Lyme IACI Read our recap of Project Lab Coat at New York Fashion Week (NYFW)

Charles Duhigg reviews his communication techniques for finding common ground in any conflict.— YOU'LL LEARN — 1) The three-step looping method for making others feel heard2) The secret principle for keeping conversations aligned3) How to uncover what people really want in a conversationSubscribe or visit AwesomeAtYourJob.com/ep1097 for clickable versions of the links below. — ABOUT CHARLES — Charles Duhigg is a Pulitzer Prize–winning investigative journalist and the author of Supercommunicators, The Power of Habit, and Smarter Faster Better. A graduate of Harvard Business School and Yale University, he is a winner of the National Academies of Sciences, National Journalism, and George Polk awards. He writes for The New Yorker and The New York Times Magazine, and was the founding host of the Slate podcast How To! with Charles Duhigg.• Book: Supercommunicators: How to Unlock the Secret Language of Connection• Book: The Power of Habit: Why We Do What We Do in Life and Business• Substack: "The Science of Better"• Website: CharlesDuhigg.com— RESOURCES MENTIONED IN THE SHOW — • Study: Granovetter study on The Strength of Weak Ties— THANK YOU SPONSORS! — • Strawberry.me. Claim your $50 credit and build momentum in your career with Strawberry.me/Awesome• LinkedIn Jobs. Post your job for free at linkedin.com/beawesome• Quince. Get free shipping and 365-day returns on your order with Quince.com/AwesomeSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Charles Duhigg⁠ is a Pulitzer Prize–winning investigative journalist and the bestselling author of three books: The Power of Habit, Smarter Faster Better and his latest, Supercommunicators, which was published this year. Charles is a winner of the National Academies of Sciences, National Journalism, and George Polk awards, and he currently writes for The New Yorker and several other publications. On this classic episode, Charles joined host Robert Glazer on ⁠the Elevate Podcast⁠ to talk about habit formation, how to become an excellent communicator, and much more. Thank you to the sponsors of The Elevate Podcast Shopify: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠shopify.com/elevate⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ Indeed: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠indeed.com/elevate⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ Headway: ⁠⁠makeheadway.com/elevate⁠⁠ (Promo Code: Elevate) Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Flying in the U.S. is still exceptionally safe, but the system relies on outdated tech and is under tremendous strain. Six experts tell us how it got this way and how it can (maybe) be fixed. (Part one of a two-part series.) SOURCES:Dorothy Robyn, senior fellow at I.T.I.F.Ed Bastian, C.E.O. of Delta Airlines.John Strong, professor of finance and economics at the William and Mary School of Business.Kenneth Levin, retired air traffic controller.Polly Trottenberg, former deputy secretary of the U.S. Department of Transportation. RESOURCES:"Brand New Air Traffic Control System Plan," (Federal Aviation Administration, 2025).The Air Traffic Controller Workforce Imperative: Staffing Models and Their Implementation to Ensure Safe and Efficient Airspace Operations, by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine (2025)."Annual Aviation Infrastructure Report: 2025," by Marc Scribner (Reason Foundation, 2025)."New air traffic academy died in Congress despite dire need for more staff," by Lori Aratani (The Washington Post, 2025)."The Real Problem With the FAA," by Dorothy Robyn (The Atlantic, 2025)."How Much Do Jet Aircraft Pay into the Airport and Airway Trust Fund to Fly from Dallas to D.C.?" by Ann Henebery, (Eno Center for Transportation, 2018).Managing the Skies, by John Strong and Clinton Oster (2016). EXTRAS:"Freakonomics Radio Takes to the Skies," series by Freakonomics Radio (2023)."In Praise of Maintenance," by Freakonomics Radio (2016).

Medicine stands at the threshold of a new era, where artificial intelligence and systems biology are working hand in hand to make care more personal, predictive, and precise than ever before. AI is already improving diagnostic accuracy, automating administrative tasks, and uncovering patterns in data—like retinal scans or genomics—that humans often miss. Rather than replacing doctors, AI enhances their ability to deliver more informed, precise, and efficient care. At the same time, individuals are gaining tools—from at-home diagnostics to wearable biosensors—that empower them to track and optimize their own health. This shift marks a move from reactive, disease-centered care to a proactive, data-driven model of scientific wellness. In this episode, I talk with Dr. Eric Topol, Dr. Nathan Price, Dr. Leroy Hood, Dr. Vijay Pande, and Daisy Wolf about how artificial intelligence, personalized data, and wearable technology are converging to radically transform medicine. Dr. Eric Topol is Executive Vice President of Scripps Research and founder/director of its Translational Institute, recognized as one of the top 10 most cited researchers in medicine with over 1,300 publications. A cardiologist and author of several bestselling books on the future of medicine, he leads major NIH grants in precision medicine and shares cutting-edge biomedical insights through his Ground Truths newsletter and podcast. Dr. Nathan Price is Chief Scientific Officer at Thorne HealthTech, author of The Age of Scientific Wellness, and a National Academy of Medicine Emerging Leader. He also serves on the Board on Life Sciences for the National Academies and is Affiliate Faculty in Bioengineering and Computer Science at the University of Washington. Dr. Leroy Hood is CEO and founder of Phenome Health, leading the Human Phenome Initiative to sequence and track the health of one million people over 10 years. A pioneer in systems biology and co-founder of 17 biotech companies, he is a recipient of the Lasker Prize, Kyoto Prize, and National Medal of Science. Dr. Vijay Pande is a General Partner at Andreessen Horowitz and founder of a16z Bio + Health, managing over $3 billion in life sciences and healthcare investments at the intersection of biology and AI. An Adjunct Professor at Stanford, he is known for his work in computational science, earning honors like the DeLano Prize and a Guinness World Record for Folding@Home. Daisy Wolf is an investing partner at Andreessen Horowitz, specializing in healthcare AI, consumer health, and healthcare-fintech innovation. She previously worked at Meta and in various startups, holds a JD from Yale Law, an MBA from Stanford, and a BA from Yale, and is based in New York City. This episode is brought to you by BIOptimizers. Head to bioptimizers.com/hyman and use code HYMAN10 to save 10%. Full-length episodes can be found here: Can AI Fix Our Health and Our Healthcare System? The Next Revolution In Medicine: Scientific Wellness, AI And Disease Reversal The Future of Healthcare: The Role of AI and Technology

It is not manifestly obvious that universities should be where most scholarly research is performed. One could imagine systems that separated out the tasks of "teaching students" and "generating new knowledge." But it turns out that combining them yields spectacular synergies, both from letting students experience cutting-edge research and from keeping researchers inspired by interacting with bright young minds. Today we talk to Elizabeth Mynatt, Dean of Computer Science at Northeastern, both about her own research in "human-centered computing," and about the bigger-picture issues of why basic research is important, and why universities are such good places to do it.Blog post with transcript: https://www.preposterousuniverse.com/podcast/2025/08/11/324-elizabeth-mynatt-on-universities-and-the-importance-of-basic-research/Support Mindscape on Patreon.Elizabeth Mynatt received a Ph.D. in computer science from the Georgia Institute of Technology. She is currently Dean of the Khoury College of Computer Sciences at Northeastern University. She is a senior investigator with Emory's Cognitive Empowerment Program and co-PI for the NSF AI-CARING Institute. She is a fellow of the Association for Computing Machinery and the American Association for the Advancement of Science, and a member of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences. She was lead author on the National Academies report, "Information Technology Innovation: Resurgence, Confluence, and Continuing Impact."Web pageGoogle Scholar publicationsWikipediaSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Story at-a-glance A specific type of fiber called beta-glucan, found in oats and barley, was shown to reduce levels of harmful PFAS chemicals in the blood within just four weeks Participants who consumed beta-glucan experienced significant drops in legacy PFAS compounds like PFOA and PFOS, which are linked to cancer and hormone disruption The fiber group was the only one to show a meaningful reduction in the seven most high-risk PFAS chemicals identified by the National Academies of Sciences, including those that raise your risk for thyroid disease, cancer and ulcerative colitis In a follow-up study using mice, animals exposed to high PFAS levels but fed beta-glucan had lower blood PFAS, improved fat metabolism and less liver stress compared to controls The key to beta-glucan's effect is its gel-forming action in your gut, which traps PFAS and interrupts their reabsorption cycle, allowing your body to eliminate them through stool