Podcasts about nih

In part two of this two-part series, Dr. Stacey Clardy and Dr. Walter Koroshetz discuss ways to empower professionals in the fields of neurology and research. 

We extend our record-breaking run with a discussion of the Court's two big recent emergency docket rulings: Noem v. Vasquez Perdomo and NIH v. American Public Health Association.

In part two of this two-part series, Dr. Stacey Clardy talks with Dr. Walter Koroshetz about overcoming funding challenges, the importance of rigor and reputation, unmet needs in neurology, and leveraging AI in neurology research.  Disclosures can be found at Neurology.org.  

In the first part of this two-part series, Dr. Stacey Clardy and Dr. Walter Koroshetz discuss strategies for advancing the fields of neurology and neuroscience research. 

Aujourd'hui, Coach Lee & Coach Sim sont encore seuls pour parler de leurs vieilles croyances désuètes, mais cette fois-ci, plus par rapport à des anciens mindsets.Dans cet épisode, ils discutent de:- L'indulgence envers les gens- La mentalité de "Si t'es gros, c'est de ta faute"- Les Quatre Accords toltèques- Vouloir aider les gens qui ne veulent pas d'aide- Prendre des PEDs ou des GLP-1 c'est "tricher"- Travailler le "vivre et laisser vivre"- Bien plus!Bonne écoute!Pour nous suivre:Coach Lee: @coach.lee__ Coach Sim: @coachsim.lat Utilisez le code "WUACV10" pour économiser 10% sur votre commande NIH sur le site ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://nihsupp.com/⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ Utilisez le code "WUACV10" pour économiser 10% sur votre commande MACHINE sur le site https://project-machine.com/

News: ST6 NK mission @3:57 Israel carries out attack in Qatar targeting Hamas leaders @7:33 Russia invades Poland..? @10:07 Russian losses in Ukraine @11:20 Trump's Epstein letter denial just suffered another huge blow @14:16 SCOTUS allows immigration agents to resume 'roving patrols' in LA @21:21 Howard Lutnick's Investment Firm Tariff Conflict of Interest @26:53 Politics: Dr. Paul Offit has been blocked from advising FDA @28:36 RFK Jr.'s anti-vax campaign targets science @30:32 Florida AG response @33:33 Trump's response House Republicans keep NIH funding Trump wanted to cut @37:44 Religious Nonsense: Ken Paxton encourages students to recite Lord's Prayer @42:30 Moroccan Feminist @44:06 Nigerian blasphemy @45:59 Health/Medicine/Science: Trump administration agrees to restore federal websites @47:02 Tylenol has entered the chat @49:11 West Coast Health Alliance @53:49 Pseudoscience: Severe knee pain @54:47

In the past several months, the Trump administration has frozen, cancelled, or rescinded millions—even billions—of dollars in federal funding for scientific and clinical research. This is funding that flows directly from bodies like the NIH to universities, academic medical centers, and others to facilitate basic science research, translational research, public health initiatives, and more. Frankly, many organizations did not see these cuts coming—at least not at this scale. And the impacts are likely to touch most every corner of the industry. This week, host Abby Burns sits down with Advisory Board experts Emily Heuser and Gaby Marmolejos to dig into how these cuts are being orchestrated and the ripple effects they may cause across—and even beyond—the healthcare industry. We're here to help: Read: How research funding cuts are impacting healthcare (and how to respond) Check out: Healthcare policy updates Check out: Philanthropy Keep track: Healthcare Policy Updates Timeline Use our tool: How policy changes will impact your bottom line Research Membership Grant Witness Navigating healthcare's next frontier: 5 takeaways from the CHG Healthcare Executive Summit A transcript of this episode as well as more information and resources can be found on RadioAdvisory.advisory.com.

Save 20% on all Nuzest Products WORLDWIDE with the code MIKKIPEDIA at www.nuzest.co.nz, www.nuzest.com.au or www.nuzest.comThis week on the podcast Mikki speaks to Prof Arny Ferrando about his work in protein, essential amino acids, protein timing, aging, anabolic resistance, and how to optimise muscle retention and fat loss.Arny Ferrando is a Professor of Geriatrics at the University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences (UAMS), where he co-directs the Center for Translational Research in Aging & Longevity (CTRAL) and holds the position of Wes Smith Distinguished Chair in Geriatrics for Longevity, Health Promotion and Frailty Prevention.His research deploys stable isotope techniques to dissect muscle protein metabolism under stress—from spaceflight, burn injury, joint arthroplasty, renal and heart failure, to aging and surgical recovery. He pioneers nutritional, pharmacological, and exercise-based strategies to counteract muscle wasting and functional decline.After earning a Ph.D. in Nutrition & Physiology from Florida State University, he conducted postdoctoral work at NASA's Johnson Space Center. He served as a U.S. Army pilot and armor officer, retiring as Lieutenant Colonel. He's driven by a lifelong athletic spirit: from West Point gymnast to powerlifter, bodybuilder, masters track athlete, and now Krav Maga instructor.He drives multiple research programs funded by NIH, the U.S. Army, and industry, and since 2023 holds a Visiting Senior Research Scientist appointment at IHMC, extending his work to human performance in extreme environments.https://www.ihmc.us/groups/arny-ferrando/ Curranz Supplement: Use code MIKKIPEDIA to get 20% off your first order - go to www.curranz.co.nz  or www.curranz.co.uk to order yours Contact Mikki:https://mikkiwilliden.com/https://www.facebook.com/mikkiwillidennutritionhttps://www.instagram.com/mikkiwilliden/https://linktr.ee/mikkiwilliden

Hey there! Send us a message. Who else should we be talking to? What topics are important? Use FanMail to connect! Let us know!The CopDoc Podcast - Season 9 - Episode 160What if police departments made decisions based on solid evidence rather than gut feelings? Dr. David Weisburd, a dual faculty member at George Mason University and Hebrew University of Jerusalem, has spent decades proving that scientific approaches can revolutionize policing.From his unexpected start evaluating one of America's first community policing programs in 1984, Weisburd discovered something remarkable: crime isn't random. His groundbreaking "law of crime concentration" demonstrates that approximately 5% of streets produce about 50% of crime in cities worldwide. This discovery challenged conventional wisdom and launched the hotspot policing movement that continues to transform law enforcement today.Contrary to what many might assume, Weisburd's research in high-crime neighborhoods reveals that residents overwhelmingly want more police presence, not less. When surveyed, only 6-7% of people living in these areas wanted fewer officers. What they actually desire isn't the absence of police but officers who treat them with respect and dignity—a finding that led Weisburd to conduct successful experiments combining focused policing with procedural justice training.Despite these advances, Weisburd argues that policing research remains drastically underfunded compared to fields like medicine. While the NIH receives around $45 billion annually, criminal justice research gets merely $200 million. This disparity explains why we lack what Weisburd calls a "cookbook" for police—practical, evidence-based guidance for officers working in different contexts and communities.Throughout our conversation, Weisburd shares stories from his international work, the challenges of conducting research during times of conflict in Israel, and his vision for a National Institute of Policing that would elevate law enforcement science to the level it deserves. Whether you're a police professional, researcher, or concerned citizen, this episode offers rare insight into how evidence-based approaches can build safer, more just communities.Listen now to understand why police science deserves billions, not millions, and how research can help departments navigate today's complex challenges with greater effectiveness and legitimacy.Contact us: copdoc.podcast@gmail.com Website: www.copdocpodcast.comIf you'd like to arrange for facilitated training, or consulting, or talk about steps you might take to improve your leadership and help in your quest for promotion, contact Steve at stephen.morreale@gmail.com

In this episode you will hear:   Mark shares two major decisions that were revealed this week, one is about the legality of withholding NIH funding, and the other one is about College Board's Landscape product Lisa leads a panel discussion of five parents, all listeners of YCBK. The parents open up and reveal the pressure their student faces at school to go to an elite college.   Here is a link for our new YCBK listener survey so you can take the survey:   Speakpipe.com/YCBK is our method if you want to ask a question and we will be prioritizing all questions sent in via Speakpipe. Unfortunately, we will NOT answer questions on the podcast anymore that are emailed in. If you want us to answer a question on the podcast, please use speakpipe.com/YCBK. We feel hearing from our listeners in their own voices adds to the community feel of our podcast.   You can also use this for many other purposes: 1) Send us constructive criticism about how we can improve our podcast 2) Share an encouraging word about something you like about an episode or the podcast in general 3) Share a topic or an article you would like us to address 4) Share a speaker you want us to interview 5) Leave positive feedback for one of our interviewees. We will send your verbal feedback directly to them and I can almost assure you, your positive feedback will make their day.   To sign up to receive Your College-Bound Kid PLUS, our new monthly admissions newsletter, delivered directly to your email once a month, just go to yourcollegeboundkid.com, and you will see the sign-up popup. We will include many of the hot topics being discussed on college campuses.   Check out our new blog. We write timely and insightful articles on college admissions:   On X for our podcast:   https://twitter.com/YCBKpodcast   1. To access our transcripts, click: https://yourcollegeboundkid.com/category/transcripts/ 2. Find the specific episode transcripts for the one you want to search and click the link 3. Find the magnifying glass icon in blue (search feature) and click it 4. Enter whatever word you want to search. I.e. Loans 5. Every word in that episode when the words loans are used, will be highlighted in yellow with a timestamps 6. Click the word highlighted in yellow and the player will play the episode from that starting point 7. You can also download the entire podcast as a transcript   We would be honored if you will pass this podcast episode on to others who you feel will benefit from the content in YCBK.   Please follow our podcast. It really helps us move up in Spotify and Apple's search feature so others can find our podcast.   If you enjoy our podcast, would you please do us a favor and share our podcast both verbally and on social media? We would be most grateful!   If you want to help more people find Your College-Bound Kid, please make sure you follow our podcast. You will also get instant notifications as soon as each episode goes live.   Check out the college admissions books Mark recommends:   Check out the college websites Mark recommends:   If you want to have some input about what you like and what you recommend, we change about our podcast, please complete our Podcast survey; here is the link:     If you want a college consultation with Mark just text Mark at 404-664-4340 or email Lisa at . All we ask is that you review their services and pricing on their website before the complimentary session; here is link to their services with transparent pricing: https://schoolmatch4u.com/services/compare-packages/  

In part one of this two-part series, Dr. Stacey Clardy talks with Dr. Walter Koroshetz about recent advancements in neurology, emerging genomic therapies, the evolving understanding of long COVID, and current NINDS priorities. Disclosures can be found at Neurology.org. 

Some people living with MS adhere to a treatment plan based exclusively on what we might consider traditional medicine. Others opt for alternative treatments. And, still, others take a whole-person health approach, blending integrative medicine with traditional treatments designed to support an individual's mind and body. Dr. Lynne Shinto joins me to discuss how a whole-person health approach can transform living with MS. Dr. Shinto is a Professor of Neurology and an MS Specialist at the Center for Women's Health at Oregon Health and Science University.   We're also sharing some encouraging news about funding for the National Institutes of Health in 2026. We'll explain the research that has led to the identification of a new and quite different subtype of MS.  We'll tell you about this year's winner of the Rachel Horne Prize for Women's Research in Multiple Sclerosis. The National MS Society's virtual program, New to MS: Navigating Your Journey, takes place in just two days. We have all the details! We have a lot to talk about! Are you ready for RealTalk MS??! This Week: A whole-person health approach to MS care  :22 House Republicans reject President Trump's $20 billion cut to 2026 NIH funding  1:26 Have researchers identified a new MS subtype?  4:16 This year's winner of the Rachel Horne Prize for Women's Research in Multiple Sclerosis   8:27 We're two days away from the National MS Society's New to MS: Navigating Your Journey virtual program  9:53 Dr. Lynne Shinto discusses how taking a whole-person approach to MS care can transform your MS journey 12:04 Share this episode  31:41 Next week's episode   32:01 SHARE THIS EPISODE OF REALTALK MS Just copy this link & paste it into your text or email: https://realtalkms.com/419 ADD YOUR VOICE TO THE CONVERSATION I've always thought about the RealTalk MS podcast as a conversation. And this is your opportunity to join the conversation by sharing your feedback, questions, and suggestions for topics that we can discuss in future podcast episodes. Please shoot me an email or call the RealTalk MS Listener Hotline and share your thoughts! Email: jon@realtalkms.com Phone: (310) 526-2283 And don't forget to join us in the RealTalk MS Facebook group! LINKS If your podcast app doesn't allow you to click on these links, you'll find them in the show notes in the RealTalk MS app or at www.RealTalkMS.com PARTICIPATE: Take the Shaping Tomorrow Together Survey https://s.alchemer.com/s3/Perspectives-on-MS REGISTER: Attend the virtual Shaping Tomorrow Together meeting with the FDA https://nmss.quorum.us/event/25463 SIGN UP: Become an MS Activist https://nationalmssociety.org/advocacy STUDY: Large-Scale Online Assessment Uncovers a Distinct Multiple Sclerosis Subtype with Selective Cognitive Impairment https://nature.com/articles/s41467-025-62156-4 REGISTER: New To MS: Navigating Your Journey https://nationalmssociety.org/understanding-ms/newly-diagnosed/new-to-ms-journey Join the RealTalk MS Facebook Group https://facebook.com/groups/realtalkms Download the RealTalk MS App for iOS Devices https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/realtalk-ms/id1436917200 Download the RealTalk MS App for Android Deviceshttps://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=tv.wizzard.android.realtalk Give RealTalk MS a rating and review http://www.realtalkms.com/review Follow RealTalk MS on Twitter, @RealTalkMS_jon, and subscribe to our newsletter at our website, RealTalkMS.com. RealTalk MS Episode 419 Guest: Dr. Lynne Shinto Privacy Policy

On this week's How on Earth, Beth describes recent developments in defunding NIH research and CDC limits on vaccine availability; then digs into vaccine safety and development with global vaccine expert, Dr Dr Kawsar Talaat. Dr Talaat is a physician who is board certified in Pediatrics, Internal Medicine and Infectious Diseases and whose research focuses … Continue reading "The (ever-changing) Scoop on Vaccines"

As one of the youngest voices in healthcare advocacy, Soneesh Kothagundla is an internationally recognized medical researcher, speaker, and changemaker.His research spans lung cancer screening and neuroscience, with contributions featured in NIH-funded grants, international conferences, and peer-reviewed projects. By focusing on gaps in early detection and complex surgical conditions, his work tackles some of the most pressing challenges in modern medicine.Soneesh first gained global attention through the #FlightPSAMovement, where a single in-flight announcement about lung cancer screening sparked worldwide conversation about youth-led advocacy. Since then, his campaigns have been amplified on billboard and bus shelters, generating more than 80 million impressions and positioning him as one of the most visible young health advocates of his generation. His work has been featured in NYC Times Square, U.S. News, and over 65 other outlets.Beyond healthcare, he is the Founder of Change A Vision, a nonprofit reducing recidivism by building prison libraries and creating self-help journals for incarcerated individuals. As a Georgia HOSA State Officer, he empowers over 20,000 students in healthcare leadership and advocacy.Currently, he is scaling his impact through The Surgeon Soneesh Show podcast, his weekly newsletter, and his upcoming book, Fasten Your Seatbelt: We're Changing the World. His ultimate mission is to shape a world where healthcare and justice systems are more equitable, innovative, and people-centered, while proving that Gen Z doesn't just wait for the future, they create it.Reach out to Soneesh:soneeshkothagundla@gmail.comlinkedin.com/in/soneeshkinstagram.com/soneeshkMore about our host: Neha Sarda is a 18-year-old from Mumbai, India with big dreams of becoming a CEO in the legal tech, biotech and fashion industries. Passionate about finance and obsessed with innovation, she builds business models and prototypes just for fun. Neha is the Senior Portfolio Manager at BYCIG, where she leads a 53-member investment analyst team and has previously co-founded two marketing agencies and a startup incubator. A natural on stage and a podcast host, she lives by the belief that curiosity isn't a phase, it's her strategy for changing the world.Listen to more young innovator podcasts: https://www.buzzsprout.com/1589629Learn more about Innovation World: https://innovationworld.org/#YouthChangemakers #GenZLeaders #InnovationInAction #GlobalVoices #FutureOfHealthcare #CreatingTheFuture #HealthcareAdvocacy #MedicalInnovation #LungCancerAwareness #NeuroscienceResearch #EarlyDetectionMatters 

Show Highlights It’s Your Life With Dr James JC Cooley and Co-Host Dr Michael Mantell- Rational Emotive & Cognitive Behavior Coach have a sit-down conversation with Dr. Mickey E. Abraham - Neurosurgery resident at UC San Diego with a focus on bioethics, innovation, and regenerative neurosurgery. Stem cells for spinal cord injury Brain computer interface Bioethics Biography Dr. Mickey E. Abraham is a neurosurgery resident at UC San Diego with a focus on bioethics, innovation, and regenerative neurosurgery. Holding an MS in Philosophy from Columbia University, he has developed expertise in neuroethics and served as a resident member of the UCSD Bioethics Committee. His research spans gene therapy, stem cell interventions, and neuromodulation, with publications in Cell Stem Cell and bioethics literature. He has secured NIH and CIRM grants and co-investigated clinical trials in spinal cord injury and Parkinson’s disease. He is dedicated to integrating ethical principles into the development of novel neurosurgical therapies and advancing responsible medical innovation. Social Media https://www.linkedin.com/in/mickey-e-abraham-713222b5/Support the show: http://www.cooleyfoundation.org/See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

On the A.M. Update: Week in Review, Aaron McIntire highlights a leaked memo from the Biotechnology Innovation Organization (BIO), uncovered by Dr. Robert Malone, detailing a $2 million campaign to oust HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. by September 2025. The memo reveals BIO's plan to lobby Congress, co-opt conservative influencers, and use figures like Dr. Mehmet Oz and Senator Bill Cassidy to undermine Kennedy's regulatory reforms without engaging his critiques directly. Dr. Jay Bhattacharya discusses restoring trust in the NIH amidst past pandemic policy failures. Lee Strobel, on Tucker Carlson's show, argues Hollywood is under demonic influence, normalizing immoral behavior through media like Friends. A poll shows 66.4% support a kinetic war against drug cartels, but listeners raise concerns about collateral damage and geopolitical consequences.   AM Update, RFK Jr., BIO memo, Robert Malone, Big Pharma, HHS, vaccine policy, Jay Bhattacharya, Lee Strobel, Hollywood demonic influence, Tucker Carlson, cartel war

In this episode, Dr. Jonathan Howard and Wendy Orent dissect the latest controversies around censorship, disinformation, and the rewriting of COVID's history. From Jonathan's YouTube ban after posting videos of public officials, to David Zweig's revisionist narratives about school closures, the conversation exposes how propaganda tactics and false claims are reshaping public perception.  They also highlight troubling developments at the FDA, NIH, and in political arenas where vaccine mandates are under attack, drawing connections between misinformation, free speech battles, and the erosion of trust in science. Connect with us further on https://sciencebasedmedicine.org/author/jonathanhoward/  The Fine Print The content presented in the "We Want Them Infected" Podcast and associated book is intended for informational and educational purposes only.  The views and opinions expressed by the speakers, hosts, and guests on the podcast do not necessarily reflect the views of the creators, producers, or distributors. The information provided in this podcast should not be considered as a substitute for professional medical, scientific, or legal advice. Listeners and readers are encouraged to consult with relevant experts and authorities for specific guidance and information. The creators of the podcast and book have made reasonable efforts to ensure that the information provided is accurate and up to date. However, as the field of medical science and the understanding of the COVID-19 pandemic continue to evolve, there may be new developments and insights that are not covered in this content. The creators are not responsible for any errors or omissions in the content or for any actions taken based on the information provided. They disclaim any liability for any loss, injury, or damage incurred by individuals who rely on the content. Listeners and readers are urged to use their judgment and conduct their own research when interpreting the information presented in the "We Want Them Infected" podcast and book. It is essential to stay informed about the latest updates, guidelines, and recommendations related to COVID-19 and vaccination from reputable sources, such as government health agencies and medical professionals. By accessing and using the content, you acknowledge and accept the terms of this disclaimer. Please consult with appropriate experts and authorities for specific guidance on matters related to health, science, and the COVID-19 pandemic.

When the next pandemic hits, will we be ready?That's the question at the center of University of Minnesota epidemiologist Mike Osterholm's new book, “The Big One.” And his answer is sobering.Osterholm joined Kerri Miller on this week's Big Books and Bold Ideas for a blunt and personal assessment of what went right and what went wrong during the COVID-19 pandemic. He's insistent that if we don't learn the lessons of the last pandemic, we will be even less prepared for the next one.Here are five key takeaways from their conversation.1. Public health communication can't just be factual.Osterholm is the founding director of the Center for Infectious Disease Research and Policy at the University of Minnesota and has decades of experience tracking and researching outbreaks. He said the big lesson for public health leaders is that kindness and humility have to be forefront as they communicate.Humility is important, he told Miller, because “people mistakenly think that science is truth. It's not. Science is the pursuit of truth.” He said the scientific community needs to do a better job explaining what we know now and how that might change as research continues.But the bigger lesson, for him, was that a “just the facts, ma'am” approach isn't effective. Public health messages need to resonate with people on a personal level.Early in the pandemic, he broke down crying on his own podcast after a close colleague's death. That human moment ended up being a connection point for people.“It wasn't about the factual stuff I talked about,” Osterholm said. “It was about relating to people on that emotional level of what we were experiencing and how we reach out to each other. So the podcast became more and more of a blending of the science — what's in the head — with concern for what's in the heart.”2. When we know what stops transmission, go all-in on that. Once we knew that COVID-19 was an aerosol, Osterholm said, it should have shifted how we thought about transmission.“We spent millions of dollars on useless things like Plexiglass shields. I kept telling people: If you can put a cigarette on this side of it and smell it, you're getting hit.”The only thing that really stops COVID-19 is a well-fitting N95 mask, said Osterholm. Instead of wasting time and money on hygiene theater and cloth masks, we should have “initiated a Manhattan Project-like activity to find the same kind of respiratory protection in something that's wearable, something that could be washed and reused over and over again, something that people could communicate in and not feel claustrophobic.”“And do you know how much we've invested in that?” he asked. “Zero.”3. Mandates aren't a magic solution.While he absolutely believes the COVID vaccines saved lives and are safe, Osterholm isn't sold on the efficacy of mandates.“In some cases, I think we set ourselves back with a mandate,” he told Miller. “If you want to turn someone off so you never have a chance to reach them, tell them they have to do it.”A better way, he believes, is to give people agency.“What you find is, that if you actually work with people and say, ‘OK, you're not going to get it now, but let me give you more information,' you actually get more people vaccinated. And the whole point for me is: I want the most number of people vaccinated.”4. The lack of a nonpartisan reports to examine the errors made during COVID-19 is glaring.Osterholm strongly believes there should be a federal, 9/11 Commission-style report that looks back at COVID-19. He and his coauthor, Mark Olshaker, wrote “The Big One” because there isn't one.“We wanted to make certain there was a record somewhere of what happened or didn't happen and what … could have made a difference,” he told Miller.One example: Osterholm contends widespread lockdowns were ineffective and crude.“The most important thing was having good medical care, and how are you going to get good medical care if your hospital is at 140 percent capacity? You can't.”Instead, he said, we should have used strategic “snow days” with the goal to keep hospital beds under 90 to 95 percent occupancy.“If we could do that, we could get good medical care that would make a difference” in saving lives, he said, without stalling the economy or forcing kids to do school at home.5. We are going backward on preparedness for the next pandemic.But as sobering as the past is, Osterholm was most dire about what comes next.“We are living in the most dangerous time that public health has experienced,” he told Miller. “[The current administration] has taken the public health system as we know it and gutted it in this country. [Look at] what's happened at the CDC this past week, with the firing of the new director who has been there a month, the loss of the senior people there, the fact that the one redeeming, hopeful lesson we learned during the pandemic is how important vaccines could be. And now we have stopped all research on the one vaccine that holds the best future for us with influenza pandemics and COVID pandemics. We live in a very anti-science world right now. And I never thought that I would see the day that the CDC, the NIH and the FDA are enemies of public health, as opposed to the protectors of it.”Subscribe to the Thread newsletter for the latest book and author news and must-read recommendations.Subscribe to Big Books and Bold Ideas with Kerri Miller on Apple Podcasts, Google Podcasts, RSS or anywhere you get your podcasts.

The medical community is upset about RFK but they don’t realize they are the ones who brought him about. Opening the books at the CDC and NIH to earn back the peoples trust. Some in congress are pushing back against it, but who is funding them?Follow The Jesse Kelly Show on YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@TheJesseKellyShowSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Below the knee atherectomy is a hot topic right now in the vascular community. Why is it so controversial? Dr. Anahita Dua, vascular surgeon at Mass General, joins host Dr. Sabeen Dhand to explore the utility of this technique and the pressing need for more Level I evidence in this space.---This podcast is supported by:AngioDynamichttps://www.auryon-system.com/---SYNPOSISThe conversation dives into the controversial role of below-the-knee atherectomy in limb salvage, an area where data has long been debated. Dr. Dua, principal investigator of the AMBITION BTK Trial—the first randomized controlled trial comparing below-the-knee atherectomy to angioplasty alone—introduces the trial and explains how it fits into the current body of literature.Together, the doctors review past evidence, current practice, and the future outlook for tibial interventions. Dr. Dua outlines the wide range of techniques and clinical strategies used to manage PAD, and stresses the importance of physician engagement with the NIH and research community to establish stronger, evidence-based protocols. She also shares her candid thoughts on the most overrated and underrated devices in tibial intervention, highlighting atherectomy's potential role in vessel preparation before below-the-knee treatment.---TIMESTAMPS00:00 - Introduction04:55 - Current State of Evidence and Challenges10:54 - Heterogeneity in PAD Treatment14:26 - Need for National Metrics and Standardization20:51 - AMBITION BTK Trial and Importance27:23 - Potential Outcomes and Implications30:18 - Trial Design34:56 - Advice for Practitioners37:36 - Underrated and Overrated Devices41:50 - Conclusion---RESOURCESAMBITION BTK Trial:https://www.angiodynamics.com/studies/ambition-btk/

Newsmax is suing Fox News, and they've scored antitrust expert (lol) Judge Aileen Cannon. And while the Supreme Court is busy burning down the judiciary, trial judges are standing up. This week Judge Allison Burroughs of the District Court of Massachusetts ordered the Trump administration to give Harvard University its grant money back, and along the way reads SCOTUS conservatives for filth. And for subscribers: Why is the White House racing to appeal the tariff ruling when it could ride the stay for another eight months?   Links:   Newsmax v. Fox News https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/71258079/newsmax-broadcasting-llc-v-fox-corporation   L.G.M.L. v. Noem https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/71240524/lgml-v-noem   Trump v. V.O.S. Selections [SCOTUS Docket] https://www.supremecourt.gov/search.aspx?filename=/docket/docketfiles/html/public/25-250.html   V.O.S. Selections v. Trump [Federal Circuit Docket] https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/70394463/vos-selections-inc-v-trump/?order_by=desc   In rare interviews, federal judges criticize Supreme Court's handling of Trump cases https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/supreme-court/supreme-court-trump-cases-federal-judges-criticize-rcna221775   Harvard v. HHS [docket via CourtListener] https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.mad.283718/   NIH v. APHA (Supreme Court stay) https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/24pdf/25a103_kh7p.pdf Show Links: https://www.lawandchaospod.com/ BlueSky: @LawAndChaosPod Threads: @LawAndChaosPod Twitter: @LawAndChaosPod  

Health Affairs' Jeff Byers welcomes Katie Keith of Georgetown Law and Deputy Editor Chris Fleming to the pod to discuss the recent Supreme Court case, American Public Health Association et al. v. National Institutes of Health et al., that explores the lawfulness of the NIH's termination of nearly $800 million worth of grant funding for programs due to DEI association.This week, Health Affairs released a new theme issue focusing on insights from the opioids crisis. Subscribe to the journal to never miss out on an upcoming issue.Join us for these upcoming events:9/17: Lunch & Learn: The Current Opioids Policy Landscape & What's Ahead (FREE TO ALL)9/23: Prior Authorization: Current State and Potential Reform (INSIDER EXCLUSIVE)Become an Insider today to get access to our trend reports, events, and exclusive newsletters.Related Articles:Unpacking The Supreme Court's Decision Over NIH Funding (Health Affairs Forefront)American Public Health Association et al. v. National Institutes of Health et al.A closely watched legal battle over NIH funding cuts could settle soon (STAT+)

Episode 19 of onAIRR features a lively and insightful conversation with three outstanding scientists committed to advancing pandemic preparedness. Dr. Lauren Williamson and Dr. Robert Carnahan, both from Vanderbilt University Medical Center, and Dr. Matthew Vogt, from the University of North Carolina, share their passion for viral immunology and the art of discovering and developing therapeutic antibodies. onAIRR's guests provide a behind-the-scenes look at how collaborative research is shaping the future of global health. They introduce the Research and Development of Vaccines and Monoclonal Antibodies for Pandemic Preparedness (ReVAMPP) research network, a major NIH-funded initiative aimed at strengthening pandemic readiness. The conversation explores the use of prototype pathogen approaches to identifying broadly neutralizing antibodies against high-priority viral families, the challenges of balancing breadth versus potency in therapeutic antibodies, and innovative screening methodologies that could transform our ability to respond to future pandemics. Comments are welcome to the inbox of onairr@airr-community.org or on social media under the tag #onAIRR. Further information can be found here: https://www.antibodysociety.org/the-airr-community/airr-c-podcast. The episode is hosted by Dr. Ulrik Stervbo and Dr. Zhaoqing Ding. Announcements and links Lauren Williamson https://www.vumc.org/crowe-lab/person/lauren-williamson-phd Robert Carnahan https://www.vumc.org/crowe-lab/person/robert-carnahan-phd Matthew Vogt https://www.vogtviruslab.com ReVAMPP  https://revampp.org ReVAMPP https://www.niaid.nih.gov/news-events/nih-awards-establish-pandemic-preparedness-research-network  "Prototype Pathogen Approach for Vaccine and Monoclonal Antibody Development: A Critical Component of the NIAID Plan for Pandemic Preparedness” https://doi.org/10.1093/infdis/jiac296  Adaptive Immune Receptor Repertoire Community (AIRR-C) https://www.airr-community.org The Antibody Society (TAbS) https://www.antibodysociety.org AIRR-C Seminar Series https://www.antibodysociety.org/the-airr-community/airr-community-seminar-series

Bizable https://GoBizable.comUntie your business exposure from your personal exposure with BiZABLE.  Schedule your FREE consultation at GoBizAble.com today. Renue Healthcare https://Renue.Healthcare/ToddRegister today to Join the Renue Healthcare Webinar Thursday September 11th at 11:00 PST.   Visit https://joinstemcelltalks.com or call 602-428-4000.  Bulwark Capital https://KnowYourRiskPodcast.comBe confident in your portfolio with Bulwark! Schedule your free Know Your Risk Portfolio review. Go to KnowYourRiskPodcast.com today. Alan's Soaps https://www.AlansArtisanSoaps.comUse coupon code TODD to save an additional 10% off the bundle price.Bonefrog https://BonefrogCoffee.com/toddThe new GOLDEN AGE is here!  Use code TODD at checkout to receive 10% off your first purchase and 15% on subscriptions.LISTEN and SUBSCRIBE at:The Todd Herman Show - Podcast - Apple PodcastsThe Todd Herman Show | Podcast on SpotifyWATCH and SUBSCRIBE at: Todd Herman - The Todd Herman Show - YouTubeBig Pharma and the Mockingbird Media have been peddling things for years. Don't believe me? Let's go over some of the ways big industries have infiltrated our media in the past…Episode Links:EXPOSED! Those Crazy Food Guidelines Saying Cereal Is Better Than Beef Are Total FraudFlintstones Winston Cigarettes Commercial (Rare)Influencers mock Jesus Christ to sell weight loss drugBeverly Hillbillies - Cast Ad #03 - Winston CigarettesPfizer Commercial (2023) 'Got Booster ?' Featuring Travis KelceWorld War Z Official Movie TrailerThe Girl With All The Gifts – Official Trailer - Official Warner Bros. UKDr Paul Offit: RFK Jr's vaccine stance making it a 'dangerous time to be a child'RFK, Jr,. on one example of the financial corruption of the NIH, CDC and FDA15 Mr. Magoo Beer Commercials | HD Upscaled & Enhanced Audio

On today's episode of Joe Untamed, we confront the growing cracks in the American justice system, mainstream medical narratives, and institutional credibility. We begin with Major Thomas Haviland, a retired U.S. Air Force officer and seasoned data analyst, who joins us to unpack the deeply disturbing findings from his Worldwide Embalmer Blood Clot Surveys. Drawing from firsthand accounts of hundreds of embalmers globally, Haviland reveals a consistent and alarming rise in unusual fibrin clots and micro-clotting in corpses—coinciding closely with the global COVID-19 vaccine rollout. He discusses the regulatory silence from the CDC, FDA, and NIH, and why his upcoming research could rewrite what we think we know about post-vaccine fatalities. Later, we shift focus to Ammon Bundy, who delivers a powerful response to the FBI's recent Shield of Bravery medals awarded to Hostage Rescue Team agents involved in the 2016 Malheur standoff—the same agents implicated in the fatal shooting of LaVoy Finicum and the mysterious wounding of Ryan Bundy. With video evidence, contradictions in official reports, and a bullet still lodged in Ryan's arm, Bundy calls out the disturbing rewriting of history and demands transparency from federal law enforcement. Recent sworn testimony reveals that a key witness in the Proud Boys case was coerced by FBI agents and DOJ prosecutors into providing false testimony—an egregious abuse of power that undermines the integrity of our justice system. This alarming revelation, paired with mounting evidence of politically motivated prosecutions and federal overreach, demands immediate action. We urge Congress to launch a full investigation into the Department of Justice's conduct, hold those responsible accountable, and ensure that no federal agency can be used as a political weapon against American citizens.  

LAS NOTICIAS CON CALLE DE 3 DE SEPTIEMBRE DE 2025- Apuñalan a tía de asesina de Gabriela Nicole - El Vocero Puerto Rico vuelve a un rol militar - El Nuevo Día JGo apoya que NFE Rechaza crear cargo de vicegobernador la gobe - El Nuevo Día Ordenan cerrar cementerio de Lares por problemas con el agua - El Nuevo Día Sueltan 33 mil documentos de Epstein, la mayoría ya eran públicos - CNNTranque total hacia el status de PR - El Nuevo Día Rompe récords el turismo en PR - El Nuevo Día NF frente a otra demanda, ahora por tratar de no usar remolcadores - El Vocero Debate para saber si deben o no tratar a los menores como adultos - El Vocero Mañana empieza la NFL los Eagles v. Cowboys - NFLGobernadora dice que no recomendará gente para la Junta - El Vocero 631 policías menos en PR desde que comenzó el año - El Vocero China enseña su arsenal y juguetes nuevos a Xi y Kim - WSJTrump dice que va a activar la Guardia Nacional en Chicago y Baltimore - US Today WSJ viene a PR a cubrir el bump de Bad Bunny en economía de PR El oro como refugio del dólar proyecta que va a subir precio - Axios Pesquera acaba con su rol del agua - Noticel USA podría comprar empresas de armas militares - Lutnick en conferencia de prensa Congreso dice no a cortar NIH como propone Trump, dicen hace falta investigación científica - Axios Si estás cansado de pagar de más por servicios que no usas ni necesitas, es hora de cambiarte a Liberty.Los planes ilimitados multi-línea Liberty Mix te permiten escoger y pagar solo por lo que necesita cada línea, con más data de alta velocidad y cero cargos escondidos.Estos planes han sido diseñados con flexibilidad en mente, ofreciéndote un servicio que se ajusta a tus necesidades, y también a tu bolsillo.Visita tu tienda Liberty más cercana hoy y escoge el plan que mejor se ajusta a ti.Liberty, contigo siempre.Incluye auspicio

We reprise this episode from earlier this year on how PETA's legal team is using the First Amendment in an attempt to stop the torture of monkeys at NIH laboratories. PETA's Jeff Kerr, in conversation with Emil Guillermo.

You can sign the letter here. The Trump administration has been retaliating against its critics, and people and groups with business before the administration have started laundering criticism through other sources with less need for goodwill. So I have been asked to share an open letter, which needs signatures from scientists, doctors, and healthcare professionals. The authors tell me (THIS IS NOT THE CONTENTS OF THE LETTER, IT'S THEIR EXPLANATION, TO ME, OF WHAT THE LETTER IS FOR): The NIH has spent at least $5 billion less of that money than Congress has appropriated to them, which is bad because medical research is good and we want more of it. In May, NIH Director Jay Bhattacharya told a room full of people that he would spend all the money by the end of the fiscal year. That is good news, because any money not spent by that point will disappear. The bad news is the fiscal year ends on September 30th and according to the American Association of Medical Colleges, “the true shortfall far exceeds $5 billion.” Our open letter requests that Dr. Bhattacharya do what he said he would and spend all the money by September 30th. We as the originators of the letter do not want to be named publicly because we are concerned about being the focal point for blame and retaliation. We would rather be members of a large crowd of signatories than be singled out as individuals to make an example of. Based on our understanding of current administration norms, we do not expect retaliation against private individuals who sign this letter. We are looking for signatures from scientists, doctors, and healthcare professionals. So if that is you, please sign here. If you want to help support the letter more broadly, email nihfundingletter@gmail.com. Our stretch goal is to have a thousand people sign the letter within the next two weeks. To hammer home (since many people failed to understand it) that this is not the contents of the letter, I am including the actual contents below: We, the undersigned scientists, doctors, and public health stakeholders, commend your commitment to spend all funds allocated to the NIH, as reported in The Washington Post. At the same time, we are concerned by reports that U.S. institutions received nearly $5 billion less in NIH awards over the past year. With less than one month to the end of the fiscal year, we submit this urgent request to ensure that your commitment is upheld. If you anticipate that all appropriated funds cannot be spent in time, we request a public disclosure of the barriers preventing the achievement of this crucial responsibility. We present this request in the spirit of the broad, bipartisan consensus in favor of spending appropriated NIH funds. In their July letter to the Office of Management and Budget, fourteen Republican senators, led by Senators Collins, Britt, and McConnell, forcefully argued that suspension of NIH funds “could threaten Americans' ability to access better treatments and limit our nation's leadership in biomedical science.” The case for investment in medical research transcends political divides as it serves our collective national interest. The return on investment from research is compelling. Synthesizing the empirical literature, economist Matt Clancy estimates that each public and private R&D dollar yields roughly $5.50 in GDP—and about $11 when broader benefits are counted. Every dollar of NIH funding not deployed represents lost opportunities for breakthrough treatments, missed chances to train the next generation of scientists, and diminished returns on America's innovation ecosystem. Spending these funds is also a competitiveness imperative as China attempts to transform itself from a low-end manufacturer to a high-tech research and innovation juggernaut. In 2024, the Chinese government increased its spending on science and technology by 10%, and the nation's total expenditure on research and development increased by 50% in nominal terms between 2020 and 2024. As China's number of clinical trials and new drug candidates begin to outpace the U.S., America cannot afford to allow biomedical research funding to go unspent. We respectfully ask that you ensure that NIH will obligate all FY25 funds by September 30, 2025, and, if that is not possible, that you address the scientific community to explain why and what must be done to ensure all appropriated funds are spent in FY26. We stand ready to support your efforts to preserve this vital national investment. https://readscottalexander.com/posts/acx-open-letter-to-the-nih  

The worst thing that can happen in health-care and biomedical research is politics getting involved in choosing what research needs to be done for what disease, Dr. Elias Zerhouni tells Bloomberg Intelligence analyst Sam Fazeli, explaining how mixing science and politics weakens innovation and public trust. On this episode of the Vanguards of Health Care podcast, Zerhouni, a former NIH director and vice chairman of OPKO Health, unpacks his new book Disease Knows No Politics, warns against cutting US research funding and explains why immigration is vital for scientific leadership. He also dives into OPKO and ModeX’s cutting-edge work on multivalent vaccines and multi-specific antibodies that could change the treatment landscape. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

When Martha's husband was diagnosed with Parkinson's, she didn't just seek answers—she built them. She dove into chemistry, microbiology, and genetics… then founded two companies to fight chronic disease at the root. Now with NIH grants, patents, and a TEDx under her belt—she's rewriting the story of gut health.

For weight loss, complete avoidance of ultra-processed foods outperforms mere “healthy diet” comprising minimally-processed items; Research fraud undermines anti-dementia drug pipeline; Comprehensive lifestyle modification program scores against cognitive decline; Women's brains especially vulnerable to Omega-3 deficiencies; Bible says “Lame shall walk again” and 21st century science may soon bring about this miracle; Breakthroughs in rheumatoid arthritis treatment.

In this episode, I wrap up my reaction to Netflix's Fit for TV: The Reality of The Biggest Loser (Episode 3) with a coach's lens—breaking down shame-based tactics, progress-photo manipulation, and why scale-only goals backfire. I unpack the NIH “metabolic slowdown” findings in plain English, explain constrained energy expenditure, and share how to protect muscle with strength training and protein. We talk realistic expectations (Stockdale Paradox), posting for accountability without derailing your mindset, GLP-1 myths, and the power of non-scale victories you can use today. If you're a busy parent 40+ looking for sustainable fat loss and better health, this practical debrief is for you. Subscribe so you don't miss what's next.FIT40 LINKS✅ Want to learn how to lose that first 5 lbs and keep it off for good?Check out The First 5 Coaching Program by clicking here: https://coach.everfit.io/package/TJ643243✅ Not quite ready for coaching, but need some at home workouts to get you started on your fitness journey?Get your free copy of the Toned In 20 Workouts by clicking here: https://fit40coaching.com/20AFFILIATE LINKS:Try Tonal for 30 Days Risk Free: https://tonal.sjv.io/FIT40Get 10% Off The Genius Protein Shot: https://www.geniusshot.com/?ref=BRYAN_FIT40&transaction_id=10214dd14c839e450a4423af7b1f8eCONNECT WITH ME ONLINEFacebook: https://www.facebook.com/bryan.fitzsimmonsInstagram: ⁠⁠⁠⁠https://www.instagram.com/coach_fitzz/⁠⁠⁠⁠Tiktok: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://www.tiktok.com/@coach_fitzz?is_from_webapp=1&sender_device=pcYoutube: https://www.youtube.com/@bryan_fit40 This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit bryanfitzsimmon.substack.com

What if a scan could do more than show you a picture, what if it could tell you a story about what's happening inside a child's body, in real time?That's exactly what Dr. Chris Flask is working to make possible.Dr. Flask is a Professor of Radiology, Biomedical Engineering, and Pediatrics at Case Western Reserve University and University Hospitals of Cleveland. He's at the forefront of an exciting transformation in medical imaging, one that could change the way we care for children with rare genetic diseases like cystic fibrosis (CF) and polycystic kidney disease (PKD).“Our goal is to turn imaging, instead of just image creation, into data,” says Dr. Flask. “We want to create numbers. So we can say, this is what's going on in the lungs. And when we put these patients on modulator therapies, we can see a 10 percent improvement in their lung disease. And similar responses in the pancreas, the liver, and the gut. That's our goal—quantifying it through this fingerprinting methodology.”This approach, MRI fingerprinting, is a revolutionary leap forward. Developed over the past decade at Case Western's MRI center, it's fast, accurate, and most importantly for kids: it requires no sedation, no radiation, and no contrast agents. Each image slice takes just 15 seconds, making it safer and more accessible for the most vulnerable patients.Dr. Flask's work is supported by the NIH, the Cystic Fibrosis Foundation, and an extraordinary 42-year collaboration with Siemens MRI. Together, they're paving the way for multi-center clinical trials using this technology to better understand disease progression and therapy outcomes.This episode is all about the intersection of science, innovation, and compassion, and the powerful impact of data-driven care.We're honored to welcome Dr. Flask to the show, although he prefers we call him Chris. You won't want to miss this deep dive into what's next for pediatric imaging and precision medicine.Share with anyone who's passionate about medical innovation, pediatric health, or rare disease research. Please like, subscribe, and comment on our podcasts!Please consider making a donation: https://thebonnellfoundation.org/donate/The Bonnell Foundation website:https://thebonnellfoundation.orgEmail us at: thebonnellfoundation@gmail.com Watch our podcasts on YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@laurabonnell1136/featuredThanks to our sponsors:Vertex: https://www.vrtx.comViatris: https://www.viatris.com/en

Supreme Court Ruling on DEI Grants The Supreme Court ruled 5–4 in favor of the Trump administration, allowing it to terminate $783 million in NIH diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) related grants. The decision centered on jurisdiction — the Court found that lawsuits over federal contracts must be filed in the Court of Federal Claims, not in district court. Justice Amy Coney Barrett cast the swing vote: siding with conservatives to block the payouts but with liberals on preventing reinstatement of the DEI guidance policy. Conservatives framed this as a victory against what they see as “ideological” grants, while critics warned of reduced research support. Corporate “Woke” Backlash — Cracker Barrel Example Discussion shifted to Cracker Barrel’s rebranding effort that downplayed its nostalgic Americana imagery. The company faced backlash, similar to Bud Light and Target controversies, leading to stock declines. After pressure from customers, investors, and even Donald Trump’s public comments, Cracker Barrel reversed course and reinstated its traditional branding. This was framed as an example of market-driven resistance to corporate progressivism. Senator’s Latin America Trip (El Salvador & Panama) The speaker described travels to El Salvador, highlighting improved safety under President Nayib Bukele. This led to “reverse migration,” with Salvadorans abroad expressing interest in returning. In Panama, focus was on the Panama Canal’s strategic importance and concerns about Chinese control over ports, infrastructure projects, and canal-adjacent facilities. The senator warned that in the event of a U.S.–China conflict, Chinese influence in Panama could threaten U.S. economic and military logistics. He urged Panamanian officials to push out Chinese companies and secure the canal with U.S.-aligned interests. Please Hit Subscribe to this podcast Right Now. Also Please Subscribe to the 47 Morning Update with Ben Ferguson and The Ben Ferguson Show Podcast Wherever You get You're Podcasts. And don't forget to follow the show on Social Media so you never miss a moment! Thanks for Listening YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@VerdictwithTedCruz/ Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/verdictwithtedcruz X: https://x.com/tedcruz X: https://x.com/benfergusonshowYouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@VerdictwithTedCruzSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

 Today on Joe Untamed, we discuss the critical issues driving the national conversation—from intensified federal immigration enforcement to alarming policies reshaping America's schools. We begin with the Trump administration's planned 30-day ICE operation in Chicago, targeting criminal illegal aliens, backed by DHS and potentially the National Guard. As the administration emphasizes law and order, blue-state leaders like Governor Pritzker and Mayor Brandon Johnson are pushing back with lawsuits and resistance. What does this clash reveal about immigration enforcement, public safety, and the scope of federal authority in defiant cities? We break it down. Next, we shift to California, where troubling reports from the Temecula Valley Unified School District expose how girls are being coerced into citing mental health concerns to avoid sharing restrooms with biological males—a stark example of progressive policies clashing with parental rights and student well-being. We're calling it out. Later, we're joined by Dr. Mark Sherwood, a former SWAT officer, gubernatorial candidate, and renowned functional medicine expert. With his rare blend of law enforcement experience and health expertise, Dr. Sherwood delivers a fearless take on America's missteps. We explore the NIH's probe into SSRIs and their possible ties to mass violence, particularly in notable transgender cases in Minnesota and elsewhere. Dr. Sherwood also addresses the medicalization of gender identity in children, comparing it to other self-harming conditions society would never endorse. From the erosion of the nuclear family to the growing reliance on pharmaceuticals over lifestyle changes, his perspective is unflinching, grounded, and rooted in principles the mainstream avoids. In response to overwhelming audience interest, we're doubling down on the EPA's groundbreaking deregulation of diesel emissions rules—highlighting how these reforms not only boost passenger safety and reduce costs but represent a wider return to common-sense government under the Trump administration. You'll hear exactly how to make your voice heard in Washington with today's fax blast, pressuring Congress to support the 10-for-1 deregulatory strategy that's already saving American families thousands.  

Jordan Sather and Nate Prince break down a week of major headlines, including RFK Jr.'s bombshell announcement that new findings point to medical interventions as a likely cause of autism, with results expected in September. They cover the firing of CDC Director Susan Menares, the mass resignation of top officials, and the permanent dismissal of 600 employees in what may be the biggest shake-up in the agency's history. The hosts also highlight Tulsi Gabbard calling out Fauci, Moderna's payouts to NIH, and Bill Gates scrambling to meet Trump as vaccine contracts are canceled. In the second half, they welcome Michele from Tamarac Gardens for an in-depth conversation on raising strong, healthy children. From vaccines and natural remedies to homeschooling, discipline, and screen time, Michele shares her family's journey into holistic parenting and her mission to empower others through herbal medicine. A powerful mix of breaking news and timeless parenting wisdom.

Guest: Richard Ridout, owner of Little Tiger Ice Cream Shop in Lake City, on the rampant crime and homelessness that businesses deal with everyday. // Secretary of Health and Human Services Robert F. Kennedy Jr. says the NIH is going to take a look into the connection between psychiatric drugs and violence committed by trans people. Many people on the far-left mocked the idea of ‘thoughts and prayers’ in the wake of the shooting at a Catholic school in Minneapolis. // International soccer star Lionel Messi is coming to Seattle and ticket prices are through the roof.

Navigating supplements during a cancer diagnosis can be overwhelming, especially when facing conflicting advice and a barrage of information. Today on Beating Cancer Daily, Saranne tackles one of the most common questions among those newly diagnosed, undergoing treatment, or living as survivors: Should I be taking supplements, and if so, which ones? Certified nutrition specialist and functional medicine expert Jacqui Bryan joins to unpack the complex world of nutritional supplements. Drawing from her personal cancer journey and decades of professional experience, Jacqui guides listeners through how to safely and effectively choose supplements that align with individual health goals—without falling prey to confusing marketing claims or risking harmful interactions during cancer treatments, like chemotherapy. Together, Saranne and Jacqui discuss the value of third-party testing, the necessity of working closely with a healthcare team, and the importance of focusing on food first for optimal healing and wellness, even for those beyond the cancer community. Jacqui Bryan is a certified nutrition specialist, whole health educator, functional medicine expert, certified health coach, and registered nurse. With over 22 years of survivorship after her breast cancer diagnosis, Jacqui brings both personal and professional insight to cancer wellness. She has appeared in over 90 episodes of Beating Cancer Daily, empowering clients and listeners to make informed, individualized nutrition choices. Jacqui specializes in guiding people to use food as medicine, supports them in safely navigating supplement use, and is a trusted resource for evidence-based holistic health. “I am a food first practitioner. My preference is that people consume a diet that is going to nourish their bodies.” – Jacqui Bryan Today on Beating Cancer Daily:·     Choosing supplements should be a personalized decision based on specific health goals, not generic recommendations. ·     Third-party testing (USP, NSF International, ConsumerLab.com) is critical for ensuring supplement safety and label accuracy. ·     Start with one supplement at a time and monitor your body's response before layering additional products. ·     Communicate all supplements use with your healthcare team to avoid harmful interactions, especially during active treatments like chemotherapy. ·     Older adults, athletes, those with gut or absorption issues, and individuals with conditions like osteoporosis require tailored supplement strategies. ·     Outrageous health claims, celebrity endorsements, or vague “proprietary blends” are red flags when evaluating supplements. ·     Regular reassessment through lab tests or tracking symptoms—ensures supplements remain relevant and effective. ·     Food should always be the primary source of nutrients, with supplements used to fill clinically necessary gaps, not as substitutes for a healthy diet.Resources Mentioned: Third-party testing certifications: USP, NSF International, ConsumerLab.com NIH supplement information: https://ods.od.nih.gov Jacqui Bryan's website: https://jacquibryan.com ComedyCures Foundation: https://comedycures.org 

Abdul and Katelyn discuss another inundating week in public health, which includes: The sudden departure of the CDC Director, Susan Monarez, just weeks after her confirmation The resignations of three other top leaders at HHS FDA's approval of the fall Covid booster, which limits the vaccine to seniors and people at high risk, as well as new alternative recommendations from major medical organizations A Supreme Court ruling that puts a new legal wrinkle in the fight to restore NIH grants The rise of radioactive shrimp and flying fresh-eating maggots! Then as we look ahead to Labor Day, Abdul sits down with Dr. Taylor Walker, president of the largest labor union representing physicians. We are dark next week for the holiday. Check out our shop at store.americadissected.com for our new America Dissected merch – including logo shirts, hoodies and mugs. And don't miss our “Vaccines Work. Science Matters.” t-shirts! This show would not be possible without the generous support of our sponsors. America Dissected invites you to check them out. This episode was brought to you by: Incogni: Take your personal data back with Incogni! Use code DISSECTED at the link below and get 60% off an annual plan: https://incogni.com/dissected OneSkin: Get 15% off OneSkin with the code DISSECTED at https://www.oneskin.co/ #oneskinpod

Sarah Isgur and David French talk about flag burning and protected free speech in the wake of President Donald Trump's executive order on the same subject. Then, husband-wife duo Sanford and Cynthia Levinson, authors of Fault Lines in the Constitution: The Framers, Their Fights, and the Flaws that Affect Us Today, join to discuss why they believe some of our contemporary political problems stem from our founding document. The Agenda:—President Trump's executive order—Texas v. Johnson—Dinkus vs. Dingus—Greenbag.org—NIH v. American Public Health Association—Intro to constitutional law for non-lawyers Advisory Opinions is a production of The Dispatch, a digital media company covering politics, policy, and culture from a non-partisan, conservative perspective. To access all of The Dispatch's offerings—including access to all of our articles, members-only newsletters, and bonus podcast episodes—click here. If you'd like to remove all ads from your podcast experience, consider becoming a premium Dispatch member by clicking here. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

His name is Dr. Elias Zerhouni, former director of the National Institutes of Health (NIH) under President George W. Bush, presidential envoy under President Barack Obama and treating physician for President Ronald Reagan. He is the author of "Disease Knows No Politics," an inspirational medical and political memoir that champions the work of the NIH, and he is our guest on the next Another View on Health. Dr. Zerhouni will share why, despite deep cuts in funding by the Trump administration, he believes the NIH needs to be at the service of all Americans, regardless of their political preferences, race, gender, sexual orientation or religion.

Lots of talk these days about ultra-processed foods (UPFs). Along with confusion about what in the heck they are or what they're not, how bad they are for us, and what ought to be done about them. A landmark in the discussion of ultra-processed foods has been the publication of a book entitled Ultra-processed People, Why We Can't Stop Eating Food That Isn't Food. The author of that book, Dr. Chris van Tulleken, joins us today. Dr. van Tulleken is a physician and is professor of Infection and Global Health at University College London. He also has a PhD in molecular virology and is an award-winning broadcaster on the BBC. His book on Ultra-processed People is a bestseller. Interview Summary Chris, sometimes somebody comes along that takes a complicated topic and makes it accessible and understandable and brings it to lots of people. You're a very fine scientist and scholar and academic, but you also have that ability to communicate effectively with lots of people, which I very much admire. So, thanks for doing that, and thank you for joining us. Oh, Kelly, it's such a pleasure. You know, I begin some of my talks now with a clipping from the New York Times. And it's a picture of you and an interview you gave in 1995. So exactly three decades ago. And in this article, you just beautifully communicate everything that 30 years later I'm still saying. So, yeah. I wonder if communication, it's necessary, but insufficient. I think we are needing to think of other means to bring about change. I totally agree. Well, thank you by the way. And I hope I've learned something over those 30 years. Tell us, please, what are ultra-processed foods? People hear the term a lot, but I don't think a lot of people know exactly what it means. The most important thing to know, I think, is that it's not a casual term. It's not like 'junk food' or 'fast food.' It is a formal scientific definition. It's been used in hundreds of research studies. The definition is very long. It's 11 paragraphs long. And I would urge anyone who's really interested in this topic, go to the United Nations Food and Agricultural Organization website. You can type in NFAO Ultra and you'll get the full 11 paragraph definition. It's an incredibly sophisticated piece of science. But it boils down to if you as a consumer, someone listening to this podcast, want to know if the thing you are eating right now is ultra-processed, look at the ingredients list. If there are ingredients on that list that you do not normally find in a domestic kitchen like an emulsifier, a coloring, a flavoring, a non-nutritive sweetener, then that product will be ultra-processed. And it's a way of describing this huge range of foods that kind of has taken over the American and the British and in fact diets all over the world. How come the food companies put this stuff in the foods? And the reason I ask is in talks I give I'll show an ingredient list from a food that most people would recognize. And ask people if they can guess what the food is from the ingredient list. And almost nobody can. There are 35 things on the ingredient list. Sugar is in there, four different forms. And then there are all kinds of things that are hard to pronounce. There are lots of strange things in there. They get in there through loopholes and government regulation. Why are they there in the first place? So, when I started looking at this I also noticed this long list of fancy sounding ingredients. And even things like peanut butter will have palm oil and emulsifiers. Cream cheese will have xanthum gum and emulsifiers. And you think, well, wouldn't it just be cheaper to make your peanut butter out of peanuts. In fact, every ingredient is in there to make money in one of two ways. Either it drives down the cost of production or storage. If you imagine using a real strawberry in your strawberry ice cream. Strawberries are expensive. They're not always in season. They rot. You've got to have a whole supply chain. Why would you use a strawberry if you could use ethyl methylphenylglycidate and pink dye and it'll taste the same. It'll look great. You could then put in a little chunky bit of modified corn starch that'll be chewy if you get it in the right gel mix. And there you go. You've got strawberries and you haven't had to deal with strawberry farmers or any supply chain. It's just you just buy bags and bottles of white powder and liquids. The other way is to extend the shelf life. Strawberries as I say, or fresh food, real food - food we might call it rots on shelves. It decays very quickly. If you can store something at room temperature in a warehouse for months and months, that saves enormous amounts of money. So, one thing is production, but the other thing is the additives allow us to consume to excess or encourage us to consume ultra-processed food to excess. So, I interviewed a scientist who was a food industry development scientist. And they said, you know, most ultra-processed food would be gray if it wasn't dyed, for example. So, if you want to make cheap food using these pastes and powders, unless you dye it and you flavor it, it will be inedible. But if you dye it and flavor it and add just the right amount of salt, sugar, flavor enhancers, then you can make these very addictive products. So that's the logic of UPF. Its purpose is to make money. And that's part of the definition. Right. So, a consumer might decide that there's, you know, beneficial trade-off for them at the end of the day. That they get things that have long shelf life. The price goes down because of the companies don't have to deal with the strawberry farmers and things like that. But if there's harm coming in waves from these things, then it changes the equation. And you found out some of that on your own. So as an experiment you did with a single person - you, you ate ultra-processed foods for a month. What did you eat and how did it affect your body, your mood, your sleep? What happened when you did this? So, what's really exciting, actually Kelly, is while it was an n=1, you know, one participant experiment, I was actually the pilot participant in a much larger study that we have published in Nature Medicine. One of the most reputable and high impact scientific journals there is. So, I was the first participant in a randomized control trial. I allowed us to gather the data about what we would then measure in a much larger number. Now we'll come back and talk about that study, which I think was really important. It was great to see it published. So, I was a bit skeptical. Partly it was with my research team at UCL, but we were also filming it for a BBC documentary. And I went into this going I'm going to eat a diet of 80% of my calories will come from ultra-processed food for four weeks. And this is a normal diet. A lifelong diet for a British teenager. We know around 20% of people in the UK and the US eat this as their normal food. They get 80% of their calories from ultra-processed products. I thought, well, nothing is going to happen to me, a middle-aged man, doing this for four weeks. But anyway, we did it kind of as a bit of fun. And we thought, well, if nothing happens, we don't have to do a bigger study. We can just publish this as a case report, and we'll leave it out of the documentary. Three big things happened. I gained a massive amount of weight, so six kilos. And I wasn't force feeding myself. I was just eating when I wanted. In American terms, that's about 15 pounds in four weeks. And that's very consistent with the other published trials that have been done on ultra-processed food. There have been two other RCTs (randomized control trials); ours is the third. There is one in Japan, one done at the NIH. So, people gain a lot of weight. I ate massively more calories. So much so that if I'd continued on the diet, I would've almost doubled my body weight in a year. And that may sound absurd, but I have an identical twin brother who did this natural experiment. He went to Harvard for a year. He did his masters there. During his year at Harvard he gained, let's see, 26 kilos, so almost 60 pounds just living in Cambridge, Massachusetts. But how did you decide how much of it to eat? Did you eat until you just kind of felt naturally full? I did what most people do most of the time, which is I just ate what I wanted when I felt like it. Which actually for me as a physician, I probably took the breaks off a bit because I don't normally have cocoa pops for breakfast. But I ate cocoa pops and if I felt like two bowls, I'd have two bowls. It turned out what I felt like a lot of mornings was four bowls and that was fine. I was barely full. So, I wasn't force feeding myself. It wasn't 'supersize' me. I was eating to appetite, which is how these experiments run. And then what we've done in the trials. So, I gained weight, then we measured my hormone response to a meal. When you eat, I mean, it's absurd to explain this to YOU. But when you eat, you have fullness hormones that go up and hunger hormones that go down, so you feel full and less hungry. And we measured my response to a standard meal at the beginning and at the end of this four-week diet. What we found is that I had a normal response to eating a big meal at the beginning of the diet. At the end of eating ultra-processed foods, the same meal caused a very blunted rise in the satiety hormones. In the 'fullness' hormones. So, I didn't feel as full. And my hunger hormones remained high. And so, the food is altering our response to all meals, not merely within the meal that we're eating. Then we did some MRI scans and again, I thought this would be a huge waste of time. But we saw at four weeks, and then again eight weeks later, very robust changes in the communication between the habit-forming bits at the back of the brain. So, the automatic behavior bits, the cerebellum. Very conscious I'm talking to YOU about this, Kelly. And the kind of addiction reward bits in the middle. Now these changes were physiological, not structural. They're about the two bits of the brain talking to each other. There's not really a new wire going between them. But we think if this kind of communication is happening a lot, that maybe a new pathway would form. And I think no one, I mean we did this with very expert neuroscientists at our National Center for Neuroscience and Neurosurgery, no one really knows what it means. But the general feeling was these are the kind of changes we might expect if we'd given someone, or a person or an animal, an addictive substance for four weeks. They're consistent with, you know, habit formation and addiction. And the fact that they happened so quickly, and they were so robust - they remained the same eight weeks after I stopped the diet, I think is really worrying from a kid's perspective. So, in a period of four weeks, it re-altered the way your brain works. It affected the way your hunger and satiety were working. And then you ended up with this massive weight. And heaven knows what sort of cardiovascular effects or other things like that might have been going on or had the early signs of that over time could have been really pretty severe, I imagine. I think one of the main effects was that I became very empathetic with my patients. Because we did actually a lot of, sort of, psychological testing as well. And there's an experience where, obviously in clinic, I mainly treat patients with infections. But many of my patients are living with other, sort of, disorders of modern life. They live with excess weight and cardiovascular disease and type two diabetes and metabolic problems and so on. And I felt in four weeks like I'd gone from being in my early 30, early 40s at the time, I felt like I'd just gone to my early 50s or 60s. I ached. I felt terrible. My sleep was bad. And it was like, oh! So many of the problems of modern life: waking up to pee in the middle of the night is because you've eaten so much sodium with your dinner. You've drunk all this water, and then you're trying to get rid of it all night. Then you're constipated. It's a low fiber diet, so you develop piles. Pain in your bum. The sleep deprivation then makes you eat more. And so, you get in this vicious cycle where the problem didn't feel like the food until I stopped and I went cold turkey. I virtually have not touched it since. It cured me of wanting UPF. That was the other amazing bit of the experience that I write about in the book is it eating it and understanding it made me not want it. It was like being told to smoke. You know, you get caught smoking as a kid and your parents are like, hey, now you finish the pack. It was that. It was an aversion experience. So, it gave me a lot of empathy with my patients that many of those kinds of things we regard as being normal aging, those symptoms are often to do with the way we are living our lives. Chris, I've talked to a lot of people about ultra-processed foods. You're the first one who's mentioned pain in the bum as one of the problems, so thank you. When I first became a physician, I trained as a surgeon, and I did a year doing colorectal surgery. So, I have a wealth of experience of where a low fiber diet leaves you. And many people listening to this podcast, I mean, look, we're all going to get piles. Everyone gets these, you know, anal fishes and so on. And bum pain it's funny to talk about it. No, not the... it destroys people's lives, so, you know, anyway. Right. I didn't want to make light of it. No, no. Okay. So, your own experiment would suggest that these foods are really bad actors and having this broad range of highly negative effects. But what does research say about these things beyond your own personal experience, including your own research? So, the food industry has been very skillful at portraying this as a kind of fad issue. As ultra-processed food is this sort of niche thing. Or it's a snobby thing. It's not a real classification. I want to be absolutely clear. UPF, the definition is used by the World Health Organization and the United Nations Food and Agricultural Organization to monitor global diet quality, okay? It's a legitimate way of thinking about food. The last time I looked, there are more than 30 meta-analyses - that is reviews of big studies. And the kind of high-quality studies that we use to say cigarettes cause lung cancer. So, we've got this what we call epidemiological evidence, population data. We now have probably more than a hundred of these prospective cohort studies. And they're really powerful tools. They need to be used in conjunction with other evidence, but they now link ultra-processed food to this very wide range of what we euphemistically call negative health outcomes. You know, problems that cause human suffering, mental health problems, anxiety, depression, multiple forms of cancer, inflammatory diseases like Crohn's disease and ulcerative colitis, metabolic disease, cardiovascular disease, Alzheimer's and dementia. Of course, weight gain and obesity. And all cause mortality so you die earlier of all causes. And there are others too. So, the epidemiological evidence is strong and that's very plausible. So, we take that epidemiological evidence, as you well know, and we go, well look, association and causation are different things. You know, do matches cause cancer or does cigarettes cause cancer? Because people who buy lots of matches are also getting the lung cancer. And obviously epidemiologists are very sophisticated at teasing all this out. But we look at it in the context then of other evidence. My group published the third randomized control trial where we put a group of people, in a very controlled way, on a diet of either minimally processed food or ultra-processed food and looked at health outcomes. And we found what the other two trials did. We looked at weight gain as a primary outcome. It was a short trial, eight weeks. And we saw people just eat more calories on the ultra-processed food. This is food that is engineered to be consumed to excess. That's its purpose. So maybe to really understand the effect of it, you have to imagine if you are a food development engineer working in product design at a big food company - if you develop a food that's cheap to make and people will just eat loads of it and enjoy it, and then come back for it again and again and again, and eat it every day and almost become addicted to it, you are going to get promoted. That product is going to do well on the shelves. If you invent a food that's not addictive, it's very healthy, it's very satisfying, people eat it and then they're done for the day. And they don't consume it to excess. You are not going to keep your job. So that's a really important way of understanding the development process of the foods. So let me ask a question about industry and intent. Because one could say that the industry engineers these things to have long shelf life and nice physical properties and the right colors and things like this. And these effects on metabolism and appetite and stuff are unpleasant and difficult side effects, but the foods weren't made to produce those things. They weren't made to produce over consumption and then in turn produce those negative consequences. You're saying something different. That you think that they're intentionally designed to promote over consumption. And in some ways, how could the industry do otherwise? I mean, every industry in the world wants people to over consume or consume as much of their product as they can. The food industry is no different. That is exactly right. The food industry behaves like every other corporation. In my view, they commit evil acts sometimes, but they're not institutionally evil. And I have dear friends who work in big food, who work in big pharma. I have friends who work in tobacco. These are not evil people. They're constrained by commercial incentives, right? So, when I say I think the food is engineered, I don't think it. I know it because I've gone and interviewed loads of people in product development at big food companies. I put some of these interviewees in a BBC documentary called Irresistible. So rather than me in the documentary going, oh, ultra-processed food is bad. And everyone going, well, you are, you're a public health bore. I just got industry insiders to say, yes, this is how we make the food. And going back to Howard Moskovitz, in the 1970s, I think he was working for the Campbell Soup Company. And Howard, who was a psychologist by training, outlined the development process. And what he said was then underlined by many other people I've spoken to. You develop two different products. This one's a little bit saltier than the next, and you test them on a bunch of people. People like the saltier ones. So now you keep the saltier one and you develop a third product and this one's got a bit more sugar in it. And if this one does better, well you keep this one and you keep AB testing until you get people buying and eating lots. And one of the crucial things that food companies measure in product development is how fast do people eat and how quickly do they eat. And these kind of development tools were pioneered by the tobacco industry. I mean, Laura Schmidt has done a huge amount of the work on this. She's at University of California, San Francisco (UCSF), in California. And we know the tobacco industry bought the food industry and for a while in the '80s and '90s, the biggest food companies in the world were also the biggest tobacco companies in the world. And they used their flavor molecules and their marketing techniques and their distribution systems. You know, they've got a set of convenience tools selling cigarettes all over the country. Well, why don't we sell long shelf-life food marketed in the same way? And one thing that the tobacco industry was extremely good at was figuring out how to get the most rapid delivery of the drug possible into the human body when people smoke. Do you think that some of that same thing is true for food, rapid delivery of sugar, let's say? How close does the drug parallel fit, do you think? So, that's part of the reason the speed of consumption is important. Now, I think Ashley Gearhardt has done some of the most incredible work on this. And what Ashley says is we think of addictive drugs as like it's the molecule that's addictive. It's nicotine, it's caffeine, cocaine, diamorphine, heroin, the amphetamines. What we get addicted to is the molecule. And that Ashley says no. The processing of that molecule is crucially important. If you have slow-release nicotine in a chewing gum, that can actually treat your nicotine addiction. It's not very addictive. Slow-release amphetamine we use to treat children with attention and behavioral problems. Slow-release cocaine is an anesthetic. You use it for dentistry. No one ever gets addicted to dental anesthetics. And the food is the same. The rewarding molecules in the food we think are mainly the fat and the sugar. And food that requires a lot of chewing and is slow eaten slowly, you don't deliver the reward as quickly. And it tends not to be very addictive. Very soft foods or liquid foods with particular fat sugar ratios, if you deliver the nutrients into the gut fast, that seems to be really important for driving excessive consumption. And I think the growing evidence around addiction is very persuasive. I mean, my patients report feeling addicted to the food. And I don't feel it's legitimate to question their experience. Chris, a little interesting story about that concept of food and addiction. So going back several decades I was a professor at Yale, and I was teaching a graduate course. Ashley Gerhardt was a student in that course. And, she was there to study addiction, not in the context of food, but I brought up the issue of, you know, could food be addictive? There's some interesting research on this. It's consistent with what we're hearing from people, and that seems a really interesting topic. And Ashley, I give her credit, took this on as her life's work and now she's like the leading expert in the world on this very important topic. And what's nice for me to recall that story is that how fast the science on this is developed. And now something's coming out on this almost every day. It's some new research on the neuroscience of food and addiction and how the food is hijacking in the brain. And that whole concept of addiction seems really important in this context. And I know you've talked a lot about that yourself. She has reframed, I think, this idea about the way that addictive substances and behaviors really work. I mean it turns everything on its head to go the processing is important. The thing the food companies have always been able to say is, look, you can't say food is addictive. It doesn't contain any addictive molecules. And with Ashley's work you go, no, but the thing is it contains rewarding molecules and actually the spectrum of molecules that we can find rewarding and we can deliver fast is much, much broader than the traditionally addictive substances. For policy, it's vital because part of regulating the tobacco industry was about showing they know they are making addictive products. And I think this is where Ashley's work and Laura Schmidt's work are coming together. With Laura's digging in the tobacco archive, Ashley's doing the science on addiction, and I think these two things are going to come together. And I think it's just going to be a really exciting space to watch. I completely agree. You know when most people think about the word addiction, they basically kind of default to thinking about how much you want something. How much, you know, you desire something. But there are other parts of it that are really relevant here too. I mean one is how do you feel if you don't have it and sort of classic withdrawal. And people talk about, for example, being on high sugar drinks and stopping them and having withdrawal symptoms and things like that. And the other part of it that I think is really interesting here is tolerance. You know whether you need more of the substance over time in order to get the same reward benefit. And that hasn't been studied as much as the other part of addiction. But there's a lot to the picture other than just kind of craving things. And I would say that the thing I like about this is it chimes with my. Personal experience, which is, I have tried alcohol and cigarettes and I should probably end that list there. But I've never had any real desire for more of them. They aren't the things that tickle my brain. Whereas the food is a thing that I continue to struggle with. I would say in some senses, although I no longer like ultra-processed food at some level, I still want it. And I think of myself to some degree, without trivializing anyone's experience, to some degree I think I'm in sort of recovery from it. And it remains that tussle. I mean I don't know what you think about the difference between the kind of wanting and liking of different substances. Some scientists think those two things are quite, quite different. That you can like things you don't want, and you can want things you don't like. Well, that's exactly right. In the context of food and traditional substances of abuse, for many of them, people start consuming because they produce some sort of desired effect. But that pretty quickly goes away, and people then need the substance because if they don't have it, they feel terrible. So, you know, morphine or heroin or something like that always produces positive effects. But that initial part of the equation where you just take it because you like it turns into this needing it and having to have it. And whether that same thing exists with food is an interesting topic. I think the other really important part of the addiction argument in policy terms is that one counterargument by industrial scientists and advocates is by raising awareness around ultra-processed food we are at risk of driving, eating disorders. You know? The phenomenon of orthorexia, food avoidance, anorexia. Because all food is good food. There should be no moral value attached to food and we mustn't drive any food anxiety. And I think there are some really strong voices in the United Kingdom Eating Disorder scientists. People like Agnes Ayton, who are starting to say, look, when food is engineered, using brain scanners and using scientific development techniques to be consumed to excess, is it any wonder that people develop a disordered relationship with the food? And there may be a way of thinking about the rise of eating disorders, which is parallel to the rise of our consumption of ultra-processed food, that eating disorders are a reasonable response to a disordered food environment. And I think that's where I say all that somewhat tentatively. I feel like this is a safe space where you will correct me if I go off piste. But I think it's important to at least explore that question and go, you know, this is food with which it is very hard, I would say, to have a healthy relationship. That's my experience. And I think the early research is bearing that out. Tell us how these foods affect your hunger, how full you feel, your microbiome. That whole sort of interactive set of signals that might put people in harmony with food in a normal environment but gets thrown off when the foods get processed like this. Oh, I love that question. At some level as I'm understanding that question, one way of trying to answer that question is to go, well, what is the normal physiological response to food? Or maybe how do wild animals find, consume, and then interpret metabolically the food that they eat. And it is staggering how little we know about how we learn what food is safe and what food nourishes us. What's very clear is that wild mammals, and in fact all wild animals, are able to maintain near perfect energy balance. Obesity is basically unheard of in the wild. And, perfect nutritional intake, I mean, obviously there are famines in wild animals, but broadly, animals can do this without being literate, without being given packaging, without any nutritional advice at all. So, if you imagine an ungulate, an herbivore on the plains of the Serengeti, it has a huge difficulty. The carnivore turning herbivore into carnivore is fairly easy. They're made of the same stuff. Turning plant material into mammal is really complicated. And somehow the herbivore can do this without gaining weight, whilst maintaining total precision over its selenium intake, its manganese, its cobalt, its iron, all of which are terrible if you have too little and also terrible if you have too much. We understand there's some work done in a few wild animals, goats, and rats about how this works. Clearly, we have an ability to sense the nutrition we want. What we understand much more about is the sort of quantities needed. And so, we've ended up with a system of nutritional advice that says, well, just eat these numbers. And if you can stick to the numbers, 2,500 calories a day, 2300 milligrams of sodium, no more than 5% of your calories from free sugar or 10%, whatever it is, you know, you stick to these numbers, you'll be okay. And also, these many milligrams of cobalt, manganese, selenium, iron, zinc, all the rest of it. And obviously people can't really do that even with the packaging. This is a very long-winded answer. So, there's this system that is exquisitely sensitive at regulating micronutrient and energy intake. And what we understand, what the Academy understands about how ultra-processed food subverts this is, I would say there are sort of three or four big things that ultra-processed does that real food doesn't. It's generally very soft. And it's generally very energy dense. And that is true of even the foods that we think of as being healthy. That's like your supermarket whole grain bread. It's incredibly energy dense. It's incredibly soft. You eat calories very fast, and this research was done in the '90s, you know we've known that that kind of food promotes excessive intake. I guess in simple terms, and you would finesse this, you consume calories before your body has time to go, well, you've eaten enough. You can consume an excess. Then there's the ratios of fat, salt, and sugar and the way you can balance them, and any good cook knows if you can get the acid, fat, salt, sugar ratios right, you can make incredibly delicious food. That's kind of what I would call hyper palatability. And a lot of that work's being done in the states (US) by some incredible people. Then the food may be that because it's low in fiber and low in protein, quite often it's not satiating. And there may be, because it's also low in micronutrients and general nutrition, it may be that, and this is a little bit theoretical, but there's some evidence for this. Part of what drives the excess consumption is you're kind of searching for the nutrients. The nutrients are so dilute that you have to eat loads of it in order to get enough. Do you think, does that, is that how you understand it? It does, it makes perfect sense. In fact, I'm glad you brought up one particular issue because part of the ultra-processing that makes foods difficult for the body to deal with involves what gets put in, but also what gets taken out. And there was a study that got published recently that I think you and I might have discussed earlier on American breakfast cereals. And this study looked at how the formulation of them had changed over a period of about 20 years. And what they found is that the industry had systematically removed the protein and the fiber and then put in more things like sugar. So there, there's both what goes in and what gets taken out of foods that affects the body in this way. You know, what I hear you saying, and what I, you know, believe myself from the science, is the body's pretty capable of handling the food environment if food comes from the natural environment. You know, if you sit down to a meal of baked chicken and some beans and some leafy greens and maybe a little fruit or something, you're not going to overdo it. Over time you'd end up with the right mix of nutrients and things like that and you'd be pretty healthy. But all bets are off when these foods get processed and engineered, so you over consume them. You found that out in the experiment that you did on yourself. And then that's what science shows too. So, it's not like these things are sort of benign. People overeat them and they ought to just push away from the table. There's a lot more going on here in terms of hijacking the brain chemistry. Overriding the body signals. Really thwarting normal biology. Do you think it's important to add that we think of obesity as being the kind of dominant public health problem? That's the thing we all worry about. But the obesity is going hand in hand with stunting, for example. So, height as you reach adulthood in the US, at 19 US adults are something like eight or nine centimeters shorter than their counterparts in Northern Europe, Scandinavia, where people still eat more whole food. And we should come back to that evidence around harms, because I think the really important thing to say around the evidence is it has now reached the threshold for causality. So, we can say a dietary pattern high in ultra-processed food causes all of these negative health outcomes. That doesn't mean that any one product is going to kill you. It just means if this is the way you get your food, it's going to be harmful. And if all the evidence says, I mean, we've known this for decades. If you can cook the kind of meal, you just described at home, which is more or less the way that high income people eat, you are likely to have way better health outcomes across the board. Let me ask you about the title of your book. So, the subtitle of your book is Why We Can't Stop Eating Food That Isn't Food. So, what is it? The ultra-processed definition is something I want to pay credit for. It's really important to pay a bit of credit here. Carlos Montero was the scientist in Brazil who led a team who together came up with this definition. And, I was speaking to Fernanda Rauber who was on that team, and we were trying to discuss some research we were doing. And every time I said food, she'd correct me and go, it is not, it's not food, Chris. It's an industrially produced edible substance. And that was a really helpful thing for me personally, it's something it went into my brain, and I sat down that night. I was actually on the UPF diet, and I sat down to eat some fried chicken wings from a popular chain that many people will know. And was unable to finish them. I think our shared understanding of the purpose of food is surely that its purpose is to nourish us. Whether it's, you know, sold by someone for this purpose, or whether it's made by someone at home. You know it should nourish us spiritually, socially, culturally, and of course physically and mentally. And ultra-processed food nourishes us in no dimension whatsoever. It destroys traditional knowledge, traditional land, food culture. You don't sit down with your family and break, you know, ultra-processed, you know, crisps together. You know, you break bread. To me that's a kind of very obvious distortion of what it's become. So, I don't think it is food. You know, I think it's not too hard of a stretch to see a time when people might consider these things non-food. Because if you think of food, what's edible and whether it's food or not is completely socially constructed. I mean, some parts of the world, people eat cockroaches or ants or other insects. And in other parts of the world that's considered non-food. So just because something's edible doesn't mean that it's food. And I wonder if at some point we might start to think of these things as, oh my God, these are awful. They're really bad for us. The companies are preying on us, and it's just not food. And yeah, totally your book helps push us in that direction. I love your optimism. The consumer facing marketing budget of a big food company is often in excess of $10 billion a year. And depends how you calculate it. I'll give you a quick quiz on this. So, for a while, the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation was by far the biggest funder of research in the world on childhood obesity. And they were spending $500 million a year to address this problem. Just by which day of the year the food industry has already spent $500 million just advertising just junk food just to children. Okay, so the Robert V. Wood Foundation is spending it and they were spending that annually. Annually, right. So, what's, by what day of the year is the food industry already spent that amount? Just junk food advertising just to kids. I'm going to say by somewhere in early spring. No. January 4th. I mean, it's hysterical, but it's also horrifying. So, this is the genius of ultra-processed food, of the definition and the science, is that it creates this category which is discretionary. And so at least in theory, of course, for many people in the US it's not discretionary at all. It's the only stuff they can afford. But this is why the food industry hate it so much is because it offers the possibility of going, we can redefine food. And there is all this real food over there. And there is this UPF stuff that isn't food over here. But industry's very sophisticated, you know. I mean, they push back very hard against me in many different ways and forms. And they're very good at going, well, you're a snob. How dare you say that families with low incomes, that they're not eating food. Are you calling them dupes? Are you calling them stupid? You know, they're very, very sophisticated at positioning. Isn't it nice how concerned they are about the wellbeing of people without means? I mean they have created a pricing structure and a food subsidy environment and a tax environment where essentially people with low incomes in your country, in my country, are forced to eat food that harms them. So, one of the tells I think is if you're hearing someone criticize ultra-processed food, and you'll read them in the New York Times. And often their conflicts of interest won't be reported. They may be quite hidden. The clue is, are they demanding to seriously improve the food environment in a very clear way, or are they only criticizing the evidence around ultra-processed food? And if they're only criticizing that evidence? I'll bet you a pound to a pinch of salt they'll be food-industry funded. Let's talk about that. Let's talk about that a little more. So, there's a clear pattern of scientists who take money from industry finding things that favor industry. Otherwise, industry wouldn't pay that money. They're not stupid in the way they invest. And, you and I have talked about this before, but we did a study some years ago where we looked at industry and non-industry funded study on the health effects of consuming sugar sweetened beverages. And it's like the ocean parted. It's one of my favorites. And it was something like 98 or 99% of the independently funded studies found that sugar sweetened beverages do cause harm. And 98 or 99% of the industry funded studies funded by Snapple and Coke and a whole bunch of other companies found that they did not cause harm. It was that stark, was it? It was. And so you and I pay attention to the little print in these scientific studies about who's funded them and who might have conflicts of interest. And maybe you and I and other people who follow science closely might be able to dismiss those conflicted studies. But they have a big impact out there in the world, don't they? I had a meeting in London with someone recently, that they themselves were conflicted and they said, look, if a health study's funded by a big sugary drink company, if it's good science, that's fine. We should publish it and we should take it at face value. And in the discussion with them, I kind of accepted that, we were talking about other things. And afterwards I was like, no. If a study on human health is funded by a sugary drink corporation, in my opinion, we could just tear that up. None of that should be published. No journals should publish those studies and scientists should not really call themselves scientists who are doing it. It is better thought of as marketing and food industry-funded scientists who study human health, in my opinion, are better thought of as really an extension of the marketing division of the companies. You know, it's interesting when you talk to scientists, and you ask them do people who take money from industry is their work influenced by that money? They'll say yes. Yeah, but if you say, but if you take money from industry, will your work be influenced? They'll always say no. Oh yeah. There's this tremendous arrogance, blind spot, whatever it is that. I can remain untarnished. I can remain objective, and I can help change the industry from within. In the meantime, I'm having enough money to buy a house in the mountains, you know, from what they're paying me, and it's really pretty striking. Well, the money is a huge issue. You know, science, modern science it's not a very lucrative career compared to if someone like you went and worked in industry, you would add a zero to the end of your salary, possibly more. And the same is true of me. I think one of the things that adds real heft to the independent science is that the scientists are taking a pay cut to do it. So how do children figure in? Do you think children are being groomed by the industry to eat these foods? A senator, I think in Chile, got in hot water for comparing big food companies to kind of sex offenders. He made, in my view, a fairly legitimate comparison. I mean, the companies are knowingly selling harmful products that have addictive properties using the language of addiction to children who even if they could read warning labels, the warning labels aren't on the packs. So, I mean, we have breakfast cereals called Crave. We have slogans like, once you stop, once you pop, you can't stop. Bet you can't just eat one. Yeah, I think it is predatory and children are the most vulnerable group in our society. And you can't just blame the parents. Once kids get to 10, they have a little bit of money. They get their pocket money, they're walking to school, they walk past stores. You know, you have to rely on them making decisions. And at the moment, they're in a very poor environment to make good decisions. Perhaps the most important question of all what can be done. So, I'm speaking to you at a kind of funny moment because I've been feeling that a lot of my research and advocacy, broadcasting... you know, I've made documentaries, podcasts, I've written a book, I've published these papers. I've been in most of the major newspapers and during the time I've been doing this, you know, a little under 10 years I've been really focused on food. Much less time than you. Everything has got worse. Everything I've done has really failed totally. And I think this is a discussion about power, about unregulated corporate power. And the one glimmer of hope is this complaint that's been filed in Pennsylvania by a big US law firm. It's a very detailed complaint and some lawyers on behalf of a young person called Bryce Martinez are suing the food industry for causing kidney problems and type two diabetes. And I think that in the end is what's going to be needed. Strategic litigation. That's the only thing that worked with tobacco. All of the science, it eventually was useful, but the science on its own and the advocacy and the campaigning and all of it did no good until the lawyers said we would like billions and billions of dollars in compensation please. You know, this is an exciting moment, but there were a great many failed lawsuits for tobacco before the master settlement agreement in the '90s really sort of changed the game. You know, I agree with you. Are you, are you optimistic? I mean, what do you think? I am, and for exactly the same reason you are. You know, the poor people that worked on public health and tobacco labored for decades without anything happening long, long after the health consequences of cigarette smoking were well known. And we've done the same thing. I mean, those us who have been working in the field for all these years have seen precious little in the ways of policy advances. Now tobacco has undergone a complete transformation with high taxes on cigarettes, and marketing restrictions, and non-smoking in public places, laws, and things like that, that really have completely driven down the consumption of cigarettes, which has been a great public health victory. But what made those policies possible was the litigation that occurred by the state attorneys general, less so the private litigating attorneys. But the state attorneys general in the US that had discovery documents released. People began to understand more fully the duplicity of the tobacco companies. That gave cover for the politicians to start passing the policies that ultimately made the big difference. I think that same history is playing out here. The state attorneys general, as we both know, are starting to get interested in this. I say hurray to that. There is the private lawsuit that you mentioned, and there's some others in the mix as well. I think those things will bring a lot of propel the release of internal documents that will show people what the industry has been doing and how much of this they've known all along. And then all of a sudden some of these policy things like taxes, for example, on sugared beverages, might come in and really make a difference. That's my hope. But it makes me optimistic. Well, I'm really pleased to hear that because I think in your position it would be possible. You know, I'm still, two decades behind where I might be in my pessimism. One of the kind of engines of this problem to me is these conflicts of interest where people who say, I'm a physician, I'm a scientist, I believe all this. And they're quietly paid by the food industry. This was the major way the tobacco industry had a kind of social license. They were respectable. And I do hope the lawsuits, one of their functions is it becomes a little bit embarrassing to say my research institute is funded [by a company that keeps making headlines every day because more documents are coming out in court, and they're being sued by more and more people. So, I hope that this will diminish the conflict, particularly between scientists and physicians in the food industry. Because that to me, those are my biggest opponents. The food industry is really nice. They throw money at me. But it's the conflicted scientists that are really hard to argue with because they appear so respectable. Bio Dr. Chris van Tulleken is a physician and a professor of Infection and Global Health at University College London. He trained at Oxford and earned his PhD in molecular virology from University College London. His research focuses on how corporations affect human health especially in the context of child nutrition and he works with UNICEF and The World Health Organization on this area. He is the author of a book entitled Ultraprocessed People: Why We Can't Stop Eating Food That Isn't Food. As one of the BBC's leading broadcasters for children and adults his work has won two BAFTAs. He lives in London with his wife and two children.

//The Wire//2300Z August 26, 2025////ROUTINE////BLUF: TRUMP DOUBLES DOWN ON CHINESE STUDENT EXPANSION AS RESEARCHER IN TEXAS IS CHARGED WITH STEALING SECRETS FOR CHINA. WAVE OF FAKE ACTIVE SHOOTER REPORTS SWEEPS THROUGH AMERICAN INSTITUTIONS. SYRIAN MIGRANT WHO ATTACKED AMERICAN IN DRESDEN RELEASED FROM CUSTODY, BUT RE-ARRESTED AFTER PUBLIC OUTRAGE.// -----BEGIN TEARLINE------International Events-Germany: Following Sunday's knife attack in Dresden, one of the individuals involved in the attack of an American tourist was released from jail. Sunday morning, two illegal immigrants from Syria were harassing two women on a tram in Dresden. John Rudat, an American tourist visiting the city intervened during the altercation, and was stabbed in the face by one of the assailants, resulting in extremely severe lacerations. The other assailant (not the man who stabbed Rudat, but a different attacker) was captured while trying to escape, but was released from custody yesterday, only to be re-arrested after public outrage pressured the prosecutor's office to act. The man who stabbed Rudat remains at large.-HomeFront-USA: Over the past few days, many different universities and institutions have been the victim of hoaxes which have taken the form of someone calling in a fake active shooter threat. What began as one or two reports has spread to about a dozen different institutions.Analyst Comment: Right now, it is not known who is calling in these fake reports, but extreme caution is warranted. The theories of why this is happening vary widely, but this could also be a desensitizing effort that precedes a legitimate attack at some other institution. As such, vigilance is recommended to avoid slipping into complacency, just in case this turns out to be a legitimate threat at some point.Washington D.C. - President Trump and Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick have doubled-down on statements supporting the import of 600,000 Chinese students, further reiterating the intent to stick to this policy at present, with President Trump stating multiple times that he is "honored" to have these students taking up seats at American universities.Texas: Yesterday afternoon Dr. Yunhai Li, a researcher at the University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center was formally charged with stealing roughly 90gb of research material. Li was arrested on Friday before attempting to board a flight to China, after uploading the stolen research data to a Chinese government cloud storage platform. Li had personally been granted both NIH and Department of Defense grants to conduct undisclosed research.Maryland: The first human case of New World Screwworm was reported by the CDC yesterday afternoon, which was contracted by a person who traveled to El Salvador. The USDA has stated that this case doesn't pose any threat to livestock at present, however a 20-mile surveillance zone has been established around the individual's location as a precaution.California: More details have come to light regarding a car fire that was reported at the Humboldt County Courthouse in Eureka over the weekend. Local authorities have stated that a man drove his vehicle onto the lawn of the courthouse, before setting the car on fire.Analyst Comment: So far, this incident appears to be an elaborate form of protest, though at present no clear ideology could be discerned from the evidence at the scene. Some people report that they saw various messages written in chalk on the sidewalk, and that hand-written papers were found scattered about the scene. All of this points to this being more of a mental health incident than anything else at this time.North Carolina: The victim of a murder on the Blue Line rail system in Charlotte has been identified as Iryna Zarutska, a Ukrainian refugee. Zarutska was stabbed to death on the train by Decarlos Brown Jr. on Friday night.Mi

1. Dunking on Gavin Newsom Ted Cruz responds to a tweet by Newsom blaming Trump for rising electricity prices. Cruz uses AI (Grok) to highlight that the states with the highest electricity rates are Democrat-led with strong renewable energy mandates. He argues that liberal policies, not Trump, are responsible for high energy costs. The discussion includes a critique of renewable energy mandates and infrastructure challenges in blue states. 2. Democrats’ “Forbidden Words” The think tank Third Way released a memo listing 45 words/phrases Democrats should avoid, claiming they alienate everyday Americans. Examples include: “privilege,” “birthing person,” “microaggression,” “cisgender,” “food insecurity,” and “environmental violence.” Cruz and Ferguson mock the list, comparing it to George Carlin’s “seven dirty words” and argue that the problem isn’t just language but ideology. 3. SCOTUS Victory for Trump on DEI Grants The Supreme Court ruled 5–4 in favor of the Trump administration, allowing it to cancel $783 million in NIH grants tied to DEI and gender ideology. The ruling was based on jurisdictional grounds—plaintiffs filed in the wrong court. Justice Amy Coney Barrett was the swing vote, siding with conservatives on the funding issue but not on reversing DEI guidance. Cruz and Ferguson discuss the implications for future lawfare and judicial activism. Please Hit Subscribe to this podcast Right Now. Also Please Subscribe to the 47 Morning Update with Ben Ferguson and The Ben Ferguson Show Podcast Wherever You get You're Podcasts. And don't forget to follow the show on Social Media so you never miss a moment! Thanks for Listening YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@VerdictwithTedCruz/ Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/verdictwithtedcruz X: https://x.com/tedcruz X: https://x.com/benfergusonshow #DEI #ThirdWay #Democrats #George Carlin #Grok #Trumpadministration #Newsom #CaliforniaYouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@VerdictwithTedCruzSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

In a live conversation on YouTube, Lawfare Editor in Chief Benjamin Wittes sat down with Lawfare Senior Editors Anna Bower, and Roger Parloff, and Lawfare contributor James Pearce to discuss the FBI's execution of a search warrant at John Bolton's house, a federal judge ruling that Alina Habba was unlawfully serving as a U.S. attorney for New Jersey, Kilmar Abrego Garcia's motion to dismiss his indictment for selective prosecution and his return to Maryland, a decision voiding the fine in the civil fraud case against President Trump, the Supreme Court's ruling in NIH v. APHA, and more.You can find information on legal challenges to Trump administration actions here. And check out Lawfare's new homepage on the litigation, new Bluesky account, and new WITOAD merch.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Monday, August 25th, 2025Today, the DOJ has released the audio and transcripts of the witness tampering meeting between Todd Blanche and Ghislaine Maxwell; the government has threatened to deport Kilmar Abrego to Uganda if he doesn't plead guilty to the two charges against him; John Bolton's house has been raided in search of classified emails sent on a private server; a federal judge orders the dismantling of the Florida concentration camp; Fort Bliss - where the Japanese were interned during WWII - is operating as an internment camp again; the White House lists Smithsonian exhibits it wants to erase from history; the Justice Department's release of the Epstein files to House Oversight is a joke; the Pentagon plans to deploy the military to Chicago; Homeland Security is violating the law by refusing to retain text messages; Illinois announces a first of its kind legal hotline for the LGBTQ community; residents keep repainting the Pulse nightclub rainbow sidewalk after the city keeps removing it; and Allison and Dana deliver your Good News.Thank You, HomeChefFor a limited time, get  50% off and free shipping for your first box PLUS free dessert for life!  HomeChef.com/DAILYBEANS.  Must be an active subscriber to receive free dessert.Thank You, Naked Winesnakedwines.com/DAILYBEANS and use code DAILYBEANS for both the code and password.Guest: Joyce VancePreorder Giving Up Is Unforgivable by Joyce Vance - 10/21/2025 Civil Discourse with Joyce Vance | Substack#SistersInLaw - Podcast - Apple Podcasts, The Insider Podcast - CAFE@joycewhitevance.bsky.social on BlueskyLive with Allison Gill and Joyce Vance | Joyce Vance SubstackLive with Allison Gill and Joyce Vance | MuellerSheWrote SubstackYou Can Nominate Dana Goldberg for this year's Out100!2025 Out100 Readers' ChoiceNational Security Counselors - DonateNPHC & FBF stand united w/ CDC, NIH, & other HHS agencies in formal dissent of HHS Sec Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. & his political rhetoric that led to the Aug 8 attack on CDC & his response. Help ensure safety of public servants. Hold RFK Jr accountable by signing the letter: savehhs.orghttps://bsky.app/profile/firedbutfighting.bsky.social/post/3lwtfq56klc2gStoriesJustice Dept. Sent Congress Epstein Files That Were Already Public, Democrats Say | The New York TimesNational Security Counselors - DonatePentagon plans military deployment in Chicago as Trump eyes crackdown | The Washington PostHomeland Security Tells Watchdog It Hasn't Kept Text Message Data Since April | The New York TimesJapanese American groups blast use of Fort Bliss, former internment camp site, as ICE detention center | NBC NewsWhite House Lists Smithsonian Exhibits It Finds Objectionable | The New York TimesFlorida ordered to dismantle Alligator Alcatraz over environmental impact | The Washington PostPritzker announces 'first of its kind' legal hotline for LGBTQ+ Illinoisans | Chicago Sun-TimesRainbow crosswalk repainted outside Pulse; Florida troopers seen standing by | News 6 Orlando Good Trouble IRS asks for public input on free tax filing options to inform congressional report | Internal Revenue Service From The Good NewsApplication of the Fair Labor Standards Act to Domestic Service - Comments open until September 2Joy SaxtonThe Art of Arpilleras under Augusto Pinochet's Authoritarian Rule – Retrospect JournalReminder - you can see the pod pics if you become a Patron. The good news pics are at the bottom of the show notes of each Patreon episode! That's just one of the perks of subscribing! patreon.com/muellershewrote Our Donation LinksNational Security Counselors - DonateMSW Media, Blue Wave California Victory Fund | ActBlueWhistleblowerAid.org/beansFederal workers - feel free to email AG at fedoath@pm.me and let me know what you're going to do, or just vent. I'm always here to listen. Find Upcoming Actions 50501 Movement, No Kings.org, Indivisible.orgDr. Allison Gill - Substack, BlueSky , TikTok, IG, TwitterDana Goldberg - BlueSky, Twitter, IG, facebook, danagoldberg.comCheck out more from MSW Media - Shows - MSW Media, Cleanup On Aisle 45 pod, The Breakdown | SubstackShare your Good News or Good TroubleMSW Good News and Good TroubleHave some good news; a confession; or a correction to share?Good News & Confessions - The Daily Beanshttps://www.dailybeanspod.com/confessional/ Listener Survey:http://survey.podtrac.com/start-survey.aspx?pubid=BffJOlI7qQcF&ver=shortFollow the Podcast on Apple:The Daily Beans on Apple PodcastsWant to support the show and get it ad-free and early?The Daily Beans | SupercastThe Daily Beans & Mueller, She Wrote | PatreonThe Daily Beans | Apple Podcasts

The gang is back together as Melissa, Kate, and Leah break down this week's mountain of legal news, including the Court's greenlighting of Trump's anti-DEI National Institutes of Health cuts, the president's war on mail-in ballots, and a batshit missive from Solicitor General John Sauer. Then, Leah speaks with candidate for Michigan attorney general Eli Savit about the latest threat to marriage equality. Finally, Kate chats with Penn Law professor Serena Mayeri about her book, Marital Privilege: Marriage, Inequality, and the Transformation of American Law.Hosts' and guests' favorite things:Leah: One First, Steve Vladeck; The Pennyroyal Green Series, Julie Anne Long; Why the Supreme Court Is Not to Be Trusted, Laurie L. Levenson (LARB)Kate: Would You Trust This Man With Your Elections? By Richard Hasen (NYT); Kim Lane Scheppele's Chautauqua lecture;Melissa: Atmosphere, Taylor Jenkins Reid; Commonwealth, Ann Patchett; The Gilded Age (HBO)Eli: Jealous Type, Doja Cat Get tickets for STRICT SCRUTINY LIVE – The Bad Decisions Tour 2025! 10/4 – ChicagoLearn more: http://crooked.com/eventsOrder your copy of Leah's book, Lawless: How the Supreme Court Runs on Conservative Grievance, Fringe Theories, and Bad VibesGet tickets to CROOKED CON November 6-7 in Washington, D.C at http://crookedcon.comFollow us on Instagram, Threads, and Bluesky

Friday, August 22nd, 2025Today, the California Assembly has passed the redistricting resolutions and will have a special election this November for voters to approve the new maps; an appeals court has thrown out the $450M civil fraud fine against Trump; the Supreme Court says the NIH grants case must be filed in the Court of Federal Claims; a federal judge  just has ruled that Alina Habba's appointment as US Attorney in New Jersey is unlawful; an Eric Adams campaign advisor has been fired after slipping a potato chip bag full of cash to a reporter; an appeals court has cleared the way for the administration to end Temporary Protected Status for Hondurans Nepalis and Nicaraguans; anti LGBTQ bigot and child beating advocate James Dobson is dead; the Trump administration has banned gender affirming care coverage for federal workers while mandating conversion therapy coverage; the Trump administration has said it is reviewing all 55M here on visas for any violations; a Texas judge has denied Elon Musk's bid to dismiss the $1M election lottery lawsuit against him; and Allison and Dana deliver your Good News.Guest: John FugelsangTell Me Everything - John Fugelsang, The John Fugelsang PodcastJohn Fugelsang - Substack@johnfugelsang.bsky.social - Bluesky, @JohnFugelsang -TwitterSeparation of Church and Hate by John Fugelsang - Pre-order You Can Nominate Dana Goldberg for this year's Out100!2025 Out100 Readers'     ChoiceNPHC & FBF stand united w/ CDC, NIH, & other HHS agencies in formal dissent of HHS Sec Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. & his political rhetoric that led to the Aug 8 attack on CDC & his response. Help ensure safety of public servants. Hold RFK Jr accountable by signing the letter: savehhs.orghttps://bsky.app/profile/firedbutfighting.bsky.social/post/3lwtfq56klc2gStoriesFormer Trump lawyer Alina Habba's appointment as U.S. attorney for New Jersey was 'unlawful,' judge rules | NBC NewsNewsom signs bills for redrawing voting maps as parties fight for control | The Washington PostNY appeals court voids the nearly $500 million civil fraud penalty against Trump | CNN PoliticsAppeals court panel clears way for Trump admin to end TPS for Hondurans, Nepalis and Nicaraguans | POLITICOMusk must face lawsuit brought by voters he convinced to sign petition in $1 million-a-day election giveaway, judge says | The IndependentTrump Admin Bans Coverage For Trans Govt Employees, Mandates Conversion Therapy Coverage | Erin In The MorningTrump administration is reviewing all 55 million foreigners with US visas for any violations | AP NewsTrump bought more than $100 million in bonds since January, filings show | NBC NewsEric Adams adviser who gave reporter potato chip bag stuffed with cash is suspended from campaign | NBC News Good Trouble The DoD has authorized DoD employees to apply to be “detailed” out to support ICE and CBP at the southern border. There's now an announcement on USAJOBS.gov, BUT the announcement includes an email address: fema-volunteerforce@fema.dhs.gov(Proton Mail: Get a free email account with privacy and encryption)From The Good NewsNew texts allegedly show Ohio Lt. Gov. Jon Husted leading FirstEnergy's push for House Bill 6Fruitful Fundraising Co.Heather Cox RichardsonReminder - you can see the pod pics if you become a Patron. The good news pics are at the bottom of the show notes of each Patreon episode! That's just one of the perks of subscribing! patreon.com/muellershewrote Our Donation LinksNational Security Counselors - DonateMSW Media, Blue Wave California Victory Fund | ActBlueWhistleblowerAid.org/beansFederal workers - feel free to email AG at fedoath@pm.me and let me know what you're going to do, or just vent. I'm always here to listen. Find Upcoming Actions 50501 Movement, No Kings.org, Indivisible.orgDr. Allison Gill - Substack, BlueSky , TikTok, IG, TwitterDana Goldberg - BlueSky, Twitter, IG, facebook, danagoldberg.comCheck out more from MSW Media - Shows - MSW Media, Cleanup On Aisle 45 pod, The Breakdown | SubstackShare your Good News or Good TroubleMSW Good News and Good TroubleHave some good news; a confession; or a correction to share?Good News & Confessions - The Daily Beanshttps://www.dailybeanspod.com/confessional/ Listener Survey:http://survey.podtrac.com/start-survey.aspx?pubid=BffJOlI7qQcF&ver=shortFollow the Podcast on Apple:The Daily Beans on Apple PodcastsWant to support the show and get it ad-free and early?The Daily Beans | SupercastThe Daily Beans & Mueller, She Wrote | PatreonThe Daily Beans | Apple Podcasts

John Fawcett breaks down the biggest stories of the day, including President Trump out on patrol, the Supreme Court's ruling on NIH grants linked to DEI policies, James Comey's classified leaks, and the latest with the controversial Alligator Alcatraz facility for illegal aliens. See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Donate (no account necessary) | Subscribe (account required) Join Bryan Dean Wright, former CIA Operations Officer, as he dives into today's top stories shaping America and the world. In this episode of The Wright Report, we cover the growing battle between Trump and the Federal Reserve, new fights over redistricting in California and Texas, major courtroom victories for the president, and breakthrough medical research on autism. From fiery clashes in Washington to hopeful discoveries in science, today's brief delivers the headlines shaping America's future. Trump vs. Powell and the Federal Reserve: Fed Chair Jerome Powell delivers a pivotal speech today as Trump threatens to fire him over high interest rates. Biden appointee Lisa Cook refuses to resign amid a DOJ mortgage fraud investigation, declaring, “I have no intention of being bullied to step down from my position.” Trump pushes to replace Fed governors with his own picks, raising the stakes for the economy and next year's midterms. California and Texas Redistricting Battles: California Governor Gavin Newsom pushes a special election to redraw maps that would flip five GOP districts to Democrats, but polls show 64 percent of Californians want to keep the independent commission's map. Meanwhile, Texas Republicans advance their own redistricting plan to shift five seats from Democrats to Republicans, with Florida and Missouri set to follow. Trump Scores Three Major Court Victories: A New York appeals court strikes down a $500 million civil fraud verdict, calling it “a stinging rebuke” to Attorney General Letitia James. The Supreme Court clears Trump to cut $800 million in DEI grants at the NIH. And the Ninth Circuit rules he can end Biden's Temporary Protected Status protections for 60,000 migrants, overturning what Bryan calls “an egregiously wrong” lower court decision. Immigration Crackdown in Washington DC: Trump personally joins ICE agents targeting illegal immigrants on mopeds working for delivery services. One arrest of a Mexican national sparked outrage until it was revealed he had raped a 13-year-old child, forcing Democrats to quickly delete their criticism. Bryan calls it proof that “facts matter, and sometimes they come out too late.” Economic Data Surprises and Tariff Revenues: Despite gloomy forecasts, Walmart sales hold firm, housing sales tick upward, and factory activity reaches its highest level since 2022. Trump's tariffs generate a record $160 billion in revenue, with Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent confirming the funds are reducing U.S. debt. “It's leaving the economic smarties scratching their heads,” Bryan notes, as predictions of collapse keep falling flat. Global Updates — Ukraine, India, and the UK: Trump urges Zelenskyy to strike inside Russia, writing, “It is very hard, if not impossible, to win a war without attacking an invader's country.” Russia responds by bombing a U.S.-owned factory in Ukraine. In India, Prime Minister Modi moves closer to China, praising “steady progress guided by respect for each other's interests” while his billionaire allies profit from Russian oil sales. In the UK, PM Keir Starmer faces fury as asylum seekers flood in and crime rises. Breakthroughs in Autism Research: South Korean scientists develop a probiotic treatment that reduces autism symptoms in mice by altering gut bacteria. At Stanford, researchers test an epilepsy drug, Z-944, that reverses autism symptoms including seizures, sensitivity issues, and social impairments. Bryan calls the findings “a wonderful way to start the weekend.”   "And you shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free." - John 8:32     Keywords: Trump Powell Federal Reserve fight, Jerome Powell interest rates, Lisa Cook DOJ investigation, California redistricting Newsom, Texas GOP redistricting plan, Trump court victories Letitia James, Supreme Court NIH DEI grants, Ninth Circuit TPS migrants, Trump DC ICE mopeds, Walmart sales tariffs, U.S. factory activity 2025, Trump tariffs debt reduction, Zelenskyy strike inside Russia, Russia bombs U.S. factory Ukraine, Modi Xi China alliance, UK asylum seekers Starmer, South Korea autism probiotic, Stanford epilepsy drug autism reversal