Podcasts about nih

Episode 5 of Standard Deviation with Oliver Bogler on the Out of Patients podcast feed pulls you straight into the story of Dr Ethan Moitra, a psychologist who fights for LGBTQ mental health while the system throws every obstacle it can find at him.Ethan built a study that tracked how COVID 19 tore through an already vulnerable community. He secured an NIH grant. He built a team. He reached 180 participants. Then he opened an email on a Saturday and learned that Washington had erased his work with one sentence about taxpayer priorities. The funding vanished. The timeline collapsed. His team scattered. Participants who trusted him sat in limbo.A federal court eventually forced the government to reinstate the grant, but the damage stayed baked into the process. Ethan had to push through months of paperwork while his university kept the original deadline as if the shutdown had not happened. The system handed him a win that felt like a warning.I brought Ethan on because his story shows how politics reaches into science and punishes the people who serve communities already carrying too much trauma. His honesty lands hard because he names the fear now spreading across academia and how young scientists question whether they can afford to care about the wrong population.You will hear what this ordeal did to him, what it cost his team, and why he refuses to walk away.RELATED LINKSFaculty PageNIH Grant DetailsScientific PresentationBoston Globe CoverageFEEDBACKLike this episode? Rate and review Out of Patients on your favorite podcast platform. For guest suggestions or sponsorship email podcasts@matthewzachary.comSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

The dotEDU hosts look back at a year that reshaped higher education in ways few expected back in January. Mushtaq, Sarah, and Jon talk through their top five stories of 2025, including  the push to dismantle the Department of Education, the cuts at NIH and NSF, the sweeping changes in the One Big Beautiful Bill, and Congress's response to it all. Here are some of the links and references from this week's show:  Register now for ACEx, Feb. 25-28, 2026, in Washington, DC  Higher Education & The Trump Administration: Resources Trump Administration Higher Ed Executive Order Tracker Full coverage of the 2nd Trump administration from The Chronicle of Higher Education  The U.S. Is Funding Fewer Grants in Every Area of Science and Medicine The New York Times (sub. req.) | Oct. 3, 2025

Dr. Monty Pal and Dr. Jason Westin discuss the federal funding climate for cancer research and the persistent problem of drug shortages, two of the major concerns facing the oncology community in 2026. TRANSCRIPT Dr. Monty Pal: Hello and welcome to the ASCO Daily News Podcast. I am your host, Dr. Monty Pal. I am a medical oncologist and vice chair of academic affairs at the City of Hope Comprehensive Cancer Center in Los Angeles. There are always multiple challenges facing oncologists, and today, we discuss two of them that really stand out for 2026: threats to federal funding for cancer research and the persistent problem of drug shortages. I am thrilled to welcome Dr. Jason Westin, who believes that one way to meet these challenges is to get oncologists more involved in advocacy, and he will share some strategies to help us meet this moment in oncology. Dr. Westin is a professor in the Department of Lymphoma and Myeloma at the University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, but he actually wears a lot of hats within ASCO. He is a member of the Board of Directors and has also previously served as chair of ASCO's Government Relations Committee. And he is also one of the inaugural members of ASCO's Political Action Committee, or PAC. He has testified before Congress about drug shortages and many other issues. Dr. Westin, I am really excited to have you on the podcast today and dive into some of these elements that will really impact our community in 2026. Thanks so much for joining us today. Dr. Jason Westin: Thank you for having me. Dr. Monty Pal: You've had such a range of experience. I already alluded to you testifying before Congress. You've actually run for office before. You wear so many different hats. I'm used to checking my PubMed every other day and seeing a new paper out from you and your group, and you publish in the New England Journal [of Medicine] on practice-setting standards and the diseases that you treat. But you've also done all this work in the domain of advocacy. I can't imagine that balancing that is easy. What has sort of motivated you on the advocacy front? Dr. Jason Westin: Advocacy to me is another way to apply our skills and help more people than just those that you're sitting across from at the time. Clinical research, of course, is a tool to try and take what we know and apply it more broadly to people that you'll never meet. And advocacy, I think, can do the same thing, where you can have a conversation with a lawmaker, you can advocate for a position, and that hopefully will help thousands or maybe even more people down the road who you'd never get to directly interact with. And so, I think it's a force multiplier in the same way that research can be. And so, I think advocacy is a wonderful part of how doctors care for our patients. And it's something that is often difficult to know where to start, but once people get into advocacy, they can see that the power, the rewarding nature of it is attractive, and most people, once they get going, continue with that through the rest of their career. Dr. Monty Pal: So, I'll ask you to expand on that a little bit. We have a lot of our younger ASCO members listening to this podcast, folks that are just starting out their careers in clinical practice or academia. Where does that journey begin? How do you get to the point that you're testifying in front of Congress and taking on these bigger sort of stances for the oncology community? Dr. Jason Westin: Yeah, with anything in medicine and in our careers, you have to start somewhere. And often you start with baby steps before you get in front of a panel of senators or other high-profile engagement opportunities. But often the first setting for junior colleagues to be engaged is doing things – we call them "Hill Days" – but basically being involved in kind of low-stakes meetings where you're with a group of peers, some of whom have done this multiple times before, and can get engaged talking to members of representatives' offices, and doing so in a way where it's a natural conversation that you're telling a story about a patient in your clinic, or that you're telling a personal experience from a policy that impacted your ability to deliver optimal care. It sounds stressful, but once you're doing it, it's not stressful. It's actually kind of fun. And it's a way that you can get comfort and skill with a group of peers who are there and able to help you. And ASCO has a number of ways to do that, both at the federal level, there's the Hill Day where we each April have several hundred ASCO members travel to Capitol Hill. There's also state engagement that can be done, so-called visiting at home, when representatives from the U.S. Congress or from state legislators are back in district. You can meet with your own representatives on behalf of yourself, on behalf of your organization, and advocate for policies in a way that can be beneficial to your patients. But those initial meetings that are in the office often they're low stakes because you could be meeting not with the representative but with their staff. And that staff sometimes is as young or even younger than our junior colleagues. These sometimes can be people in their 20s, but they're often extremely knowledgeable, extremely approachable, and are used to dealing with people who are new to advocacy. But they actually help make decisions within the office. So it's not a waste of time. It's actually a super useful way to engage. So, it's that first step of anything in life. The activation energy is always high to do something new. But I'd encourage people who are listening to this podcast already having some level of interest about it to explore ways that they could engage more. Dr. Monty Pal: You know, I have to tell you, I'm going to riff on what you just said for a second. ASCO couldn't make it any easier, I think, for folks to participate and get involved. So, if you're listening to this and scratching your head and thinking, "Well, where do I begin? How do I actually sign on for that meeting with a local representative?" Go to the ASCO ACT Network website. And I'll actually talk to our producer, Geraldine, to make sure we've got a link to that somewhere associated with this podcast after it's published, Jason, but I actually keep that on my browser and it's super easy. I check in there every now and then and see if there's any new policy or legislation that ASCO, you know, is sort of taking a stance on, and it gives me some fodder for conversation with my local representatives too. I mean, it's just an awesome, awesome vehicle. I'm going to segue right from there right to the issues. So, you and I are both at academic centers. You know, I think this is something that really pervades academia and enters into implications for general clinical practice. There's been this, you know, massive sort of proposal for decreased funding to the NCI and to the NIH and so forth. Tell us what ASCO is doing in that regard, and tell us perhaps how our community can help. Dr. Jason Westin: We live in interesting times, and I think that may be an understatement x 100. But obviously investments in research are things that when you're at an academic center, you see and feel that as part of your daily life. Members of Congress need to be reminded of that because there's a lot of other competing interests out there besides investing in the future through research. And being an elected representative is a hard job. That is something where you have to make difficult choices to support this, and that may mean not supporting that. And there's lots of good things where our tax dollars could be spent. And so, I'm sympathetic to the idea that there's not unlimited resources. However, ASCO has done an excellent job, and ASCO members have led the charge on this, of stating what research does, what is the benefit of research, and therefore why should this matter to elected representatives, to their staff, and to those people that they're elected to serve. And ASCO has led with a targeted campaign to basically have that message be conveyed at every opportunity to elected representatives. And each year on Hill Day, one of the asks that we have is to continue to support research: the NCI, NIH, ARPA-H, these are things that are always in the asks to make sure that there's appropriate funding. But effectively playing offense by saying, "It's not just a number on a sheet of paper, this is what it means to patients. This is what it means to potentially your loved ones in the future if you are in the opposite situation where you're not on the legislative side, but you're in the office receiving a diagnosis or receiving a difficult piece of news." We only have the tools we have now because of research, and each breakthrough has been years in the making and countless hours spent funded through the engine of innovation: clinical research and translational research. And so ASCO continues to beat that drum. You mentioned earlier the ACT Network. Just to bring that back again is a very useful, very easy tool to communicate to your elected representatives. When you sign up on the ASCO ACT website, you get emails periodically, not too much, but periodically get emails of, "This is a way you can engage with your lawmakers to speak up for this." And as you said, Monty, they make it as easy as possible. You click the button, you type in your address so that it figures out who your elected representatives are, and then it will send a letter on your behalf after like five clicks to say, "I want you to support research. I want you to vote for this particular thing which is of interest to ASCO and by definition to members of ASCO." And so the ACT Network is a way that people listening can engage without having to spend hours and significant time, but just a few clicks can send that letter to a representative in Congress. And the question could be: does that matter? Does contacting your senator or your elected representative do anything? If all they're hearing is somebody else making a different argument and they're hearing over and over again from people that want investments in AI or investments in something else besides cancer research, whatever it is, they may think that there's a ground shift that people want dollars to be spent over here as opposed to at the NIH or NCI or in federally funded research. It is important to continue to express the need for federal funding for our research. And so, it really is important for folks to engage. Dr. Monty Pal: 100%. One of the things that I think is not often obvious to a lot of our listeners is where the support for clinical trials comes from. You know, you've obviously run the whole gamut of studies as have I. You know, we have our pharmaceutical company-sponsored studies, which are in a particular bucket. But I would say that there's a very important and critical subset of studies that are actually government funded, right? NCI-funded clinical trials. If you don't mind, just explain to our audience the critical nature of the work that's being done in those types of studies and if you can, maybe compare and contrast the studies that are done in that bucket versus perhaps the pharmaceutical bucket. Dr. Jason Westin: Both are critical, and we're privileged that we have pharma studies that are sponsored and federally funded clinical research. And I think that part of a healthy ecosystem for us to develop new breakthroughs has a need for both. The pharma sponsored studies are done through the lens of trying to get an approval for an agent that's of interest so that the pharma company can then turn around and use that outside of a clinical trial after an FDA approval. And so those studies are often done through the lens of getting over the finish line by showing some superiority over an existing treatment or in a new patient population. But they're done through that lens of kind of the broadest population and sometimes relatively narrow endpoints, but to get the approval so that then the drug can be widely utilized. Clinical trials done through cooperative groups are sometimes done to try and optimize that or to try and look at comparative things that may not be as attractive to pharma studies, not necessarily going for that initial approval, but the fine tuning or the looking at health outcomes or looking at ensuring that we do studies in representative populations that may not be as well identified on the pharma sponsored trials, but basically filling out the gaps in the knowledge that we didn't gain from the initial phase 3 trial that led to the approval. And so both are critical. But if we only do pharma sponsored trials, if we don't fund federally supported research and that dries up, the fear I have, and many others have, is that we're going to be lacking a lot of knowledge about the best ways to use these great new therapies, these new immune therapies, or in my team, we do a lot of clinical trials on CAR T-cell therapies. If we don't have federally funded research to do the important clinical studies, we'll be in the dark about the best ways to use these drugs, and that's going to be a terrible shame. And so we really do need to continue to support federal research. Dr. Monty Pal: Yeah, there are no softball questions on this podcast, but I think everybody would be hard pressed to think that you and I would come on here and say, "Well, no, we don't need as much money for clinical trials and NCI funding" and so forth. But I think a really challenging issue to tackle, and this is something we thought to ask you ahead of the podcast, is what to do about the general climate of, you know, whether it's academic research or clinical practice here that seems to be getting some of our colleagues thinking about moving elsewhere. I've actually talked to a couple of folks who are picking up and moving to Europe for a variety of considerations, other continents, frankly. The U.S. has always been a leader when it comes to oncology research and, one might argue, research in general. Some have the mindset these days that we're losing that footing a little bit. What's your perspective? Are you concerned about some of the trends that you're seeing? What does your crystal ball tell you? Dr. Jason Westin: I am highly concerned about this. I think as you said, the U.S. has been a leader for a long time, but it wasn't always. This is not something that's preordained that the world-leading clinical research and translational research will always be done in the United States. That is something that has been developed as an ecosystem, as an engine for innovation and for job development, new technology development, since World War II. That's something that through intentional investments in research was developed that the best and brightest around the world, if they could choose to go anywhere, you wanted them to come to work at universities and academic places within the United States. And I think, as you said, that's at risk if you begin to dry up the investment in research or if you begin to have less focus on being engaged in research in a way that is forward thinking, not just kind of maintaining what we do now or only looking at having private, for profit sponsored research. But if you don't have the investment in the basic science research and the translational research and the forward-thinking part of it, the fear is that we lose the advantage and that other countries will say, "Thank you very much," and be happy to invest in ways to their advantage. And I think as you mentioned, there are people that are beginning to look elsewhere. I don't think that it's likely that a significant population of researchers in the U.S. who are established and have careers and families – I don't think that we're going to see a mass exodus of folks. I think the real risk to me is that the younger, up-and-coming people in undergraduate or in graduate school or in medical school and are the future superstars, that they could either choose to go into a different field, so they decide not to go into what could be the latest breakthroughs for cancer patients but could be doing something in AI or something in a different field that could be attractive to them because of less uncertainty about funding streams, or they could take that job offer if it's in a different country. And I think that's the concern is it may not be a 2026 problem, but it could be a 2036 or a 2046 problem that we reap what we sow if we don't invest in the future. Dr. Monty Pal: Indeed, indeed. You know, I've had the pleasure of reviewing abstracts for some of our big international meetings, as I'm sure you've done in the past too. I see this trend where, as before, we would see the preponderance of large phase 3 clinical trials and practice setting studies being done here in the U.S., I'm seeing this emergence of China, of other countries outside of the U.S. really taking lead on these things. And it certainly concerns me. If I had to sort of gauge this particular issue, it's at the top of my list in terms of what I'm concerned about. But I also wanted to ask you, Jason, in terms of the issues that are looming over oncology from an advocacy perspective, what else really sort of keeps you up at night? Dr. Jason Westin: I'm quite concerned about the drug shortages. I think that's something that is a surprisingly evergreen problem. This is something that is on its face illogical that we're talking about the greatest engine for research in the world being the United States and the investment that we've made in drug development and the breakthroughs that have happened for patients all around the world, many of them happen in the United States, and yet we don't necessarily have access to drugs from the 1970s or 1980s that are cheap, generic, sterile, injectable drugs. This is the cisplatins and the vincristines and the fludarabine type medications which are not the sexy ones that you see the ads in the magazine or on TV at night. These are the backbone drugs for many of our curative intent regimens for pediatrics and for heme malignancies and many solid tumors. And the fact that that's continuing to be an issue is, in my opinion, a failure to address the root causes, and those are going to require legislative solutions. The root causes here are basically a race to the bottom where the economics to invest in quality manufacturing really haven't been prioritized. And so it's a race to the cheapest price, which often means you undercut your competitor, and when you don't have the money to invest in good manufacturing processes, the factory breaks down, there's no alternative, you go into shortage. And this has been going on for a couple of decades, and I don't think there's an end in sight until we get a serious solution proposed by our elected officials. That is something that bothers me in the ways where we know what we should be doing for our patients, but if we don't have the drugs, we're left to be creative in ways we shouldn't have to do to figure out a plan B when we've got curative intent therapies. And I think that's a real shame.  There's obviously a lot of other things that are concerning related to oncology, but something that I have personally had experience with when I wanted to give a patient a CAR T-cell, and we don't have a supply of fludarabine, which is a trivial drug from decades ago in terms of the technology investments in genetically modified T-cells, to not then have access to a drug that should be pennies on the dollar and available at any time you want it is almost like the Air Force investing in building the latest stealth bomber, but then forgetting to get the jet fuel in a way that they can't use it because they don't have the tools that they need. And so I think that's something that we do need to have comprehensive solutions from our elected officials. Dr. Monty Pal: Brilliantly stated. I like that analogy a lot. Let's get into the weeds for a second. What would that proposal to Congress look like? What are we trying to put in front of them to help alleviate the drug shortages? Dr. Jason Westin: We could spend a couple hours, and I know podcasts usually are not set up to do that. And so I won't go through every part. I will direct you that there have been a couple of recent publications from ASCO specifically detailing solutions, and there was a recent white paper from the Senate Finance Committee that went through some legislative solutions being explored. So Dr. Gralow, ASCO CMO, and I recently had a publication in JCO OP detailing some solutions, more in that white paper from the Senate Finance. And then there's a working group actually going through ASCO's Health Policy Committee putting together a more detailed proposal that will be published probably around the end of 2026. Very briefly, what needs to happen is for government contracts for purchasing these drugs, there needs to be an outlay for quality, meaning that if you have a manufacturing facility that is able to deliver product on time, reliably, you get a bonus in terms of your contract. And that changes the model to prioritize the quality component of manufacturing. Without that, there's no reason to invest in maintaining your machine or upgrading the technology you have in your manufacturing plant. And so you have bottlenecks emerge because these drugs are cheap, and there's not a profit margin. So you get one factory that makes this key drug, and if that factory hasn't had an upgrade in their machines in 20 years, and that machine conks out and it takes 6 months to repair or replacement, that is an opportunity for that drug to go into shortage and causes a mad dash for big hospitals to purchase the drug that's available, leaving disparities to get amplified. It's a nightmare when those things happen, and they happen all the time. There are usually dozens, if not hundreds, of drugs in shortage at any given time. And this has been going on for decades. This is something that we do need large, system-wide fixes and that investment in quality, I think, will be a key part. Dr. Monty Pal: Yeah, brilliantly said. And I'll make sure that we actually include those articles on the tagline for this podcast as well. I'll talk to our producer about that as well.  I'm really glad you mentioned the time in your last comment there because I felt like we just started, but in fact, I think we're right at our close here, Jason, unfortunately. So, I could have gone on for a couple more hours with you. I really want to thank you for these absolutely terrific insights and thank you for all your advocacy on behalf of ASCO and oncologists at large. Dr. Jason Westin: Thank you so much for having me. I have enjoyed it. Dr. Monty Pal: Thanks a lot. And many thanks to our listeners too. You can find more information about ASCO's advocacy agenda and activities at asco.org. Finally, if you value the insights that you heard today on the ASCO Daily News Podcast, please rate, review, and subscribe wherever you get your podcasts. Thanks so much. ASCO Advocacy Resources: Get involved in ASCO's Advocacy efforts: ASCO Advocacy Toolkit Crisis of Cancer Drug Shortages: Understanding the Causes and Proposing Sustainable Solutions, JCO Oncology Practice Disclaimer: The purpose of this podcast is to educate and to inform. This is not a substitute for professional medical care and is not intended for use in the diagnosis or treatment of individual conditions. Guests on this podcast express their own opinions, experience, and conclusions. Guest statements on the podcast do not express the opinions of ASCO. The mention of any product, service, organization, activity, or therapy should not be construed as an ASCO endorsement. Find out more about today's speakers:     Dr. Monty Pal   @montypal   Dr. Jason Westin @DrJasonWestin   Follow ASCO on social media:      @ASCO on X     ASCO on Bluesky    ASCO on Facebook      ASCO on LinkedIn      Disclosures:     Dr. Monty Pal:    Speakers' Bureau: MJH Life Sciences, IntrisiQ, Peerview   Research Funding (Inst.): Exelixis, Merck, Osel, Genentech, Crispr Therapeutics, Adicet Bio, ArsenalBio, Xencor, Miyarsian Pharmaceutical   Travel, Accommodations, Expenses: Crispr Therapeutics, Ipsen, Exelixis   Dr. Jason Westin: Consulting or Advisory Role: Novartis, Kite/Gilead, Janssen Scientific Affairs, ADC Therapeutics, Bristol-Myers Squibb/Celgene/Juno, AstraZeneca, Genentech/Roche, Abbvie, MorphoSys/Incyte, Seattle Genetics, Abbvie, Chugai Pharma, Regeneron, Nurix, Genmab, Allogene Therapeutics, Lyell Immunopharma Research Funding: Janssen, Novartis, Bristol-Myers Squibb, AstraZeneca, MorphoSys/Incyte, Genentech/Roche, Allogene Therapeutics

Drs. Audrey Thurm and Latha Soorya join us to discuss key findings from the NIH-funded Natural History Study in Phelan-McDermid syndrome, including intellectual disability profiles, daily living skill growth, regression, and how caregiver input drives research. Learn how these discoveries are guiding clinical trials, behavioral therapy, and everyday care—and why your family's participation makes all the difference.

In this episode of The Eric Coffey Show, Eric reflects on why he left Florida to plant himself in the heart of federal activity—because real opportunity often sits closest to the fire. Joined by seasoned former senior executives from NIH, USDA, and major federal organizations, the conversation touches on the importance of showing up, investing in community, strengthening your credentials, and positioning yourself inside key socioeconomic and professional groups. Eric pulls back the curtain on why proximity, collaboration, and continuous self-development will determine who thrives as new coalitions and high-level industry connections are formed. Key Takeaways Proximity creates opportunity: Being close to federal decision-makers accelerates relationship-building and access. Sharpen your credentials: Use downtime to update certifications, join associations, and stay active in professional groups. Engage the ecosystem: Chambers, NCMA chapters, and socioeconomic organizations open doors most small businesses never tap into. Learn more: https://federalhelpcenter.com/ https://govcongiants.org/  Watch the full Youtube Live here: https://www.youtube.com/live/c7fV-oJd74k

Find More Great Info From Dr. Melanie Matheu Here: SUBSTACK: https://lilscience.substack.com TIKTOK:https://www.tiktok.com/@laughterinlight YOUTUBE: https://www.youtube.com/@LaughterInLight Hawk talks with immunologist Dr. Melanie Matthew about the upcoming flu season and the devastating impact of RFK Jr as HHS Secretary. Australia experienced record-setting influenza deaths this year, with flu killing more people than COVID. The H3N2 variant mutated to evade vaccine protection, leading to unprecedented hospitalizations. Japan declared a flu epidemic five weeks early, and similar patterns are emerging in the United States.Dr. Matthew explains why flu vaccination remains critical despite mutations, reducing hospitalizations by 30-40% in adults and 70-75% in children. The conversation shifts to RFK Jr's anti-vaccine policies at HHS, where he claims no vaccine is safe and effective despite having zero background in immunology or pediatrics. His appointment, along with Marty Makary at FDA and Jay Bhattacharya at NIH, represents a complete rejection of scientific reality in favor of political ideology.The discussion covers RFK Jr's role in 88 child deaths in Samoa from measles, his vitamin A recommendations causing liver damage in Texas children, and how VAERS data is being misrepresented. Dr. Matthew details the exodus of top scientists from NIH, cancelled research grants, and terminated clinical trials that will kill patients. Forever chemicals (PFAS) are being approved for pesticides while vaccine research funding gets slashed.America faces losing measles elimination status, rising preventable disease deaths, and compromised pandemic preparedness. The CDC's COVID vaccine guidance for pregnant women has been offline for months despite evidence linking infection to preterm births and neurological damage. This administration prioritizes grift over public health, with consequences spanning decades. SUPPORT & CONNECT WITH HAWK- Support on Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/mdg650hawk- Support Hawk's Merch Store: https://hawkmerchstore.com- Connect on TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@hawkeyewhackamole- Connect on BlueSky: https://bsky.app/profile/mdg650hawk.bsky.social- Connect on YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@hawkpodcasts ALL HAWK PODCASTS INFO- Additional Podcasts Available Here: https://www.hawkpodcasts.com- Listen to Hawk Podcasts On Your Favorite Platform:Spotify: https://spoti.fi/3RWeJfyApple Podcasts: https://apple.co/422GDuLYouTube: https://youtube.com/@hawkpodcastsiHeartRadio: https://ihr.fm/47vVBdPPandora: https://bit.ly/48COaTBSimplecast: https://hawk-droppings.simplecast.com- Hawk Podcasts RSS Feed: https://feeds.simplecast.com/pPVtxSNJ

Dr. Nicola Hawley is an Associate Professor of Epidemiology at the Yale School of Public Health, where she also holds a secondary appointment in Anthropology. She serves as Associate Director for Dissemination and Implementation Science at the Yale Center for Clinical Investigation. Trained as a human biologist, Dr. Hawley is an internationally recognized expert in maternal and child health, with a focus on how early life experiences, from pregnancy through childhood, shape long-term risks for obesity and chronic disease. Her research bridges epidemiology, anthropology, and global health, using community-engaged and culturally grounded approaches to improve health outcomes in under-resourced and Indigenous settings. Much of her work centers in the Pacific, particularly in Sāmoa and American Sāmoa, where she leads NIH- and PCORI-funded studies on gestational and Type 2 diabetes, obesity prevention, and intergenerational health. She's also deeply committed to mentorship, helping train the next generation of global health and maternal-child health researchers. ------------------------------ Find the work discussed in this episode: Heinsberg LW, Loia M, Tasele S, Faasalele-Savusa K, Carlson JC, Anesi S, et al. (2025) Study protocol for the Health Outcomes in Pregnancy and Early Childhood (HOPE) Study: A mother-infant study in American Samoa. PLoS One 20(9): e0326644. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0326644 ------------------------------ Contact the Sausage of Science Podcast and the Human Biology Association: Facebook: facebook.com/groups/humanbiologyassociation/, Website: humbio.org, Twitter: @HumBioAssoc Chris Lynn, Co-Host Website: cdlynn.people.ua.edu/, E-mail: cdlynn@ua.edu, Twitter:@Chris_Ly Courtney Manthey, Guest-Co-Host, Website: holylaetoli.com/ E-mail: cpierce4@uccs.edu, Twitter: @HolyLaetoli Anahi Ruderman, SoS Co-Producer, HBA Junior Fellow, E-mail: ruderman@cenpat-conicet.gob.ar

This week, Bobbi Conner talks with MUSC's Dr. Steven Kautz about precision neurorehabilitation and the $6.5 million grant from NIH for research in this specialty area.

An ODU professor is using AI to help doctors identify glioblastoma, a fast-growing and often recurring cancer, without invasive biopsies.

Our guest today is Dr. Julie Chen, the Chief Medical Officer at Radence.   She previously served as Chief Medical Officer at companies such as Human Longevity and Vitagene. Her research, at the FDA, NIH, National Cancer Institute, USC, and Mount Sinai, has shaped scientific advancement in precision medicine. As a fellowship-trained integrative internal medicine physician, she developed numerous corporate wellness programs in Silicon Valley focusing on whole-systems approach to healthcare. Dr. Chen is a frequent medical expert on major media outlets, including ABC, NBC, FOX, and MSN, and she has been featured in national magazines and podcasts. In 2023, she was named one of the Top 25 Women Leaders in Biotechnology by Healthcare Technology Report for her leadership in health tech development. Dr. Chen is a member of the Buck Institute's President's Circle, dedicated to advancing research in aging and longevity.   Website and social media: www.radence.com https://www.linkedin.com/in/julie-chen-md-89035b14/ https://www.linkedin.com/company/radencehealth/posts/?feedView=all https://www.instagram.com/radencehealth/   This episode would be a rare opportunity to hear from one of medicine's most forward-looking voices on how personalized science, emerging technologies, and a proactive mindset are reshaping health span.   LEARN MORE ABOUT RADENCE: https://radence.com/insights-lab/redesigning-medicine-from-the-inside-out/

Top Stories for November 29th Publish Date: November 29th PRE-ROLL: SUGAR HILL ICE SKATING From the BG AD Group Studio Welcome to the Gwinnett Daily Post Podcast. Today is Saturday, November 29th and Happy Birthday to Vin Scully I’m Peyton Spurlock and here are your top stories presented by Gwinnett KIA Mall of Georgia. Piedmont Oncology Opens Early Detection Pancreatic Cancer Clinic, First of Its Kind in Georgia You can now use a digital driver’s license to buy beer, cigarettes in Georgia Musical events, attractions to get into the magical spirit of the holiday season All of this and more is coming up on the Gwinnett Daily Post podcast, and if you are looking for community news, we encourage you to listen daily and subscribe! Break 1: Kia Mall of Georgia STORY 1: Piedmont Oncology Opens Early Detection Pancreatic Cancer Clinic, First of Its Kind in Georgia Piedmont Oncology just opened Georgia’s first Early Detection Pancreatic Cancer Clinic, and honestly, it’s a big deal. Pancreatic cancer is brutal—13% five-year survival rate, no screening test, vague symptoms that sneak up on you. But this clinic? It’s here to change that. Dr. Andrew Page, the clinic’s medical director, says early detection is everything. “Education about risk factors is critical,” he explained. The clinic will focus on genetic counseling, research collaborations with NIH and Mayo Clinic, and, hopefully, developing a much-needed screening test. None of this would’ve happened without donors like Purple Pansies. Their support is saving lives. STORY 2: You can now use a digital driver’s license to buy beer, cigarettes in Georgia Big news for Georgians: you can now use a digital driver’s license to buy alcohol, tobacco, and other age-restricted items. Yep, your phone just got even more useful. The Georgia Department of Driver Services (DDS) announced the update Monday, calling it a “major step forward” in modernizing IDs. But here’s the catch: it’s up to individual businesses to accept them. No guarantees. Oh, and don’t try using a screenshot—doesn’t count. Retailers need a special mDL reader to scan the license, and staff still have to verify your age. Progress? Sure. Perfect? Not quite yet. STORY 3: Musical events, attractions to get into the magical spirit of the holiday season It’s that time again—holiday magic is everywhere, and Atlanta’s got no shortage of ways to celebrate. From concerts to tree lightings, here’s what’s happening: Holiday Shows at the FOX Theatre: Lauren Daigle’s Behold Christmas Tour (Dec. 4): Grammy-winning magic. Christmas Together (Dec. 6): Amy Grant, Cece Winans, and Michael W. Smith. A Drummer Boy Christmas (Dec. 8): for King + Country’s festive storytelling. Elf the Musical (Dec. 16–20): Buddy’s heartwarming journey. Nutcracker! Magical Christmas Ballet (Dec. 23–24): Ballet meets acrobatics. Festive Attractions: Stone Mountain’s Flight to the North Pole (Nov. 8–Jan. 4): Help Santa save Christmas. Garden of Lights (Nov. 15–Jan. 11): Stroll through dazzling displays. Georgia Aquarium Holidays (Nov. 14–Jan. 2): Twinkling lights, Santa, and sea life. Don’t miss these great events! We have opportunities for sponsors to get great engagement on these shows. Call 770.874.3200 for more info. We’ll be right back Break 2: Ingles Markets - DTL HOLIDAY STORY 4: Student loan change could drain nurse pipeline, Ga. dean warns Nursing is no longer considered a “professional degree” by the U.S. Department of Education, and nurses are, understandably, furious. The change, tied to the “One Big Beautiful Bill”, means nursing students can’t access the $200,000 loan cap reserved for professional programs. Instead, they’re stuck with a $100,000 limit—less than what many need to cover tuition. Linda McCauley, dean of Emory’s Nursing School, didn’t hold back: “In a time when we desperately need more nurses, why make it harder? It feels like they didn’t think this through.” The fallout? Fewer nurses, more debt, and a lot of frustration. STORY 5: Flight delays: Here are your rights when flying over the holidays in 2025 Stuck at the airport? Here’s a tip: if your flight’s delayed more than three hours (domestic) or six hours (international), you’ve got rights. Travel expert Katy Nastro says airlines must offer a refund or rebook you—your choice. But here’s the catch: no double-dipping. You can’t get both. And meal vouchers? Only if the delay’s the airline’s fault, like staffing or mechanical issues. Hotels? Depends on the airline. The Department of Transportation even published a guide for what airlines owe you. Pro tip: screenshots of your license don’t count for ID. Break 3: BUFORD HOLIDAY FESTIVAL STORY 6: Forsyth school board approves use of same alarm system in place at Apalachee High School Forsyth County schools are stepping up safety with a $2.4 million Centegix alarm system, approved by the Board of Education this week. You’ve probably heard of these “panic alarms”—they’re the same system credited with the quick response during the tragic Apalachee High School shooting last year. Teachers and staff wear a button they can press in emergencies, instantly alerting law enforcement without fumbling for a phone. The system also includes color-coded strobe lights for visual alerts, ensuring ADA compliance. The first year’s cost? $420,000, with the rest spread over five years. Safety, it seems, is getting an upgrade. STORY 7: Recall alert: Honda recalls 256K vehicles for loss of power software error Honda’s recalling over 256,000 vehicles—specifically 2023–2025 Accord Hybrids—because of a software glitch that could cause the car to lose power mid-drive. Not ideal, right? The issue? The integrated control module’s CPU might reset itself while you’re cruising along. Dealers will fix it for free, though, so there’s that. Honda says owners will get a heads-up by mail starting Jan. 5, but if you’re the impatient type (or just worried), you can call them at 888-234-2138. Oh, and if you’re curious, the recall number is TN2. Stay safe out there! We’ll have closing comments after this Break 4: THE SUGAR HILL HOLIDAY Signoff – Thanks again for hanging out with us on today’s Gwinnett Daily Post Podcast. If you enjoy these shows, we encourage you to check out our other offerings, like the Cherokee Tribune Ledger podcast, the Marietta Daily Journal, or the Community Podcast for Rockdale Newton and Morgan Counties. Read more about all our stories and get other great content at www.gwinnettdailypost.com Did you know over 50% of Americans listen to podcasts weekly? Giving you important news about our community and telling great stories are what we do. Make sure you join us for our next episode and be sure to share this podcast on social media with your friends and family. Add us to your Alexa Flash Briefing or your Google Home Briefing and be sure to like, follow, and subscribe wherever you get your podcasts. Produced by the BG Podcast Network Show Sponsors: www.ingles-markets.com www.kiamallofga.com 2025 Buford Holiday Festival & Parade All-In-One Flyer Holiday Celebration 2025 – City of Sugar Hill Ice Rink – Downtown Sugar Hill NewsPodcast, CurrentEvents, TopHeadlines, BreakingNews, PodcastDiscussion, PodcastNews, InDepthAnalysis, NewsAnalysis, PodcastTrending, WorldNews, LocalNews, GlobalNews, PodcastInsights, NewsBrief, PodcastUpdate, NewsRoundup, WeeklyNews, DailyNews, PodcastInterviews, HotTopics, PodcastOpinions, InvestigativeJournalism, BehindTheHeadlines, PodcastMedia, NewsStories, PodcastReports, JournalismMatters, PodcastPerspectives, NewsCommentary, PodcastListeners, NewsPodcastCommunity, NewsSource, PodcastCuration, WorldAffairs, PodcastUpdates, AudioNews, PodcastJournalism, EmergingStories, NewsFlash, PodcastConversations See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

===== MDJ Script/ Top Stories for November 28th Publish Date:  November 28th    Commercial: From the BG AD Group Studio, Welcome to the Marietta Daily Journal Podcast.    Today is Friday, November 28th and Happy Birthday to Dave Righetti I’m Keith Ippolito and here are the stories Cobb is talking about, presented by Times Journal Flight delays: Here are your rights when flying over the holidays in 2025 Holiday lights on display in metro Atlanta ‘Elf The Musical’ coming to Fox Theatre for the Christmas season Plus, Leah McGrath from Ingles Markets on soy and oat milk All of this and more is coming up on the Marietta Daily Journal Podcast, and if you are looking for community news, we encourage you to listen and subscribe!  BREAK: INGLES 2 STORY 1: Flight delays: Here are your rights when flying over the holidays in 2025 Ever been stuck at the airport, staring at the departure board, wondering what your rights are? Turns out, there’s a “magic number” for delays: 3 hours for domestic flights, 6 for international. Hit that threshold, and airlines have to help—refund, rebook, your call. But here’s the catch: no extra compensation in the U.S. Some airlines, like Delta or Alaska, will throw in meal vouchers or even a hotel if it’s their fault (think staffing, not weather). Others? Not so generous. Pro tip: check your airline’s policy before you fly. And pack snacks. Always.  STORY 2: Holiday lights on display in metro Atlanta  The holidays are here, and metro Atlanta is lighting up—literally. Whether you’re cruising through a drive-thru wonderland or strolling under glowing canopies, there’s magic everywhere. Candy Rush at Six Flags (Marietta): A mile of lights, candy canes, and a gingerbread village. Sweet tooth? Satisfied. Nov. 14–Jan. 4. $39.99 per car. Fantasy in Lights at Callaway Gardens: Seven miles, 10 million lights, and Santa. Forbes loves it, and so will you. Nov. 14–Jan. 4. Tickets start at $24.99. Lanier Islands’ Magical Nights of Lights: Six miles of twinkling displays. Pure nostalgia. Nov. 15–Jan. 4. From $25. WildWoods: AGLOW at Fernbank: Glowing gardens, luminous dandelions, and interactive magic. Nov. 14–Feb. 28. From $16.95. Go make some memories! STORY 3: ‘Elf The Musical’ coming to Fox Theatre for the Christmas season Buddy the Elf is in town, and he’s bringing the holiday cheer! “Elf The Musical” is hitting the Fox Theatre stage Dec. 16-21, but Buddy’s not waiting till then to spread some Christmas magic. Catch him around Atlanta this weekend: Friday night at The Blind Elf Parlour Bar (5:30-7:30 p.m.), or Saturday at the Children’s Museum (10 a.m.-noon), the Georgia Festival of Trees (2-4 p.m.), and Atlantic Station’s Light the Station event (4-7:30 p.m.). So, grab your syrup and get ready—it’s gonna be festive! We have opportunities for sponsors to get great engagement on these shows. Call 770.799.6810 for more info.  We’ll be right back. Break: STRAND THEATRE STORY 4: Piedmont Oncology Opens Early Detection Pancreatic Cancer Clinic, First of Its Kind in Georgia  Piedmont Oncology just opened Georgia’s first Early Detection Pancreatic Cancer Clinic (EDC) at Piedmont Atlanta Hospital, and honestly, it’s a game-changer. Pancreatic cancer is brutal—only 13% of patients survive five years—but this clinic is here to change that. Why’s it so hard to catch early? No screening test exists, symptoms are vague, and many high-risk patients don’t even know they’re at risk. That’s where the EDC steps in: genetic counseling, cutting-edge research with NIH and Mayo Clinic, and a team laser-focused on early detection. “This is about saving lives,” said Dr. Andrew Page, the clinic’s medical director. STORY 5: More than 4 million expected to pass through Atlanta airport during Thanksgiving season Thanksgiving travel is in full swing, and Hartsfield-Jackson is bracing for over 4 million passengers. “It’s like our Super Bowl,” said General Manager Ricky Smith, half-joking but clearly ready for the chaos. The busiest day? Dec. 1, with 375,000 travelers expected—though that’s slightly down from last year, thanks to folks opting for road trips during the recent government shutdown. Still, the airport’s pulling out all the stops: new info totems, real-time TSA wait times, and extra security (some visible, some not). Smith’s advice? Arrive early, stay patient, and if something feels off, speak up. And now here is Leah McGrath from Ingles Markets on soy and oat milk We’ll have closing comments after this. Break: Ingles Markets 2 Signoff-   Thanks again for hanging out with us on today’s Marietta Daily Journal Podcast. If you enjoy these shows, we encourage you to check out our other offerings, like the Cherokee Tribune Ledger Podcast, the Marietta Daily Journal, or the Community Podcast for Rockdale Newton and Morgan Counties. Read more about all our stories and get other great content at mdjonline.com Did you know over 50% of Americans listen to podcasts weekly? Giving you important news about our community and telling great stories are what we do. Make sure you join us for our next episode and be sure to share this podcast on social media with your friends and family. Add us to your Alexa Flash Briefing or your Google Home Briefing and be sure to like, follow, and subscribe wherever you get your podcasts. Produced by the BG Podcast Network Show Sponsors: www.ingles-markets.com Strand Marietta – Earl and Rachel Smith Strand Theatre See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

A practicing addiction medicine specialist, Dr. Umhau directs AlcoholRecoveryMedicine.com, and provides telemedicine treatment for people with alcohol use disorder in Arizona, California, Florida, Maryland, North Carolina, Texas, and Virginia.For over 20 years Dr. Umhau was a senior clinical investigator at the National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism of the National Institutes of Health, (NIH). As a Commander in the United States Public Health Service, he served as Clinical Director for an Indian Health Service Hospital in Whiteriver, Arizona and as a Medical Officer in the Division of Psychiatric Products of the FDA. His scientific interest in nutritional neuroscience is informed by decades of clinical experience.  He is president of the Academy of Medicine of Washington, District of Columbia.In this Episode John delves into nutrition for alcoholics, for the brain and focusses on Omega 3, Vitamin A (retinol) and Vitamin D3.Visit his website if you need help -https://www.alcoholrecoverymedicine.com/

A couple of weeks ago, the FDA Commissioner published a WSJ oped “The FDA Liberates Women's Hormone Replacement Therapy” (←gift link) and, with other FDA colleagues, a JAMA essay entitled “Updated Labeling for Menopausal Hormone Therapy” (open-access). That change, and the data cited, led to a series of articles in the days that followed, such as at STAT News “FDA reverses decades-old warning on hormone therapy products for menopause. Agency says the treatments o!fer heart, brain, and bone health benefits” and at the Washington Post “The FDA finally corrects its error on menopause hormone therapy. Women have been needlessly scared away from effective treatments.” If you read through these links, you'll be confused. Does MHT have proven cognitive benefits? What about a study from 1991 that showed ~50% reduction of fatal heart events with MHT? Or the 35% decreased risk of Alzheimer's disease? Or the breast cancer increased risk attributed to medroxyprogesterone acetate?I turned to my go-to gynecologist truth teller, Dr. Jen Gunter, to get her review of the evidence. This is a complex topic, with old data from the 2002 Women's Heath Initiative (WHI), new reports since, population level analysis, changes in preparations of MHT including local delivery, and much more.Here is our conversation which isn't just about MHT but includes “Big Wellness” marketing direct to middle aged women, the new FDA approved drug for hot flashes, the $14 million cut of the NIH's Office of Women's Health , marked increase in philanthropic support of women's health research, the Surgeon General nominee, ovarian failure, and a lightning round on proven benefits of MHT.Here's a brief clip on her views of the women's health “wellness” predatorsWe also discussed the reasons for Dr. Gunter's planned move next year back to Canada after practicing gynecology for 3 decades in the United States. I referred to a recent GT I wrote about the WHI and the potential favorable impact of MHT on the immune system, as suggested by new data on organ clocks. That finding, which has been replicated, may be linked to healthy aging, extending healthspan.****************************Thanks to the >190,000 Ground Truths subscribers from every US state and 210 countries. Your subscription to these free essays and podcasts makes my work in putting them together worthwhile.If you found this interesting PLEASE share it!Paid subscriptions are voluntary and all proceeds from them go to support Scripps Research. They do allow for posting comments and questions, which I do my best to respond to. Please don't hesitate to post comments and give me feedback. Let me know topics that you would like to see covered.Many thanks to those who have contributed—they have greatly helped fund our summer internship programs for the past two years. It enabled us to accept and support 47 summer interns in 2025! We aim to accept even more of the several thousand who will apply for summer 2026.Thank you Debbie Weil, Cynthia Brumfield, Sara Garcia, Harshi Peiris, Ph.D., Liane Moccia, and over 1,000 others for tuning into my live video with Dr. Jen Gunter! Join me for my next live video in the app. Get full access to Ground Truths at erictopol.substack.com/subscribe

In this episode of "Swallow Your Pride," host Theresa Richard brings together a panel of NIH-funded researchers from the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill to unpack the complexity of diagnosing and treating motor speech disorders after left-hemisphere stroke. Theresa Richard guides a conversation that demystifies the overlap between apraxia of speech, dysarthria, and aphasia, highlights the challenges clinicians face in acute and subacute care, and introduces innovative assessment tools designed to bring more objectivity and clarity to real-world practice. The team shares emerging findings, practical insights for SLPs across the continuum of care, and a look at how new perceptual and acoustic measures may shape the future of stroke-related speech assessment. Links mentioned in the show: UNC Center for Aphasia and Related Disorder's Lab website (includes information on our research and helpful therapy resources regarding aphasia, communication partner training, and aphasia-friendly print materials): https://www.med.unc.edu/healthsciences/sphs/card/ Tools Available for Speech Therapists for Assessment... Word Information Measure and Moving Average Type Token Ratio (Shiny App): https://unccard.shinyapps.io/WIM_MATTR/ Word Complexity Measure (Shiny App): https://unccard.shinyapps.io/shiny-woRdcomplex-2/ Word Complexity Measure Ratio (Shiny App): https://unccard.shinyapps.io/shiny-wcmRatio/ The post 385 – Navigating the Complexities of Speech Disorders After Stroke: A Deep Dive into Current Research and Practices appeared first on Swallow Your Pride Podcast.

Emily Cadiz is a teacher, musician, mom of three, and founder of Prelude Early Learning, home of Finnegan the Dragon. After a traumatic brain injury left her needing to relearn how to talk and walk, she rebuilt her skills through music and singing—an experience that inspired Prelude's music-based approach to teaching language and pre-reading. With 20+ years in education and master's degrees in education, special education, and music, Emily has created an NIH-supported program that's shown up to 250% growth in early literacy skills. In our talk, Emily dives deep into her accident and her history as an educator. She emphasizes why she advocates for inclusive music in classrooms, rather than traditional speech therapy. She also has some great advice for those transitioning from education to entrepreneurship.For all links and resources mentioned in this episode, head to the show notes: https://www.educatorforever.com/episode163.

In this episode, Kelly Brownell speaks with Jerold Mande, CEO of Nourish Science, adjunct professor at the Harvard School of Public Health, and former Deputy Undersecretary for Food Safety at the USDA. They discuss the alarming state of children's health in America, the challenges of combating poor nutrition, and the influence of the food industry on public policy. The conversation explores the parallels between the tobacco and food industries and proposes new strategies for ensuring children reach adulthood in good health. Mande emphasizes the need for radical changes in food policy and the role of public health in making these changes. Transcript So, you co-founded this organization along with Jerome Adams, Bill Frist and Thomas Grumbly, as we said, to ensure every child breaches age 18 at a healthy weight and in good metabolic health. That's a pretty tall order given the state of the health of youth today in America. But let's start by you telling us what inspired this mission and what does it look like to achieve this in today's food environment? I was trained in public health and also in nutrition and in my career, which has been largely in service of the public and government, I've been trying to advance those issues. And unfortunately over the arc of my career from when I started to now, particularly in nutrition and public health, it's just gotten so much worse. Indeed today Americans have the shortest lifespans by far. We're not just last among the wealthy countries, but we're a standard deviation last. But probably most alarming of all is how sick our children are. Children should not have a chronic disease. Yet in America maybe a third do. I did some work on tobacco at one point, at FDA. That was an enormous success. It was the leading cause of death. Children smoked at a higher rate, much like child chronic disease today. About a third of kids smoked. And we took that issue on, and today it's less than 2%. And so that shows that government can solve these problems. And since we did our tobacco work in the early '90s, I've changed my focus to nutrition and public health and trying to fix that. But we've still made so little progress. Give us a sense of how far from that goal we are. So, if the goal is to make every child reaching 18 at a healthy weight and in good metabolic health, what percentage of children reaching age 18 today might look like that? It's probably around a half or more, but we're not quite sure. We don't have good statistics. One of the challenges we face in nutrition is, unfortunately, the food industry or other industries lobby against funding research and data collection. And so, we're handicapped in that way. But we do know from the studies that CDC and others have done that about 20% of our children have obesity about a similar number have Type 2 diabetes or the precursors, pre-diabetes. You and I started off calling it adult-onset diabetes and they had to change that name to a Type 2 because it's becoming so common in kids. And then another disease, fatty liver disease, really unthinkable in kids. Something that the typical pediatrician would just never see. And yet in the last decade, children are the fastest growing group. I think we don't know an exact number, but today, at least a third, maybe as many as half of our children have a chronic disease. Particularly a food cause chronic disease, or the precursors that show they're on the way. I remember probably going back about 20 years, people started saying that we were seeing the first generation of American children that would lead shorter lives than our parents did. And what a terrible legacy to leave our children. Absolutely. And that's why we set that overarching goal of ensuring every child reaches age 18 in good metabolic health. And the reason we set that is in my experience in government, there's a phrase we all use - what gets measured gets done. And when I worked at FDA, when I worked at USDA, what caught my attention is that there is a mission statement. There's a goal of what we're trying to achieve. And it's ensuring access to healthy options and information, like a food label. Now the problem with that, first of all, it's failed. But the problem with that is the bureaucrats that I oversaw would go into a supermarket, see a produce section, a protein section, the food labels, which I worked on, and say we've done our job. They would check those boxes and say, we've done it. And yet we haven't. And if we ensured that every child reaches age 18 at a healthy weight and good metabolic health, if the bureaucrats say how are we doing on that? They would have to conclude we're failing, and they'd have to try something else. And that's what we need to do. We need to try radically different, new strategies because what we've been doing for decades has failed. You mentioned the food industry a moment ago. Let's talk about that in a little more detail. You made the argument that food companies have substituted profits for health in how they design their products. Explain that a little bit more, if you will. And tell us how the shift has occurred and what do you think the public health cost has been? Yes, so the way I like to think of it, and your listeners should think of it, is there's a North star for food design. And from a consumer standpoint, I think there are four points on the star: taste, cost, convenience, and health. That's what they expect and want from their food. Now the challenge is the marketplace. Because that consumer, you and I, when we go to the grocery store and get home on taste, cost, and convenience, if we want within an hour, we can know whether the food we purchased met our standard there. Or what our expectations were. Not always for health. There's just no way to know in a day, a week, a month, even in a year or more. We don't know if the food we're eating is improving and maintaining our health, right? There should be a definition of food. Food should be what we eat to thrive. That really should be the goal. I borrowed that from NASA, the space agency. When I would meet with them, they said, ' Jerry, it's important. Right? It's not enough that people just survive on the food they eat in space. They really need to thrive.' And that's what WE need to do. And that's really what food does, right? And yet we have food, not only don't we thrive, but we get sick. And the reason for that is, as I was saying, the marketplace works on taste, cost and convenience. So, companies make sure their products meet consumer expectation for those three. But the problem is on the fourth point on the star: on health. Because we can't tell in even years whether it's meeting our expectation. That sort of cries out. You're at a policy school. Those are the places where government needs to step in and act and make sure that the marketplace is providing. That feedback through government. But the industry is politically strong and has prevented that. And so that has left the fourth point of the star open for their interpretation. And my belief is that they've put in place a prop. So, they're making decisions in the design of the product. They're taste, they gotta get taste right. They gotta get cost and convenience right. But rather than worrying what does it do to your health? They just, say let's do a profit. And that's resulted in this whole category of food called ultra-processed food (UPF). I actually believe in the future, whether it's a hundred years or a thousand years. If humanity's gonna thrive we need manmade food we can thrive on. But we don't have that. And we don't invest in the science. We need to. But today, ultra-processed food is manmade food designed on taste, cost, convenience, and then how do we make the most money possible. Now, let me give you one other analogy, if I could. If we were CEOs of an automobile company, the mission is to provide vehicles where people can get safely from A to point B. It's the same as food we can thrive on. That is the mission. The problem is that when the food companies design food today, they've presented to the CEO, and everyone gets excited. They're seeing the numbers, the charts, the data that shows that this food is going to meet, taste, cost, convenience. It's going to make us all this money. But the CEO should be asking this following question: if people eat this as we intend, will they thrive? At the very least they won't get sick, right? Because the law requires they can't get sick. And if the Midmanagers were honest, they'd say here's the good news boss. We have such political power we've been able to influence the Congress and the regulatory agencies. That they're not going to do anything about it. Taste, cost, convenience, and profits will work just fine. Couldn't you make the argument that for a CEO to embrace that kind of attitude you talked about would be corporate malpractice almost? That, if they want to maximize profits then they want people to like the food as much as possible. That means engineering it in ways that make people overeat it, hijacking the reward pathways in the brain, and all that kind of thing. Why in the world would a CEO care about whether people thrive? Because it's the law. The law requires we have these safety features in cars and the companies have to design it that way. And there's more immediate feedback with the car too, in terms of if you crashed right away. Because it didn't work, you'd see that. But here's the thing. Harvey Wiley.He's the founder of the food safety programs that I led at FDA and USDA. He was a chemist from academia. Came to USDA in the late 1800s. It was a time of great change in food in America. At that point, almost all of families grew their own food on a farm. And someone had to decide who's going to grow our food. It's a family conversation that needed to take place. Increasingly, Americans were moving into the cities at that time, and a brand-new industry had sprung up to feed people in cities. It was a processed food industry. And in order to provide shelf stable foods that can offer taste, cost, convenience, this new processed food industry turned to another new industry, a chemical industry. Now, it's hard to believe this, but there was a point in time that just wasn't an industry. So these two big new industries had sprung up- processed food and chemicals. And Harvey Wiley had a hypothesis that the chemicals they were using to make these processed foods were making us sick. Indeed, food poisoning back then was one of the 10 leading causes of death. And so, Harvey Wiley went to Teddy Roosevelt. He'd been trying for years within the bureaucracy and not making progress. But when Teddy Roosevelt came in, he finally had the person who listened to him. Back then, USDA was right across from the Washington Monument to the White House. He'd walk right over there into the White House and met with Teddy Roosevelt and said, ' this food industry is making us sick. We should do something about it.' And Teddy Roosevelt agreed. And they wrote the laws. And so I think what your listeners need to understand is that when you look at the job that FDA and USDA is doing, their food safety programs were created to make sure our food doesn't make us sick. Acutely sick. Not heart disease or cancer, 30, 40 years down the road, but acutely sick. No. I think that's absolutely the point. That's what Wiley was most concerned about at the time. But that's not the law they wrote. The law doesn't say acutely ill. And I'll give you this example. Your listeners may be familiar with something called GRAS - Generally Recognized as Safe. It's a big problem today. Industry co-opted the system and no longer gets approval for their food additives. And so, you have this Generally Recognized as Safe system, and you have these chemicals and people are worried about them. In the history of GRAS. Only one chemical has FDA decided we need to get that off the market because it's unsafe. That's partially hydrogenated oils or trans-fat. Does trans-fat cause acute illness? It doesn't. It causes a chronic disease. And the evidence is clear. The agency has known that it has the responsibility for both acute and chronic illness. But you're right, the industry has taken advantage of this sort of chronic illness space to say that that really isn't what you should be doing. But having worked at those agencies, I don't think they see it that way. They just feel like here's the bottom line on it. The industry uses its political power in Congress. And it shapes the agency's budget. So, let's take FDA. FDA has a billion dollars with a 'b' for food safety. For the acute food safety, you're talking about. It has less than 25 million for the chronic disease. There are about 1400 deaths a year in America due to the acute illnesses caused by our food that FDA and USDA are trying to prevent. The chronic illnesses that we know are caused by our food cause 1600 maybe a day. More than that of the acute every day. Now the agency should be spending at least half its time, if not more, worrying about those chronic illness. Why doesn't it? Because the industry used their political power in Congress to put the billion dollars for the acute illness. That's because if you get acutely ill, that's a liability concern for them. Jerry let's talk about the political influence in just a little more detail, because you're in a unique position to tell us about this because you've seen it from the inside. One mechanism through which industry might influence the political process is lobbyists. They hire lobbyists. Lobbyists get to the Congress. People make decisions based on contributions and things like that. Are there other ways the food industry affects the political process in addition to that. For example, what about the revolving door issue people talk about where industry people come into the administrative branch of government, not legislative branch, and then return to industry. And are there other ways that the political influence of the industry has made itself felt? I think first and foremost it is the lobbyists, those who work with Congress, in effect. Particularly the funding levels, and the authority that the agencies have to do that job. I think it's overwhelmingly that. I think second, is the influence the industry has. So let me back up to that a sec. As a result of that, we spend very little on nutrition research, for example. It's 4% of the NIH budget even though we have these large institutes, cancer, heart, diabetes, everyone knows about. They're trying to come up with the cures who spend the other almost 50 billion at NIH. And so, what happens? You and I have both been at universities where there are nutrition programs and what we see is it's very hard to not accept any industry money to do the research because there isn't the federal money. Now, the key thing, it's not an accident. It's part of the plan. And so, I think that the research that we rely on to do regulation is heavily influenced by industry. And it's broad. I've served, you have, others, on the national academies and the programs. When I've been on the inside of those committees, there are always industry retired scientists on those committees. And they have undue influence. I've seen it. Their political power is so vast. The revolving door, that is a little of both ways. I think the government learns from the revolving door as well. But you're right, some people leave government and try to undo that. Now, I've chosen to work in academia when I'm not in government. But I think that does play a role, but I don't think it plays the largest role. I think the thing that people should be worried about is how much influence it has in Congress and how that affects the agency's budgets. And that way I feel that agencies are corrupted it, but it's not because they're corrupted directly by the industry. I think it's indirectly through congress. I'd like to get your opinion on something that's always relevant but is time sensitive now. And it's dietary guidelines for America. And the reason I'm saying it's time sensitive is because the current administration will be releasing dietary guidelines for America pretty soon. And there's lots of discussion about what those might look like. How can they help guide food policy and industry practices to support healthier children and families? It's one of the bigger levers the government has. The biggest is a program SNAP or food stamps. But beyond that, the dietary guidelines set the rules for government spending and food. So, I think often the way the dietary guidelines are portrayed isn't quite accurate. People think of it in terms of the once (food) Pyramid now the My Plate that's there. That's the public facing icon for the dietary guidelines. But really a very small part. The dietary guidelines are meant to help shape federal policy, not so much public perception. It's there. It's used in education in our schools - the (My) Plate, previously the (Food) Pyramid. But the main thing is it should shape what's served in government feeding programs. So principally that should be SNAP. It's not. But it does affect the WIC program- Women, Infants and Children, the school meals program, all of the military spending on food. Indeed, all spending by the government on food are set, governed by, or directed by the dietary guidelines. Now some of them are self-executing. Once the dietary guidelines change the government changes its behavior. But the biggest ones are not. They require rulemaking and in particular, today, one of the most impactful is our kids' meals in schools. So, whatever it says in these dietary guidelines, and there's reason to be alarmed in some of the press reports, it doesn't automatically change what's in school meals. The Department of Agriculture would have to write a rule and say that the dietary guidelines have changed and now we want to update. That usually takes an administration later. It's very rare one administration could both change the dietary guidelines and get through the rulemaking process. So, people can feel a little reassured by that. So, how do you feel about the way things seem to be taking shape right now? This whole MAHA movement Make America Healthy Again. What is it? To me what it is we've reached this tipping point we talked about earlier. The how sick we are, and people are saying, 'enough. Our food shouldn't make us sick at middle age. I shouldn't have to be spending so much time with my doctor. But particularly, it shouldn't be hard to raise my kids to 18 without getting sick. We really need to fix that and try to deal with that.' But I think that the MAHA movement is mostly that. But RFK and some of the people around them have increasingly claimed that it means some very specific things that are anti-science. That's been led by the policies around vaccine that are clearly anti-science. Nutrition is more and more interesting. Initially they started out in the exact right place. I think you and I could agree the things they were saying they need to focus on: kids, the need to get ultra-processed food out of our diets, were all the right things. In fact, you look at the first report that RFK and his team put out back in May this year after the President put out an Executive Order. Mostly the right things on this. They again, focus on kids, ultra-processed food was mentioned 40 times in the report as the root cause for the very first time. And this can't be undone. You had the White House saying that the root cause of our food-caused chronic disease crisis is the food industry. That's in a report that won't change. But a lot has changed since then. They came out with a second report where the word ultra-processed food showed up only once. What do you think happened? I know what happened because I've worked in that setting. The industry quietly went to the White House, the top political staff in the White House, and they said, you need to change the report when you come out with the recommendations. And so, the first report, I think, was written by MAHA, RFK Jr. and his lieutenants. The second report was written by the White House staff with the lobbyists of the food industry. That's what happened. What you end up with is their version of it. So, what does the industry want? We have a good picture from the first Trump administration. They did the last dietary guidelines and the Secretary of Agriculture, then Sonny Perdue, his mantra to his staff, people reported to me, was the industries- you know, keep the status quo. That is what the industry wants is they really don't want the dietary guidelines to change because then they have to reformulate their products. And they're used to living with what we have and they're just comfortable with that. For a big company to reformulate a product is a multi-year effort and cost billions of dollars and it's just not what they want to have to do. Particularly if it's going to change from administration to administration. And that is not a world they want to live in. From the first and second MAHA report where they wanted to go back to the status quo away from all the radical ideas. It'll be interesting to see what happens with dietary guidelines because we've seen reports that RFK Jr. and his people want to make shifts in policies. Saying that they want to go back to the Pyramid somehow. There's a cartoon on TV, South Park, I thought it was produced to be funny. But they talked about what we need to do is we need to flip the Pyramid upside down and we need to go back to the old Pyramid and make saturated fat the sort of the core of the diet. I thought it meant to be a joke but apparently that's become a belief of some people in the MAHA movement. RFK. And so, they want to add saturated fat back to our diets. They want to get rid of plant oils from our diets. There is a lot of areas of nutrition where the science isn't settled. But that's one where it is, indeed. Again, you go back only 1950s, 1960s, you look today, heart disease, heart attacks, they're down 90%. Most of that had to do with the drugs and getting rid of smoking. But a substantial contribution was made by nutrition. Lowering saturated fat in our diets and replacing it with plant oils that they're now called seed oils. If they take that step and the dietary guidelines come out next month and say that saturated fat is now good for us it is going to be just enormously disruptive. I don't think companies are going to change that much. They'll wait it out because they'll ask themselves the question, what's it going to be in two years? Because that's how long it takes them to get a product to market. Jerry, let me ask you this. You painted this picture where every once in a while, there'll be a glimmer of hope. Along comes MAHA. They're critical of the food industry and say that the diet's making us sick and therefore we should focus on different things like ultra-processed foods. In report number one, it's mentioned 40 times. Report number two comes out and it's mentioned only once for the political reasons you said. Are there any signs that lead you to be hopeful that this sort of history doesn't just keep repeating itself? Where people have good ideas, there's science that suggests you go down one road, but the food industry says, no, we're going to go down another and government obeys. Are there any signs out there that lead you to be more hopeful for the future? There are signs to be hopeful for the future. And number one, we talked earlier, is the success we had regulating tobacco. And I know you've done an outstanding job over the years drawing the parallels between what happened in tobacco and food. And there are good reasons to do that. Not the least of which is that in the 1980s, the tobacco companies bought all the big food companies and imparted on them a lot of their lessons, expertise, and playbook about how to do these things. And so that there is a tight link there. And we did succeed. We took youth smoking, which was around a 30 percent, a third, when we began work on this in the early 1990s when I was at FDA. And today it's less than 2%. It's one area with the United States leads the world in terms of what we've achieved in public health. And there's a great benefit that's going to come to that over the next generation as all of those deaths are prevented that we're not quite seeing yet. But we will. And that's regardless of what happens with vaping, which is a whole different story about nicotine. But this idea success and tobacco. The food industry has a tobacco playbook about how to addict so many people and make so much money and use their political power. We have a playbook of how to win the public health fight. So, tell us about that. What you're saying is music to my ears and I'm a big believer in exactly what you're saying. So, what is it? What does that playbook look like and what did we learn from the tobacco experience that you think could apply into the food area? There are a couple of areas. One is going to be leadership and we'll have to come back to that. Because the reason we succeeded in tobacco was the good fortune of having a David Kessler at FDA and Al Gore as Vice President. Nothing was, became more important to them than winning this fight against a big tobacco. Al Gore because his sister died at a young age of smoking. And David Kessler became convinced that this was the most important thing for public health that he could do. And keep in mind, when he came to FDA, it was the furthest thing from his mind. So, one of it is getting these kinds of leaders. Did does RFK Jr. and Marty McCarey match up to Al Gore? And we'll see. But the early signs aren't that great. But we'll see. There's still plenty of time for them to do this and get it right. The other thing is having a good strategy and policy about how to do it. And here, with tobacco, it was a complete stretch, right? There was no where did the FDA get authority over tobacco? And indeed, we eventually needed the Congress to reaffirm that authority to have the success we did. As we talked earlier, there's no question FDA was created to make sure processed food and the additives and processed food don't make us sick. So, it is the core reason the agency exists is to make sure that if there's a thing called ultra-processed food, man-made food, that is fine, but we have to thrive when we eat it. We certainly can't be made sick when we eat it. Now, David Kessler, I mentioned, he's put forward a petition, a citizens' petition to FDA. Careful work by him, he put months of effort into this, and he wrote basically a detailed roadmap for RFK and his team to use if they want to regulate ultra-processed stuff food. And I think we've gotten some, initially good feedback from the MAHA RFK people that they're interested in this petition and may take action on it. So, the basic thrust of the Kessler petition from my understanding is that we need to reconsider what's considered Generally Recognized as Safe. And that these ultra-processed foods may not be considered safe any longer because they produce all this disease down the road. And if MAHA responds positively initially to the concept, that's great. And maybe that'll have legs, and something will actually happen. But is there any reason to believe the industry won't just come in and quash this like they have other things? This idea of starting with a petition in the agency, beginning an investigation and using its authority is the blueprint we used with tobacco. There was a petition we responded, we said, gee, you raised some good points. There are other things we put forward. And so, what we hope to see here with the Kessler petition is that the FDA would put out what's called an advanced notice of a proposed rulemaking with the petition. This moves it from just being a petition to something the agency is saying, we're taking this seriously. We're putting it on the record ourselves and we want industry and others now to start weighing in. Now here's the thing, you have this category of ultra-processed food that because of the North Star I talked about before, because the industry, the marketplace has failed and gives them no incentive to make sure that we thrive, that keeps us from getting sick. They've just forgotten about that and put in place profits instead. The question is how do you get at ultra-processed food? What's the way to do it? How do you start holding the industry accountable? Now what RFK and the MAHA people started with was synthetic color additives. That wasn't what I would pick but, it wasn't a terrible choice. Because if you talk to Carlos Monteiro who coined the phrase ultra-processed food, and you ask him, what is an ultra-processed food, many people say it's this industrial creation. You can't find the ingredients in your kitchen. He agrees with all that, but he thinks the thing that really sets ultra-processed food, the harmful food, is the cosmetics that make them edible when they otherwise won't I've seen inside the plants where they make the old fashioned minimally processed food versus today's ultra-processed. In the minimally processed plants, I recognize the ingredients as food. In today's plants, you don't recognize anything. There are powders, there's sludges, there's nothing that you would really recognize as food going into it. And to make that edible, they use the cosmetics and colors as a key piece of that. But here's the problem. It doesn't matter if the color is synthetic or natural. And a fruit loop made with natural colors is just as bad for you as one made with synthetics. And indeed, it's been alarming that the agency has fast tracked these natural colors and as replacements because, cyanide is natural. We don't want to use that. And the whole approach has been off and it like how is this going to get us there? How is this focus on color additives going to get us there. And it won't. Yeah, I agree. I agree with your interpretation of that. But the thing with Kessler you got part of it right but the main thing he did is say you don't have to really define ultra-processed food, which is another industry ploy to delay action. Let's focus on the thing that's making us sick today. And that's the refined carbohydrates. The refined grains in food. That's what's most closely linked to the obesity, the diabetes we're seeing today. Now in the 1980s, the FDA granted, let's set aside sugar and white flour, for example, but they approved a whole slew of additives that the companies came forward with to see what we can add to the white flour and sugar to make it shelf stable, to meet all the taste, cost, and convenience considerations we have. And profit-making considerations we have. Back then, heart disease was the driving health problem. And so, it was easy to overlook why you didn't think that the these additives were really harmful. That then you could conclude whether Generally Recognized as Safe, which is what the agency did back then. What Kessler is saying is that what he's laid out in his petition is self-executing. It's not something that the agency grants that this is GRAS or not GRAS. They were just saying things that have historical safe use that scientists generally recognize it as safe. It's not something the agency decides. It's the universe of all of us scientists generally accept. And it's true in the '80s when we didn't face the obesity and diabetes epidemic, people didn't really focus on the refined carbohydrates. But if you look at today's food environment. And I hope you agree with this, that what is the leading driver in the food environment about what is it about ultra-processed food that's making us so sick? It's these refined grains and the way they're used in our food. And so, if the agency takes up the Kessler petition and starts acting on it, they don't have to change the designation. Maybe at some point they have to say some of these additives are no longer GRAS. But what Kessler's saying is by default, they're no longer GRAS because if you ask the scientists today, can we have this level of refined grains? And they'd say, no, that's just not Generally Recognized as Safe. So, he's pointing out that status, they no longer hold that status. And if the agency would recognize that publicly and the burden shifts where Wiley really always meant it to be, on the industry to prove that there are foods or things that we would thrive on, but that wouldn't make us sick. And so that's the key point that you go back to when you said, and you're exactly right that if you let the industry use their political power to just ignore health altogether and substitute profits, then you're right. Their sort of fiduciary responsibility is just to maximize profits and they can ignore health. If you say you can maximize profits, of course you're a capitalist business, but one of the tests you have to clear is you have to prove to us that people can thrive when they eat that. Thrive as the standard, might require some congressional amplification because it's not in the statute. But what is in the statute is the food can't make you sick. If scientists would generally recognize, would say, if you eat this diet as they intend, if you eat this snack food, there's these ready to heat meals as they intend, you're going to get diabetes and obesity. If scientists generally believe that, then you can't sell that. That's just against the law and the agency needs them to enforce the law. Bio:   Jerold Mande is CEO of Nourish Science; Adjunct Professor of Nutrition, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health; and a Non-Resident Senior Fellow, Tisch College of Civic Life, Tufts University. Professor Mande has a wealth of expertise and experience in national public health and food policy. He served in senior policymaking positions for three presidents at USDA, FDA, and OSHA helping lead landmark public health initiatives. In 2009, he was appointed by President Obama as USDA Deputy Under Secretary for Food Safety. In 2011, he moved to USDA's Food, Nutrition, and Consumer Services, where he spent six years working to improve the health outcomes of the nation's $100 billion investment in 15 nutrition programs. During President Clinton's administration, Mr. Mande was Senior Advisor to the FDA commissioner where he helped shape national policy on nutrition, food safety, and tobacco. He also served on the White House staff as a health policy advisor and was Deputy Assistant Secretary for Occupational Health at the Department of Labor. During the George H.W. Bush administration he led the graphic design of the iconic Nutrition Facts label at FDA, for which he received the Presidential Design Award. Mr. Mande began his career as a legislative assistant for Al Gore in the U.S. House and Senate, managing Gore's health and environment agenda, and helping Gore write the nation's organ donation and transplantation laws.  Mande earned a Master of Public Health from the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill and a Bachelor of Science in nutritional science from the University of Connecticut. Prior to his current academic appointments, he served on the faculty at the Tufts, Friedman School of Nutrition Science and Policy, and Yale School of Medicine.

Harvard president Alan Garber and National Institutes of Health head Jay Bhattacharya are two main characters at the heart of the national fight over the future of academia. Alan Garber has been cast as the defender of academic freedom and democracy; Jay Bhattacharya is Donald Trump's pick to lead the NIH, the agency withholding billions of dollars in research grants from Harvard. Oddly enough, the two men go way back: Garber was Bhattacharya's undergraduate thesis advisor and mentor in the late 1980s. This episode tells the story of how the two men found themselves adversaries — and what it means for the future of science. Find more On the Media every week, here: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/on-the-media/id73330715Learn more about sponsor message choices: podcastchoices.com/adchoicesNPR Privacy Policy

This episode dives into the unraveling of America's public health infrastructure as political interference reshapes the CDC, FDA, and NIH. Jonathan and Wendy walk through the CDC's new vaccine-autism messaging, the chaos and infighting inside the FDA, cuts to critical NIH trials, and Jay Bhattacharya's controversial "pandemic plan" built on personal responsibility instead of public health action. With outbreaks of measles, pertussis, and flu rising, they explore how misinformation, censorship, and agency dysfunction are putting the country at risk. 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.

Shaun will NOT bow down to the Democrats demands! PLUS, Dr. Nick and Leah Wilson, authors of the upcoming book Reclaim Vitality: A Guide to Exit Conventional Medicine and Live Naturally, tells Shaun about the whole genome sequencing program the NIH is rolling out to collect every baby's entire genome sequence, funneling kids into biotech therapies, and their fight to shape public health policies so people can stand for their own health freedoms. And The Heritage Foundation's Dr. EJ Antoni discusses the possible implications of BlackRock owning both the meat packing and pharmaceutical industries, Obamacare subsidies, and Trump's meeting with NYC mayor-elect Zohran Mamdani. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Send us a textA vaccine built for a virus might be whispering a powerful message to cancer care. We dig into a new Nature paper suggesting that mRNA COVID shots could enhance the effectiveness of checkpoint inhibitor immunotherapy—especially in non‑small cell lung cancer and melanoma—by acting as an immune alarm that sharpens anti‑tumor responses. The data is retrospective, not causal, so we break down why the signal is exciting, where confounders can hide, and what the next generation of trials must test: timing, vaccine type, biomarkers, and who stands to benefit most.From there, we switch gears to the first weeks of a dog's life. A small but detailed study of Australian breeders maps nine practical socialization steps—novel objects, varied surfaces, calibrated sound exposure, hands‑on handling, human visitors, other animals, off‑site trips, car rides, and rotating environments—that build confident, adaptable companions. We compare three rearing strategies, from uniform protocols to individual puppy plans, and connect these choices to fewer fear issues, better training outcomes, and smoother vet and grooming visits down the line.Journalist and author Melanie Kaplan joins us to share Hammy's story—a beagle rescued from a research lab—and the deeper reporting behind her book, Lab Dog: A Beagle and His Human Investigate the Surprising World of Animal Research. We talk about why beagles became the default lab dog, the emotional toll and resilience of retired animals, and the promising rise of non‑animal alternatives like organs‑on‑chips, human cell models, and computational toxicology. With FDA and NIH signaling support for methods that are more humane and more predictive, there's a real path to better science with less harm.If this conversation moved you or made you think, follow the show, share it with a friend who loves science and animals, and leave a quick review to help others find us.Links to Melanie's Book and SocialsHere is the link to all our socials and stuff!!!Support the showFor Science, Empathy, and Cuteness!Being Kind is a Superpower. All our social links are here!

Broadcast from KSQD, Santa Cruz on 11-20-2025: Dr. Dawn discusses GLP-1 inhibitors like Zepbound and semaglutide showing unexpected benefits for addiction treatment beyond diabetes and weight loss. Patients in rehab report these drugs mute cravings for alcohol, cocaine, and cigarettes. Multiple studies show reduced substance abuse rates in users, with VA and NIH conducting trials examining brain activity and responses to triggers. With 80,000 annual drug overdose deaths and 48 million Americans having substance abuse disorders, these medications may revolutionize addiction treatment by dampening brain reward circuitry, though costs threaten healthcare budgets. A Stanford twin study found those twins assigned a vegan diet had substantially lower cholesterol, insulin, and body weight compared to their omnivore twins after several months, with LDL dropping 15mg, four pounds more weight loss, and 20% lower insulin. Dr. Dawn explains how a fungal disease decimating Central American frog populations caused 500% malaria increases in some areas. The fungus kills frogs by blocking skin electrolytes until hearts stop, eliminating tadpoles that eat mosquito larvae. Ecosystem collapses followed with algae blooms and snake population drops. She provides other examples showing how species losses affect human health, emphasizing the "one health" movement recognizing ecosystem health as fundamental to human wellbeing. An Australian study found people aged 70+ who listen to or play music regularly had 39% lower dementia rates, though causation remains uncertain. Princeton research shows music activates multiple brain regions simultaneously. Learning instruments increases gray matter, and musical memory remains intact in advanced dementia since it's stored separately from other memories. A caller discusses how modern screen-based activities provide less multisensory engagement than past social experiences like dances. Another caller describes Grover's disease causing persistent itchy skin with no known cause. Dr. Dawn recommends an elimination diet removing common allergens for one month, then reintroducing individually to identify food sensitivities triggering immune responses. Dr. Dawn explains xenotransplantation advances with genetically edited pigs beginning full-scale kidney transplant trials. Companies use CRISPR to disable genes causing immune rejection and insert human genes promoting immune tolerance. With only 10% of global kidney patients receiving organs, these could provide unlimited supply. Other innovations include kidneys with thymus tissue to teach immune tolerance and external pig liver systems as transplant bridges. She concludes noting research showing female dogs remember and prefer humans who demonstrate competence at tasks, while male dogs show no preference.

Are you still confused (or totally terrified) about hormone therapy because of what you heard that it causes cancer? Do you have breast cancer and have been told you cannot take hormone therapy, but still question if this is true? Then this episode is for you. Today I sit down with cancer survivor Dr. Lindsey Berkson, one of the most outspoken, evidence-driven voices in hormone science. She has been on the front lines for more than 40 years, challenging misinformation, teaching clinicians, and calling out the myths that have held women back from lifesaving care. We cover: What really happened in the 2002 WHI study and why the press release created global panic Why estrogen may be breast-protective…even for breast cancer patients What the 2024 NIH study of 10 million women revealed about HRT Why not ALL estrogen is proliferative The discovery of ER-beta and how it reframed estrogen's role in cancer biology What 25 human trials show about HRT use in ER+ breast cancer survivors What is oxytocin and how does this hormone help women in menopause   Dr. Lindsey Berkson is a pioneer in hormone and nutritional health with over four decades of clinical and research experience. She's triple board-certified in nutrition, a hormone scholar at Tulane University's estrogen think tank, and one of the first practitioners to bridge endocrinology, nutrition, and gut health into an integrated approach to healing. She's also the author of more than 20 books, including Hormone Deception and Healthy Digestion the Natural Way, and has developed physician-formulated nutraceutical lines and patented bioidentical hormone applications.   New book: Oxytocin Medicine https://amzn.to/3JWdDAm Recommended Reading: Hormones 101 by Dr. Jeffrey Dash Courses: https://drlindseyberkson.com/courses/ Contact Dr. Lindsey Berkson Website: https://drlindseyberkson.com/ Instagram: @dlberkson https://www.instagram.com/dlberkson/ Facebook: @Dr.LindseyBerkson https://www.facebook.com/Dr.LindseyBerkson/ Give thanks to our sponsors: Try Vitali skincare. 20% off with code ZORA here - https://vitaliskincare.com Get Primeadine spermidine by Oxford Healthspan. 15% discount with code ZORA ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠here⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ - http://oxfordhealthspan.com/discount/ZORA Get Mitopure Urolithin A by Timeline. 20% discount with code ZORA at https://timeline.com/zora Try Suji to improve muscle 10% off with code ZORA at TrySuji.com - https://trysuji.com Try OneSkin skincare with code ZORA for 15% off https://oneskin.pxf.io/c/3974954/2885171/31050   Join the Hack My Age community on: YouTube: https://youtube.com/@hackmyage Facebook Page: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠@⁠Hack My Age⁠     Facebook Group: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠@⁠Biohacking Menopause⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠   Biohacking Menopause Private Women's Only Support Group: https://hackmyage.com/biohacking-menopause-membership/ Instagram: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠@⁠HackMyAge⁠    Website: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠HackMyAge.com⁠    For partnership inquiries: https://www.category3.ca/  For transparency: Some episodes of Hack My Age are supported by partners whose products or services may be discussed during the show. The host may receive compensation or earn a minor commission if you purchase through affiliate links at no extra cost to you. All opinions shared are those of the host and guests, based on personal experience and research, and do not necessarily represent the views of any sponsor. Sponsorships do not imply medical endorsement or approval by any healthcare provider featured on this podcast.  

What if your erection could tell you something deeper about your health—something even your doctor might miss?In this exclusive episode, Dr. Arthur Burnett, one of the leading experts in urology and a key figure in the science behind Viagra, joins the conversation. Together, we explore the real connection between erectile dysfunction, prostate cancer, and overall prostate health. We dive into what's fact, what's fiction, and why ED might be your body's first warning sign of something much bigger. Whether you're dealing with performance issues or concerned about your prostate, this episode is for you.Hit play now. Your health, and your future, may depend on it.--------------About Dr. Arthur BurnettDr. Arthur Burnett is a world-renowned urologist and professor at the Johns Hopkins School of Medicine, where he holds the prestigious Patrick C. Walsh Professorship in Urology. As Director of the Male Consultation Clinic and Vice Chair for faculty development at the James Buchanan Brady Urological Institute, he brings decades of groundbreaking expertise in erectile dysfunction, prostate cancer, and reconstructive urology.A pioneer in the discovery of nitric oxide's role in erections, Dr. Burnett's research was instrumental in the development of Viagra. He has performed over 3,000 nerve-sparing radical prostatectomies and authored more than 500 peer-reviewed publications. With honors from the NIH, FDA, and the American Urological Association, Dr. Burnett continues to lead the field in advancing male sexual and prostate health.Want to connect with Dr. Arthur Burnett? Visit the Johns Hopkins Urology website or find his books on Amazon to learn more about his work in men's health.--------------Resources mentioned:Modern Man CribMediterranean DietGood Morning Wood Smoothie--------------Curious about how you can boost your bedroom game and build lasting confidence? Check out the course at getwoodnow.com and start your journey to feeling like yourself again!--------------If you enjoyed this episode and want to learn more and get more tips, subscribe to The Modern Man newsletter for exclusive content delivered straight to your inbox! https://dranne.co/themodernman--------------Follow Me On:InstagramTwitterFacebookTikTokYouTube--------------For all links and resources mentioned on the show and where to subscribe to the podcast, please visit

Full Show Notes: https://bengreenfieldlife.com/drandrew Dr. Andrew Koutnik is a research scientist whose career bridges cutting-edge science, elite performance, and personal experience living with type 1 diabetes for over 17 years. His work focuses on how nutrition, metabolism, and lifestyle can be leveraged to maximize human health, performance, and resilience across diverse conditions—from chronic disease to extreme environments. Dr. Andrew Koutnik earned his Ph.D. in Medical Sciences (Molecular Pharmacology and Physiology) from the University of South Florida Morsani College of Medicine. Prior to joining FSU, Dr. Andrew Koutnik served as a Faculty/Principal Investigator at Sansum Diabetes Research Institute and Florida Institute for Human and Machine Cognition. His research has spanned over $70,000,000 in research funding, including NASA missions, U.S. Special Operations Command, Defense Advanced Research Projects, Office of Naval Research, Department of Defense, and NIH-funded clinical trials Episode Sponsors: LVLUP Health: I trust and recommend LVLUP Health for your peptide needs as they third-party test every single batch of their peptides to ensure you’re getting exactly what you pay for and the results you’re after! Head over to lvluphealth.com/BGL and use code BEN15 for a special discount on their game-changing range of products. Ketone-IQ: Ketones are a uniquely powerful macronutrient that can cross the blood-brain barrier and increase brain energy and efficiency. With a daily dose of Ketone-IQ, you'll notice a radical boost in focus, endurance, and performance. Save 30% off your first subscription order of Ketone-IQ at Ketone.com/BENG. CAROL Bike: The science is clear—CAROL Bike is your ticket to a healthier, more vibrant life. And for a limited time, you can get $100 off yours with the code BEN. Don't wait any longer, join over 25,000 riders and visit carolbike.com/ben today. Sunlighten: Sunlighten's patented infrared sauna technology delivers the highest quality near, mid, and far infrared wavelengths to reduce inflammation, boost mitochondrial function, enhance detox pathways, and optimize recovery—backed by 25+ years of clinically proven, non-toxic innovation. Save up to $1,400 at Sunlighten.com/BEN with code BEN. Gameday Men’s Health: Gameday Men's Health offers science-backed, physician-led men's health optimization with personalized protocols for testosterone, peptide therapy, ED treatment, and more—helping you perform at your best whether you're training hard or keeping up with life. Visit gamedaymenshealth.com/bengreenfield for a free testosterone test and consultation at a clinic near you. Boundless Bar: If you’re ready to fuel workouts, sharpen your focus, and support whole-body vitality, grab your Boundless Bars now at boundlessbar.com —and save 10% when you sign up for a Boundless Bar subscription.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Dr. Rachel Gatlin entered neuroscience with curiosity and optimism. Then came chaos. She started her PhD at the University of Utah in March 2020—right as the world shut down. Her lab barely existed. Her advisor was on leave. Her project focused on isolation stress in mice, and then every human on earth became her control group. Rachel fought through supply shortages, grant freezes, and the brutal postdoc job market that treats scientists like disposable parts. When her first offer vanished under a hiring freeze, she doubled down, rewrote her plan, and won her own NIH training grant. Her story is about survival in the most literal sense—how to keep your brain intact when the system built to train you keeps collapsing.RELATED LINKS• Dr. Rachel Gatlin on LinkedIn• Dr. Gatlin's Paper Preprint• Dr. Eric Nestler on Wikipedia• News Coverage: Class of 2025 – PhD Students Redefine PrioritiesFEEDBACKLike this episode? Rate and review Out of Patients on your favorite podcast platform. For guest suggestions or sponsorship email podcasts@matthewzachary.comSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

When David Fajgenbaum nearly died of Castleman disease for the fifth time, he decided to take fate into his own hands. Using his medical training, he searched for an existing drug that might save his life—and found one. Now his organization, Every Cure, is scaling the same approach to uncover hidden treatments for other diseases with no known cure. David and Claudia discussed: How Every Cure is using AI to test 75 million possible disease-drug combinations The perverse incentives that keep generic drug repurposing in the shadowsWhy the hardest part of innovation isn't discovery, it's getting proven treatments into clinical practiceRepurposing existing drugs makes so much sense. But as David points out, there's no market for it:“Once a drug is generic.. the price is going to plummet… And even if you were to double the sales of your drug because you found a new disease area, now you've gone from 1% to 2% of what you got before… So there's no incentive whatsoever for our system to find a new use for a generic drug. Zero incentive.”Relevant LinksLearn more about Every CureRead David's book Chasing My Cure: A Doctor's Race to Turn Hope Into ActionWatch David's TEDTalk Listen to David's Podcast interview with Adam GrantGet info on the Dada2 FoundationWatch a video on Matt Might's story About Our GuestDavid Fajgenbaum, MD, MBA, MSc, is co-Founder & President of Every Cure and a physician-scientist at the University of Pennsylvania, where he is one of the youngest faculty members ever to receive tenure at Penn Medicine. He is also the national bestselling author of Chasing My Cure: A Doctor's Race to Turn Hope Into Action, which is being adapted into a film by Forrest Gump producer Wendy Finerman. During medical school, Fajgenbaum discovered a treatment that saved his own life and founded the Castleman Disease Collaborative Network. He has advanced 13 more repurposed treatments for cancers and rare diseases and co-founded Every Cure to unlock more hidden cures from existing medicines which has received over $100M from ARPA-H and TED's Audacious Project. He also serves on the Board of Directors for the Reagan-Udall Foundation for the FDA. One of the youngest recipients of multiple top NIH and FDA grants, Fajgenbaum has authored over 100 scientific papers in leading journals, including The New England Journal of...

Cancer is a disease caused by the uncontrolled growth of cells that escape the body's natural defenses. One way cancer protects itself is by taking advantage of certain immune cells called regulatory T cells, or Tregs. Normally, Tregs help prevent autoimmune diseases by controlling the immune system. But inside tumors, they behave differently. Instead of defending the body, they suppress the immune cells that could attack the cancer. Many cancer treatments aim to activate the immune system to fight tumors more effectively. However, the presence of Tregs within the tumor makes this difficult. These cells act like bodyguards for the cancer, blocking the immune response that might otherwise slow or stop tumor growth. Researchers have tried to eliminate Tregs by targeting a protein called CD25, found on their surface. However, earlier efforts often failed because these treatments also interfere with interleukin-2 (IL-2), a molecule that is essential for other immune cells to function. Blocking IL-2 weakens the entire immune response, limiting the treatment's effectiveness. To overcome this challenge, scientists recently developed a new antibody called 2B010. This study, titled “A novel anti-human CD25 mAb with preferential reactivity to activated T regulatory cells depletes them from the tumor microenvironment,” was published in Oncotarget (Volume 16). Full blog - https://www.oncotarget.org/2025/11/19/new-antibody-removes-tregs-to-boost-immune-response-against-cancer/ Paper DOI - https://doi.org/10.18632/oncotarget.28752 Correspondence to - Ethan M. Shevach - eshevach@Niaid.NIH.gov Abstract video - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2NJcGsI7WXA Sign up for free Altmetric alerts about this article - https://oncotarget.altmetric.com/details/email_updates?id=10.18632%2Foncotarget.28752 Subscribe for free publication alerts from Oncotarget - https://www.oncotarget.com/subscribe/ Keywords - cancer, Treg, CD25, TME, mAb, GVHD To learn more about Oncotarget, please visit https://www.oncotarget.com and connect with us: Facebook - https://www.facebook.com/Oncotarget/ X - https://twitter.com/oncotarget Instagram - https://www.instagram.com/oncotargetjrnl/ YouTube - https://www.youtube.com/@OncotargetJournal LinkedIn - https://www.linkedin.com/company/oncotarget Pinterest - https://www.pinterest.com/oncotarget/ Reddit - https://www.reddit.com/user/Oncotarget/ Spotify - https://open.spotify.com/show/0gRwT6BqYWJzxzmjPJwtVh MEDIA@IMPACTJOURNALS.COM

The city Finance Committee voted down Mayor Johnson's revenue plan, dealing a significant blow to his 2026 budget. Crain's politics reporter Justin Laurence discusses with host Amy Guth.Plus: Hines eyes Boeing's West Loop tower after scuttled Sterling Bay deal, Big Ten's $2.4 billion deal talks extended after pushback, FTC drops fight for injunction blocking GTCR's Surmodics deal and a study finds NIH grant cuts leave hundreds of clinical trials, 74,000 patients in limbo. Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

Prenatal substance use is often misunderstood, oversimplified, and met with stigma instead of support. In this conversation, Christina Dent and Meghann Perry explore the complex realities facing mothers who use substances during pregnancy—from trauma and addiction to healthcare barriers and the fear of criminalization. Together, they reflect on the importance of compassionate care, the power of bonding and attachment, and what it looks like to invest in families so both moms and babies can thrive. This episode invites us to move beyond judgment and toward curiosity, connection, and systems that heal rather than harm. About Meghann: Meghann Perry, CARC, RCPF, is an award-winning keynote speaker, storyteller, theatre educator, curriculum developer, harm reductionist and addiction recovery coach. She creates innovative learning experiences blending Theatre, Storytelling, and Coaching and is an international educator of the behavioral health workforce. Meghann is the author of two groundbreaking programs, Recovery Storytelling and Embodied Storytelling, and a global keynote speaker and presenter on peer support, storytelling, and stigma for organizations like NIH, NAADAC, FAVOR, PRCoE, HRSA, Hazelden, and the recent Lisbon Addictions Conference. Meghann is a person who used drugs who passionately supports people in prevention, harm reduction and recovery and leads a team of dedicated facilitators redefining education and intervention in the substance and mental health field.  Links:  Meghann's paper in Health Affairs: www.healthaffairs.org/doi/10.1377/hlthaff.2025.00647 Meghann Perry Group website: www.meghannperry.com   Keywords: prenatal substance use, maternal health, addiction, recovery, healthcare, bonding, criminalization, compassionate care, systemic issues, early childhood trauma.

In this episode of Medsider Radio, we sat down with Kaitlin Maier, co-founder and CEO of Reia. Reia has developed a self-managed pessary — a collapsible device that empowers women to treat pelvic organ prolapse comfortably and independently. A mechanical engineering graduate of Dartmouth, Kaitlin previously worked at Sherpa Technology Group, developing patent strategies for leading life science and technology firms. In this conversation, Kaitlin shares how she and her co-founders turned a student project into an FDA-cleared product using resource constraints as a design advantage. She explains how to turn FDA feedback into forward momentum, why running an NIH-funded randomized controlled trial (RCT) strengthened both credibility and confidence, and how non-dilutive funding can buy the time and control founders need to build on their own terms.Before we dive into the discussion, I wanted to mention a few things:First, if you're into learning from medical device and health technology founders and CEOs, and want to know when new interviews are live, head over to Medsider.com and sign up for our free newsletter.Second, if you want to peek behind the curtain of the world's most successful startups, you should consider a Medsider premium membership. You'll learn the strategies and tactics that founders and CEOs use to build and grow companies like Silk Road Medical, AliveCor, Shockwave Medical, and hundreds more!We recently introduced some fantastic additions exclusively for Medsider premium members, including playbooks, which are curated collections of our top Medsider interviews on key topics like capital fundraising and risk mitigation, and 3 packages that will help you make use of our database of 750+ life science investors more efficiently for your fundraise and help you discover your next medical device or health technology investor!In addition to the entire back catalog of Medsider interviews over the past decade, premium members also get a copy of every volume of Medsider Mentors at no additional cost, including the latest Medsider Mentors Volume VII. If you're interested, go to medsider.com/subscribe to learn more.Lastly, if you'd rather read than listen, here's a link to the full interview with Kaitlin Maier.

storically tumultuous year for federal employees didn't dim the public's pre-shutdown view of government services, according to a new survey that largely credited tech adoption for the positive perceptions. The 2025 American Customer Satisfaction Index Federal Government Study, released Tuesday, found citizen satisfaction with federal government services at a 19-year high with a score of 70.4 on a 0-to-100 scale, a 1% jump from 2024. The survey of 6,914 randomly chosen respondents was conducted before the longest government shutdown in U.S. history, but ACSI's director of research emeritus emphasized that the results still “reflect real momentum in improving how citizens experience federal services.” Forrest Morgeson, an associate professor of marketing at Michigan State in addition to his role at ACSI, said that the introduction of AI is making a large impact, and such advancement “signal a future where government services can be more responsive and accessible to all.” Many of the highest-ranking federal agencies in customer satisfaction were lauded for their implementation of technologies, including USDA, the State Department and the Small Business Administration. The National Institutes of Health didn't ensure that the entity housing personal health information of over 1 million people — including biosamples — implemented proper cybersecurity protocols, according to an internal watchdog. In a report publicly released Friday, the Department of Health and Human Services' Office of Inspector General made five recommendations for the security of the All of Us program — a database of diverse health information from 1 million participants that's meant to aid research — after finding weaknesses. According to the report, while the award recipient operating the program's Data and Research Center implemented some cybersecurity measures, NIH failed to ensure other controls were addressed. The report found that NIH didn't ensure that the awardee, which wasn't identified, appropriately limited access to the program's data and didn't communicate national security concerns related to maintaining genomic data — or data relating to DNA. It also failed to ensure that weaknesses in security and privacy were fixed within a timeline outlined in federal requirements. The audit was initially conducted by the inspector general due to the threats that cyberattacks and the potential exposure of sensitive information can pose to the agency's programs. The watchdog's objective was to scrutinize the access, security and privacy controls of the program. Also in this episode: HPE Networking Chief AI Officer Bob Friday joins SNG host Wyatt Kash in a sponsored podcast discussion on how agencies can leverage cloud and AI to build more automated, secure and mission-ready networks. This segment was sponsored by HPE.

Who is MD Gov Moore targeting with his new political slate? The legality of creating an 8-0 Democratic advantage in the Congressional District map in Maryland. Regional grid operator members vote on new rules for adding. Half of NIH institutes have short two-week director searches open. And more. Music by Kara Levchenko.

A new JAMA Internal Medicine study reveals that Trump's NIH funding cuts have abruptly halted nearly 400 clinical trials, leaving more than 74,000 patients — especially those in underserved communities — without essential care and research options. Subscribe to our newsletter to stay informed with the latest news from a leading Black-owned & controlled media company: https://aurn.com/newsletter Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

BrainStorm wants to hear from you! Send us a text.The quest to speed up clinical trials is personal for John Dwyer, CEO of the Global Alzheimer's Platform (GAP). A long-time UsA2 advocate, he's been motivated by the generations of family members lost to Alzheimer's and Parkinson's disease. Dwyer shares with BrainStorm host Meryl Comer the critical challenges of NIH funding cuts by the Trump Administration, forcing many trial sites to shut down at a time of new FDA-cleared blood tests for early diagnosis.  Dwyer highlights GAP's innovations in improving the participant experience through streamlining visits, personalized feedback, and bringing mobile trials directly to small communities. This must listen episode reinforces clinical trial participation as a valuable care option while advancing research for millions affected by Alzheimer's and related dementias. This episode of BrainStorm is sponsored by Johnson & JohnsonSupport the show

In this on-site conversation from the AAO-HNSF 2025 Annual Meeting & OTO EXPO in Indianapolis, host Rahul K. Shah, MD, MBA, AAO-HNS/F EVP and CEO, sits down with Gregory J. Basura, MD, PhD, Chair of the AAO-HNSF Humanitarian Efforts Committee. They explore the intersection of neuroscience, clinical innovation, and global humanitarian outreach—from Dr. Basura's NIH-funded research in tinnitus neuroimaging to his transformative fellowship and capacity-building work across Africa and beyond. Listeners will hear how early mentorship inspired his lifelong commitment to global otolaryngology, how partnerships in Ghana and Cape Town evolved into the creation of the African Otological Society, and how this collaborative model is now expanding into South America. The episode is both a scientific deep-dive and a call to service, highlighting the power of sustainable global training and mentorship in our specialty

What happens when a powerhouse research enterprise, a statewide health system, and a relentless push for access all meet at the same table? Our conversation with Dr. David Miller, CEO of Michigan Medicine, opens the door to a candid look at how precision care, digital tools, and financial reality collide—and how smart leadership turns that collision into progress.We dig into the new map of Michigan Medicine: the academic medical center in Ann Arbor, integrated hospitals in Lansing and West Michigan, and partnerships that extend specialty expertise across the state. Then we follow the research-to-care pipeline, from NIH-backed labs to clinical trials to real-world therapies. You'll hear how next-generation sequencing is making targeted cancer treatments more accessible, and why histotripsy—a noninvasive, ultrasound-based approach to treating liver tumors—is a model for bringing breakthroughs from engineering benches to exam rooms.Technology is more than a buzzword here. Dr. Miller explains how generative AI is cutting documentation time with ambient notes, speeding routine approvals, and supporting clinical decisions, all while keeping a human in the loop. We talk training the next wave of physicians to be technology fluent, and how virtual visits and remote monitoring expand access without trading away empathy. On payment and policy, we confront the hard parts: Medicaid churn, prior authorization friction, and the need for value-based insurance design that lowers barriers to high-value care. The throughline is simple and urgent—make it easier for patients to get the right care at the right time, and align incentives so innovation actually reaches people.If you care about healthcare that is precise, humane, and actually reachable, this conversation will give you a practical, hopeful blueprint. Subscribe, share with a friend who's navigating care, and leave a review to help more listeners find the show. Your feedback keeps this community sharp—and pushes the system toward what works.Support the showEngage the conversation on Substack at The Common Bridge!

The NIH has cut billions of dollars in research projects under the Trump administration. The AP's Jennifer King reports.

A former NIH director discusses the urgent need to put public health above party lines. Then, a pancreatic cancer survivor reflects on his diagnosis and the complex Whipple procedure that saved his life.

Do the many clinical trials into high-dose vitamin C prove it can actually treat the common cold and cancer, rather than just boost the immune system? Why is there ongoing scepticism? Why are multifactorial chronic diseases so hard to study in clinical trials? What is the right dosage to get the best results from vitamin C?In this episode we have the often misunderstood topic of Vitamin C as an antioxidant to get clear on, particular the high-dose approach and particularly delivered intravenously. Despite a very clear consensus that Vitamin C is a great booster to immune function, research that shows that it helps fight the common cold or flu have been dismissed by doctors and medical researchers; as well as claims that higher doses can increase its efficacy. Other claims that Vitamin C can help fight cardio-vascular disease and even cancer have been with even greater scepticism. So what exactly can vitamin C do to assist our immune function to fight disease, and why is there so much confusion about the answer given the high quantity of clinical trials data?Fortunately today's guest has exactly the right skill set and research knowledge to separate the science from the here-say, medical doctor and orthomolecular medicine researcher, Dr. Richard Z Cheng. Dr. Cheng has a PhD in biochemistry and molecular biology; he's served as a doctor in the US military; he has consulted for the National Cancer Institute, and presented at the National Institute of Health (NIH); he has conducted clinical trials; He is the editor in Chief of the Orthmolecular Medicine New Service; He is also a fellow of the American Academy of Anti- Aging medicine; and has run anti-aging and regenerative medicine clinics in both China and the US for over 20 years.What we discuss:00:00 Intro05:15 Most animals produce Vitamin C in the body, but not primates.06:00 Oxidation & Redox: Giving or receiving an electron.11:00 After reducing oxidation the body recycles it back into vitamin C.14:00 Teamwork: sharing electrons between nutrients and vitamins.18:20 Conventional consensus: good for prevention but not treatment.21:00 Over 80K papers on Vit C on Pub Med!21:30 Linus Pauling Intravenous Vitamin C for cancer and heart disease.27:00 Shortening of common cold and lowering of symptoms - Harri Hemila.29:00 Low dose studies dilute the data on the efficacy of the high dose studies.31:00 Intravenous treatment allows much higher doses safely.33:00 Differences in absorption between IV and oral application.35:20 Pro-oxidant effect only possible at IV high dose.36:30 IV clinical trials.39:20 Cytokine storm cascades in acute respiratory distress.44:00 High Dose IV Vitamin C saved lives in China during Covid 19.50:00 Attacks following Richard's NIH presentation on Vitamin C during covid.57:00 Cardio vascular disease - Vit. C research history.01:01:00 Collagen Synthesis for vascular walls & Vitamin C deficiency.01:07:20 Is the taboo for life style medicine lifting?01:09:30 Issues of gold standard RCT trials not working for multifactorial integrative interventions.01:16:00 Recommendations for preventative use of Vitamin C for listeners. References:E Cameron & Linus Pauling - 'Supplemental ascorbate in the supportive treatment of cancer: Prolongation of survival times in terminal human cancer', 1976E.T. Creagan, 'Failure of high-dose vitamin C (ascorbic acid) therapy to benefit patients with advanced cancer', 1979Harri Hemilä - over 200 meta-analyses and clinical trialsPing Chen et al. 'Pharmacokinetic Evaluation of Intravenous Vitamin C'Richard Z Cheng, ‘Can early and high intravenous dose of vitamin C prevent and treat coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)?'KU Cancer Center researchers announce study of high-dose intravenous vitamin C to treat muscle-invasive bladder cancer, 2024National Cancer Institute overview of IV Vitamin C cancer research.

Natasha is joined by Dr. Lisa Diamond and Dr. Scout on this episode of the Natasha Helfer Podcast. This is a powerful episode as, in Lisa's words: "Scout and I have witnessed the entire birth and now destruction of the field of queer and trans mental and physical health (Scout is 60, I'm 54), so we have lived through this whole weird arc of seeing lgbtq health become a legitimate profession, and now it's being threatened—it's both personally and professionally devastating for both of us to witness this happening. "It is astounding that at a time when we recently survived a global pandemic that left so many people feeling isolated in ways that has profoundly affected our mental and physical health… and at a time when we have very clear data on the risk of suicide and lessened wellbeing for the LGBTQI+ community due to societal discrimination… that the government is choosing to dismantle and destroy so many departments/entities meant to support the health, science and data collection of ALL Americans." Dr. Diamond and Dr. Scout have created a survey for anyone affected by the current administration. Please consider filling it out. "We launched the study with zero funding, it's driven by pure love and panic, and it's affecting EVERYONE who loves or works with queer or trans people, including family members, friends, social workers, physicians, school, teachers, therapist, educators, EVERYONE. All of us are going through something, and we are going through this at the same time that the federal government has CEASED all data collection on our health. So Scout and I figured "OK, you don't wanna do this? We're just gonna have to do it ourselves." Go here to fill out the survey: https://csbsutah.co1.qualtrics.com/jfe/form/SV_9WyKRPONJuL67Yy?fbclid=IwY2xjawOEdthleHRuA2FlbQIxMABicmlkETFoOW43aDJMdnNGb1kwSThZc3J0YwZhcHBfaWQQMjIyMDM5MTc4ODIwMDg5MgABHkWvMqhUx7OYFY_0kbvt2yVu911j1Ch5DAnsBloLDDgUw1CHSZ3BRNwBhq3A_aem_2e27bX8Xk_kP7utbPv482g Also, if you're an organization that would like to partner with this project reach out to: research@cancer-network.com From Natasha: I loved Lisa's reminder that we survive oppression and destruction through connection. This is a small thing we can do to make a difference and that in of itself is healing and empowering. Please take the 20-25 minutes to fill out this survey. And please forward it to anyone you know who is impacted. Scout, PhD (they/he) is the Executive Director of the National LGBTQI+ Cancer Network and the principal investigator of both the CDC-funded LGBTQI+ tobacco-related cancer disparity network and Out: The National Cancer Survey. They spend much of their time providing technical assistance for tobacco and cancer focusing agencies expanding their reach and engagement with LGBTQI+ populations. Scout has a long history in health policy analysis and a particular interest in ensuring research and surveillance activities include LGBTQI+ people. They have faculty appointments at Dartmouth Cancer Center and Boston University's school of public health. They are a member of FDA's Tobacco Products Scientific Advisory Committee, on the Advisory Panel for NIH's All of Us initiative, and a former member of NIH Council of Councils as well as former Co-Chair of the NIH Sexual and Gender Minority Research Office Work Group. Their work has won them recognition from the U.S. House of Representatives, two state governments, and many city governments. Scout is an openly nonbinary and trans father of three, an avid hiker, and is currently training for the aptly named Dopey Challenge races at Disney. Lisa M. Diamond, Ph.D., is a Distinguished Professor of Psychology and Gender Studies at the University of Utah and a past president of the International Academy for Sex Research. For nearly 30 years, she has studied gender and sexuality across the lifespan, with current work centered on social safety and its impact on the health and well-being of LGBTQ+ individuals. Dr. Diamond is internationally recognized for her pioneering research on sexual fluidity, including her award-winning book Sexual Fluidity (Harvard University Press). She co-edited the first APA Handbook of Sexuality and Psychology, is a fellow of two APA divisions, and has published over 150 scholarly works. Her research has been supported by major national foundations, and she has delivered more than 200 invited talks worldwide, including a TED Talk with over 700,000 views. — Join Natasha February 11-17th 2026 on a cruise leaving out of Tampa, Florida. You can grab a package and work with Natasha on the ship. Sign up before January 1st and you get the early bird special: Natasha packages: $750 per couple $675 per couple - early bird (before January 1st) Payment plans are available. For further questions, email Mimi at unleashedvacations@gmail.com. Book now to make sure you don't miss out! See you on board. — To help keep this podcast going, please consider donating at natashahelfer.com and share this episode. To watch the video of this podcast, you can subscribe to Natasha's channel on Youtube and follow her professional Facebook page at natashahelfer LCMFT, CST-S. You can find all her cool resources at natashahelfer.com.  The information shared on this program is informational and should not be considered therapy. This podcast addresses many topics around mental health and sexuality and may not be suitable for minors. Some topics may elicit a trigger or emotional response so please care for yourself accordingly. The views, thoughts and opinions expressed by our guests are their own and do not necessarily reflect the views or feelings of Natasha Helfer or the Natasha Helfer Podcast. We provide a platform for open and diverse discussions, and it is important to recognize that different perspectives may be shared. We encourage our listeners to engage in critical thinking and form their own opinions. The intro and outro music for these episodes is by Otter Creek. Thank you for listening. And remember: Symmetry is now offering Ketamine services. To find out more, go to symcounseling.com/ketamine-services. There are also several upcoming workshops. Visit natashahelfer.com or symcounseling.com to find out more.

What if the biggest threat to our survival isn't the next virus, but our failure to learn from the last one? In this episode, Dr. Michael Osterholm, Regents Professor and Director of the Center for Infectious Disease Research and Policy (CIDRAP) at the University of Minnesota, explains why America's public health system is dangerously underprepared for the next major outbreak. He shares how misinformation and political interference have eroded confidence in science, leaving critical institutions like the CDC and NIH struggling to fulfill their missions. Dr. Osterholm discusses lessons from COVID-19 and why failing to apply them could cost millions of lives in the future. He also explores the promise of universal vaccines, the need for sustained investment in pandemic defense, and how rebuilding public trust starts with humility, transparency, and truth-telling. Tune in to hear what it will really take to prepare for “the big one. Resources Connect with and follow Dr. Michael Osterholm on LinkedIn. Follow the University of Minnesota on LinkedIn! Follow the Center for Infectious Disease Research and Policy (CIDRAP) on LinkedIn and visit their website! Learn more about the Vaccine Integrity Project here! Pick up any of Dr. Osterholm's books here! Check out the Osterholm Update podcast! Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

What if blockbuster weight-loss drugs and a broken food system are two sides of the same story? We sit down with Dr. David Harlan—physician, researcher, and former NIH diabetes branch chief—to trace the unlikely path from the “incretin effect” to GLP-1 therapies that are transforming care for type 2 diabetes and obesity. Along the way, we ask harder questions about incentives, access, and why lifestyle still matters even when the medicine is powerful.Dr. Harlan breaks down how GLP-1 receptor agonists amplify insulin release, quiet cravings, and drive meaningful weight loss—often alongside better blood pressure, improved A1C, and fewer heart events. He explains the Gila monster connection, why weekly injections replaced multiple daily shots, and what the latest safety data actually shows. We get candid about what happens when people stop these drugs, why genetics complicate the “just try harder” narrative, and how brain chemistry shapes appetite, compulsion, and energy.Then we zoom out to the policy level: the rise of food deserts, cheap ultra-processed calories, and the paradox of publicly funding both the problem and the fix. We explore practical steps that work in the real world—SKU-controlled health savings accounts, everyday movement campaigns, healthier default options in public spaces, and community gardens and sidewalks that make active living normal again. The throughline is simple and human: use the science to help people now, and rebuild the environment so fewer need the medicine later.If you care about diabetes, obesity, prevention, or the economics shaping our plates and prescriptions, this conversation offers clarity and a path forward. Support the show by subscribing, sharing with a friend, and leaving a review with the one insight you'll apply this week.Support the showEngage the conversation on Substack at The Common Bridge!

About this episode: Between lawsuits, layoffs, and lags in funding, NIH has undergone significant changes in how it reviews and approves grant proposals for critical research. In this episode: Jeremy Berg, a former NIH leader, talks about what's changed and what's to come for indirect cost reimbursements, funding approvals, and the scientific research ecosystem as a whole. Guests: Jeremy M. Berg, PhD, is a professor of computational and systems biology at the University of Pittsburgh, where he is also the Associate Senior Vice Chancellor of Science Strategy and Planning. He previously served as the Director of the National Institute for General Medical Sciences at NIH. Host: Lindsay Smith Rogers, MA, is the producer of the Public Health On Call podcast, an editor for Expert Insights, and the director of content strategy for the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health. Show links and related content: Appeals court judges seem skeptical of Trump administration's defense of capping NIH overhead payments—STAT Trump order gives political appointees vast powers over research grants—Nature Life-saving medicines begin in the basic research DOGE wants to stop funding—Pittsburgh Post-Gazette Transcript information: Looking for episode transcripts? Open our podcast on the Apple Podcasts app (desktop or mobile) or the Spotify mobile app to access an auto-generated transcript of any episode. Closed captioning is also available for every episode on our YouTube channel. Contact us: Have a question about something you heard? Looking for a transcript? Want to suggest a topic or guest? Contact us via email or visit our website. Follow us: @‌PublicHealthPod on Bluesky @‌JohnsHopkinsSPH on Instagram @‌JohnsHopkinsSPH on Facebook @‌PublicHealthOnCall on YouTube Here's our RSS feed Note: These podcasts are a conversation between the participants, and do not represent the position of Johns Hopkins University.

Pre-Order The Forever Strong PLAYBOOK and receive exclusive bonuses: https://drgabriellelyon.com/playbook/Want ad-free episodes, exclusives and access to community Q&As? Subscribe to Forever Strong Insider: https://foreverstrong.supercast.comIn this fascinating episode, Dr. Gabrielle Lyon talks with neuroscientist Dr. Ben Rein, PhD (author of Why Brains Need Friends), about the science of social connection, emotion, and cognitive health. Dr. Rein, an expert in neurobiology and psychedelic research, reveals the cutting-edge studies that explain why loneliness is as damaging as smoking and how our digital world is affecting our brain's ability to connect.They discuss the neurochemistry of love, the controversial use of MDMA in therapy, and whether AI can ever truly replace human intimacy. This conversation provides an essential look at the biological drivers of happiness, performance, and long-term brain health.Chapter Markers:0:00 - MDMA (Molly): The History & Therapeutic Benefits 5:59 - The Legal Status of MDMA for PTSD 6:44 - The Safety and Effectiveness of MDMA in Clinical Trials 8:29 - PTSD (The Amygdala Alarm) 9:41 - How MDMA Soothes the Amygdala to Access Memory 11:42 - Is There an Alternative to MDMA? (Ketamine's Mechanism) 13:16 - Ketamine and Neuroplasticity for Depression 15:48 - Botox and Empathy: 18:12 - The Problem of Volume: How Screens Depersonalize Interaction 19:48 - The Virtual Disengagement Hypothesis Explained 25:00 - Defining Cognitive and Emotional Empathy 29:43 - MDMA's Link to Serotonin & Social Reward 31:04 - Do SSRIs Have Pro-Social Effects? 36:10 - The Science of Likability and "Easy to Read" Faces 40:10 - Top 3 Ways to Be More Likable49:49 - The Likability Gap: Why You Underestimate How Well-Liked You Are 56:59 - The Neurobiology of Oxytocin, Dopamine, and Serotonin1:09:23 - The Goldilocks Zone of Empathy 1:15:58 - Narcolepsy 1:18:16 - Alcohol: Why the Neurotoxin is Bad for Brain Health 1:21:47 - Exercise and Neurogenesis1:22:27 - Sex, Orgasm, and Oxytocin Release 1:25:06 - Oxytocin During Childbirth Who is Ben Rein:Dr. Ben Rein is an award-winning neuroscientist and Chief Science Officer of the Mind Science Foundation, where he supports early-career researchers in neuroscience. He earned his PhD from SUNY Buffalo and completed postdoctoral training at Stanford University, publishing over 20 peer-reviewed papers on autism, empathy, MDMA, and digital behavior. Recognized by the NIH, the Society for Neuroscience, and Sigma Xi, he also serves as a scientific advisor to more than 20 organizations. With over one million followers and 75 million video views, Dr. Rein is celebrated for making neuroscience accessible to the public and has been featured by outlets such as Good Morning America, ABC News, and PopularMechanics.Thank you to our sponsors:BodyHealth: Use code LYON20 to get 20% off your first order https://www.bodyhealthaffiliates.com/73L4QL3/7XDN2/BON CHARGE Holiday Sale https://boncharge.com for 25% off Pique 20% off for life: https://Piquelife.com/DRLYONFind Ben Rein at: Website: https://www.benrein.com/Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/dr.benrein/#TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@dr.benrein?lang=enFacebook:

Behind every medical breakthrough for kids is usually a long history of research advances. Research is incremental, and new therapies exist, thanks to questions that are asked in science laboratories. Those investigators not only asked the hard questions but also found the funding to answer them. What happens when that funding starts to disappear? Research drives progress in pediatric medicine from vaccines to breakthrough treatments for rare diseases. That progress is currently at risk. Cuts and cancellations in key federal research programs, including CDC and NIH funding, threaten to stall discoveries and disproportionately impact pediatric investigators. In this episode, we dig into what's happening with child health research funding, why it matters for every pediatrician, and where the greatest opportunities for advocacy lie. For this episode, we are joined by two experts at the forefront of this conversation. Joe St. Geme, MD, is the Physician in Chief at the Children's Hospital of Philadelphia, as well as the President of the CHOP Practice Association. He is also a professor at the University of Pennsylvania Perelman School of Medicine. Zach Zaslow is the Vice President of Advocacy and Community Health at Children's Hospital Colorado. Some highlights from this episode include:  The status of pediatric research funding  How pediatric research directly impacts community pediatricians  What current threats exist  How providers can advocate for their patients and families   For more information on Children's Colorado, visit: childrenscolorado.org. 

Millions of dollars in federal grants have been terminated, throwing cutting-edge research at American universities into crisis. On this week's On the Media, meet the two men at the center of the fight over the future of academia.[0:00] Harvard president Alan Garber and National Institutes of Health director Jay Bhattacharya are at the heart of the national fight over the future of academia. Alan Garber has been cast as the defender of academic freedom and democracy; Jay Bhattacharya is Donald Trump's pick to lead the NIH, the agency withholding billions of dollars in research grants from Harvard. Oddly enough, the two men go way back: Garber was Bhattacharya's undergraduate thesis adviser and mentor in the late 1980s. This episode tells the story of how the two men found themselves adversaries — and what it means for the future of science.  On the Media is supported by listeners like you. Support OTM by donating today (https://pledge.wnyc.org/support/otm). Follow our show on Instagram, Twitter and Facebook @onthemedia, and share your thoughts with us by emailing onthemedia@wnyc.org.

Two-time Emmy and three-time NAACP Image Award-winning television Executive Producer Rushion McDonald interviewed Dr. Schenta D. Randolph.

Two-time Emmy and three-time NAACP Image Award-winning television Executive Producer Rushion McDonald interviewed Dr. Schenta D. Randolph.

Milk has long been sold as the key to strong bones, but research challenges that claim: many people don't tolerate dairy, calcium needs are lower than advertised, and higher milk intake doesn't necessarily prevent fractures. Politics and industry marketing helped set “three glasses a day,” even though healthy bones depend more on overall diet and lifestyle—things like vitamin D, movement, and avoiding soda, excess sugar, and stress that drive calcium loss. Dairy may be helpful for some diets, but it can also trigger bloating, acne, congestion, or digestive issues. The good news is that strong bones and good nutrition are still very doable without cow's milk—think leafy greens, sardines, almonds, chia, and sunshine for vitamin D. In this episode, I discuss, along with Dr. David Ludwig and Dr. Elizabeth Boham why bone health depends more on diet, lifestyle, and nutrient balance than on dairy. David S. Ludwig, MD, PhD, is an endocrinologist and researcher at Boston Children's Hospital, Professor of Pediatrics at Harvard Medical School, and Professor of Nutrition at the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health. He co-directs the New Balance Foundation Obesity Prevention Center and founded the Optimal Weight for Life (OWL) program, one of the nation's largest clinics for children with obesity. For over 25 years, Dr. Ludwig has studied how diet composition affects metabolism, body weight, and chronic disease risk, focusing on low glycemic index, low-carbohydrate, and ketogenic diets. Called an “obesity warrior” by Time Magazine, he has championed policy changes to improve the food environment. A Principal Investigator on numerous NIH and philanthropic grants, Dr. Ludwig has published over 200 scientific articles and three books for the public, including the #1 New York Times bestseller Always, Hungry? Dr. Elizabeth Boham is Board Certified in Family Medicine from Albany Medical School, and she is an Institute for Functional Medicine Certified Practitioner and the Medical Director of The UltraWellness Center. Dr. Boham lectures on a variety of topics, including Women's Health and Breast Cancer Prevention, insulin resistance, heart health, weight control and allergies. She is on the faculty for the Institute for Functional Medicine. This episode is brought to you by BIOptimizers. Head to bioptimizers.com/hyman and use code HYMAN to save 15%. Full-length episodes can be found here:Why Most Everything We Were Told About Dairy Is Wrong Is It Okay To Eat Cheese And What Types Of Dairy Should You Avoid? Is Lactose Intolerance Causing Your Gut Issues?