Podcasts about Ohio State University

Send us a textAbout Dr. Kathryn Richdale:Dr. Kathryn Richdale received her BS from the University of Notre Dame and her OD, PhD, and Cornea and Contact Lens Advanced Practice Fellowship from The Ohio State University. She was founding director of the Clinical Vision Research Center, and established the Myopia Control Clinic at the State University of New York College of Optometry before joining the University of Houston College of Optometry (UHCO) as an Associate Professor in 2017. Dr. Richdale is an attending in the Cornea and Contact Lens Service, oversees the Myopia Management Service, and teaches in both the optometric and graduate programs at UHCO. She conducts research and teaches primarily in the areas of cornea, contact lenses and refractive error. Dr. Richdale earned her Diplomate in the American Academy of Optometry Cornea, Contact Lenses and Refractive Technologies section in 2019 and is currently a board member for our Academy's journal (OVS) and Foundation.---If you're considering or have ever considered getting a virtual team member for your practice check out hiredteem.com, mention The Myopia Podcast when signing up for a $250 dollar discount off of your first month's teem member.https://hireteem.com/myopia-podcast/

A digital world in relentless movement—from artificial intelligence to ubiquitous computing—has been captured and reinvented as a monoculture by Silicon Valley "big tech" and venture capital firms. Yet very little is discussed in the public sphere about existing alternatives. Based on long-term field research across San Francisco, Tokyo, and Shenzhen, Common Circuits: Hacking Alternative Technological Futures (Stanford UP, 2025) explores a transnational network of hacker spaces that stand as potent, but often invisible, alternatives to the dominant technology industry. In what ways have hackers challenged corporate projects of digital development? How do hacker collectives prefigure more just technological futures through community projects? Luis Felipe R. Murillo responds to these urgent questions with an analysis of the hard challenges of collaborative, autonomous community-making through technical objects conceived by hackers as convivial, shared technologies. Through rich explorations of hacker space histories and biographical sketches of hackers who participate in them, Murillo describes the social and technical conditions that allowed for the creation of community projects such as anonymity and privacy networks to counter mass surveillance; community-made monitoring devices to measure radioactive contamination; and small-scale open hardware fabrication for the purposes of technological autonomy. Murillo shows how hacker collectives point us toward brighter technological futures—a renewal of the "digital commons"—where computing projects are constantly being repurposed for the common good. Mentioned in this episode: "Political Software: Mapping Digital Worlds from Below" Project Website here Luis Felipe R. Murillo is Assistant Professor of Anthropology and Faculty Fellow at the Notre Dame Technology Ethics Center at the University of Notre Dame. His work is dedicated to the study of computing from an anthropological perspective. Liliana Gil is Assistant Professor of Comparative Studies (STS) at The Ohio State University. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/new-books-network

A digital world in relentless movement—from artificial intelligence to ubiquitous computing—has been captured and reinvented as a monoculture by Silicon Valley "big tech" and venture capital firms. Yet very little is discussed in the public sphere about existing alternatives. Based on long-term field research across San Francisco, Tokyo, and Shenzhen, Common Circuits: Hacking Alternative Technological Futures (Stanford UP, 2025) explores a transnational network of hacker spaces that stand as potent, but often invisible, alternatives to the dominant technology industry. In what ways have hackers challenged corporate projects of digital development? How do hacker collectives prefigure more just technological futures through community projects? Luis Felipe R. Murillo responds to these urgent questions with an analysis of the hard challenges of collaborative, autonomous community-making through technical objects conceived by hackers as convivial, shared technologies. Through rich explorations of hacker space histories and biographical sketches of hackers who participate in them, Murillo describes the social and technical conditions that allowed for the creation of community projects such as anonymity and privacy networks to counter mass surveillance; community-made monitoring devices to measure radioactive contamination; and small-scale open hardware fabrication for the purposes of technological autonomy. Murillo shows how hacker collectives point us toward brighter technological futures—a renewal of the "digital commons"—where computing projects are constantly being repurposed for the common good. Mentioned in this episode: "Political Software: Mapping Digital Worlds from Below" Project Website here Luis Felipe R. Murillo is Assistant Professor of Anthropology and Faculty Fellow at the Notre Dame Technology Ethics Center at the University of Notre Dame. His work is dedicated to the study of computing from an anthropological perspective. Liliana Gil is Assistant Professor of Comparative Studies (STS) at The Ohio State University. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/anthropology

Food is more than fuel. Its culture, comfort, connection and, increasingly, a source of confusion for families. Parents ask questions shaped by headlines, influencers and evolving dietary guidelines. Pediatricians aren't simply monitoring growth curves, they are helping families navigate a complex nutrition environment that influences children's health now and long into adulthood. In this episode, we explore how to navigate today's dietary landscape with clarity, compassion and evidence-based tools you can use in everyday practice, highlighting the importance of healthy eating.  This episode was recorded on the exhibit floor at the 2025 American Academy of Pediatrics Conference in Denver, Colorado. Praveen Goday, MD, is a gastroenterologist at Nationwide Children's Hospital, as well as the director of their nutrition and feeding programs. He is also a clinical professor at Ohio State University. Some highlights from this episode include: The current dietary landscape and the role of outside influences How the idea of health has changed throughout the years What best practices parents can use to positively influence their children  Hopes for the future of nutrition       For more information on Children's Colorado, visit: childrenscolorado.org. 

Eve gives an overview of current and future consumer trends where dairy can play a role. Functional foods, health and wellness, high protein foods, fermented and cultured foods, women's health, brain health, and aging are all part of the mix. (7:26)The panelists discuss the healthfulness of saturated fats, the resurgence of butter, milk's bioactive compounds, and how best to reach the public about the health benefits of dairy. (10:41)Eve talks about marketing to Gen Z consumers, who are motivated by novelty. How do we reimagine a food that's been here for thousands of years? What new ways can we talk about it? What ways can we optimize dairy science and research to show up in generative systems like ChatGPT? (20:34)The group then tackles the topic of lactose. Lactose and honey are the only two sugars not made by plants. Why is it lactose that is in the milk of mammals? Dr. Jiminez-Flores thinks lactose is a dark horse in dairy and we have much yet to discover about it. He notes that some milk oligosaccharides are not digested by babies, but are used by bacteria in the development of a healthy microbiome. Dr. Lucy notes that dairy also contains peptides that have been found to reduce hypertension. The group also delves into how dairy products can be part of preventative health care. (23:53)Do consumers perceive dairy products to be minimally processed? Eve explains that dairy is perceived as a clean, fresh food. Given the current trend to reduce additives and food dyes, she sees potential for dairy food science innovation in this area. Dr. Aldrich talks about the glycemic index of lactose-free milk. (38:13)The panelists agree that dairy has a great upcycling story to tell. Converting fiber into milk and meat and feeding non-human grade byproducts are just two examples. Eve notes that younger consumers care about sustainability, but there's a huge “say-do” gap: 76% of North American consumers identify as caring about conscious and sustainable practices, but less than 40% actually act on those values when making purchases. The panel also notes that whey is another great upcycling story. Dr. Jiminez-Flores emphasizes how important consumer trust in science and research is, and how we are currently experiencing a loss of that trust. (45:48)Panelists share their take-home thoughts. (1:01:01)Please subscribe and share with your industry friends to invite more people to join us at the Real Science Exchange virtual pub table.  If you want one of our Real Science Exchange t-shirts, screenshot your rating, review, or subscription, and email a picture to anh.marketing@balchem.com. Include your size and mailing address, and we'll mail you a shirt.

We are happy to welcome back Jaime Porras for this episode! Jaime Porras is the District Vice President for Fusion Academy, overseeing nine campuses across Los Angeles and Santa Barbara. With more than two decades in education (including fourteen years at Fusion), he has held roles from teacher to Head of School and is passionate about fostering student-centered, relationship-driven learning environments. He holds an MA in Education with a focus on Social Justice from Antioch University Los Angeles and a BA in English from Ohio State University. A proud Buckeye and Culver City resident, Jaime enjoys sports, travel, literature, and discovering the best tacos in L.A., where he lives with his wife and daughter. Jaime joins us for this episode to discuss how the 1:1 learning model at Fusion Academy has become increasingly important in recent years as students have faced growing challenges with anxiety and depression, and disengagement. He explains that the pandemic drastically worsened many students' struggles with executive functioning and social anxiety but how, in a 1:1 setting, Fusion is able to provide a safe, supportive space where students can rebuild their confidence and reconnect with learning. By removing the pressure and comparison of a traditional classroom, students feel safer to take risks, make mistakes, and grow. Jaime highlights the importance of building a strong mentor-student relationship in which the teacher can truly understand and cater to each individual's unique needs, interests, and learning style, a personalized approach that also helps address issues around executive functioning, as Fusion teachers break down assignments into manageable steps while also explicitly modeling positive behaviors and social-emotional skills. Jaime notes that the 1:1 environment allows students the space to process feelings of failure in a healthy way without judgment from their peers. At the same time, Fusion works to build a sense of community and belonging via shared social spaces and activities, although the focus remains on creating an environment customized for each student's needs. Jaime believes that this model will only become more important in the years ahead as schools grapple with the lasting impacts of the pandemic on student mental health and engagement. Our conversation highlights how the 1:1 approach at Fusion Academy empowers students to rebuild their confidence and reconnect with their strengths even in the face of significant challenges. As the education landscape continues to evolve, this model may serve as an important blueprint for supporting the diverse needs of today's learners! Show Notes: [2:27] - Jaime describes how post-pandemic isolation worsened student anxiety and depression while boosting demand for 1:1 learning. [5:59] - 1:1 environments reduce social pressure and allow teachers to address each student's unique needs. [9:00] - Jaime stresses that individualized settings can lead to belonging, safety, and feelings of mattering. [12:08] - Learning begins with love and rapport, creating trust before taking on executive functioning challenges. [14:01] - Jaime explains how executive functioning develops with maturity, so Fusion Academy celebrates incremental progress. [17:11] - Jaime notes how 1:1 settings allow students to process failure safely and quickly recover. [19:41] - Fusion removes traditional school obstacles, focusing on individualized support without judgment. [22:37] - 1:1 learning suits kids who need safety, personalization, and emotional comfort. [23:08] - Jaime highlights Fusion's flexibility to adjust instantly for each student's needs. [25:21] - Jaime compares Fusion's structure to private lessons that separate focused learning from broader social experiences. [27:46] - Small-group environments let students more easily build real friendships and resolve conflicts. [29:48] - Jaime criticizes traditional schools for pressuring kids into activities that adults rarely pursue. [31:53] - Hear Jaime share a student's gradual growth from isolation to leadership, proving that patience and personalization can lead to confidence. [35:19] - Jaime predicts that 1:1 education will shape all schooling by highlighting growth over conformity. [38:30] - Where can Jaime be reached? Links and Related Resources: Episode 52: How a 1:1 Instruction Model Helps Students with Jaime Porras and Vailet Yarijanian Episode 154: Why Self-Efficacy and Self-Advocacy are Important for Diverse Learners with Ashley Harding Episode 189: The Private School Option for Kids with Learning Differences with Collette Bowers Zinn Episode 243: From Inclusion to Belonging: Creating Neurodiversity-Affirming Schools with Amanda Morin Connect with Jaime Porras: Fusion Academy Website  

What if your lab work, genetics, and lifestyle data could all talk to each other—giving you a single, clear picture of how to optimize your energy, hormones, and longevity? In this episode, I sit down with Dr. Meghan Jones, a board-certified Emergency Medicine physician and Fellow of Wild Health's Precision Medicine Program, to explore how their Clarity Report™ uses genomics and biomarker analysis to map out a personalized path toward healing and performance. Dr. Jones shares her journey from emergency medicine to precision health—why she left crisis care to help people prevent disease and live stronger, longer lives. Together we unpack my own Wild Health Clarity Report™ findings and discuss how data-driven coaching can uncover the hidden stressors, nutrient gaps, and hormone imbalances that keep you stuck. In this episode: What the Wild Health Clarity Report™ measures and why it matters How genetics, labs, and lifestyle data combine to reveal your root causes My personal insights from metabolic and hormone testing How precision medicine can improve energy, resilience, and longevity If you're ready to move beyond symptom management and start your own investigation, visit www.wildhealth.com and use code COACHDEBBIEPOTTS to save on your Precision Medicine Clarity Report™. Guest Bio: Dr. Meghan Jones, MD is a board-certified Emergency Medicine physician and Fellow of Wild Health's Precision Medicine Program. She earned her medical degree at West Virginia University and completed her residency at The Ohio State University. After years in emergency medicine, Dr. Jones transitioned to precision health to help patients uncover root causes and achieve results once thought out of reach. She's passionate about helping people live as well as they can—for as long as they can—and is an active mom of two who loves fitness, outdoor adventure, and community. Links

In this episode of AgCredit Said It, host Libby Wixtead interviews Davey Neidhart, a sixth-generation farmer, about his journey in diversifying his farming operation by adding additional revenue streams. Davey shares his background, explaining how a family tragedy initially pushed him away from farming, leading him to pursue a degree in agricultural economics at Ohio State University. After working at a steel mill, he returned to farming, purchasing his first farm with the help of AgCredit. Davey discusses his venture into hops farming and how an unexpected opportunity led him to acquire a stump grinding business, which he successfully ran for ten years. The episode also covers his latest business venture, a farm drainage company named Neidhart Farm Drainage, which he started in response to a high demand for drainage services in his area. Davey emphasizes the importance of seizing opportunities, building relationships, and not being afraid to take risks. He also highlights the value of collaboration over competition in the agricultural industry.   Show Notes: https://www.agcredit.net/news/ep-98-seizing-business-opportunities-davey-neidhart   Connect with AgCredit on Facebook, Twitter and Instagram   Share questions and topic ideas with us: Email podcast@agcredit.net

Today Razib talks to Sean Trende. He is a prominent American political analyst who currently serves as the Senior Elections Analyst for RealClearPolitics, a position he has held since 2010. He is also a Fellow at the American Enterprise Institute (AEI) and a lecturer at The Ohio State University, where he earned his Ph.D. in political science in 2023. Before transitioning to full-time political analysis, Trende practiced law for eight years at firms including Kirkland & Ellis LLP and Hunton & Williams LLP, holding a J.D. and M.A. from Duke University and a B.A. from Yale University. Known for his expertise in election forecasting, redistricting, and political demographics, he authored the book The Lost Majority (2012), co-authored The Almanac of American Politics 2014, and served as a court-appointed special master to redraw Virginia's legislative districts in 2021. Trende and Razib first talk about the elections in the fall of 2025 in Virginia and New Jersey, and what they tell us about the elections next year. They also discuss the election of Zohran Mamdani in New York City, and the rise of populism on the Left and Right. Razib asks Trende about why political commentary often assumes single-party rule is about to happen, only to be refuted by the reality of the opposition's resurgence once these claims are made. They also talk about Trende's distinctive personal background, and his perspective as a more centrist-libertarian commentator and professor in the political analyst field.

Adele Flynn, treasurer of Ohio Farm Bureau, joins the podcast to discuss her recent trip to the White House and the conversations had on long-term relief to farm country. Dr. Ian Sheldon of The Ohio State University also provides an update on trade and tariffs.

Horse owners often feed supplements to address gaps in their horses' diet that forage and concentrates might not meet, such as supporting joint comfort, hoof quality, or muscle recovery. Researchers suggest that supplements can be beneficial when a horse has a documented deficiency, such as low vitamin or mineral levels, or a clearly identified need, such as poor hoof quality. Owners should always consult a veterinarian or an equine nutritionist when choosing supplements for their horses and prioritize products backed by research.During this Ask TheHorse Live episode, two experts answer questions and discuss everything you need to know about equine supplements. This episode is brought to you by SmartEquine. About the Experts: Frank M. Andrews, DVM, MS, Dipl. ACVIM (LAIM), is a graduate of Washington State University College of Veterinary Medicine in Pullman, where he received a DVM and MS. After a year in private veterinary practice, he completed an equine medicine and surgery residency at The Ohio State University, in Columbus. After 20 years on the faculty at the University of Tennessee College of Veterinary Medicine, in Knoxville, he is currently LVMA Equine Committee professor and director of Equine Health and Sports Performance at Louisiana State University School of Veterinary Medicine (LSU Vet Med), in Baton Rouge. Andrews has clinical and research interests in gastric ulcers and gastrointestinal disease, and he's completed research on the efficacy of pharmacologic agents in the treatment of gastric ulcers in horses. Andrews is actively involved in clinical equine practice and clinical research.Liz Schatz, DVM, is a graduate of the Kansas State University College of Veterinary Medicine, in Manhattan, where she was awarded the Glenn Ray Teagarden Award for Proficiency in Equine Medicine. After veterinary school, she completed an equine surgery internship at New Jersey Equine Clinic, in Millstone Township, and a large animal medicine, surgery, and emergency/critical care internship at New Bolton Center, in Kennett Square, Pennsylvania. She then completed a fellowship at the Comparative Orthopedic Research Laboratory while doing equine emergency work for New Bolton Center Field Service. She moved on to private practice for several years prior to joining SmartEquine in 2022, where her main area of interest is nutrition education. Schatz is a passionate Thoroughbred aftercare advocate and is an active volunteer for both MidAtlantic Horse Rescue and CANTER Pennsylvania. She is an avid lifelong rider and owns a horse farm in Central North Carolina, where she cares for her own OTTBs and any number of beloved vagabond animals.

How do we stay awake and aware without constantly being outraged? Or, perhaps even worse, normalizing what should be utterly unacceptable?Staying human is hard in this environment. So many leaders are trying to hold onto their boundaries and values against pressure to act contrary to them, to stay compassionate and curious when so many forces benefit from and encourage our outrage.Anger, rage, and outrage are powerful and can be useful emotions. But when we live from a perpetual state of outrage, we lose access to the self-leadership and adaptive skills that help us lead well, and eventually it takes us out.Today's guest is here to help us understand what outrage really is, why it's so potent right now, how it becomes weaponized, and how we can use it without losing ourselves.Kurt Gray is a social psychologist who studies our moral minds and how best to bridge political divides. Gray received his PhD from Harvard University, and now directs the Deepest Beliefs Lab at The Ohio State University. He also leads the Center for the Science of Moral Understanding, which explores new ways to reduce polarization, and is a Field Builder in the New Pluralists, which seeks to build a more pluralistic America.Gray's work on morality, politics, religion, creativity, and AI has been widely discussed in the media, including the New York Times, the Economist, Scientific American, Wired, and Hidden Brain. He is the co-author of the book The Mind Club: Who Thinks, What Feels and Why it Matters, and the author of Outraged: Why We Fight about Morality and Politics. Listen to the full episode to hear:How Kurt's childhood experiences with his stepmother's conservative, evangelical family have informed his thinking about how we can connect despite differencesHow our human wiring for threat detection causes “harm creep,” even while many of us are safer than everHow our outrage is connected to our perceptions of our risk and vulnerabilityHow our moral imagination helps us maintain our empathy and humanity without losing sight of our values and boundariesWhy we need to learn to recognize destruction narratives and how they're being used to sow divisionWhy leading with facts and statistics fails in moral and political arguments and how we can more effectively begin to bridge the gapsWhy we need to leave room for uncertainty and humility in our convictionsLearn more about Kurt Gray, PhD:WebsiteConnect on LinkedInMoral Understanding NewsletterOutraged: Why We Fight About Morality and Politics and How to Find Common GroundThe Mind Club: Who Thinks, What Feels, and Why it MattersLearn more about Rebecca:rebeccaching.comWork With RebeccaThe Unburdened Leader on SubstackSign up for the weekly Unburdened Leader EmailResources:Atlas of the Heart: Mapping Meaningful Connection and the Language of Human Experience, Brené BrownRage Becomes Her: The Power of Women's Anger, Soraya ChemalyEP 96: Rage to Action: The Leading Power of Women's Anger with Soraya ChemalyBrené Brown on the State of Leadership in America Today | On with Kara SwisherEP 52: Charlie Gilkey: Leading With What Matters MostDaryl DavisSaja Boys - "Your Idol"Stranger Things Bad ThoughtsOrdinary People Change the World Series, Brad Meltzer and Christopher Eliopoulos

Dr Kerry A Rogers from The Ohio State University in Columbus summarizes the treatment landscape and reviews relevant clinical datasets for patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia. CME information and select publications here.

【欢迎订阅】 每天早上5:30，准时更新。【阅读原文】标题：Colleges Are Preparing to SelfLobotomize.The skills that students will need in an age of automation are precisely those that are eroded by inserting AI into the educational process.正文：Colleges are now scrambling to do too much. Over the summer, Ohio State University announced a new initiative promising to “embed AI education into the core of every undergraduate curriculum, equipping students with the ability to not only use AI tools, but to understand, question and innovate with them—no matter their major.” Administrators understandably want to “future proof” their graduates at a time when the workforce is rapidly transforming. But such policies represent a dangerously hasty and uninformed response to the technology. Based on the available evidence, the skills that future graduates will most need in the AI era—creative thinking, the capacity to learn new things, flexible modes of analysis—are precisely those that are likely to be eroded by inserting AI into the educational process.知识点：scramble to do sth phr. /ˈskræmbl tuː/to hurry or compete with others to do something. 争先恐后地做；匆忙应对e.g. Companies are scrambling to adapt to the new market regulations. 公司们正争先恐后地适应新的市场法规。获取外刊的完整原文以及精讲笔记，请关注微信公众号「早安英文」，回复“外刊”即可。更多有意思的英语干货等着你！ 【节目介绍】 《早安英文-每日外刊精读》，带你精读最新外刊，了解国际最热事件：分析语法结构，拆解长难句，最接地气的翻译，还有重点词汇讲解。所有选题均来自于《经济学人》《纽约时报》《华尔街日报》《华盛顿邮报》《大西洋月刊》《科学杂志》《国家地理》等国际一线外刊。【适合谁听】1、关注时事热点新闻，想要学习最新最潮流英文表达的英文学习者2、任何想通过地道英文提高听、说、读、写能力的英文学习者3、想快速掌握表达，有出国学习和旅游计划的英语爱好者4、参加各类英语考试的应试者（如大学英语四六级、托福雅思、考研等）【你将获得】 1、超过1000篇外刊精读课程，拓展丰富语言表达和文化背景2、逐词、逐句精确讲解，系统掌握英语词汇、听力、阅读和语法3、每期内附学习笔记，包含全文注释、长难句解析、疑难语法点等，帮助扫除阅读障碍。

Amy Boros and Shari Insley teach middle school science in different parts of the state, but they share a passion for bringing the real world into their classrooms for their students. Over the summer, the Perrysburg Education Association member and the North Olmsted Education Association member shared grant funding to travel far out into the real world for a once-in-a-lifetime learning experience that will enhance their students' learning for years to come. On this episode, they share how they're using what they saw and did in Iceland to help their students learn and grow in Ohio, and their advice for other educators who want to experience this kind of real-world professional development for themselves.SEE THE HIGHLIGHTS | Click here to see some of Shari's photos from the Fund for Teachers fellowship in Iceland. Click here to see Amy's highlights from the trip. EXPLORE THE OPPORTUNITIES | Amy and Shari mentioned several grants and learning opportunities available to Ohio science educators. See the following links for more information about some of them:Fund For Teachers Grant  Teacher Air Camp  Yellowstone Educator Opportunity Summer 2026 Amy and Shari also shared an OEA Technology Grant to buy cameras and go pros to use on their trip and in their classrooms back home. Please note, OEA is in the process of redeveloping and streamlining the Affiliate Grant Program, and as part of the transition, no applications are being accepted for Technology Grants for the 2025-26 cycle. Make sure you listen to Episode 16 of Public Education Matters to learn more on the OEA grants being offered right now.SHARE YOUR THOUGHTS | If you'd like to share your feedback on the Public Education Matters podcast, including your ideas for what you'd like to hear about - or talk about - on future episodes, please email educationmatters@ohea.org. SUBSCRIBE | Click here to subscribe to Public Education Matters on Apple Podcasts or click here to listen on Spotify so you don't miss a thing. You can also find Public Education Matters on many other platforms. Click here for some of those links so you can listen anywhere. And don't forget you can listen to all of the previous episodes anytime on your favorite podcast platform, or by clicking here.Featured Public Education Matters guests: Amy Boros, Perrysburg Education Association memberAmy Boros teaches 5th and 6th grade Science at Hull Prairie Intermediate School in Perrysburg. She has experience in classroom teaching at the elementary, middle school and collegiate levels; educational classroom technology; grant researching, authoringand evaluation, as well as educational consulting and conference presentations in both mathematics and science. With degrees from Bowling Green State University and the University of Toledo, Amy is currently in her 30th year in education.Amy is an accomplished grant writer who has been awarded thousands of dollars in grants for her classroom, school, district, and outside organizations. In addition, Amy has authored several articles about middle school science education in Science Scope Journal and Science and Children Journal, publications of The National Science Teachers Association.In 2019, Amy was invited to participate in an extensive research project onboard the Lake Guardian, an EPA research vessel on Lake Erie; selected as one of 15 educators to collect data alongside scientists. While on board, she evaluated the presence ofmicroplastics, toxic algae and microbial organisms in surface water and sediment throughout Lake Erie's basins.She continues to work alongside scientists by helping with research, most recently in Costa Rica and Yellowstone National Park.Amy was awarded the 2022 President's Innovation Award in Environmental Education, a joint award from the White House and the EPA for her environmental education work inside and outside of the classroom.Shari Insley, North Olmsted Education Association memberShari Insley is a middle school math and science teacher for North Olmsted City Schools with 20 years of experience in education. Of her 20 years in education, the past 18 years have been dedicated to North Olmsted, and her first 2 years were spent teaching in Gallup, New Mexico.Shari earned a B.S. in Middle Childhood Education in Mathematics and Science and a Master's degree in Curriculum and Teaching from Bowling Green State University in Bowling Green, Ohio. In addition to her teaching expertise, Shari was honored as the recipient of the 2024 Presidential Innovation Award for Environmental Educators. She has also served on the Strategic Planning Committee for the Science Education Council of Ohio the past 2 years.Since 2016, Shari has dedicated her summers to participating in educator courses to expand her knowledge of freshwater ecosystems in the Great Lakes. She has taken part in grant opportunities through Ohio Sea Grant at The Ohio State University's Stone Laboratory, sailed aboard the R/V Lake Guardian with the EPA, and worked with the Gelfand STEM Center at Case Western Reserve University. Most recently, Shari was awarded a Fund for Teachers grant to travel to Iceland in the summer of 2025, where she explored the country's unique geothermal and glacial environments to enrich her environmental science curriculum.Connect with OEA:Email educationmatters@ohea.org with your feedback or ideas for future Public Education Matters topicsLike OEA on FacebookFollow OEA on TwitterFollow OEA on InstagramGet the latest news and statements from OEA hereLearn more about where OEA stands on the issues Keep up to date on the legislation affecting Ohio public schools and educators with OEA's Legislative WatchAbout us:The Ohio Education Association represents nearly 120,000 teachers, faculty members and support professionals who work in Ohio's schools, colleges, and universities to help improve public education and the lives of Ohio's children. OEA members provide professional services to benefit students, schools, and the public in virtually every position needed to run Ohio's schools.Public Education Matters host Katie Olmsted serves as Media Relations Consultant for the Ohio Education Association. S...

In this special rerun episode of The Dairy Nutrition Blackbelt Podcast, Dr. Jeff Firkins from The Ohio State University explores how nutrient interactions influence fiber degradation in dairy cows. He explains the balance between starch and fiber digestion, the role of rumen pH, and the impact of feed additives on maintaining optimal rumen health. Learn how to maximize fiber utilization and improve energy efficiency in dairy diets. Listen now on all major platforms!"Positive and negative associative effects determine whether nutrients enhance or inhibit fiber degradation, directly influencing rumen function and energy utilization."Meet the guest: Dr. Jeff Firkins is a Professor at The Ohio State University. After earning his Ph.D. and completing a postdoc at the University of Illinois, he joined OSU, advancing to Professor. His research focuses on rumen fermentation, nutrient efficiency, and microbial interactions affecting fiber utilization in dairy cattle. With over 160 journal articles and 200 invited presentations, Dr. Firkins continues to guide advancements in dairy nutrition. Liked this one? Don't stop now — Here's what we think you'll love!What will you learn: (00:00) Highlight(01:19) Introduction(01:54) Guest background(02:44) Fiber degradation(04:49) Soluble carbohydrates(06:39) Starch in dairy diets(09:08) Feed additives(12:09) Closing thoughtsThe Dairy Nutrition Blackbelt Podcast is trusted and supported by the innovative companies:* Adisseo* Priority IAC* Fortiva- Virtus Nutrition- Kemin

Send us a textDr. Justin T. Collier, MD is Healthcare CTO for North America at Lenovo ( https://www.lenovo.com/ ) where he brings his expertise in clinical informatics and technology together to help advance clinical outcomes and patient experience ( https://techtoday.lenovo.com/us/en/solutions/healthcare ).  Prior to joining Lenovo, Dr. Collier served for nearly 6 years as the Healthcare and Life Sciences Industry Practice manager at World Wide Technology, the global technology solutions provider that offers digital strategy, supply chain, and IT services to large commercial and public sector organizations, supporting their healthcare ecosystem clients nationwide. Before that, Dr. Collier served HCA Healthcare as their TriStar Division Chief Medical Information Officer for over 7 years, tackling initiatives in EHR, data and analytics, telemedicine, and clinician mobility solutions. Dr. Collier has been a long-time member of the Tennessee HIMSS chapter, previously serving on their board and continuing to serve on their advisory council.Dr. Collier has a MD from the Medical College of Georgia and did his Residency in the Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation Residency Program, at The Ohio State University.Lenovo is a global technology company headquartered in Beijing, China, with operational headquarters in Morrisville, North Carolina (USA).#JustinCollier #Lenovo #Healthcare #Digitization #ElectronicHealthRecords #EHR #Interoperability #ApplicationProgrammingInterfaces #SmartHospital #Automation #ClinicalWorkflowModernization #Cybersecurity #EdgeAI #HumanCenteredTechnologyDesign #CaregiverSupport #ClinicalWellBeing #Burnout #DigitalTherapeutics #Biometrics #Robotics #RemoteMonitoring #VirtualCare #AgingInPlace #PhysicalMedicine #Rehabilitation #IoT #SmartDevices #EdgeComputing #AIEnableSolutions #CloudInfrastructure#ProgressPotentialAndPossibilities #IraPastor #Podcast #Podcaster #STEM #Innovation #Technology #Science #ResearchSupport the show

In a rare joint appearance, the mayors of Columbus, Findlay, Lima, and Toledo—Andrew J. Ginther, Christina Muryn, Sharetta Smith, and Wade Kapszukiewicz—take the stage for a powerful conversation on the future of urban leadership in Ohio. Together, these four leaders represent more than a million Ohioans—nearly 10% of the state's population. From economic growth and urban development to transit, public safety, and civic engagement, they share strategies for building stronger, more connected, and more resilient cities. Featuring: Andrew J. Ginther, Mayor, City of Columbus Christina Muryn, Mayor, City of Findlay Sharetta Smith, Mayor, City of Lima Wade Kapszukiewicz, Mayor, City of Toledo Your host is Stacia Naquin, News Anchor, WBNS 10TV. This forum was sponsored by The Ohio State University, The Ohio Mayors Alliance, and The Robert Weiler Company. The presenting sponsor of the CMC livestream was The Center for Human Kindness at the Columbus Foundation. CMC's livestream partner was The Columbus Dispatch. This forum was supported by Downtown Columbus, Inc. and The National Veterans Memorial and Museum. If you'd like to keep exploring this week's forum topic, our partners at The Columbus Metropolitan Library recommend reading "Silicon Heartland: Transforming the Midwest from Rust Belt to Tech Belt," by Rebecca A. Fannin (2023).  This forum was recorded before a live audience at The National Veterans Memorial and Museum in Columbus, Ohio on December 10, 2025.

At this time of year when stress levels are high, we can find ourselves being sent over the edge by frustrating post office queues, infuriating traffic jams and tension-filled family occasions. But what's the best way to release our anger and find peace and calm this festive season? To find out, Ian Sample hears from science correspondent Nicola Davis, who recently tried out a rage room as a means of channelling her fury, and from Brad Bushman, professor of mass communication and psychology at Ohio State University. Is venting the most effective way to overcome anger, and if not, what is?. Help support our independent journalism at theguardian.com/sciencepod

Jeffrey Epstein's ascent into elite financial and social circles was not accidental, according to sustained criticism aimed at retail magnate Les Wexner, who is widely regarded as a central early enabler of Epstein's power and legitimacy. Epstein, despite lacking conventional financial credentials, was granted extraordinary authority over Wexner's assets, including sweeping power of attorney, access to properties, and control of finances. Critics argue this patronage gave Epstein the money, credibility, and institutional cover that allowed him to embed himself among political, academic, and royal elites for decades. Wexner, they contend, was not a passive bystander but a key architect in Epstein's rise, with his financial backing serving as the foundation upon which Epstein built his broader influence and protection.The criticism extends beyond Wexner himself to the institutions that continued to honor him while avoiding scrutiny of his ties to Epstein. Universities, particularly Ohio State University, are accused of prioritizing donor relationships and endowments over accountability, despite past failures to address sexual abuse allegations in other contexts. Observers argue that Wexner's philanthropy and political donations helped deflect investigation and shield him from serious congressional inquiry, even as Epstein's crimes became undeniable. Calls have grown for Congress to compel Wexner to testify under oath, framing his continued avoidance of direct questioning as emblematic of how wealth and institutional power have delayed accountability in the Epstein case.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:OSU alumni hold photos of billionaire Les Wexner with Jeffrey Epstein while demanding testimonyBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

Kevin talks about his alma matre Xavier University's upset victory over the University of Cincinnati in the "Crosstown Shootout"; Indiana's stunning victory over THE Ohio State University; the College Football Playoff selection results; Cincinnati Bengals vs Buffalo Bills; the U.S. Commerce Department released the much anticipated Personal Consumption Expenditures Price Index the Core Personal Consumption Expenditures Price Index; local gas prices compared to the national prices; Kevin has the details, digs into the data, puts the information into historical perspective, offers his insights and of course, his opinions.

Kevin talks about his alma matre Xavier University's upset victory over the University of Cincinnati in the "Crosstown Shootout"; Indiana's stunning victory over THE Ohio State University; the College Football Playoff selection results; Cincinnati Bengals vs Buffalo Bills; the U.S. Commerce Department released the much anticipated Personal Consumption Expenditures Price Index the Core Personal Consumption Expenditures Price Index; local gas prices compared to the national prices; Kevin has the details, digs into the data, puts the information into historical perspective, offers his insights and of course, his opinions.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

In this episode of The Crop Science Podcast Show, Dr. Felipe Dalla Lana from Louisiana State University discusses the challenges and innovations in rice disease management in the U.S. crop industry. He unpacks the unique environmental pressures in southern rice production, the limitations of current fungicide use, and the integrated strategies being adopted for sustainable outcomes. Listen now on all major platforms!"About half of the rice grown in the U.S. is exported, but a significant portion is used in domestic food and beverage production."Meet the guest: Dr. Felipe Dalla Lana is an Assistant Professor and Rice Pathology Specialist at Louisiana State University, with a research focus on rice disease epidemiology and management. He holds a Ph.D. and M.S. in Plant Pathology from The Ohio State University. His work emphasizes disease resistance, fungicide limitations, and environmental adaptability in rice production.Liked this one? Don't stop now — Here's what we think you'll love!What you will learn:(00:00) Highlight(01:00) Introduction(06:22) Rice disease pressure(09:07) Louisiana rice industry(15:59) Major rice diseases(20:20) Fungicide limitations(26:20) Yield loss risks(38:00) Final three questionsThe Crop Science Podcast Show is trusted and supported by innovative companies like:- KWS

Jeffrey Epstein's ascent into elite financial and social circles was not accidental, according to sustained criticism aimed at retail magnate Les Wexner, who is widely regarded as a central early enabler of Epstein's power and legitimacy. Epstein, despite lacking conventional financial credentials, was granted extraordinary authority over Wexner's assets, including sweeping power of attorney, access to properties, and control of finances. Critics argue this patronage gave Epstein the money, credibility, and institutional cover that allowed him to embed himself among political, academic, and royal elites for decades. Wexner, they contend, was not a passive bystander but a key architect in Epstein's rise, with his financial backing serving as the foundation upon which Epstein built his broader influence and protection.The criticism extends beyond Wexner himself to the institutions that continued to honor him while avoiding scrutiny of his ties to Epstein. Universities, particularly Ohio State University, are accused of prioritizing donor relationships and endowments over accountability, despite past failures to address sexual abuse allegations in other contexts. Observers argue that Wexner's philanthropy and political donations helped deflect investigation and shield him from serious congressional inquiry, even as Epstein's crimes became undeniable. Calls have grown for Congress to compel Wexner to testify under oath, framing his continued avoidance of direct questioning as emblematic of how wealth and institutional power have delayed accountability in the Epstein case.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:OSU alumni hold photos of billionaire Les Wexner with Jeffrey Epstein while demanding testimonyBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

Kevin talks about his alma matre Xavier University's upset victory over the University of Cincinnati in the "Crosstown Shootout"; Indiana's stunning victory over THE Ohio State University; the College Football Playoff selection results; Cincinnati Bengals vs Buffalo Bills; the U.S. Commerce Department released the much anticipated Personal Consumption Expenditures Price Index the Core Personal Consumption Expenditures Price Index; local gas prices compared to the national prices; Kevin has the details, digs into the data, puts the information into historical perspective, offers his insights and of course, his opinions.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

JCO Editor-in-Chief Dr. Jonathan Friedberg is joined by colleagues Dr. Jennifer Woyach, Dr. Wojciech Jurczak, and Dr. Matthew Davids to discuss simultaneous publications presented at ASH 2025 on pertibrutinib, a new upfront treatment option for patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia. TRANSCRIPT The disclosures for guests on this podcast can be found in the show notes. Dr. Jonathan Friedberg: I'm Jonathan Friedberg, editor of Journal of Clinical Oncology, and welcome to JCO After Hours, where we are covering two manuscripts that were presented at the American Society of Hematology meeting 2025 in Orlando, Florida. I am delighted to be joined by colleagues on this call to discuss these pivotal manuscripts which cover the topic of pirtobrutinib, a new upfront treatment option for patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia. I will first just introduce our guests, Dr. Woyach. Dr. Jennifer Woyach: Hi, my name is Jennifer Woyach. I am from the Ohio State University. Dr. Wojciech Jurczak: Hello, I am Wojciech Jurczak, working at the National Research Institute of Oncology in Krakow, Poland. Dr. Matthew Davids: Hi, I am Matthew Davids from Dana-Farber Cancer Institute in Boston. Dr. Jonathan Friedberg: We are going to start by just learning a little bit about these two trials that were both large, randomized phase 3 studies that I think answered some definitive questions. We will start with your study, Jennifer. If you could just describe the design of your study and the patient population. Dr. Jennifer Woyach: Absolutely. So this is the BRUIN CLL-314 study, and this is a phase 3 randomized trial of pirtobrutinib versus ibrutinib in patients with CLL or SLL who had not previously been treated with a covalent BTK inhibitor. The patients were both treatment-naive and relapsed/refractory, about one-third of the patients treatment-naive, the rest relapsed/refractory, and they were stratified based upon 17p deletion and the number of prior lines of therapy. The primary objective was looking at non-inferiority of overall response rate over the entire treated population as well as the relapsed/refractory patient population. Key secondary objectives included progression-free survival in the intention-to-treat and the smaller relapsed/refractory and treatment-naive populations. Dr. Jonathan Friedberg: And just comment a little bit on the risk of the patients. Dr. Jennifer Woyach: This study was fairly typical of this cohort of patients. Within the relapsed/refractory patient population, there was a median of one prior line of therapy in each of the groups, up to nine prior lines of therapy in the patients included on the study. For the overall cohort, about two-thirds of the patients were IGHV unmutated, about 15% had 17p deletion, 30% had TP53 mutations, and about 35% to 40% had a complex karyotype, which is three or more abnormalities. Dr. Jonathan Friedberg: And what were your findings? Dr. Jennifer Woyach: Regarding the primary outcome, which is the focus of the publication, we did find that pirtobrutinib was indeed non-inferior and actually superior to ibrutinib for overall response rate throughout the entire patient population and in both the relapsed/refractory and treatment-naive cohorts. PFS is a little bit immature at this time but is trending towards also being significantly better in pirtobrutinib-treated patients compared with ibrutinib-treated patients. Probably most significantly, we found this to be the case in the treatment-naive cohort where there was a striking trend to an advantage of pirtobrutinib versus ibrutinib. Dr. Jonathan Friedberg: And the follow-up that you have on that progression-free survival? Dr. Jennifer Woyach: So we have about 18 months follow-up on progression-free survival. Dr. Jonathan Friedberg: The second study, Wojciech, can you just go through the design and patient population that you treated? Dr. Wojciech Jurczak: Thank you, Dr. Friedberg, for this question. So the BRUIN CLL-313 study was, in fact, the first phase 3 study with pirtobrutinib in exclusively untreated CLL patients. It was a randomized study where we challenged pirtobrutinib versus bendamustine-rituximab. At the time we designed the protocol, bendamustine-rituximab was an option as a standard of care, and Bruton tyrosine kinase monotherapy was used far more commonly than nowadays. The primary target of the study was progression-free survival. We took all untreated patients except for those with 17p deletions. Therefore, it is a good representation for intermediate risk. We had about 60% of the population, 56 to be precise, which was unmutated, evenly distributed into two treatment arms. 17p deleted cases were excluded, but we had about 7% and 8% of TP53 mutated patients as well as about 11% and 7%, respectively, in the pirtobrutinib and bendamustine-rituximab arm of patients with complex karyotype. The progression-free survival was in favor of pirtobrutinib and was assessed by an independent review committee. What is important is that the progression-free survival of the bendamustine-rituximab arm was actually similar to the other studies addressing the same questions, like the comparison with ibrutinib in the ALLIANCE study or zanubrutinib in the SEQUOIA study. What was different was the hazard ratio. In our study, it was 0.20. It was one of the longest effect sizes noted in the frontline BTK study. It represented an 80% reduction in progression-free survival or death. If we compare it to ibrutinib or zanubrutinib, it was 0.39 and 0.42 respectively. Presumably, this great effect contributed towards a trend of overall survival difference. Although survival data are not mature enough, there is a clear trend represented by three patients we lost in the pirtobrutinib arm versus 10 patients lost in the bendamustine-rituximab arm. This trend in overall survival is becoming statistically significant despite the fact that there was a possibility of crossover, and effectively 52.9 patients, which means 18 out of 34 patients relapsing in the bendamustine-rituximab arm, were treated by pirtobrutinib. Dr. Jonathan Friedberg: I am going to turn it over to Matt. The question is: why study pirtobrutinib in this patient population? And then with these two studies, how do you find the patients that were treated, are they representative of people who you see? And do you see this maybe being approved and more widely available? Dr. Matthew Davids: I think in terms of the first question, why study this in a frontline population, we have seen very impressive data with pirtobrutinib in a very difficult-to-treat population of CLL patients. This was from the original BRUIN phase 1/2 study where most of the patients had at least two or three lines of therapy, often both a covalent BTK inhibitor and the BCL2 inhibitor venetoclax, and yet they were still responding to pirtobrutinib. The drug was also very well tolerated in that early phase experience. And actually, we have seen phase 3 data from the BRUIN 321 study comparing pirtobrutinib to bendamustine and rituximab in a relapse population as well. So I think that really motivated these studies to look at pirtobrutinib as a first therapy. You know, often in other cancers of course, we want to use our best therapy first, and I think these studies are an initial step at looking at that. In terms of the second question around the patient population, these are pretty representative patient populations, I would say, for most frontline CLL studies. We see patients who are a bit younger and fitter than sort of the general population of CLL patients who are treated in clinical practice, and I think that is true here as well. Median age in the sort of mid-60s here is a bit younger than the typical patients we are treating in practice. But that is not different from other CLL frontline studies that we have seen recently, so I think it makes it a little bit easier as we kind of think across studies to feel comfortable that these are relatively similar populations. Dr. Jonathan Friedberg: How do you see this either getting regulatory approval or potentially being used compared to current standard of care options? Dr. Matthew Davids: So my understanding is that both of these trials were designed with registrational intent in the frontline setting, and they are both positive studies. That is certainly very encouraging in terms of the potential for an approval here. We have seen in terms of the FDA recently some concerns around the proportion of patients who are coming from North America, and my understanding is that is relatively low on these two studies. But nonetheless, the datasets are very impressive, and so I think it is certainly supportive of regulatory approval for frontline pirtobrutinib. Dr. Jonathan Friedberg: I will ask Jennifer a question. The control arm in your study was ibrutinib, and I think many in the audience may recognize that newer, second-generation BTK inhibitors like acalabrutinib and zanubrutinib are more frequently used now if monotherapy is decided. How do you respond to that, and how would you put your results in your pirtobrutinib arm in context with what has been observed with those agents? Dr. Jennifer Woyach: Yeah, that is a great question. Even though in the United States we are predominantly using acalabrutinib or zanubrutinib when choosing a monotherapy BTK inhibitor, this is actually not the case throughout the entire world where ibrutinib is still used very frequently. The head-to-head studies of both acalabrutinib and zanubrutinib compared to ibrutinib have shown us pretty well what the safety profile and efficacy profile of the second-generation BTK inhibitors is. So even though we do not have a head-to-head study of acalabrutinib or zanubrutinib versus pirtobrutinib, I think, given the entirety of data that we have with all of the covalent BTK inhibitors, I think we can safely look at the pirtobrutinib arm here, how the ibrutinib arm compares or performs in context with those other clinical trials. And though we really can not say anything about pirtobrutinib versus acalabrutinib or zanubrutinib, I think we can still get a good idea of what might be the clinical scenarios in which you might want to choose pirtobrutinib. Dr. Jonathan Friedberg: And Wojciech, do you agree with that? Obviously, I think you have acknowledged that chemoimmunotherapy is rarely used anymore as part of upfront treatment for CLL. So, I guess a similar question. If you were to put the pirtobrutinib result in your study in context with, I guess, more contemporary type controls, would you agree that it is competitive? Dr. Wojciech Jurczak: Well, I think that that was the last study ever where bendamustine-rituximab was used as a comparator arm. So we should notice that smashing difference. Because if we look at the progression-free survival at two years, we have 93.4% in pirtobrutinib arm versus 70.7% in bendamustine-rituximab arm. Bendamustine-rituximab arm did the same as in the other trials, like ALLIANCE or SEQUOIA. Pirtobrutinib did exceptionally well, as pirto is not just the very best BTK inhibitor overcoming the resistance, but perhaps even more important for the first line, it is very well tolerated and is a very selective drug. Now, if we look at treatment-related adverse events, the discontinuation rate, they were hardly ever seen. If we compared the adverse events in exposure-adjusted incidence, literally all adverse events were two or three times higher in bendamustine-rituximab arm except for the bleeding tendency, which however was predominantly in CTCAE grade 1 and 2 with just 0.7% of grade 3 hemorrhage. Therefore, I think that we should actually put the best and the safest drugs upfront if we may, and pirtobrutinib is, or should be, the first choice if we choose monotherapy. Now, I understand that we are not presenting you the data of pirtobrutinib in combination with anti-CD20 or with BCL2 inhibitors, but that is to come. Dr. Jonathan Friedberg: Matt, how would you envision, were regulatory approval granted and this were an option, using this in the upfront patient population? Is there anybody who you would preferentially use this or start on this treatment? Or would this be something that you would tend to reserve for second line? Dr. Matthew Davids: So I would say that in general for most of my patients who would want to start with a continuous BTK inhibitor, I would still use a covalent BTK inhibitor, and I say that for a couple of reasons despite the very promising data from these studies. The first is that the follow-up for both of these phase 3 trials is still quite short, in the range of a median 18 to 24 months. And we know that CLL is a marathon, not a sprint, and these patients are going to probably be living for a very long time. And we do have much longer follow-up from the covalent BTK inhibitors, median of 10-year follow-up with ibrutinib and five to six years with zanubrutinib and acalabrutinib respectively. And you know, I do not think that the pirtobrutinib is going to fall off a cliff after two years, but on the other hand, I think there is a lot of value to long-term data in this disease, and that is why I think for most of my patients I would stick with covalent BTK inhibitors. But the other important factor that we need to consider is patients who are younger and may have many different CLL treatments over the years. We have to be very careful, I think, about how we sequence these drugs. We know right now that we can start with covalent BTK inhibitors and then subsequently patients will respond well to the non-covalent inhibitor pirtobrutinib in later lines of therapy. But right now we do not have prospective data the other way around. So how will the patients on these studies who progress on pirtobrutinib respond to covalent BTK inhibitors? We do not know yet. There have not been a lot of progression events, which is great, but we would like to see some data in that respect to feel more comfortable with that sequence. Now, I do think that particularly for older patients and those who have significant cardiovascular comorbidities, if they wanted to go on a continuous BTK inhibitor, I do think these data really strongly support using pirtobrutinib as the BTK inhibitor of choice in that population. In particular, the cardiovascular risks with pirtobrutinib seem to be quite low. I was very struck in the comparison with BR that the rate of AFib was equivalent between the two arms of the study. And that is really the first time we have seen that with any of these BTK inhibitors, no elevated risk of AFib in a randomized study. I think that is the population where it will get the most traction first, is the upfront, sort of older patient with significant cardiovascular comorbidities. And as the data from these studies mature, I think that we will start to see more widespread use of pirtobrutinib in the frontline setting. Dr. Jonathan Friedberg: Jennifer, I am just curious if you have any personal experience or heard anecdotally about after progression on pirtobrutinib the use of other BTK inhibitors and whether there is a growing experience there. Dr. Jennifer Woyach: I do not think that there is much clinical experience, you know, as Matt alluded to, it certainly has not been tested yet. There has been some data in relapsed CLL suggesting that in people who have resistance mutations to covalent BTK inhibitors after treatment with pirtobrutinib, sometimes those mutations go away. I think most of us are concerned that they are probably not actually gone but maybe in compartments that we just have not sampled, suggesting that sort of approach where you might sequence a covalent inhibitor after a non-covalent in somebody who had already been resistant probably would not work that well. But, you know, in this setting where people had never been exposed to a covalent BTK inhibitor before, we really have no idea what the resistance patterns are going to be like. We assume they will be the same as what we have seen in relapsed CLL, but I think we just need some longer follow-up to know for sure. Dr. Wojciech Jurczak: If I may confront Dr. Davids about the use of covalent BTK inhibitors upfront, well, I think that we should abandon the idea of using the first and the second and the third generation, at least if we don't have medical lines. If we endlessly block the same pathway, it is not going to be effective. So if pirtobrutinib gets approval in first, second line, we do not necessarily have to use it in the first line. I am not here in a position to defend that we should treat patients with pirtobrutinib upfront and not BCL2 time-limited regimen. However, the way I look at CLL patients when choosing therapy is not just how should I treat them now, but what would be the best regimen in 5, 10 years if I have to re-treat them. And in some instances, the idea may be that in this setting we would like to have a BTK inhibitor upfront to have a BCL2 inhibitor later to make it time-limited. Although I understand and I agree with Matthew that if we have an elderly, fragile population, then the charm of having a drug taken once a day in a tablet with literally few cardiovascular adverse events might be an option. Dr. Jonathan Friedberg: And I will give Matt the last word whether he wants to respond to that, and also just as a forward-looking issue, I know both investigators have implied that there will be future studies looking at combinations with pirtobrutinib, and if you have any sense as to what you would be looking for there. Dr. Matthew Davids: The field really is heading toward time-limited therapy for most patients, I would say. There is a bit of a discrepancy right now in the field between sort of what we are doing in academic practice and what is done sort of more widely in community practice. And so right now we are going to see evolving datasets comparing these approaches. We are already seeing data now from the CLL17 study with ibrutinib comparing continuous to time-limited venetoclax-based therapy, and we are seeing similar efficacy benefits from these time-limited therapies without the need for continuous treatment. And so that is where I think some of the future studies with pirtobrutinib combining it with venetoclax and other partners are so important. Fortunately, several of these studies are already ongoing, including a phase 3 trial called CLL18, which is looking at pirtobrutinib with venetoclax, comparing that to venetoclax and obinutuzumab. So I am optimistic that we are going to be developing these very robust datasets where we can actually use pirtobrutinib in the frontline setting as a time-limited therapy as a component of a multi-drug regimen. So far, those early data are very promising. Dr. Wojciech Jurczak: Perhaps last but not least, in a single center we have treated over 300 patients with pirtobrutinib. So eventually some of them relapsed. And I must say that our experience on BCL2 inhibitors, not just venetoclax but including sonrotoclax, are appealingly good. Therefore, by using pirtobrutinib even earlier, we do not block the efficacy of other compounds. Dr. Jonathan Friedberg: All right. Well, I want to thank all of our speakers. I also want to congratulate our two guests who presented these very influential papers at the ASH Annual Meeting, and chose to publish them in JCO, so we thank you for that, and Dr. Davids for your commentary - really appreciated. That is this episode of JCO After Hours. Thank you for your attention. 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.   Disclosures Dr. Wojciech Jurczak Consulting or Advisory Role: BeiGene, Lilly, Abbvie/Genentech, Takeda, Roche, AstraZeneca Research Funding: Roche, Takeda, Janssen-Cilag, BeiGene, AstraZeneca, Lilly, Abbvie/Genentech Dr. Jennifer Woyach Consulting or Advisory Role: Pharmacyclics, Janssen, AstraZeneca, Beigene, Loxo, Newave Pharmaceutical, Genentech, Abbvie, Merck Research Funding: Company name: Janssen, Schrodinger, beone, Abbvie, Merck, Loxo/Lilly Dr. Matthew Davids Honoraria: Curio Science, Aptitude Health, Bio Ascend, PlatformQ Health, Plexus Consulting or Advisory Role: Genentech, Janssen, Abbvie, AstraZeneca, Adaptive Biotechnologies, Ascentage Pharma, BeiGene, Lilly, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Genmab, Merck, MEI Pharma, Nuvalent, Inc., Galapagos NV, Schroedinger Research Funding: Ascentage Pharma, Novartis, MEI Pharma, AstraZeneca  

Ohio State men’s basketball beat reporter Adam Jardy recaps the recent 86-82 victory over the Northwestern Wildcats on the latest episode of the BuckeyeXtra basketball podcast. In this edition, we share our takeaways from this matchup and discuss where the Buckeyes go from here.

Welcome to the Oncology Brothers podcast! In this episode, we dived into the complexities of non-malignant hematology, focusing on iron abnormalities—both deficiency and overload. We welcomed Dr. Marina Beltrami from The Ohio State University, who guided us through three challenging clinical scenarios: 1. Anemia in Pregnancy: We discussed a 34-year-old woman in her second trimester with low MCV and ferritin levels, exploring treatment options including the safety and efficacy of IV iron versus oral iron. 2. Anemia with Mixed Etiologies: We analyzed a case involving a 78-year-old man with a history of prostate cancer, diabetes, and chronic kidney disease, discussing the broad differential diagnosis and the role of bone marrow biopsy and molecular studies. 3. Iron Overload: We examined a 47-year-old woman with elevated ferritin levels and a heterozygous hemochromatosis mutation, debating the necessity of phlebotomy and the importance of liver imaging. Throughout the episode, we emphasized the significance of a comprehensive iron panel and the clinical context in diagnosing and managing these conditions. Dr. Beltrami shared valuable insights on the use of erythropoietin-stimulating agents in chronic kidney disease and the potential risks associated with their use. Tune in for an informative discussion packed with practical insights for healthcare professionals dealing with iron-related disorders! Follow us on social media: •⁠  ⁠X/Twitter: https://twitter.com/oncbrothers •⁠  ⁠Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/oncbrothers •⁠  Website: https://oncbrothers.com/ Don't forget to like, subscribe, and check out our other episodes for more discussions on treatment algorithms, conference highlights, and FDA approvals. We are the Oncology Brothers! #Anemia #IronDeficiency #Hemochromatosis #IronOverload #Hematology #Ferritin #OncologyBrothers 

This week we're replaying our favorite shows about winged mammals. In this episode from April 2022, research from Ohio State University finds bats can become close when they're made to live together. Plus: in 1930, a BBC announcer came on the air to say “there is no news.” Like college roommates, vampire bats bond when randomly paired (Ohio State University)#OnThisDay 1930: the BBC's news announcer said, “there is no news” (BBCArchive on Twitter)Our Patreon backers keep this show flying and making friends!

Ohio State men’s basketball beat reporter Adam Jardy talks about the recent loss to Pittsburgh on the latest episode of the BuckeyeXtra basketball podcast. During this edition, we talk about how damaging this loss was for the Buckeyes and look ahead to Big Ten play.

In this episode of Two Bees in a Podcast, Amy Vu and Dr. Cameron Jack discuss bioacoustics in relation to honey bee biology with Dr. Reed Johnson, a Professor at Ohio State University. This episode ends with a Q&A segment. Check out our website: www.ufhoneybee.com for additional resources from today's episode. 

Dr. Tim Elmore is the founder of Growing Leaders, an Atlanta-based non-profit created to develop emerging leaders. Since founding the company in 2003, he has spoken to more than 500,000 leaders in businesses. schools, athletic teams, and non-profits, including The Home Depot, Coca-Cola, American Eagle, and Chik-Fil-A, as well as the San Fransisco Giants, Buffalo Bills, the Ohio State University, and Stanford University. He's written over 40 books and has appeared on major news networks talking about leading multiple generations. Download my FREE Coaching Beyond the Scoreboard E-book www.djhillier.com/coach Download my FREE 60 minute Mindset Masterclass at www.djhillier.com/masterclassDownload my FREE top 40 book list written by Mindset Advantage guests: www.djhillier.com/40booksSubscribe to our NEW YouTube channel: https://www.youtube.com/@MindsetAdvantagePurchase a copy of my book: https://a.co/d/bGok9UdFollow me on Instagram: @deejayhillierConnect with me on my website: www.djhillier.com

Short Summary: Dr. Holly Helbig and Dr. David Levine describe how they use SAA and other biomarkers to spot infection early, guide treatment, support biosecurity, and monitor horses in real time.Landing page copy: Acute phase proteins such as serum amyloid A (SAA) give veterinarians an early look at inflammation, infection, and how a horse responds to treatment. In this Equine Innovators episode, we dig into how SAA and other key biomarkers guide everyday decisions—from biosecurity on busy farms and showgrounds to managing postoperative cases, colic, and foal exams.Host Stephanie Church, editorial director at The Horse, talks with Dr. Holly Helbig of Zoetis and Dr. David Levine from the University of Pennsylvania's New Bolton Center about when they reach for SAA, how it compares with fibrinogen and white blood cell counts, and why serial testing often matters more than any single number. They share stall-side and hospital protocols, real-world case examples, and ways biomarker trends support smarter antimicrobial use and quarantine decisions.In this episode, Drs. Helbig and Levine discuss:What acute phase proteins are and how SAA reflects early inflammation in horsesHow fast SAA and fibrinogen rise and fall, and how that timing shapes testing plansWhen stallside SAA testing shines in ambulatory practice, at horse shows, and on the farmUsing SAA to help sort out joint flares vs. septic joints and guide post-surgical monitoringPractical cutoffs and patterns for foals, including how vaccination and IV plasma affect SAAWhere SAA fits into antimicrobial stewardship and cost-conscious biosecurity strategiesEmerging research and what might come next for biomarkers in equine practiceTune in to hear how two equine veterinarians lean on SAA and other biomarkers to clarify tough calls, support horse owners, and keep diagnostics and treatments on the right track.GUESTS AND LINKS – EPISODE 23:Host: Stephanie L. Church, editorial director at The Horse: Your Guide to Equine Health Care/TheHorse.com | @stephlchurch on Instagram | Email Stephanie (schurch@thehorse.com)Links: (SAA and other Biomarker resources from TheHorse.com) SAA: A Magic 8 Ball for Detecting Infection in Horses?, SAA: Infection Detection in Horses (Infographic), SAA Measurements Can Help Detect Surgical Implant Infection, Advances in Equine Infectious Disease DetectionGuest: Holly Helbig, DVM, joined Zoetis in 2023 as an equine technical services veterinarian. She is a graduate of The Ohio State University with a focus in lameness and sport horse medicine. Helbig was the official veterinarian for The World Equestrian Center Ohio; The Kentucky Horse Shows series; and various FEI competitions for 10 years prior to joining Zoetis. She also had an ambulatory practice serving patients...

The guys talk about The Ohio State University being the best program in all of sport along with the Shedeur era Sanders era,

Subscribers can dive into exclusive, extended conversations from this podcast! To join the adventure, head to BumpInTheRoad.Substack.com. The Vietnam War was a difficult reality for an entire generation. For Don Eggspuehler his draft notice appeared on his graduation day from Ohio State University. Don went on to become a pilot in the Marine Corps flying A6 jets. In Vietnam, A6 jets supported the ground troops, targeting enemy troops and missiles on the ground. Don wrote home regularly sharing his loss of friends and fellow pilots, as well as the details of his Vietnam experience. Years later, while visiting his ailing mother, he discovered a box of letters. His letters. From Vietnam. Don's book, Letters To Mom, is a compilation of letters and photos. It offers a first hand account of the war, on the ground and in the air. Join us for some good tales, and some difficult ones, from a war that shaped a generation. It's an Award Winning, Amazon best selling book! What they're saying: "This is a beautiful book about life, its imperfections, its challenges, and its joys. It is a book of hope and wisdom for all of us facing a bump in the road." –Pragito Dove "Pat has woven together beautiful stories of life setbacks that have been transformed into spiritual growth. This book is a gift and a must-read for souls experiencing pain and yearning for growth." –Gary Hensel Learn more at BumpInTheRoad.us Follow Bump on: ➡️ Twitter ➡️ Facebook ➡️ Substack ➡️ Instagram ➡️ YouTube

Advances in molecular diagnostics are reshaping how cancer is detected, monitored, and treated, and liquid biopsy is becoming central to that progress. This simple blood draw can reveal key tumor biology at diagnosis and over time, providing timely insight and guiding more precise decisions throughout a patient's journey. Clinicians now face an important challenge: knowing what is actionable today and what is coming next so more patients can benefit from the promise of these advances.As we kick off Season 7, host and patient advocate Karan Cushman expands this season's focus on Bringing Precision Medicine to Everyone with a deeper look inside the science of liquid biopsy. The conversation features two leaders shaping the field: Dr. Christian Rolfo, Division Director of Medical Oncology at The James Comprehensive Cancer Center at Ohio State University, and Dr. Roberto Borea, Medical Oncologist and emerging investigator from the Rolfo Lab.Together, they break down the scientific momentum driving liquid biopsy forward, including tumor fraction, MRD-guided treatment strategies, resistance monitoring, fragmentomics, and the expanding frontier of early detection. They also discuss the barriers that continue to slow broader adoption, such as assay variability, limited standardization, reimbursement gaps, and operational challenges in community settings.In this episode, we cover:• How tumor fraction is emerging as a meaningful real-time biomarker• Where MRD-driven escalation and de-escalation strategies are heading• The current promise and limitations of early detection and MCED testing• What is required to standardize liquid biopsy across reporting, workflows, and clinical trialsEpisode 70 offers a clear look at the advances researchers are helping drive right now and what these developments could mean for clinicians, laboratories, and patients in the near future.This conversation builds on episode 69 with Dr. Kashyap Patel, who introduced the foundations of liquid biopsy and its role in accelerating treatment decisions. Combined, these two episodes offer clinicians and patients an overview of where the science and real-world applications stand now and where the field is headed next.

Short Summary: Dr. Holly Helbig and Dr. David Levine describe how they use SAA and other biomarkers to spot infection early, guide treatment, support biosecurity, and monitor horses in real time.Landing page copy: Acute phase proteins such as serum amyloid A (SAA) give veterinarians an early look at inflammation, infection, and how a horse responds to treatment. In this Equine Innovators episode, we dig into how SAA and other key biomarkers guide everyday decisions—from biosecurity on busy farms and showgrounds to managing postoperative cases, colic, and foal exams.Host Stephanie Church, editorial director at The Horse, talks with Dr. Holly Helbig of Zoetis and Dr. David Levine from the University of Pennsylvania's New Bolton Center about when they reach for SAA, how it compares with fibrinogen and white blood cell counts, and why serial testing often matters more than any single number. They share stall-side and hospital protocols, real-world case examples, and ways biomarker trends support smarter antimicrobial use and quarantine decisions.In this episode, Drs. Helbig and Levine discuss:What acute phase proteins are and how SAA reflects early inflammation in horsesHow fast SAA and fibrinogen rise and fall, and how that timing shapes testing plansWhen stallside SAA testing shines in ambulatory practice, at horse shows, and on the farmUsing SAA to help sort out joint flares vs. septic joints and guide post-surgical monitoringPractical cutoffs and patterns for foals, including how vaccination and IV plasma affect SAAWhere SAA fits into antimicrobial stewardship and cost-conscious biosecurity strategiesEmerging research and what might come next for biomarkers in equine practiceTune in to hear how two equine veterinarians lean on SAA and other biomarkers to clarify tough calls, support horse owners, and keep diagnostics and treatments on the right track.GUESTS AND LINKS – EPISODE 23:Host: Stephanie L. Church, editorial director at The Horse: Your Guide to Equine Health Care/TheHorse.com | @stephlchurch on Instagram | Email Stephanie (schurch@thehorse.com)Links: (SAA and other Biomarker resources from TheHorse.com) SAA: A Magic 8 Ball for Detecting Infection in Horses?, SAA: Infection Detection in Horses (Infographic), SAA Measurements Can Help Detect Surgical Implant Infection, Advances in Equine Infectious Disease DetectionGuest: Holly Helbig, DVM, joined Zoetis in 2023 as an equine technical services veterinarian. She is a graduate of The Ohio State University with a focus in lameness and sport horse medicine. Helbig was the official veterinarian for The World Equestrian Center Ohio; The Kentucky Horse Shows series; and various FEI competitions for 10 years prior to joining Zoetis. She also had an ambulatory practice serving patients...

In this special series on corn production from The Crop Science Podcast Show, Dr. Osler Ortez, Assistant Professor of Corn and Emerging Crops at The Ohio State University, shares key insights into hybrid performance trials, corn management, and emerging crop opportunities. He explains how decades of agronomic research are guiding the future of crop efficiency and sustainability. Learn what these lessons reveal for future management decisions. Listen now on all major platforms!"Corn performance trials have revealed over five decades of genetic progress and management adaptation across diverse production environments."Meet the guest: Dr. Osler Ortez serves as Assistant Professor of Corn and Emerging Crops at The Ohio State University. He earned his Ph.D. in Agronomy and Crop Production from the University of Nebraska–Lincoln, an M.S. in Agronomy from Kansas State University, and a B.S. in Agriculture from Zamorano University in Honduras. Liked this one? Don't stop now — Here's what we think you'll love!What you will learn:(00:00) Highlight(01:14) Introduction(05:08) Row crop systems(05:23) Emerging crops in Ohio(11:07) Double cropping(11:50) Corn management(26:37) Hybrid study insights(29:04) Final three questionsThe Crop Science Podcast Show is trusted and supported by innovative companies like:- KWS

This is part 2 of a discussion with Brandon Bir, who is the director of sustainability at Crimson Cup coffee in Columbus Ohio. In this episode we focus on sustainability in coffee production.We talk a lot about sustainable farming of coffee cherry and get into many topics like certifications and the complications associated with those efforts as well as the challenges with traceability. We also discuss the affects to the farming community when sustainability is not a priority.We also tell the story of how Crimson Cup worked with a group of farmers in Uganda to provide them the ability to roast coffee for the first time and make a difference in the process.Brandon grew up in rural Indiana and has a passion for farming and sustainability. He brings that passion to the work he does at Crimson Cup. After studying the culinary arts Brandon became a barrista and then a coffee roaster and educator. Brandon works to develop a network of farmers and producers for Crimson Cup that promotes high quality coffee and fair trade. Brandon is also an active collaborater with researchers at the Ohio State University.MenuBrandon's Recipe for coffee2 glass servers, 26 grams of medium ground coffee, a kettle of 200 degrees fahrenheit water, a Hario v60 with a white/bleached paper filter, a spoon or stir stick, a gram scale.Dump your ground coffee into one of the glass servers. Place on the scale and tare. Add 400 grams of hot water (start a timer). At 1:45, stir 10 times to make sure the extraction is even. At 2:15, dump the solution through the filter/V60 over your second glass server. Allow the liquid to drip through and serve immediately.ResourcesTo learn more about how Crimson Cup approaches sustainability and to learn more about The Chain Collaborative check out these resources.Crimson Cup Helps Coffee Farmers in UganadaCrimson Cup - Why Coffee Lovers Care About Sustainable SourcingThe Chain CollaborativeTo learn more about sustainability initiatives and help support specialty coffee shops check out these links below.Specialty Coffee Association - The Coffee Price CrisisTEDx Talks - Brewing a solution to climate changeHow Sustainable Coffee Farms Could Save This African ForestHow to find sustainable specialty coffee shops and roasters

This week we're replaying our favorite shows about winged mammals. In this episode from June 2022, a study from Ohio State University finds bats can remember a ringtone for years if they associate the sound with food. Plus: a French company uses old face masks to make rulers and protractors for geometry class. A rare discovery of long-term memory in wild frog-eating bats (Ohio State University)Plaxtil Recycles Used Face Masks Into School Supplies (Cool Hunting)Our Patreon backers always remember how to make this show possible – thanks for your support!

Ohio State men’s basketball beat reporter Adam Jardy recaps the recent 67-66 loss to the Pittsburgh Panthers on the latest episode of the BuckeyeXtra. During this edition, we provide our takeaways from this matchup and talk about where the Buckeyes go from here.

Ohio State men’s basketball beat reporter Adam Jardy recaps last night’s 113-60 victory over Mount St. Mary’s on the latest episode of the BuckeyeXtra basketball podcast. In this edition, we share our takeaways from the game and discuss where the Buckeyes go from here.

On episode 385 of Dave Tate's Table Talk Podcast Dave sits down with Strength & Conditioning Coaches Colton Razo and Michael Silbernagel.  Colton Razo — Assistant Strength & Conditioning Coach for Track & Field at The Ohio State University. Formerly University of Houston, Bemidji State, SD Mines, Kansas (GA). Frequent presenter at USTFCCCA and T&F education events. Michael Silbernagel — Manager at Sanford Sports (Bismarck) and adjunct professor (University of Mary). Former Head S&C at UMary (built the department), MSCC (CSCCa), USAPL Raw National Champion.   LINKS Colton Razo • Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/razo_strength/ • Ohio State staff bio: https://ohiostatebuckeyes.com/sports/mens-track-field/roster/coaches/colton…   Michael Silbernagel • Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/coachsilby/ • Sanford Sports author page: https://www.sanfordsports.com/blog/authors/michael-silbernagel • University of Mary profile: https://goumary.com/sports/womens-track-and-field/roster/coaches/michael-si…   Become an elitefts channel member for early access to Dave Tate's Table Talk podcast and other perks.  @eliteftsofficial   Support Dave Tate's Table Talk: FULL Crew Access - https://www.elitefts.com/join-the-crew Limited Edition Apparel - https://www.elitefts.com/shop/apparel/limited-edition.html Programs & More - https://www.elitefts.com/shop/dave-tate-s-table-talk-crew.html TYAO Application - https://www.elitefts.com/dave-tate-s-tyao-application   Best-selling elitefts Products: Pro Resistance Training Bands: https://www.elitefts.com/shop/bands.html Specialty Barbells: https://www.elitefts.com/shop/bars-weights/specialty-bars.html Wraps, Straps, Sleeves: https://www.elitefts.com/shop/power-gear.html   Sponsors:  Get an extra 10% OFF at elitefts (CODE: TABLE TALK): https://www.elitefts.com/ Get 10% OFF Your Next Marek Health Labs (CODE: TABLETALK): https://marekhealth.com/tabletalk Get a free 8-count Sample Pack of LMNT's most popular drink mix flavors: http://www.drinklmnt.com/tabletalk Support Massenomics! https://www.massenomics.com/ Save 20% on monthly, yearly, or lifetime MASS Research Review (CODE ELITEFTS20): https://massresearchreview.com/ Get 10% OFF RP Hypertrophy App (CODE: TABLE TALK) https://rpstrength.com/pages/hypertrophy-app

Most people think high blood pressure is just about “bad pipes,” but it's really a whole–body problem driven by inflammation, insulin resistance, and years of eating sugary, processed foods. Hidden problems like sleep apnea, belly fat, toxins, and not getting enough key nutrients slowly damage your blood vessels and raise the risk of heart attacks, strokes, kidney failure, and memory loss. Instead of simply pushing the numbers down with medication, the Functional Medicine approach looks for the real “why” behind high blood pressure in each person—food choices, sleep, stress, genetics, environment, and more. By rebuilding health with real food and targeted nutrients, better sleep, movement, and stress relief, many of these root causes can be reversed or improved. The message is clear: high blood pressure isn't destiny, and with the right changes, the body often has a powerful ability to heal. In this episode, I speak about, along with Dr. George Papanicolaou and Dr. Cindy Geyer, how high blood pressure is largely driven by inflammation and lifestyle factors, but with some foundational changes it can be reversed. Dr. George Papanicolaou is a graduate of the Philadelphia College of Osteopathic Medicine and is Board Certified in Family Medicine from Abington Memorial Hospital. Over time as the healthcare system made it harder for patients to receive personal care, Dr. Papanicolaou decided a change was needed. He began training in Functional Medicine through the Institute of Functional Medicine. In 2015, he established Cornerstone Personal Health—a practice dedicated entirely to Functional Medicine. In August 2017, Dr. Papanicolaou joined The UltraWellness Center. Dr. Cindy Geyer received her bachelor of science and her doctor of medicine degrees, with honors, from the Ohio State University. She completed residency in internal medicine at Strong Memorial Hospital in Rochester, N.Y. and is triple board certified in internal medicine, integrative medicine and lifestyle 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:What Causes High Blood Pressure And How To Fix It Treating The Underlying Causes Of High Blood Pressure Treating High Blood Pressure at the UltraWellness Center How To Do The 10-Day Detox

This week's Wealth Formula Podcast is about the economics of sports—if you are a sports fan like me, you will love it. But before we get to that, I want to give you my two cents on one of the most important elements to financial success in anything: conviction. As I write this, Bitcoin sold off from a high of $126K to under $90K. Other cryptos have lost 50-90 percent of their value in the same time. It's been called a blood bath. Some are even saying it’s over for Bitcoin. I might even believe them if I hadn't seen the same story at least 5 times before over the past decade. True bitcoiners have tremendous belief in what bitcoin means to the world. Someone who bought $1,000 of Bitcoin in 2010 and simply refused to sell would now be sitting on hundreds of millions of dollars. That is the reward for true conviction. The irony of this bitcoin cycle is that many of those individuals with high conviction are finally cashing in on the fruit of their patience. Almost every day, another wallet that hasn't been active since 2011 is selling off a billion dollars into the market into the hands of Wall Street and governments. That's why prices are tumbling. But don't be fooled into thinking that these buyers are the dumb money holding the bag. The story does not end here. Nor is the Bitcoin story a one-off either. History repeats itself as the story of investments unfolds over time. In December 1999, Amazon stock traded at $106. After the dot-com crash, it fell to $5.97. Every talking head had a eulogy written for the company. But if you were crazy enough to hold through the storm, your conviction paid off spectacularly: $10,000 invested in Amazon in 2001 is worth over $20 million today. Now, moving on to the topics of sports. One of my favorite examples of conviction is from 1920, when George Halas bought the Chicago Bears franchise for $100. The Halas family could've “taken profits” countless times. They lived through multiple depressions, a world war, a dozen recessions, five or six league restructurings, labor disputes, player strikes, and decades of bad seasons. Anybody else would've bailed. But they didn't, and today, the Chicago Bears are valued at over $6.3 billion. These stories have different time periods and different industries, but they all teach the same lesson: Conviction is one of the most profitable assets you can own. That's the message I want to leave you before we move into a perhaps more entertaining topic: the economics of professional sports. Most people think of sports in terms of touchdowns, rivalries, and Super Bowl rings. But the truth is… professional sports is one of the greatest wealth-creation machines in American history. Few people understand those engines better than our guest this week. He's one of the clearest, most respected voices in sports economics today, and he's going to break it all down for us: salary caps, streaming deals, and team valuations. If you are a sports fan, you are going to love this week's episode of Wealth Formula Podcast! Transcript Disclaimer: This transcript was generated by AI and may not be 100% accurate. If you notice any errors or corrections, please email us at phil@wealthformula.com.  Donald Trump pretty much bankrupted the USFL by saying we’re gonna go head to head, uh, with the NFL instead of trying to build a a Spring Sports League. Welcome everybody. This is Buck Joffrey with the Wealth Formula podcast. Happy, uh, Thanksgiving week, uh, and uh, this week because it is a holiday week in, you know, football and all that kind of stuff that goes along with it. We’re gonna talk. About the economics of sports. And if you’re a sports fan like me, you’re gonna really like this. I really had fun with this interview actually. It was just like me asking a bunch of questions I always had. But anyway, before we get to that, I want to give you my 2 cents. One of the most important elements that I think there is give financial success in anything, and that is conviction. And I bring this up to you in part because Bitcoin sold off. Um, and well at least all the time, I’m recording this from a high of 126,000 and then it, it plunged actually below 90,000. And then of course, there were other cryptos that lost 50 to 90% of their value in the same time. Uh, yeah, it was a bit of a bloodbath. It’s been called a bloodbath and it is a blood bath. And of course, there are some who are declaring Bitcoin dead Again. Um, and you know what? I might even believe them if I hadn’t seen, uh, the same story, at least I’d say, I don’t know, maybe four or five times over the past I, eight years, nine years, whatever. True Bitcoiners though, have a tremendous belief in what Bitcoin means to the world and where this is headed. And some of them, well before I ever got in, right? I mean. That serious conviction because, you know, the people who were buying, you know, back in 2012, 13, I mean, this was completely outta nowhere, had no one’s, uh, no one’s support, nothing. In fact, in 2010, uh, you know, if, if you bought Bitcoin back then simply refuse to sell up until now, um, say you bought a thousand dollars of Bitcoin. You’d be sitting on hundreds of millions of dollars of Bitcoin, right? That’s the reward for true conviction. And those people, frankly deserve it. Because can you imagine if you just bought a thousand bucks or something and it was already up to a million, it was already up to 10 million and all the way up to 20 million, you still didn’t sell. I mean, I don’t even know if I could, I don’t know if I could do that. I don’t think I could. I mean, at some point I would be like, take the money and run. Right. Um. You know, it’s a funny thing though. The irony of this Bitcoin cycle that we have right now is that many of those individuals with, you know, super high conviction, um, the ones that were in way before any of us and before me, well, they’re actually, a lot of them are actually cashing out sort of the fruit of their patients. Right. Almost every day right now, you’re seeing a another wallet that’s been dormant since like 2011. And all of a sudden it sells. It’s something that has done nothing, but just sit there in storage, selling off a billion dollars into the market, probably, you know, started out as like 10 grand. Right? And where’s that money going? It’s going to the hands of Wall Street’s, going in the hands of, uh, governments. That’s actually the ironic part here. That’s why prices are tumbling. Because I think people are saying, well, gosh, we’re at a hundred grand. I’m sitting on hundreds of millions of dollars. I’m sitting on a billion dollars. Uh, I think it’s time to get out, right? But don’t be fooled, in my opinion, to think that these buyers are, uh, you know, they’re the dumb people holding the bag. I mean the, the people holding the bag, it’s Wall Street, right? They’re governments and reserves. And, uh, you know, big treasury companies, the story doesn’t end here. And the other thing is that Bitcoin story is not a one-off in history at all, right? In fact, you know, it, Bitcoin gets a lot of attention. But you even look at something like Amazon, right? December, 1999, Amazon stock trading at $106. Then the.com crash comes, and guess what? It fell down to $5 and 97 cents. That’s a Bitcoin like crash, right? And every talking had a eulogy written for the company. And if you were crazy enough to hold through that storm, your conviction paid off spectacularly. If you had $10,000 invested in Amazon in 2001, it’s worth over $20 million today. So anyway, that’s the point I have though. You know, it’s, the point is about conviction. Uh, and, and I’m not saying that you should just be dumb, buy something and be dumb about it, but especially on these asymmetric things where you think something could be really big, give yourself a time, a period, right? I mean. The only thing other than Bitcoin that I think I, I’m really interested in, in the crypto space is something called Solana. Solana is down like 50% from its ties, and I still think that, you know, when the dust settles, I think this is going to be something that’s gonna pay, pay off. Now if I were to watch it day by day, uh. It’s demoralizing, right? But, but I think the point is, if you have some conviction in something, give it some time. You know, say, I’m gonna watch this for at least five years if I can, if I don’t absolutely get into a situation where I need that money, which hopefully you don’t, because this is not where that kind of money belongs. Right? But give it some time and don’t look, there’s lots of noise, and, and, and then just give it some time and see what happens. Right? Now speaking of giving it some time, you know, a similar story in the sports arena in 1920, George Halas, I think it was Papa Bear, right? George Papa Bear. Halas bought the Chicago Bears franchise for a hundred bucks. Yep, a hundred bucks. Now the Halas family could have taken profits countless times, and they lived through lots of, uh, bad times. Depressions, uh, you know, world War, uh, a dozen recessions, five or six, uh, league restructurings, labor disputes, player strikes, decades of bad seasons. And maybe anybody else would’ve billed at some point if they’d made, you know, millions of dollars from the a hundred bucks. But they didn’t. And the Chicago Bears, as much as I don’t like the Chicago Bears, are valued over $6.3 billion. Now these stories, ultimately, they’re, you know, different time periods, different industries, but same lesson conviction, it’s one of the most profitable assets you can own or attributes at least. Maybe it’s not an asset, I don’t know. That’s a message I wanna leave you before we get into the topic of today, which is the economics of professional sports. Now, most people think of sports in terms of touchdowns, rivalries, super Bowl rings, all that kind of thing. But the truth is professional sports is one of the greatest wealth creation machines in American history, and few people understand those engines better than our guest this week. He’s one of the clearest, most respected voices of sports economics today. And he is gonna break it all down for us. We talk salary caps, streaming deals, team valuations. We talk about the Green Bay Packers and why they’re owned by the city of Green Bay instead of owners. All that kind of stuff that you might have wondered about but you never really knew. So if you’re a sports fan, enjoy it and happy Thanksgiving. We’ll have that interview for you right after these messages. Wealth formula banking is an ingenious concept powered by whole life insurance, but instead of acting just as a safety net, the strategy supercharges your investments. First, you create a personal financial reservoir that grows at a compounding interest rate much higher than any bank savings account. As your money accumulates, you borrow from your own. Bank to invest in other cash flowing investments. Here’s the key. Even though you’ve borrowed money at a simple interest rate, your insurance company keeps paying you compound interest on that money even though you’ve borrowed it. At result, you make money in two places at the same time. That’s why your investments get supercharged. This isn’t a new technique. It’s a refined strategy used by some of the wealthiest families in history, and it uses century old rock solid insurance companies as its backbone. Turbocharge your investments. Visit Wealth formula banking.com. Again, that’s wealth formula banking.com. Welcome back to the show everyone. Today. My guest on Wealth Formula podcast is, uh, Dr. Victor Matheson, professor of Economics and Accounting at College of Holy Cross. He’s a leading authority on sports economics, studying everything from the financial impact of mega events like the Olympics and World Cup, to the inner workings of professional sports leagues, lotteries, and public finance. Uh, welcome to the show. How are you? Well, thanks for having me. Great. Always happy to talk some sports economics. Oh gosh, this is interesting. I’m a huge, uh, I’m a huge sports fan, especially NFL and, uh, so, you know, instead of talking personal finance, you know, without, uh, without any, uh, uh, sports in it, this is definitely a, uh, welcome for me. So, um, well, vigor, let’s start, start with this, you know, um. Most of us who are big sports fans, you know, we’re really driven by the idea of the, the, you know, the, the emotion, the entertainment. Taking a step back from your perspective, how should we look at this whole ecosystem of sports as an economic system? Well, uh, first of all, it’s. It’s both bigger and smaller than, uh, than you would imagine. So if we think of the NFL, the NFL ha generat more revenue than any, uh, sports league in the world. Uh, this year it’ll come in somewhere around 22 ish billion dollars. Uh, that certainly seems like a lot of money. On the other hand, a Sherwin Williams paint store comes in at about that same sort of, uh, revenue, you know. On many podcasts talking about talking about paint, right? Um, if we talk worldwide, all the sports leagues all put together, uh, we’re talking about maybe a hundred billion or so, maybe 120 billion, roughly the same size as Johnson and Johnson. So, uh, you know, it’s a big industry. It’s a, you know, billions in with a B, but it’s also a tiny percentage of, of the total amount of economic. Being generated every year, and, and so we can easily get, uh, um, we can easily get ahead of ourselves and say, well, you know, uh, it’s the biggest company in the world, the NFL, it’s, it’s not even 500. Interesting. Um, so let’s talk a little bit about this, um, uh, how value is created in these leagues. So, so, you know, you said professional leagues are built on the economics of controlled scarcity. So talk a little bit about that, if you would, how this scarcity model drives value and, and, and protects, uh, uh, profitability. Right. So let’s compare, you know, let’s compare a Walmart. To the NFL, right? Uh, so Walmart takes a look at all these potential places that you could put a Walmart and they say, oh, this would be a good one. And a Walmart goes in. And now that Walmart’s generating economic impact and generating revenues for the, for the. For the company and all these sort of things. Now let’s look at the NFL, right? Uh, the NFL does the same thing. They said, Hey, uh, let’s look at Las Vegas. Would that be a good place for a, for a team? Uh, is is London gonna be a good place for a team? Uh, and they look at those. Uh, but here’s the deal. If Walmart looks at 50 places and says, Hey, these 35 would be good places. They’re not gonna just pick the best one for a franchise. They’re gonna put. Walmart’s in all of those, right? Uh, the NFL on the other hand, very specifically saying, you know, we actually don’t wanna put an NFL franchise in every place that we could, uh, make a profit in because we want to be in the, in a world where there are fewer NFL franchises than there are cities that want them, and that generates demand for this. Um, Walmart can’t do that because if Walmart doesn’t put in a franchise somewhere, uh, you know, Target’s gonna come in instead. Uh, that’s not gonna happen in the NFL, uh, because there’s no other competitor to that. So they can actually restrict the number of franchises they have, which means that every franchise is selling at a, a super premium price. These are, you know, at the lowest end, we’re talking five, six, $7 billion franchises. Now, uh, they could sell multiple new expansion franchises, but they choose not to. To maximize the value of those existing franchises. It’s been a while actually since the NFL expanded, um, the league. And I’m curious, what are, you know, what is it that drives them ultimately to do that? I mean, again, you just mentioned there’s this whole scarcity issue. I mean, what do you think are sort of the limitations or sort of the. You know, the, the, the points at which they say, well, gosh, maybe we do move to London, or maybe we do that. Like, do you have a sense of that? Yeah. So a couple things they wanna do. So first of all, one of the big things that all of the leagues in the United States have done is they want to be a big enough league to make sure that they cover all of the good spots or most of the good spots for a team. You don’t wanna leave enough good team locations that a rival league could come and start to challenge you. Right? So thinking back to the 1950s, uh, one of the most important sports leagues ever to come about in the United States. Actually never even existed. And this league is what was called the Continental League. And the Continental League in the 1950s arose as a challenger to major league baseball. Major League baseball in the 1950s was exactly the same size as it was in 1901. It was 16 teams. But the United States had grown immensely and the league had started to move, you know, the Dodgers to LA and the Giants to San Francisco, but you still had huge amounts of the country uncovered by baseball. And so this Continental League came about as an idea saying, you know what? We can take on Major League Baseball by putting franchises in places that it doesn’t exist. They said, oh, here’s our new eight league team. And the way Major League Baseball responded to that is before continental baseball could even start, uh, start existing, it said, oh yeah, well we’re gonna put a team in Minneapolis. We’re gonna put a team in Houston. We’re gonna put teams in these Lee in these cities that the Continental Baseball Association was gonna go into. And therefore, uh, continental baseball never got into existence because Major League Baseball expanded into those locations and everyone has taken that, that hit. You need to be big enough to make sure that every place with a, a good chance at having a team, or at least most of them, uh, are covered so that there’s 8, 10, 12 cities out there, uh, a big enough footprint that you could have your own new league. Uh, do that. So, I mean, if you look at the NHL, if you look at NBA major league baseball, NFL, all about 30 teams. There’s about 30 or a few more big cities. But what’s very important is there’s not 10 or 12 big cities out there, uh, without NFL teams, without football teams that. A rival league could move into that space. You know, I’m curious when you, you brought up that Continental league in baseball. It reminds me when I was a kid of, uh, the United States football, like the USFL and all, they got all these, uh, players, like I remember Herschel Walker started there and, and there was a number of actually guys who ended up in the NFL and being big stars there. So they, they definitely, uh, started out pretty strong. What went wrong for the USFL? It’s so funny you say that. Uh, the answer is actually one big, uh, name. It’s actually Donald Trump. Yeah. So, so what USFL did is, is they noticed that their niche was, um, was the spring, right? We play college football, we pay play high school football, and we play the NFL in the fall, which means that, uh, people out there in the spring, there’s no football out there to be had. The USFL said, you know, we could move into this market. So first of all, we’re gonna move into the spring where there’s not a rival. Second of all, we’re gonna take at least some cities where there’s not active, um, football teams either places like Birmingham, right? Uh, so any case, uh, what happened there is the USFL. Kind of got a little, its ego kind of got ahead of itself and it said, Hey, now that we’ve established ourselves in the spring, we do have some big stars like, uh, uh, Herschel Walker, like Doug Flutie, uh, some of these others. We’re gonna try to take the, uh, take the NFL on, uh, head to head and we’re gonna move from the spring to the fall. And the other thing they did that was very important is they filed a lawsuit against, uh, the NFL, saying that the NFL was engaging in antitrust activity that was keeping this rival league down. It was, uh, keeping them off TV by using their market power with some of the broadcasters. It was using its market power with stadiums to keep these teams out. And so they took him to court, and I think the, the hope was that there would have to be a settlement and that settlement would result in the USFL merging with the NFL. And the owners of the big teams in the USFL would kind of get a backdoor into the NFL this way. As it turns out, the court, in fact did find in favor of the USFL. Uh, they said yes, the NFL is engaging in illegal antitrust activity, but they also said. You guys are insane. Uh, going against the NFL in the fall, there was no way you’re gonna make it. So even though the NFL was found guilty, the jury only awarded $1 of damages. Uh, technically in antitrust cases, that’s tripled. So they actually were awarded $3 in damages and the league basically folded the next day. They won their lawsuit, but they folded the next day. But of course, the owner that had most. Most importantly pushed the league to go head to head against the NFL was the owner of the new, uh, New Jersey team, the Generals New Jersey Generals. Right? And it was Donald J. Trump. Donald Trump. Uh, so Donald Trump pretty much bankrupted the USFL. By, uh, by saying we’re gonna go head to head, uh, with the NFL instead of trying to build a, a Spring Sports League. Now, to be fair to Donald Trump, which I don’t necessarily want to be, but to be fair to him, um, there’s no guarantee that the USFL would’ve made it as a spring league either, but I think anyone, again, a jury looking at this said there was just no chance of that league, uh, surviving against, uh, the NFL. If you try to go head to head in the poll. Just, just outta curiosity, uh, you know, there, when you talk about Trump, I know like he’s had an interest in, you know, professional football teams for a long time where he did, at least, there’s a certain politics that goes into buying an NFL team as well, right? Right. So the NFL is a partnership. Yeah. Which means that they can choose who they decide to partner with. And, uh, the presumption was, uh, in the 1980s when Donald Trump was trying to become an NFL owner that Donald Trump, uh, neither had the money, nor had the friendships among other NFL player, uh, NFL owners, uh, to get into that very exclusive club. And so again, he was able to get into the USFL because it was a much lower buy-in, in terms of, of cost. The USFL owners couldn’t be as picky about who they wanted as fellow partners, and again, I think Donald Trump saw the USFL as a way to potentially get into the NFL through the back door through this lawsuit, and, and by moving directly in the, in the fall because the jury just didn’t find that, that there was any plan. By which the USFL teams could have ever become profitable, uh, going head to head in the fall against the NFL. Let’s talk a little bit about sort of valuations, because what’s interesting is, you know, you’ve talked about scarcity and, you know, the way that the leagues have manipulated, uh, that to make sure that there, you know, the values continue to grow, but at some point in the last 30, 40 years, the numbers just really skyrocketed, right? Where these football teams, you know. It wasn’t a straight line in terms of how much they were worth. What, what went into that massive inflection of, uh, of, of valuation? So, first of all, I think you’re exactly right. There has been this massive inflection. Uh, so I’ve been teaching sports economics since the 1990s and, and the 1990s were kind of at the end of an era where this was really one of the sames back in the seventies, eighties, and even as late as the early nineties, that if you wanna become a millionaire. Start out a multimillionaire and then buy a sports team because it was a, it was just a, uh, a dumpster fire that you could just burn up cash without any hope of any sort of real return. And that changed in probably the late eighties, early nineties. That really changed, uh, a couple things. Change that, uh, first of all. By the nineties and certainly by the two thousands, um, most of the big professional sports in the United States had solved lots of their labor relation problems with the, with the athletes. So there was always this question about, uh, you know, do athletes have the ability to bargain with other teams? Are they able to get free agent, uh, agency, are teams going to be constantly fighting and, and spending every dollar that they can down to the point of bankruptcy to buy that superstar team? And what happened again in the nineties, starting in the eighties through the nineties and the two thousands is pretty much leagues have, uh, agreed to a world where. We’re gonna limit the amount of spending, uh, that we’re gonna do on players so that we’re not all bankrupting each other, bidding for players. In order to get the players to go along with that, we come to an agreement that we’re gonna share basically half the money with the players. And that’s exactly how the NHL works, the NBA works and the NFL works. Major League Baseball is not like that yet. And we may see not this season, but the next one, um, them trying to finally join ranks with the other, uh, with the other leagues. Uh, the question is whether we’re gonna see that happen without a gigantic, uh, work stoppage that. You know, some people who are pessimistic think we’re, we may not have baseball at all in 2027. 2026 is fine, but 20, 27 may, may fall. So as soon as like your costs are all covered up, that you know that everyone is kind of playing on a level playing field. Once we know that we don’t have to worry about bankrupting ourselves. We are only paying players, what we’re bringing in as revenue. All of a sudden, this is a fairly safe investment in a way that it never was prior to, you know, this all dying down. Couple other things going on here as well is, of course, the country’s gotten bigger. We have gotten bigger, but without adding additional, many additional franchises, which means, uh, those, those tickets are becoming increasingly expensive. We’ve gotten richer in a, in a skewed fashion, so that, uh, that of course the rich have gotten richer, a lot faster than the poor have. But of course, going to a baseball game, especially with those luxury boxes and things like this, is, uh, an activity that is reserved for the wealthy. And as the wealthy have gotten more, uh, uh, have gotten, you know, increasingly rich, uh, that means that. You know, businesses like Major League Baseball in the NFL that cater to the upper class, uh, do disproportionately well. And the last thing, and I’m sure you’ve talked about, uh, this before, is on your show, obviously you can have, um, you can have investments that are irrational as long as you think there’s someone later that’s irrational, that you can, you can hand it off to, right? This is, this is all the Greater fool theory. Uh, although I don’t think necessarily in this case, the, the owners are fools, but. Sports teams are a toy of billionaires that you say, well, look, I, I am, I’m a Mark Cuban. I’ve made billions of dollars. Now I want to spend some of my, my money on a, a fun asset. You know, you and I might collect a baseball cards. Mark Cuban might collect baseball teams, right? Uh, so, uh, in a world you might be willing to overpay because you wanna be a sports soldier and you wanna rub elbows with. You know, KA Leonard, you wanna rub elbows with, uh, with, with Shhe Tani. Um, and you may be willing to overpay for that asset, but guess what? 20 years down the way, there’s still gonna be another billionaire who wants to rub elbows with that next generation of superstars. And so you’re fairly sure that the next time when it comes to sell your franchise, there will be another person who’s willing to pay a premium for that asset as well. So again, as we’ve gotten more billionaires, more billionaire wealth, um, this is something that, uh, you know, has attracted folks like Steve Ballmer to, to part with, with big money. And, uh, again, as billionaire assets have grown, uh, the ability and the desire to buy these teams has grown as well. I would think a major driver of the value. Is also coming from, um, the, the media sources, uh, that are changing, right? Where, I mean, I remember, you know, again, being a kid and there was this, you know, there was Monday night football and it was on NBC and. And that, that’s how it worked. But now there’s like bidding for these things and you’ve got Amazon, uh, doing Thursday night football, which is a little weird. Um, and you know, you sometimes you have, uh, uh, you have games on Peacock. What’s going on with that? How does it affect the economics? Uh, and ultimately, like where is this headed? So, uh, in a, in a league like the NFL, uh, over 60% of all revenues that they generate is media revenue, right? Because most of us aren’t going to games every day, uh, too expensive for us, or too time consuming or all sorts of other things. But, uh, lots of us tune in on tv. So we’re talking about, uh, well over $10 billion of annual media contracts with the NFL. Um, and those numbers have been going up, uh, at least in part because you have media companies, uh, in a pretty competitive environment bidding against one another for these things. Now, one of the things about, again, things like the NFL or the NBA is it allows broadcasters or other types of TV networks to bring in customers in a way that their regular programming doesn’t. So a, a company may actually be willing to overpay for the NFL, kind of as a way to get people to buy all of your other products. A famous example from early days, uh, is, is Fox, right? So in the old days there were three big networks. So old days, I’m talking, you know, 1970s, there were the three big networks, right? There was A, B, CNB, C, and CBS, and they all competed against one another. And then in the 1980s, this rival network came up and this is Fox. And they wanted to get into all these markets nationwide. Well, how do you make sure that a. A local station decides to pick up the Fox programming. So for example, I grew up in Denver and Denver had a, had a, an independent channel that, you know, played reruns and all sorts of other things, and, and so they have a broadcast license already. Fox goes up to them and says, Hey, would you like to carry our regular programming? And, and that, that channel said, well, I don’t really think so. We’re doing fine showing Gilligan’s Island and Love Boat and things like this, and we don’t need, uh, an entire set of your programming. We’re doing just fine, as as it is. Uh, so Fox couldn’t get a foothold in that Denver market. So what Fox does is they buy rights to the NFL. All of a sudden now they go back and say, Hey, we’ve got all this Fox programming, we’ve got the Simpsons, and we’ve got, I don’t know, uh, you know, uh, you know, these early, these early Fox programming. But, um, they say, but we also have the NFL. You can’t, you can’t turn down the NFL. And then all of a sudden that existing affiliate says, okay, all right, we’ll add the whole line of Fox programming because you’re right, we can’t turn down having the NFL. So what, what basically happens here is the NFL serves as this kind of must stock item. And uh, you know, Fox was willing to overpay for the NFL because now they’re gonna get everyone to be able to buy the Simpsons and everything else they were offering at the same time. Uh, and so media rights have gone much, have gone up much faster. And we see this all over the place, right? How do you get people to buy. Amazon Prime. Well, let’s say that’s the only way you get to watch, uh, football on Thursday nights. How do you get people to buy, you know, apple tv? You offer major league soccer games as part of their package, right? Uh, and so this is how you kinda legitimize yourself as an actual, real, uh, you know, quote real media company is by offering some, uh, live. Live sports. And that gets people who would not otherwise buy Netflix or Amazon Prime or Apple, uh, to actually purchase those because again, they’re offering this secondary item. Then presumably that in turn drives up the value of of the NFL and you know, they’re bringing in a lot more money because they’ve got not just the three major networks bidding on them, but they’ve got all sorts of big companies with deep pockets. Willing to, you know, increase their, their, their revenue is and, and that sort of snowballs. Is that, is that fair? No, and that’s exactly right. And, and for as much as I talk about, you know, that billionaire who wants the an NFL team or an NDA team as a. Prestige asset. Uh, they’re also concerned about having it as an actual functioning asset as well. So I’m willing to pay, you know, a lot more, even if I’m willing to pay a premium. That premium is based on a fundamental value in the first place. And how do you drive that fundamental value? You drive that fundamental value by maximizing the revenue you generate through things like media contracts, and by maximizing. And by minimizing your costs, by making sure that your labor costs aren’t gonna run away with you, uh, because again, hopefully you, uh, most of the leagues have solved kind of their long-term labor, uh, their labor strife between them and the players within each league. There is also some different rules, and specifically, again, being a big NFL fan, I love the fact that the NFL has a salary cap and profit sharing for each team. ’cause it makes for a much more competitive league, basically, you know, for people who don’t know what that means, essentially each team can pay, has a salary cap of how much they can pay players for a given year. But not all of the leagues have that. Uh, I don’t really follow the other ones. I, I’m not sure who has it, who doesn’t, but I know that, like in baseball, I don’t think they have that. And it creates a situation where you’ve got the Dodgers or the Yankees in, in, in the World Series. More often than not, and you know, you’re not getting the smaller teams usually. No. So you’re exactly right. So the NFL has what’s called a, uh, a salary cap, and it’s actually got what’s called a hard cap. So they’re actually quite serious about this, and there are very few exceptions that can be made to go over this cap. Uh, this cap is based on the total amount of revenue that’s being generated by the league. Uh, and again, the cap basically is the way that they make sure that they share. A fair proportion of the money with the players. Uh, what’s also important is they also have a floor. So the, the cap this year is about 225 million, if I remember right, but the floor is about 200 million. So every team in the league basically is spending the same amount on labor this season, which makes for a very even playing field. And we know that some teams are gonna lose and some teams are gonna win. And it seems like the Browns and the, and the jets never win. And it seems like other teams always do. But what’s important about that is it’s not just because they’re in a big city, that they have these gigantic revenue advantages and that they can buy a championship. It really is, you know, who is smartest with their money, who’s smartest with your coaching, who’s lucky with the draft and things like this. And, uh, that makes for a very nice thing here. What’s also super important is the NFL has a gigantic amount of revenue sharing, and the reason for this is every single game you watch on TV is part of a contract that’s being sold by the league, not the team. And because of that, the league is generating all these, all this revenue, and then is equally distributing that money to each of the individual teams. So a, a team playing in little tiny Green Bay is generating exactly the same amount of media revenue as the New York Giants. Or the LA Rams. So that’s really nice. Uh, again, gigantic amounts of, uh, again, even revenue sharing to all the participants. As a matter of fact, of all of the businesses in the United States, the NFL is probably the single most socialist company. In the United States. So this Great American pastime is wildly socialist when it comes to how they distribute their, their income. So what incentivizes a team to be better and to win Then from the ownership standpoint, if there’s revenue sharing, is it just at the, the other sources of income that come, like advertising, things like that. I’m, I’m just curious, like if there’s so much revenue sharing, what is it that drives a team to, you know, try to be better from the ownership standpoint? So first of all is that being bad doesn’t help you, right? This isn’t major league baseball, so we’re gonna go the o. The other extreme, at least for a US sport, is major League baseball. No, uh, salary cap there at all. So you can pay, uh, players as much as you want, although there is what’s called a luxury tax. So as you, as your, uh, salary, your total payroll gets too big, you start getting, uh, uh, paying penalties to the league, which is then redistributed to the poor teams in the league. That being said, you can spend as much as you want. So yeah, the Dodgers, they spent somewhere, uh, by some accounts somewhere around $400 million this year on talent, including, you know, gigantic contracts to folks like Shhe, Tani, right? Um, but there’s also no minimum either. So if you’re a team that decides, hey, we’re not even gonna bother to try to compete this year, uh, you are the. I don’t know to, if I should call them the Oakland A or the Las Vegas a a or the Sacramento A or the Traveling through the desert, sort of a for a while. Um, but, you know, this is a team that made a decision not to compete and had a, had a tiny payroll. Uh, other teams have decided to do this, and the, and the NFL you could decide that you didn’t wanna win. But it wouldn’t save you any money because again, not only is there a salary cap, there’s a salary floor. So if I have to pay $225 million each year anyway, I might as well try to win with that 225 million. Uh, ’cause I don’t have a choice to just collect my paycheck and hire, you know, the Minnesota Gophers for $20 million, uh, for my, for my team this year. ’cause that’s not an option. Right. Um, one of the things I wanted to just kind of, uh, drill down a little bit on is the model of the Green Bay Packers. As you um mentioned, it’s a tiny little town, northern Wisconsin. Uh, not much going on there. I’ve, I’ve been there myself for a game. It is unique in that it is owned, not by billionaires, but it’s owned essentially as by the fans. How, how does that work? And, and I guess the question is like, why, why aren’t other teams modeled that way? So other teams are not modeled that way because the NFL does not want other teams to be modeled that way, nor do any of the other, uh, major leagues out there. Uh, it’s not good for the NFL for a couple reasons. Uh, first of all. They have to open their books. If it’s a public company and they don’t like to open their books, um, you also don’t have a face for that, uh, league in a way that, that a person couldn’t, couldn’t be in there, uh, pouring extra money in as a kind of a, an, an angel investor. Uh, on top of that, uh, you can’t threaten to relocate to another city unless you get taxpayer subsidized. Um, you know, uh, stadiums and things because it’s a publicly owned team and we know that, that those public owners will not ever decide to move that team out. How did they get that status in the first place? That’s an interesting story, and it’s a story that’s not unique to. The Packers, but it is fairly unique to the United States. So, uh, in the rest of the world, this type of ownership model actually is fairly common. Um, teams that your, you know, listeners would’ve heard of, like Barcelona, like Al Madrid, these are club owned teams. Um, there is not an owner there. They are owned by the fans themselves, and they’re in the business of. Trying to stay in business every year while winning as many games as possible. Uh, there is, they’re not trying to win trophies for a, a Steinbrenner or a Mark Cuban. They’re trying to win, uh, trophies for that fan base. That literally, again, the, the season ticket holders are those owners. Um, the NFL itself, you know, was, was a very hard Scrabble league for a long time. It started in 1920, uh, and between 1920 and 1935. Roughly 55 teams played at least one season in the NFL. And of those 55 teams, basically all but about six of them, had gone outta business or relocated at some point in here. Uh, this is why actually we got such a socialist, uh, uh, business model here is because the owners of the big teams, the owners of the bears. Uh, the owners of the Giants, uh, they said, look, you know, this league isn’t gonna work if we can’t actually find someone to play. And yeah, we’re making money here, but we’re not gonna continue making money if we can’t find other teams that are gonna work in this league. So they said, Hey, we are gonna be very generous. We’re gonna make sure that, that we share our revenues with the people, uh, the other people in our league. We would rather have a small piece of a big pie, uh, than a big piece of a pie that is tiny or disappears completely. Uh, so that’s why we ended up with this, uh, revenue sharing. And of course they were very open to any sort of model that kept stable teams around, including a model where rather than some rich owner in, in Green Bay owns that team. Instead, it’s a municipally owned team. As long as that team had stability and conform long-term rivalries and can afford to put forward a product that’s gonna, that’s gonna work on a, you know, on an NFL field to make a competitive product, they were happy to kind of do whatever they needed to do because again, this was a, this was a really tough league to be in. For the first roughly 20 years with, you know, a lot more successes. There’s been a lot of talk, uh, I know about private equity entering the, uh, the NFL. Tell us, give us a little bit of an understanding of that. I mean, obviously, I, I kind of think of these owners in these buying groups as private equity already, so what’s the big deal? Is the point. So in most sports leagues have already allow private equity and already allow ownership groups with multiple owners, uh, to, to own teams. So again, uh, you know, the, the Red Sox, they have multiple owners of, of that team. Uh, again, Celtics, same sort of thing. Um, but in the NFL we have required basically one owner, right? So this is a, a person. That owns the team and is the face of the team and is this controlling majority owner, uh, they’re going to explicitly allow external people unrelated to the ownership group, to own pieces of NFL teams here. Uh, and I think the, the real issue here, uh, has to do with, uh, there are some franchises in the NFL where the owners are asset rich, but cash poor. I’m thinking actually, for example, the Bears. So the bears are still owned by the same group. Who bought the Bears back in 1920 ish. Right? So this, you know, the, the same family, the Halas, uh, have owned this team for a hundred years. Uh, by this point, you know, little pieces of the team have been handed down to all the cousins and the grandkids and the great grandkids and this sort of folks. Uh, so, uh, you know, I think in total there’s something like 86 different owners of the, of the Bears now, but they’re all part of that original ownership group that everyone. You know, has inherited a little, a little share here. Now mind you, you know, one 86th of the, uh, of the bears is like a hundred million dollars. You know, the bears are probably an $8 billion franchise. And so that’s a hundred million dollars of assets that each one of these grandkids has just because, you know, their grandfather made a smart, uh, smart investment a hundred years ago. Um, but it doesn’t mean that they can live the lifestyle of a person with a hundred million dollars. Because they’re not allowed to sell their share to anyone because private equity was never allowed. And the amount of money that that team is actually generating in terms of annual operating profits isn’t super high. So you’ve got a world where you’re wildly rich, but you can’t really do a lot with those riches. So you know, this is a team that would be prime for the idea of, well, let’s sell off 20% of this. 20% of the team is gonna be maybe a couple billion dollars. And, and then we will just share that basically it’s a big Christmas present to each one of these, uh, these kids here. And again, the, the thing here is that’s $2 billion in cash that each of these small minority owners gets rather than, you know, an asset that they can’t actually use. To buy a yacht in Monaco. Right? And so that’s giving these kids, or the, you know, these minority owners an option to basically, uh, you know, get liquidity for their ownership. And, and that’s the big difference, right? And of course the other thing is, is there are lots of wildly rich people who would like to be an owner of a team in a way that you could do that 20 or 30 years ago by being just a, you know, just a multimillionaire or a multi, multi multimillionaire. That was enough. Uh. You know, you can be a billionaire nowadays and not have nearly what it needs to become an owner in one of these big groups. So, uh, you know, if we think about, uh, Arod, right? Arod bought, uh, the Timberwolves, uh, in the NDA, um. But he couldn’t do it alone despite the fact that he was, uh, you know, for 10 years the highest paid athlete in the world, you know, signed the single biggest contract, uh, in the history of professional sports, uh, when he did so. Uh, and even a guy with that sort of money doesn’t have enough money to buy a sports franchise. So, uh, I think the NFL is, you know, looking down the, the road to a, a world where. Someone wants to sell, but there’s not that many folks with $10 billion out there. And so the idea that we were gonna keep a, a world where there’s gonna be one single owner forever, uh, you know that that’s a pretty small pool of people in a world where you’re thinking about selling franchises at $10 billion. But if we allow these to be sold private equity wise. Then people can live their dream of being a sports owner, you know, for a mere couple billion dollars. And of course, that increases the pool of, of potential people by a lot. You know, you, you mentioned, um, during, just a minute ago in, in passing that these teams don’t actually necessarily throw off a lot of cash. They’re not, you know, they’re not super profitable. It’s not like a bunch of money’s being distributed to owners. Uh, can you talk a little bit about that? I, I didn’t know that actually. Sure. So a bunch of these teams in, in fact, in terms of operating revenue, don’t actually generate gigantic amounts of, of money every year. Uh, again, taking an an NFL team, so an NFL team is gonna generate, you know, somewhere around $500 million, maybe six or $700 million a year, but you’re already competing about 250 million of that to, uh, to the players. So half of that revenue coming in automatically is going to the players. If you built yourself a new stadium anytime recently, obviously you could have big payments on that. Uh, there’s other operating expenses associated with that. Um, in, in a world where you’re not the NFL, but you’re a world like, uh, major League baseball, where. You have much more variability in your, in your player costs year to year and more variability in your revenue. Uh, you could easily end up with years where you’ve got negative cash flow or at least negative profits, and, uh, and that means that you need, you need to be able to weather that. And so of course that’s one of the reasons, for example, why the NFL, you know, wouldn’t just take anyone as an owner, you need to be for sure rich enough to, uh, to weather both the ups and the downs. Again, if you borrowed any money to, uh, to purchase the team, uh, that’s obviously a big, uh, big interest payment there as well. So you could easily have teams again, depending how the owner purchased that, that are not kicking out gigantic amounts of cash on a year to year basis. One of the things that I’ve been hearing about, I don’t really know how this would work, is the, is of private equity moving into potentially like college sports. So we’ve seen some changes in, uh, for example, in college football where now these players can legally get paid. So it’s, it’s starting to look more and more like a professional. Uh, professional league. So how would that work if you’ve got private money essentially buying, uh, the sports teams of an individual university? Or maybe I’m not, maybe that’s not exactly what’s happening, but that’s kind of the impression I got. So first of all, that is exactly what could be happening and, and what people are talking about. Uh, I am deeply skeptical that this is a good idea for the institutions involved. Um. So basically it works exactly like any other sort of, uh, sports franchise, right? Uh, basically you would have an owner, uh, you know, let’s call him Mark Cuban, although he’s not, you know, he’s, he’s not talking about doing this. But imagine Mark Cuban decided he wants to buy, uh, Ohio State, right? Uh, so he comes up with a a billion dollars hands over a billion dollars to Ohio State. And now Mark Cuban is the recipient of any revenues being generated by the Ohio State, uh, program here. Um, and so this works like, just like anything else, right? So this is, this is basically, um, a person like bringing money in, in exchange for a piece of the action. Uh, the reason I’m highly skeptical about this because. Uh, remember the name of your university is very, very strongly tied with the name of your athletic program, right? So, you know, the Ohio State University is the name of both the educational program as well as the, uh, you know, the sports teams, right? And so, uh, one of the reasons that that schools have sports teams in the first place. Is as a method of advertising for their other things, right? So they, they use spectator sports to bring in the students to, uh, bring in, uh, actually, you know, public taxpayer money, all sorts of things. Um, and of course if the school controls the money from the, uh, you know, controls the athletic program as well as the academic program, then we can presume that the interests of the athletic program and the academic program are aligned. As soon as you’ve sold off your, your athletic program to an external, uh, you know, an external buyer, then you have every reason to believe that the incentives of that athletic program, the incentives of the. Academic program are no longer aligned in, in a way that is useful. Um, for example, you could have that, that equity person say, you know what? I’m gonna make money no matter what, and I’m just gonna tank all of our programs because I’m gonna generate more revenue by spending less. And that’s what maximizes my profit. But that may very well harm the academic side. And so if you allow, you know, private equity to come in and they have any control. Over that, uh, athletic program, you basically outsourced an extremely important part of your business while still meaning that your business in the athletics is, is importantly tied to the other parts of your business that you haven’t outsourced. And, uh, that makes me deeply concerned for anyone who would consider going down this route. Is, is that likely to happen, do you think? I don’t think anyone who makes predictions about college sport to this point, uh, can, can do that with any certainty at all. It’s fascinating stuff. Um, and one last question I guess for you, which is, you know, we talk about like people who own teams, uh, being, you know, multi-billionaires. Um. Is there any way that fans can still get a stake if they’re just simple millionaires? Is that just not something that’s po un unless you’re live in Green Bay, I guess, is that pretty much non-existent? So it depends what you’re interested in doing, right? So if you’re a mere multimillionaire, uh, you’re not gonna become an NFL owner. You’re not gonna become an NDO owner. Right. Mm-hmm. Um, if you’re very famous and a multimillionaire, you might be able to come into an ownership group because they want you as the face of the organization. Right. Um, one example of this was George W. Bush who came in with a very tiny ownership stake, uh, when, uh, he bought the Texas Rangers and he owned about. 2% of that, that team. But he was the face of that because he was the son of the president. Right. Uh, and, and then when the Rangers did well, uh, you know, he, he made a fortune doing that as well. So, um, the answer is generally no. But as long as your heart isn’t wedded to the NFL or NBA, there are certainly options that you can come into. Right. Um, we have seen. One tier down, uh, buying into things like the WNBA or the, uh, NWSL in women’s soccer or, uh, or women’s basketball. Uh, even that’s become pricey nowadays. These are a hundred million dollar franchises now these days. Or you can take chances with lower level, essentially minor league, uh, soccer in the United States or, uh, elsewhere, uh, in, in the world. And I think you know where we’re going here. So if you’re a merely. Multimillionaire, uh, and you’re a, a famous, uh, movie star or two, you could put your money in and buy a football or soccer team in Wales, uh, called Reim. Right? And of course, that’s exactly what Ryan Reynolds did. And Malaney and, uh, you know, they did not have anywhere close to NFL money despite being famous guys, you know, big movie stars, you know, you know, tens of millions of dollars in, uh, in money. They’re nowhere close to being NFL owner money. Guess what they were wreck some owner money and, uh, they get all the fun and excitement of being an owner without needing to be a billionaire. Interesting. Well, listen, uh, I, I appreciate all your time and, uh, it’s, it’s fun for me personally as a sports fan to see how this stuff works. Um, do you have a site where you write, do you have people curious about this stuff or, or how can they learn more? So how people can learn more is, uh, is there is some fun sports economic stuff out there. Uh, the classic, uh, book in sports economics is of course Moneyball by Michael Lewis, who of course is a great writer about all things finance and, and people who are interested in, in general interest books about, you know, all sorts of things related from to the tech boom to, uh, obviously the financial crisis of the two thousands to. His early days in, in junk bonds in the 1980s. Uh, Michael Lewis is one of the, one of the great writers out there. Um, uh, other fun books by colleagues of mine, uh, omics by Stephan Semanski is, is a fun one. Uh, and, uh, you know, you can catch up, uh, with some, uh, some. Other podcasts that, uh, that follow these sort of things, including Freakonomics has often things on sports that are, that are fun as well. Uh, unfortunately if you wanna, you know, hear from me, it’s all textbook stuff and then I’ll have to give you a grade. And so probably that. Uh, but again, it, it’s a great time to be a fan of sports and of economics ’cause there’s just so much good stuff out there. Thanks so much for being on the program today. Again, my pleasure. You make a lot of money, but are still worried about retirement. Maybe you didn’t start earning until your thirties. Now you’re trying to catch up. Meanwhile, you’ve got a mortgage, a private school to pay for, and you feel like you’re getting further and further behind. Now, good news, if you need to catch up on retirement, check out a program put out by some of the oldest and most prestigious life insurance companies in the world. It’s called Wealth Accelerator, and it can help you amplify your returns quickly, protect your money from creditors, and provide financial protection to your family if something happens. Steve, the concepts here are used by some of the wealthiest families in the world, and there’s no reason why they can’t be used by you. Check it out for yourself by going to wealth formula banking.com. Welcome back to the show everyone. Hope you enjoyed it. And, uh, once again, uh, I wanna just wish you a happy Thanksgiving and, uh, thank you for, you know, being a listener of this show. And one more thing, just a reminder, uh, we are heading into sort of the last month or so. Of, uh, investment possibilities in the investor club. Wealth formula.com is where you go to join that group. And if you’re looking for a last minute tax mitigation type investment, make sure you sign up as soon as possible. Uh, that’s it for this week on Wealth Formula Podcast. Happy Thanksgiving. This is Buck Jre signing off. If you wanna learn more, you can now get free access to our in-depth personal finance course featuring industry leaders like Tom Wheel Wright and Ken McElroy. Visit wealthformularoadmap.com.

Did you know that Emily Dickinson wrote 4 tributes to the dandelion? Join Food Sleuth Radio host and Registered Dietitian, Melinda Hemmelgarn for her conversation with John Cardina, PhD, Professor Emeritus in the Dept. of Horticulture and Crop Science at the Ohio State University, former USDA research agronomist and author of Lives of Weeds: Opportunism, Resistance, Folly. Cardina discusses man's largely futile fight against “weeds” on farms, lawns and gardens, the value of biodiversity and small holder farms, and why we should rethink our attempts to eradicate “invasives.” Related Websites: https://www.cornellpress.cornell.edu/book/9781501758980/lives-of-weeds/

We're in the midst of an AI gold rush. Every corner of healthcare is racing to harness generative AI for productivity and cost savings. But here's the catch: healthcare isn't Silicon Valley. The mantra of “move fast and break things” doesn't work in a high-risk, complex environment. When it comes to AI in healthcare, safety and effectiveness must come before speed. This week on Radio Advisory, guest host and Advisory Board digital health expert Ty Aderhold sits down with David Woods, Mike Rayo, and Dane Morey from the Cognitive Systems Engineering Lab at The Ohio State University. Drawing on new research about how AI changes human decision-making, they unpack the risks and realities of AI in healthcare, challenge common misconceptions, and ask critical questions—like whether AI can recognize and communicate its own errors. Bottom line: There is no risk-free use of AI in healthcare. To truly evaluate safety and effectiveness, leaders must assess AI-human systems as a whole—not in isolation. Plus, stay tuned for an update on the end of the longest government shut down in U.S. history, and the healthcare programs (still) caught in the crosshairs. We're here to help: Empirically derived evaluation requirements for responsible deployments of AI in safety-critical settings How AI Can Degrade Human Performance in High-Stakes Settings The Silicon Valley Way: Move fast and break…aviation safety? Cognitive Systems Engineering Lab | Innovation at the Intersection of People, Technology, and Work Your playbook for developing an AI governance strategy How to succeed using AI: Lessons from 4 leading organizations [Dec. 4] The healthcare leader's to-do list for successful AI adoption 3 ways to get the most out of contingent nursing workforce partnerships A transcript of this episode as well as more information and resources can be found on RadioAdvisory.advisory.com.

In the Real Science Exchange Legacy Series, we celebrate the pioneers who have shaped the dairy industry. In this episode, we honor Dr. Bill Weiss, professor emeritus at The Ohio State University. This episode was recorded at the 2025 ADSA annual meeting in Louisville, Kentucky, where Dr. Weiss received the 2025 ADSA Award of Honor. Dr. Weiss shares about his early life, schooling, and academic career. (2:29)Panelists introduce themselves and how they know Bill. Dr. Firkins started at OSU one month before Dr. Weiss, Dr. St. Pierre was in graduate school with Dr. Weiss, and Dr. Tebbe was Dr. Weiss's last graduate student. (4:47)Dr. St. Pierre and Dr. Firkins share about Bill's deep contributions to the science of energy, protein, and trace mineral nutrition in dairy cattle. They note he was a great mentor to his students and an exceptional colleague. Dr. Weiss reflects on his career and the collaborations he had with his colleagues even though they were on different campuses. Dr. Tebbe underlines what a hard worker Dr. Weiss is, yet always had time for his students. (11:45)Panelists share stories about Bill's driving, winning 20 gallons of ice cream in a contest in graduate school, Bill's less serious side, and his love for cars and golf. They also tease him a bit for being a glutton for punishment and serving on both the 2001 NRC and NASEM committees. (19:06)Panelists share their take-home thoughts. (29:11)Please subscribe and share with your industry friends to invite more people to join us at the Real Science Exchange virtual pub table.  If you want one of our Real Science Exchange t-shirts, screenshot your rating, review, or subscription, and email a picture to anh.marketing@balchem.com. Include your size and mailing address, and we'll mail you a shirt.

Tech firms are racing to develop robot assistants that can take over our dreaded household chores. But teaching machines to perform these deceptively simple tasks is tedious. They need to observe the actions thousands, sometimes millions of times. And there's a cottage industry springing up to provide this training. Marketplace's Meghan McCarty Carino spoke with Ayanna Howard, roboticist and dean of Ohio State University's college of engineering, to learn more.

Tech firms are racing to develop robot assistants that can take over our dreaded household chores. But teaching machines to perform these deceptively simple tasks is tedious. They need to observe the actions thousands, sometimes millions of times. And there's a cottage industry springing up to provide this training. Marketplace's Meghan McCarty Carino spoke with Ayanna Howard, roboticist and dean of Ohio State University's college of engineering, to learn more.