Podcasts about panels

Okay y'all, today's episode is personal. I'm talking with my hormone doctor, Dr. Christine Ibrahim - yes, the one who changed my actual life. She's the first person who made sense of what was going on in my body and didn't dismiss me with a “you're fine” when I clearly wasn't. We're getting into the real stuff: bioidentical hormone replacement therapy, what those blood panels actually mean, the difference between peri and menopause, and why your mental health might be taking a hit. If you've ever felt like you're doing all the “right” things and still don't feel like yourself - this one's for you.Highlights:(03:50) When bloodwork says “fine” but you feel awful(07:42) Why Dr. Christine treats people, not numbers(14:19) The IGF marker and feeling younger inside(22:06) Cortisol steal: stress messing with your hormones(28:45) 70+ symptoms of peri and menopause (yes, 70)(38:10) The truth about that scary hormone studyFind out more about Dr Christine IbrihamWebsiteInstagram: drchristineibrahimmdQualia Mind - click hereCoupon Code: SHOCKANDYALL (15% off any purchase)Visit Nicole's on demand fitness platform for live weekly classes and a recorded library of yoga, strength training, guided audio meditations and mobility (Kinstretch) classes, as well: https://www.sweatandstillness.comGrab Nicole's bestselling children's book and enter your email for A FREE GIFT: https://www.yolkedbook.comFind Nicole on Instagram:https://www.instagram.com/nicolesciacca/Tik Tok: https://www.tiktok.com/@thenicolesciaccaFacebook: https://www.facebook.com/nicolesciaccayoga/Youtube:https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC1X8PPWCQa2werd4unex1eAPractice yoga with Nicole in person in Santa Monica, CA at Aviator Nation Ride. Get the App to book in: https://apps.apple.com/us/app/aviator-nation-ride/id1610561929Book a discovery call or virtual assessment with Nicole here: https://www.calendly.com/nicolesciaccaThis Podcast is proudly produced by Wavemakers AudioMentioned in this episode:www.Neurohacker.com/shockandyall and use the code SHOCKANDYALL to get 15% off your first order

Unsere heutigen Gäste bringen unterschiedliche Perspektiven mit: aus Zivilgesellschaft, Verwaltung, Wissenschaft, Design, Antidiskriminierungsarbeit und Ethik. Sie alle vereint eine zentrale Frage: Wie lässt sich Künstliche Intelligenz sinnvoll, glaubwürdig und im Sinne des Gemeinwohls einsetzen? Diese Folge ist keine klassische Studioaufnahme, sie ist ein Mitschnitt eines Panels, das ich im Rahmen der AI IMPACT DAYS 2025 moderieren durfte. Die Tagung hat eindrucksvoll gezeigt, was entstehen kann, wenn Menschen mit Haltung, Erfahrung und Gestaltungslust über KI diskutieren, jenseits von Hype und Dystopie. In der Diskussion geht es um Chancen und Grenzen, um Bias, Vertrauen, Teilhabe und darum, wie Technologie in sozialen Kontexten wirklich wirken kann. Seit über acht Jahren beschäftigen wir uns in diesem Podcast mit der Frage, wie Arbeit den Menschen stärkt, statt ihn zu schwächen. In fast 500 Gesprächen mit über 600 Menschen haben wir darüber gesprochen, was sich verändert hat – und was sich noch verändern muss. Wie können wir sicherstellen, dass KI nicht bestehende Diskriminierung verstärkt, sondern im Gegenteil hilft, Barrieren abzubauen? Welche Rahmenbedingungen brauchen Organisationen, um KI verantwortungsvoll und wirkungsvoll einzusetzen? Und warum braucht es gerade jetzt Haltung, Mut und Räume zum Ausprobieren – bevor wir KI zu schnell zur Norm machen? Fest steht: Für die Lösung unserer aktuellen Herausforderungen brauchen wir neue Impulse. Daher suchen wir weiter nach Methoden, Vorbildern, Erfahrungen, Tools und Ideen, die uns dem Kern von New Work näherbringen. Darüber hinaus beschäftigt uns von Anfang an die Frage, ob wirklich alle Menschen das finden und leben können, was sie im Innersten wirklich, wirklich wollen. Ihr seid bei On the Way to New Work – heute mit einem besonderen Panel von den AI IMPACT DAYS 2025. [Hier](https://linktr.ee/onthewaytonewwork) findet ihr alle Links zum Podcast und unseren aktuellen Werbepartnern

Dack says build a fireplace and enjoy it. Chip asks about the best ways to sharpen chisels. Kit wonders if there's a way to easily change and upgrade wiring using existing baseboard. The crew talks about the pluses and drawbacks of cedar shingle panels   Mike and Grant help Patrick answer listener questions and talk about the challenges to building and remodeling houses.      Tune in to Episode 690 of the Fine Homebuilding Podcast to learn more about:  Sharpening methods for planes and chisels  Planning for future line- and low-voltage wiring  Cedar shingles mounted on panels for fast installation  Have a question or topic you want us to talk about on the show? Email us at fhbpodcast@taunton.com.     ➡️ Check Out the Full Show Notes: FHB Podcast 690 ➡️ Learn about the Fine Homebuilding Summit ➡️ Follow Fine Homebuilding on Social Media:   Instagram • Facebook • TikTok • Pinterest • YouTube  ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐  If you enjoy the show, please subscribe and rate us on iTunes, Spotify, YouTube Music, or wherever you prefer to listen.

Was viele für einen ausgereizten Markt halten, sieht Coolblue als Chance: Der niederländische Elektronikhändler zeigt mit beeindruckender Kundenzufriedenheit und radikaler Serviceorientierung, wie auch in einem gesättigten Umfeld noch zweistelliges Wachstum möglich ist. In dieser Folge spricht Sven Rittau mit Urs Möller, Country Manager Germany, über das ehrgeizige Ziel, Coolblue auch auf dem deutschen Markt zur Love Brand zu machen – mit eigenem Lieferservice, Stores als Erlebnisräume und einem kompromisslosen Fokus auf den KundInnen. Dabei geht es nicht nur um NPS, sondern um die Frage, wie man sich in einem gesättigten Markt wie Unterhaltungselektronik noch sinnvoll differenzieren kann – etwa durch eigene Logistik, Markenführung und Unternehmenskultur. Urs Möller erklärt, warum Coolblue nicht auf maximale Auswahl, sondern auf durchdachte Produktlösungen setzt – und warum das Unternehmen bewusst auf physische Stores als Teil der Customer Journey setzt. Im Gespräch geht es außerdem um die Expansion in Deutschland, die Rolle zufriedener KundInnen fürs Wachstum und die drei zentralen Hebel, die Coolblue in den nächsten Jahren skalieren will. In dieser Folge mit Urs Möller und Sven Rittau lernst Du:

Warum stehen in der Öffentlichkeit, in Medien, auf Panels und Bühnen noch immer hauptsächlich Männer? Nur eine von vier Speaker:innen auf deutschen Bühnen ist eine Frau. In TV-Formaten überwiegen männliche Experten um ein Vielfaches.Warum zögern gerade kluge, kompetente Frauen mit dem Schritt in die Sichtbarkeit – obwohl sie längst bereit wären?In dieser Folge von Wirkungsvoll spreche ich mit Isabelle Gardt, Geschäftsführerin bei OMR und Initiatorin der Diversity-Initiative OMR 5050. Sie gibt Einblicke in ihre Vision, die Realität hinter den Zahlen – und konkrete Schritte, wie wir Räume schaffen, in denen Frauen mutig sichtbar werden.Sie zeigt, warum Sichtbarkeit kein Zufall ist – sondern eine strategische Entscheidung.Denn: Wer gestalten will, muss gesehen werden.Darum solltest du reinhören – Das nimmst du aus der Folge mit:· Wie du als Frau selbstbewusst sichtbar wirst – auch ohne 150 % liefern zu müssen· Was Unternehmen tun müssen, damit Diversität nicht nur ein Buzzword bleibt· Warum „einfach machen“ mehr verändert als jeder perfekte Plan· Wie du deine Bühne findest – auch wenn du noch nicht perfekt bist· Weshalb Sichtbarkeit eine Entscheidung UND eine Verantwortung istShownotes Isabelle Gardt:https://5050.omr.com/newsletterhttps://5050.omr.com/https://www.instagram.com/5050_omr/Shownotes Ina Böttcher: https://ina-boettcher.de/mastermind-womens-excellence/ Website: https://ina-boettcher.de Buche dir dein Gespräch mit mir: https://calendly.com/ina-boettcher/kennenlernenVernetze dich mit mir auf Social Media: LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/inaboettcher-medientraining/ Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/inaboettcher_medientraining/ YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@Ina_Boettcher/ Du möchtest sicherer vor der Kamera werden und deine Botschaften klar herüberbringen? Stellst du dir manchmal vor, wie du mit Leichtigkeit vor dein Publikum trittst und die volle Aufmerksamkeit gewinnst? In meinen Interviews und Videos erfährst du, wie du mehr aus dir herausholst und dein wirkungsvolles Auftreten vor der Kamera üben kannst.

The main event is finally here. And it's the pinnacle of one of the greatest Star Wars collectors weekends ever. In May of 2024, 200 collectors traveled to Kennesaw, Georgia for Rogue Fun, a multi-day Star Wars trip centering on collecting and connecting. And on Saturday, May the Fourth, the Georgia Alliance hosted a 7-hour ballroom event, featuring dinner, room sales and five incredible Star Wars-themed panel presentations. The panels covered the history of Star Wars and the Sears holiday catalogs, two legendary action figure customizers, the artist who introduced Boba Fett to the world in 1978, and Steve Sansweet and the authors of two of the most iconic books about collectibles. And the presentations ended with a wildly funny and insightful chat with two former Kenner creatives who worked on the Kenner line and helped design some of the most beloved Star Wars figures and playsets. The evening concluded with every collector's dream: an epic room sales event in the ballroom. From Kenner to Hasbro, and from prototypes and production pieces, the event had enough Star Wars items for sale to fill an entire store! Join host David Quinn for an in-depth look at day three of the memorable Rogue Fun weekend. Featuring live moments and stories from Star Wars fans and collectors Rich Alot, Howard Bollinger, Lewis Brown, John Celestri, Tim Effler, Matt Fox, Jerry Hancock, Josie Harmon, Paul Harrison, Don Henderson, Erik Janniche, Bruce Lieberman, Jonathan McElwain, Doug Meyer, Maggie Moore, Shawn Moynihan, Narayan S. Naik, Steven J. Sansweet, Barry Scott, Ryan Shaw, Jason Smith, Tim Theall, Mike Tricomi, Vinny Tricomi, Jason Wasulko, Shannon Wasulko, Gary Ray Weaver, Glen Williams and many more! This is the magic of the Star Wars collecting community at its peak. And this is Star Wars: Prototypes and Production! To Listen to the Episode on the Prototype Archives Site: https://www.prototypearchives.com/podcast Links to the Episode on Various Podcast Platforms: APPLE PODCASTS: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/star-wars-prototypes-and-production/id1448205460 YOUTUBE MUSIC/PODCASTS: https://music.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL7UruGWpd8qKrObL8-DSLekomB8GuB1VT SPOTIFY: https://open.spotify.com/show/744L0XQhmpXn2AZeaxUhOZ CASTBOX: https://castbox.fm/channel/Star-Wars%3A-Prototypes-and-Production-id1904296?utm_source=website&utm_medium=dlink&utm_campaign=web_share&utm_content=Star%20Wars%3A%20Prototypes%20and%20Production-CastBox_FM STITCHER: https://www.stitcher.com/show/1054209 PANDORA: https://www.pandora.com/podcast/star-wars-prototypes-and-production/PC:1001054209 PODBEAN: https://www.podbean.com/podcast-detail/u4ywr-80960/ AMAZON MUSIC: https://music.amazon.com/podcasts/c98fb265-c233-43d9-ae3b-1102bfb03e45/star-wars-prototypes-and-production PLAYERFM: https://player.fm/series/2473540 SOUNDCLOUD: https://soundcloud.com/david-quinn-908355451/tracks PODVINE: https://podvine.com/podcast/star-wars-prototypes-and-production iHEART: https://www.iheart.com/podcast/256-star-wars-prototypes-and-p-31050806/ https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/star-wars-prototypes-and-production/id1448205460

Send us a textEpisode 188 - June 15, 2025Lazarus #61. News of Note2. New Comic Series3. 3 Amazing New Book4. Great Responsibility - Lazarus #65. 3 Books We Hope Will Be SpectacularConsider becoming a patron!Support the show

ATXtv Day 4 – We Are Leftovers & Mad Men MagicThis was the day. The reason Susan and Cort traveled to Austin: The Leftovers cast reunion panel. Get ready for chills, tears, laughter, and maybe even some “JustinKevin” spiritual energy. Then, they rounded out the evening with the 10th anniversary celebration of Mad Men's finale—aka Jon Hamm worship. From mystical on-set experiences to Chipotle firsts, this ep covers it all.00:00 – Leftovers Day Begins!Lined up early with the superfans. The anticipation, the crowd, the vibe… all worth it.03:00 – The Leftovers Cast PanelAnn Dowd, Amy Brenneman, Carrie Coon, Damon Lindelof, Tom Perrotta, and Mimi Leder deliver heartwarming stories, behind-the-scenes truths, and long-awaited answers.35:00 – Mad Men PanelJon Hamm, John Slattery, and moderator Noah Hawley dish about casting, smoking 72 fake cigarettes, and why slouching was banned on set.51:00 – Chipotle Firsts & ATX Fest Wrap-UpGranola bar survival tips, cotton candy nightcaps, and exhausted reflections from four full days of TV nerdery.

Send us a textPsychocomicogy's Samantha Chavez and Tad discuss The Unbeatable Squirrel Girl and more!Consider becoming a patron!Support the show

Ryan and Charles talk about the Essence20 panels and announcements at RenegadeCon 2025. Listen Now! (mp3) Featuring Letter From Snake Eyes part 4, generously provided by Wordburglar. Check it and other amazing 80s-inspired out at Wordburglar.com. Although the host works for Renegade Game Studios, this podcast and the network that hosts it are not affiliated […]

Part 2 – Lost Authors, Leftover Fans & Legendary VoicesOur Day 3 (or Festival Day 2?) brought surprises, voice crushes, elevator chaos, and fangirling in full force. Susan and Cort dive into early screenings (Duster Ep. 4), secret societies in Anne Rice's universe, and a panel with Damon Lindelof and Tom Perrotta. Expect TV nerdiness, near-missed seats, and Cort's personal vendetta against chocolate croissants.00:00 – Rainy mornings & lazy startsSkipped morning panels to recover from late-night storms and schedule shuffles.02:00 – Duster Episode 4 Early ScreeningSeventies vibes, FBI twists, Keith David's velvet voice, and car chases galore.07:00 – AMC's Anne Rice Universe PanelInterview with the Vampire season 3 updates, Talamacus show revelations, and a new rockstar vampire on the rise. Yes, actual rock songs are coming.24:00 – Showrunners & Authors PanelElevator drama, sneaking into packed rooms, and saving seats like champions. Damon & Tom spill tea on The Leftovers, book-to-screen shifts, and Carrie Coon's game-changing performance.41:00 – Punch Bowl Burgers & Restaurant RejectionsA Big-Ass Burger and a big-ass letdown when their favorite restaurant becomes VIP-only.46:30 – Book Club CurveballCort and Susan attend an ATXtv “book club” hoping for another Damon & Tom Q&A... only to realize they were never coming. Womp womp.50:00 – Poolside Nostalgia & Looking Ahead to the Cast PanelPhotos, chills, and predictions for Day 4's main event: The Leftovers cast reunion.

Send us a textTad, Mark Pracht, and Sean Harklerode discuss Sgt. Rock, Joe Kubert, and more!Consider becoming a patron!Support the show

Philipstown also approves zoning for solar Philipstown is planning to bill the Garrison Landing Water District's nine users for the first time in over a decade and require them to reimburse the town for some of the $2 million it has spent buying water and digging a new well. The Town Board has scheduled a public hearing for June 24 on a proposal to borrow $500,000 for the Garrison Landing Water District, whose residents and businesses are receiving water from the new well drilled and connected at town expense when the existing wells failed. Philipstown also purchased water for the district and repaired leaks in its system to the extent that it has "basically repaired every single water line in Garrison Landing at this point," Supervisor John Van Tassel said when the board met on June 5. Now it is looking to recoup some of those expenses through the bonding, which will be repaid by water district users. "We will stretch the bond payments out for as long as we can to make it easier for them, but they will ultimately be responsible for paying back a good portion of this," Van Tassel added on Wednesday (June 11). Part of the proposed borrowing will fund meters. The existing meters have not worked in 15 years, said Van Tassel. The town did not have money for the meters, he said, and had been mistakenly told that state law prohibited billing users more than the $20,000 annually they've been paying collectively since the town acquired the system in 1998. "We will come up with a flat rate for residential use, we're going to come up with a flat rate for commercial use, and then there will be a rate per gallon for the water usage," said Van Tassel at the June 5 meeting. "Everybody will pay their fair share for water." A state audit released in May calculated that Philipstown spent $2.4 million between 2018 and 2023 to fill Garrison Landing's water needs, shrinking its general-fund balance from $1 million to $53,137. Annual expenses for the district rose during the same period from about $85,000 to $975,000, "the most significant factor of the town's financial decline," the audit said. Solar guidelines The Town Board on June 5 approved zoning for private and commercial solar systems. Under the guidelines, property owners who want to install roof- or ground-mounted systems for personal use can do so if they follow the regulatory process required for accessory structures, such as garages. The zoning limits the height of panels on pitched roofs to 8 inches, flat roofs to 2 feet or the height of parapets, and ground-mounted solar systems to 12 feet. Panels must have anti-reflective coating and ground-mounted systems cannot be larger than 5,000 square feet and must be shielded from neighbors. Commercial solar farms are allowed everywhere except the Ridgeline Protection District and only in the Scenic Overlay District with a special permit. The guidelines specify that solar farms, "to the greatest extent possible," be installed on industrial properties; Superfund sites that have undergone environmental cleanup; mining sites; abandoned parcels; landfills; parking lots; and the roofs of commercial buildings. In addition, companies building community solar projects, which allow residents to buy shares of the electricity they generate, must target Philipstown residents for subscriptions, particularly low- and moderate-income households. Requests for variances can be made to the Zoning Board of Appeals. Solar farms capable of generating up to 5 megawatts of electricity need 7-foot-high fencing with a self-locking gate to secure the mechanical equipment. Systems over 1 megawatt need a plan for decommissioning, removal and site restoration.

Hey Panelers!This episode of the podcast Mark, Frank, Rob and Steve come together to talk about the movie Superman II (1980) that has been a discussion point of many of us comic fans. Especially since 2006 when the Richard Donner Cut was released.  This is a Podcast about our discussion about the two versions of the film. What we liked between both. What we think would be the best mix. Plus which one we prefer to watch. Let us know your thoughts. This is a pre-emptive Episode of the podcast to come out when the James Gunn Movie Superman comes out in July. Something for everyone to talk about. We had a great time talking about this film in both forms. We hope you enjoy it! This was a great 300th episode of the podcast and we thank you all for listening! Check us out on Apple Podcast, Amazon Music, Deezer, Tune In, and Spotify,or whatever podcast player of choice you use. We Can be found on YouTube: Just Search Panels to Pixels Podcast!Subscribe! And just Check the Thumbs up if you like it! We would appreciate it! You can send Feedback at: Facebook.com/PanelsToPixels Email us: Panelstopixels1@gmail.com Instagram: @PanelsToPixelsPodcast

Days 1 & 2 – Tornadoes, Panels, and Popcorn DramaSusan and Cort are live(ish) from the Austin Television Festival! From Texas-sized hailstorms and hotel confusion to binge-watching and brushing shoulders with TV legends, they recap their first two whirlwind days at ATX. Tune in for festival highlights, travel misadventures, unexpected heartthrobs, and the joy (and pain) of trying new coffee.00:00 – Welcome from ATX, hotel shenanigans, and The Great Texas StormRainy departures, flight drama, and a very Texas pit stop at Buc-ee's.They tour the International Assassin Hotel and joke about bathtub reenactments.A near-apocalyptic storm traps them under a sparking transformer—no Autobots, just drama. Ponchos are deemed useless in 80mph winds.11:00 – For the Love of Four SeasonsThey attend the Four Seasons panel and talk Netflix, writer's room therapy, and meeting Alan Alda.18:00 – Food, sun, and shady sidewalksCort makes Susan walk, regrets are had, coffee is disappointing, but the Mediterranean lunch redeems the day.24:00 – Netflix's The Waterfront PremiereA surprise favorite! They attend the pilot screening and Q&A, get starstruck by Kevin Williamson, and swoon over Holt McCallany's voice.30:00 – Panel etiquette and predictionsWhy Q&A hogs are the worst, and what they're hoping for from the rest of the weekend.

Hosts Nicholas Friedman, LeAlec Murray, and Leah President are STOKED for Anime Expo 2025, and once you here about all these scheduled panels and premieres, you will be, too! We're also talking about our favorite announcements out of  PlayStation's State of Play 2025, the upcoming Nyaight of the Living Cat anime, the Given The Double Album: Hiiragi mix & To the Sea coming to theaters, and recommending anime for your friends who still just don't quite get it. Have a question for The Anime Effect? Ask it here. To bring your brand to life in this podcast, email podcastadsales@sonymusic.com. Crunchyroll Heads to Anime Expo 2025 with New Anime Premieres, Panels and More PlayStation's State of Play 2025 Delivers Silent Hill f, Digimon Story Details Xbox Games Showcase ATLUS announced Persona 4 Revival Nyaight of the Living Cat Anime Unleashes New Trailer, Visual, Cast and Theme Song News Given The Double Album: Hiiragi mix & To the Sea Comes to Theaters Later This Month Fira X Wear Launches My Hero Academia Line Styled After UA Sports Uniforms Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Send us a textMaria, Marisol, and Tad discuss Gilbert Hernandez' Luba #4 and the Mario & Jaime Hernandez stories in Measles #1 & #2.Consider becoming a patron!Support the show

Send us a textJeremy Whitley joins Tad to discuss Aces and Aros: An Asexual and Aromantic Comic Book Anthology and more!Available via Kickstarter https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/comicuno/aces-and-aros-an-asexual-and-aromantic-comic-book-anthology?ref=android_project_shareConsider becoming a patron!Support the show

Send us a textEpisode 187 - June 8, 2025Lazarus #51. News of Note2. New Comic Series3. 3 Amazing New Book4. Great Responsibility - Lazarus #55. 3 Books We Hope Will Be SpectacularConsider becoming a patron!Support the show

Was wäre, wenn ein unsichtbares Licht deinem Körper beim Heilen, Regenerieren und sogar beim besseren Schlaf helfen könnte?

Send us a textTad is joined by Otis Frampton to discuss The Patchwork Girl of Oz, Oddly Normal, and more.Consider becoming a patron!Support the show

Our Beer expert Em Sauter from Pints and Panels discusses the best brews to enjoy this summer!

Discover how tactile sensory wall panels create structured sensory experiences that help children with autism process information safely. These interactive panels develop fine motor skills, emotional regulation, and cognitive abilities while providing crucial multisensory stimulation for brain development. Little People's Cove City: Bonney Lake Address: 11312 218th Ave E Website: https://www.littlepeoplescove.com

Send us a textTad is joined by Bad Idea VP of Sales and Marketing Siena Fallon to discuss their upcoming slate of new comics and more!Consider becoming a patron!Support the show

Reposted from Murder Magnets: A Poker Face Podcast, which you can find at https://podcastica.com/podcast/murder-magnets-a-poker-face-podcast “It's Lovely at the Top”Journey back to elementary school with Penny, Becky & Steve as they unravel this pint-sized mystery with Charlie. Next up: Poker Face S2E7 “One Last Job.” Let us know your thoughts!You can email or send a voice message to bullshit@podcastica.com. Or check out our Facebook group, where we put up comment posts for each episode, at facebook.com/groups/podcastica.Links:‘Poker Face' Returns To Nielsen Charts As Top 5 Streaming Original With Season 2 Debut - IMDb'Poker Face' Has Gone Full Murder-of-the-Week in Season 2Adam Sandler's masterpiece: Lunchlady LandCheck out all our other shows at podcastica.com Check out Becky's podcast “What's On Tonight” at What's On Tonight Check out Steve's podcast “Panels to Pixels” at Panels to PixelsAdvertising Inquiries: https://redcircle.com/brandsPrivacy & Opt-Out: https://redcircle.com/privacy

Send us a textTad and Psychocomicogy tackle Tom King's most emotionally challenging work Sheriff of Babylon.Consider becoming a patron!Support the show

Send us a textGreg Petre & Marc Koprinarov return to 22 Panels to discuss their Eisner Nomination, Comic Shop Tour, and the first hardcover collection of Santos Sisters.Consider becoming a patron!Support the show

Send us a textEpisode 186 - June 1, 2025Lazarus #41. News of Note2. New Comic Series3. 3 Amazing New Book4. Great Responsibility - Lazarus #45. 3 Books We Hope Will Be SpectacularConsider becoming a patron!Support the show

Send us a textTad is joined by Jeffrey Alan Love, Michael Tivey, and Christopher Condon to discuss their upcoming series News from the Fallout.Consider becoming a patron!Support the show

Send us a textPaul Tobin returns to 22 Panels to discuss String - and eventually he and Tad even get around to itConsider becoming a patron!Support the show

Your heroes return to accept their mission: discuss Mission: Impossible - The Final Reckoning! In this episode we share our history with the franchise, discuss our thoughts on The Final Reckoning, and give the ComiClub definitive rankings of the series. Mission: Impossible – The Final Reckoning is directed by Christopher McQuarrie; and stars Tom Cruise, Hayley Atwell, Ving Rhames, and Simon Pegg.Follow ComiClub on Instagram @ComiClubPodcastComiClub is hosted by Blaine McGaffigan and Adam Cook.

Send us a textEpisode 6: Marshmallows of Personal TruthIn which we kick back, share stories, play games, and watch our friend slowly die…Never Have I Ever Dared to think we'd learn the Secret History of the Gods! Pull up a log and join the gang around the campfire — we're doing a beach day episode! Straightforward fun and games! Graham cracker bushes! A Psychedelic-Party-Toad! Everybody definitely lives through this one! When has a solicit text ever lied to you?Enjoy it while it lasts, this calm before the storm, as our first arc races towards its conclusion in only 2 more episodes… Consider becoming a patron!Support the show

Send us a textStephan Frank returns to discuss Palomino vols. 4-5, process, and more.Palomino and Romance in the Age of the Space God are available on Kickstarter now!http://kck.st/44AxtJtConsider becoming a patron!Support the show

Send us a textIn-Between Years continues with discussion of Penny Century #7 & Luba #3.Consider becoming a patron!Support the show

In today's episode I am walking you through exactly which labs you need to uncover the root cause of your acne and clearing your skin for good!    Thank you so much for being here! I am so happy to have you and hope this podcast provides you with the resources you need as you navigate the complicated world of acne, skin health, gut health, wellness and more!  I would love to connect with you over on IG @detoxingwithdani   Links from today's episode: If you are looking for 1:1 support to clear your skin and heal your gut reach out to Dani on Instagram or you can email at contact@detoxingwithdani.com    Take the ACNE ROOT CAUSE QUIZ HERE   Let's Connect! You can find me on IG @detoxingwithdani or join our private facebook group HERE    MEDICAL & HEALTH DISCLAIMER: The information and other content provided in this podcast, page, or in any linked materials, are not intended and should not be construed as medical advice, nor is the information a substitute for professional medical expertise or treatment.   If you or any other person has a medical concern, you should consult with your health care provider or seek other professional medical treatment. Never disregard professional medical advice or delay in seeking it because of something that you have heard on this podcast or in any linked materials. If you think you may have a medical emergency, call your doctor or emergency services immediately.

Send us a textTad is joined by Grant Snider to discuss his new book Thinking About Thinking, and much, much more.Consider becoming a patron!Support the show

Send us a textEpisode 185 - May 26, 2025Lazarus #31. News of Note2. New Comic Series3. 3 Amazing New Book4. Great Responsibility - Lazarus #35. 3 Books We Hope Will Be SpectacularConsider becoming a patron!Support the show

JCO PO author Dr. Dean A. Regier at the Academy of Translational Medicine, University of British Columbia (UBC), and the School of Population and Public Health, BC Cancer Research Institute shares insights into his JCO PO article, “Clinical Effectiveness and Cost-Effectiveness of Multigene Panel Sequencing in Advanced Melanoma: A Population-Level Real-World Target Trial Emulation.” Host Dr. Rafeh Naqash and Dr. Regier discuss the real-world clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of multigene panels compared with single-gene BRAF testing to guide therapeutic decisions in advanced melanoma. Transcript Dr. Rafeh Naqash:Hello and welcome to JCO Precision Oncology Conversations, where we bring you engaging conversations with authors of clinically relevant and highly significant JCO PO articles. I'm your host, Dr. Rafeh Naqash, Podcast Editor for JCO Precision Oncology and Assistant Professor at the OU Health Stephenson Cancer Center in the University of Oklahoma. Today, we are excited to be joined by Dr. Dean A. Regier, Director at the Academy of Translational Medicine, Associate Professor at the School of Population and Public Health, UBC Senior Scientist at the British Columbia Cancer Research Institute, and also the senior author of the JCO Precision Oncology article entitled "Clinical Effectiveness and Cost-Effectiveness of Multigene Panel Sequencing in Advanced Melanoma: A Population-Level Real-World Target Trial Emulation." At the time of this recording, our guest's disclosures will be linked in the transcript. Dean, welcome to our podcast and thank you for joining us today. Dr. Dean Regier:Thank you. I'm delighted to be here. Dr. Rafeh Naqash:So, obviously, you are from Canada, and medicine, or approvals of drugs to some extent, and in fact approvals of gene testing to some extent is slightly different, which we'll come to learn about more today, compared to what we do in the US—and in fact, similarly, Europe versus North America to a large extent as well. Most of the time, we end up talking about gene testing in lung cancer. There is a lot of data, a lot of papers around single-gene panel testing in non-small cell lung cancer versus multigene testing. In fact, a couple of those papers have been published in JCO PO, and it has shown significant cost-effectiveness and benefit and outcomes benefit in terms of multigene testing. So this is slightly, you know, on a similar approach, but in a different tumor type. So, could you tell us first why you wanted to investigate this question? What was the background to investigating this question? And given your expertise in health economics and policy, what are some of the aspects that one tends or should tend to understand in terms of cost-effectiveness before we go into the results for this very interesting manuscript? Dr. Dean Regier:Yeah, of course, delighted to. So, one of the reasons why we're deeply interested in looking at comparative outcomes with respect to single- versus multigene testing— whether that's in a public payer system like Canada or an insurer system, a private system in the United States— is that the question around does multigene versus single-gene testing work, has not typically tested in randomized controlled trials. You don't have people randomized to multigene versus single-gene testing. And what that does, it makes the resulting evidence base, whether it's efficacy, safety, or comparative cost-effectiveness, highly uncertain. So, the consequence of that has been uneven uptake around the world of next-generation sequencing panels. And so if we believe that next-gen sequencing panels are indeed effective for our patients, we really need to generate that comparative evidence around effectiveness and cost-effectiveness. So we can go to payers, whether it be single payer or a private insurer, to say, "Here are the comparative outcomes." And when I say that uptake has been uneven, uptake there's been actually plenty, as you know, publications around that uneven uptake, whether it be in Europe, in the United States, in Canada. And so we're really interested in trying to produce that evidence to create the type of deliberations that are needed to have these types of technologies accessible to patients. And part of those deliberations, of course, is the clinical, but also in some contexts, cost-effectiveness. And so, we really start from the perspective of, can we use our healthcare system data, our learning healthcare system, to generate that evidence in a way that emulates a randomized controlled trial? We won't be able to do these randomized controlled trials for various, like really important and and reasons that make sense, quite frankly. So how can we mimic or emulate randomized controlled trials in a way that allows us to make inference around those outcomes? And for my research lab, we usually think through how do we do causal inference to address some of those biases that are inherent in observational data. So in terms of advanced melanoma, we were really interested in this question because first of all, there have been no randomized controlled trials around next-gen sequencing versus single-gene testing. And secondly, these products, these ICIs, immune checkpoint inhibitors, and BRAF and MEK inhibitors, they are quite expensive. And so the question really becomes: are they effective? And if so, to what extent are they cost-effective? Do they provide a good reason to have information around value for money? Dr. Rafeh Naqash:So now going to the biology of melanoma, so we know that BRAF is one of the tumor-agnostic therapies, it has approvals for melanoma as well as several other tumor types. And in fact, I do trials with different RAF-RAS kinase inhibitors. Now, one of the things that I do know is, and I'm sure some of the listeners know, is the DREAMseq trial, which was a melanoma study that was an NCI Cooperative Group trial that was led by Dr. Mike Atkins from Georgetown a couple of years back, that did show survival benefit of first-line immunotherapy sequencing. It was a sequencing study of whether to do first-line BRAF in BRAF-mutant melanoma followed by checkpoint inhibitors, or vice versa. And the immune checkpoint inhibitors followed by BRAF was actually the one that showed benefit, and the trial had to stop early, was stopped early because of the significant benefit seen. So in that context, before we approach the question of single-gene versus multigene testing in melanoma, one would imagine that it's already established that upfront nivolumab plus ipilimumab, for that matter, doublet checkpoint inhibitor therapy is better for BRAF-mutant melanoma. And then there's no significant other approvals for melanoma for NRAS or KIT, you know, mucosal melanomas tend to have KIT mutations, for example, or uveal melanomas, for that matter, have GNAQ, and there's no targeted therapies. So, what is the actual need of doing a broader testing versus just testing for BRAF? So just trying to understand when you started looking into this question, I'm sure you kind of thought about some of these concepts before you delved into that. Dr. Dean Regier:I think that is an excellent question, and it is a question that we asked ourselves: did we really expect any differences in outcomes between the testing strategies? And what did the real-world implementation, physician-guided, physician-led implementation look like? And so, that was kind of one of the other reasons that we really were interested is, why would we go to expanded multigene panel sequencing at all? We didn't really expect or I didn't expect an overall survival a priori. But what we saw in our healthcare system, what happened in our healthcare system was the implementation in 2016 of this multigene panel. And this panel covered advanced melanoma, and this panel cost quite a bit more than what they were doing in terms of the single-gene BRAF testing. And so when you're a healthcare system, you have to ask yourself those questions of what is the additional value associated with that? And indeed, I think in a healthcare system, we have to be really aware that we do not actually follow to the ideal extent randomized controlled trials or trial settings. And so that's the other thing that we have to keep in mind is when these, whether it's an ICI or a BRAF MEK inhibitor, when these are implemented, they do not look like randomized controlled trials. And so, we really wanted to emulate not just a randomized controlled trial, but a pragmatic randomized controlled trial to really answer those real-world questions around implementation that are so important to decision making. Dr. Rafeh Naqash:Sure. And just to understand this a little better: for us in the United States, when we talk about multigene testing, we generally refer to, these days, whole-exome sequencing with whole-transcriptome sequencing, which is like the nuclear option of of the testings, which is not necessarily cheap. So, when you talk about multigene testing in your healthcare system, what does that look like? Is it a 16-gene panel? Is it a 52-gene panel? What is the actual makeup of that platform? Dr. Dean Regier:Excellent question. Yeah, so at the time that this study is looking at, it was 2016, when we, as BC Cancer—so British Columbia is a population right now of 5.7 million people, and we have data on all those individuals. We are one healthcare system providing health care to 5.7 million people. In 2016, we had what I call our "home-brew" multigene panel, which was a 53-gene panel that was reimbursed as standard of care across advanced cancers, one of them being advanced melanoma. We have evolved since then. I believe in 2022, we are using one of the Illumina panels, the Focus panel. And so things have changed; it's an evolving landscape. But we're specifically focused on the 53-gene panel. It was called OncoPanel. And that was produced in British Columbia through the Genome Sciences Centre, and it was validated in a single-arm trial mostly around validity, etc. Dr. Rafeh Naqash:Thank you for explaining that. So now, onto the actual meat and the science of this project. So, what are some of the metrics from a health economy standpoint that you did look at? And then, methodology-wise, I understand, in the United States, we have a fragmented healthcare system. I have data only from my institution, for that matter. So we have to reach out to outside collaborators and email them to get the data. And that is different for you where you have access to all the data under one umbrella. So could you speak to that a little bit and how that's an advantage for this kind of research especially? Dr. Dean Regier:Yeah. In health economics, we look at the comparative incremental costs against the incremental effectiveness. And when we think about incremental costs, we think not just about systemic therapy or whether you see a physician, but also about hospitalizations, about all the healthcare interactions related to oncology or not that a patient might experience during their time or interactions with the healthcare system. You can imagine with oncology, there are multiple interactions over a prolonged time period depending on survival. And so what we try to do is we try to—and the benefit of the single-payer healthcare system is what we do is we link all those resource utilization patterns that each patient encounters, and we know the price of that encounter. And we compare those incremental costs of, in this case, it's the multigene panel versus the single-gene panel. So it's not just the cost of the panel, not just the cost of systemic therapy, but hospitalizations, physician encounters, etc. And then similarly, we look at, in this case, we looked at overall survival - we can also look at progression-free survival - and ask the simple question, you know, what is the incremental cost per life-year gained? And in that way, we get a metric or an understanding of value for money. And how we evaluate that within a deliberative priority setting context is we look at safety and efficacy first. So a regulatory package that you might get from, in our case, Health Canada or the FDA, so we look at that package, and we deliberate on, okay, is it safe and is it effective? How many patients are affected, etc. And then separately, what is the cost-effectiveness? And at what price, if it's not cost-effective, at what price would it be cost-effective? Okay, so for example, we have this metric called the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio, which is incremental cost in the numerator, and in this case, life-years gained in the denominator. And if it is around $50,000 or $100,000 per life-year gained—so if it's in that range, this ratio—then we might say it's cost-effective. If it's above this range, which is common in oncology, especially when we talk about ICIs, etc., then you might want to negotiate a price. And indeed, when we negotiate that price, we use the economic evaluation, that incremental cost-effectiveness ratio, as a way to understand at what price should we negotiate to in order to get value for money for the healthcare system. Dr. Rafeh Naqash:Thank you for explaining those very interesting terminologies. Now, one question I have in the context of what you just mentioned is, you know, like the drug development space, you talked about efficacy and safety, but then on the safety side, we talk about all-grade adverse events or treatment-related adverse events—two different terminologies. From a healthcare utilization perspective, how do you untangle if a patient on a BRAF therapy got admitted for a hypoxic respiratory failure due to COPD, resulting in a hospitalization from the cost, overall cost utilization, or does it not matter? Dr. Dean Regier:We try to do as much digging into those questions as possible. And so, this is real-world data, right? Real-world data is not exactly as clean as you'd get from a well-conducted clinical trial. And so what we do is we look at potential adverse event, whether it's hospitalization, and the types of therapies around that hospitalization to try- and then engage with clinicians to try to understand or tease out the different grades of the adverse event. Whether it's successful or not, I think that is a real question that we grapple with in terms of are we accurate in delineating different levels of adverse events? But we try to take the data around the event to try to understand the context in which it happens. Dr. Rafeh Naqash:Thank you for explaining that, Dean. So, again to the results of this manuscript, could you go into the methodology briefly? Believe you had 147 patients, 147 patients in one arm, 147 in the other. How did you split that cohort, and what were some of the characteristics of this cohort? Dr. Dean Regier:So, the idea, of course, is that we have selection criteria, study inclusion criteria, which included in our case 364 patients. And these were patients who had advanced melanoma within our study time period. So that was 2016 to 2018. And we had one additional year follow. So we had three total years. And what we did is that we linked our data, our healthcare system data. During this time, because the policy change was in 2016, we had patients both go on the multigene panel and on the single-gene BRAF testing. So, the idea was to emulate a pragmatic randomized controlled trial where we looked at contemporaneous patients who had multigene panel testing versus single-gene BRAF testing. And then we did a matching procedure—we call it genetic matching. And that is a type of matching that allows us to balance covariates across the patient groups, across the multigene versus BRAF testing cohorts. The idea again is, as you get in a randomized controlled trial, you have these baseline characteristics that look the same. And then the hope is that you address any source selection or confounding biases that prohibit you to have a clean answer to the question: Is it effective or cost-effective? So you address all those biases that may prohibit you to find a signal if indeed a signal is there. And so, what we did is we created—we did this genetic matching to balance covariates across the two cohorts, and we matched them one-to-one. And so what we were able to do is we were able to find, of those 364 patients in our pool, 147 in the multigene versus 147 in the single-gene BRAF testing that were very, very similar. In fact, we created what's called a directed acyclic graph or a DAG, together with clinicians to say, “Hey, what biases would you expect to have in these two cohorts that might limit our ability to find a signal of effectiveness?” And so we worked with clinicians, with health economists, with epidemiologists to really understand those different biases at play. And the genetic matching was able to match the cohorts on the covariates of interest. Dr. Rafeh Naqash:And then could you speak on some of the highlights from the results? I know you did survival analysis, cost-effectiveness, could you explain that in terms of what you found? Dr. Dean Regier:We did two analyses. The intention-to-treat analysis is meant to emulate the pragmatic randomized controlled trial. And what that does is it answers the question, for all those eligible for multigene or single-gene testing: What is the cost-effectiveness in terms of incremental life-years gained and incremental cost per life-years gained? And the second one was around a protocol analysis, which really answered the question of: For those patients who were actually treated, what was the incremental effectiveness and cost-effectiveness? Now, they're different in two very important ways. For the intention-to-treat, it's around population questions. If we gave single-gene or multigene to the entire population of advanced melanoma patients, what is the cost-effectiveness? The per-protocol is really around that clinical question of those who actually received treatment, what was the incremental cost and effectiveness? So very different questions in terms of population versus clinical cost and effectiveness. So, for the intention-to-treat, what we found is that in terms of life-years gained is around 0.22, which is around 2.5 months of additional life that is afforded to patients who went through the multigene panel testing versus the single-gene testing. That was non-statistically significant from zero at the 5% level. But on average, you would expect this additional 2.5 months of life. The incremental costs were again non-statistically significant, but they're around $20,000. And so when we look at incremental cost-effectiveness, we can also look at the uncertainty around that question, meaning what percentage of incremental cost-effectiveness estimates are likely to be cost-effective at different willingness-to-pay thresholds? Okay? So if you are willing to pay $100,000 to get one gain of life-years, around 52.8% of our estimates, in terms of when we looked at the entire uncertainty, would be cost-effective. So actually that meets the threshold of implementation in our healthcare system. So it's quite uncertain, just over 50%. But what we see is that decision-makers actually have a high tolerance for uncertainty around cost-effectiveness. And so, while it is uncertain, we would say that, well, the cost-effectiveness is finely balanced. Now, when we looked at the population, the per-protocol population, those folks who just got treatment, we actually have a different story. We have all of a sudden around 4.5 or just under 5 months of life gained that is statistically significantly different from zero, meaning that this is a strong signal of benefit in terms of life-years gained. In terms of the changes in costs or the incremental costs, they are larger again, but statistically insignificant. So the question now is, to what extent is it cost-effective? What is the probability of it being cost-effective? And at the $100,000 per life-year gained willingness-to-pay, there was a 73% chance that multigene panel testing versus single-gene testing is cost-effective. Dr. Rafeh Naqash:So one of the questions I have here, this is a clarification both for myself and maybe the listeners also. So protocol treatment is basically if you had gene testing and you have a BRAF in the multigene panel, then the patient went on a BRAF treatment. Is that correct? Dr. Dean Regier:It's still physician choice. And I think that's important to say that. So typically what we saw in both in our pre- and post-matching data is that we saw around 50% of patients, irrespective of BRAF status, get an ICI, which is appropriate, right? And so the idea here is that you get physician-guided care, but if the patient no longer performs on the ICI, then it gives them a little bit more information on what to do next. Even during that time when we thought it wasn't going to be common to do an ICI, but it was actually quite common. Dr. Rafeh Naqash:Now, did you have any patients in this study who had the multigene testing done and had an NRAS or a KIT mutation and then went on to those therapies, which were not captured obviously in the single-gene testing, which would have just tried to look at BRAF? Dr. Dean Regier:So I did look at the data this morning because I thought that might come up in terms of my own questions that I had. I couldn't find it, but what we did see is that some patients went on to clinical trials. So, meaning that this multigene panel testing allowed, as you would hope in a learning healthcare system, patients to move on to clinical trials to have a better chance at more appropriate care if a target therapy was available. Dr. Rafeh Naqash:And the other question in that context, which is not necessarily related to the gene platform, but more on the variant allele frequency, so if you had a multigene panel that captured something that was present at a high VAF, with suspicion that this could be germline, did you have any of those patients? I'm guessing if you did, probably very low number, but I'm just thinking from a cost-effective standpoint, if you identify somebody with germline, their, you know, first-degree relative gets tested, that ends up, you know, prevention, etc. rather than somebody actually developing cancer subsequently. That's a lot of financial gains to the system if you capture something early. So did you look at that or maybe you're planning to look at that? Dr. Dean Regier:We did not look at that, but that is a really important question that typically goes unanswered in economic evaluations. And so, the short answer is yes, that result, if there was a germline finding, would be returned to the patient, and then the family would be able to be eligible for screening in the appropriate context. What we have found in economic evaluations, and we've recently published this research, is that that scope of analysis is rarely incorporated into the economic evaluation. So those downstream costs and those downstream benefits are ignored. And when you- especially also when you think about things like secondary or incidental findings, right? So it could be a germline finding for cancer, but what about all those other findings that we might have if you go with an exome or if you go with a genome, which by the way, we do have in British Columbia—we do whole-genome and transcriptome sequencing through something called the Personalized OncoGenomics program. That scope of evaluation, because it's very hard to get the right types of data, because it requires a decision model over the lifetime of both the patients and potentially their family, it becomes very complicated or complex to model over patients' and families' lifetime. That doesn't mean that we should not do it, however. Dr. Rafeh Naqash:So, in summary Dean, could you summarize some of the known and unknowns of what you learned and what you're planning in subsequent steps to this project? Dr. Dean Regier:Our North Star, if you will, is to really understand the entire system effect of next-generation sequencing panels, exome sequencing, whole genomes, or whole genomes and transcriptome analysis, which we think should be the future of precision oncology. The next steps in our research is to provide a nice base around multigene panels in terms of multigene versus single-gene testing, whether that be colorectal cancer, lung cancer, melanoma, etc., and to map out the entire system implications of implementing next-generation sequencing panels. And then we want to answer the questions around, “Well, what if we do exomes for all patients? What if we do whole genomes and transcriptomes for all patients? What are the comparative outcomes for a true tumor-agnostic precision oncology approach, accounting for, as you say, things like return of results with respect to hereditary cancers?” I think the challenge that's going to be encountered is really around the persistent high costs of something like a whole-genome and transcriptome sequencing approach. Although we do see the technology prices going down—the "$1,000 genome" or “$6,000 genome" on whatever Illumina machine you might have—that bioinformatics is continuing to be expensive. And so, there are pipelines that are automated, of course, and you can create a targeted gene report really rapidly within a reasonable turnaround time. But of course, for secondary or what I call level two analysis, that bioinformatics is going to continue to be expensive. And so, we're just continually asking that question is: In our healthcare system and in other healthcare systems, if you want to take a precision oncology approach, how do you create the pipelines? And what types of technologies really lend themselves to benefits over and above next-generation sequencing or multigene panels, allowing for access to off-label therapies? What does that look like? Does that actually improve patients? I think some of the challenges, of course, is because of heterogeneity, small benefiting populations, finding a signal if a signal is indeed there is really challenging. And so, what we are thinking through is, with respect to real-world evidence methods and emulating randomized controlled trials, what types of evidence methods actually allow us to find those signals if indeed those signals are there in the context of small benefiting populations? Dr. Rafeh Naqash:Thank you so much, Dean. Sounds like a very exciting field, especially in the current day and age where cost-effectiveness, financial toxicity is an important aspect of how we improve upon what is existing in oncology. And then lots more to be explored, as you mentioned. The last minute and a half I want to ask about you as an individual, as a researcher. There's very few people who have expertise in oncology, biomarkers, and health economics. So could you tell us for the sake of our trainees and early career physicians who might be listening, what was your trajectory briefly? How did you end up doing what you're doing? And maybe some advice for people who are interested in the cost of care, the cost of oncology drugs - what would your advice be for them very briefly? Dr. Dean Regier:Sure. So I'm an economist by training, and indeed I knew very little about the healthcare system and how it works. But I was recruited at one point to BC Cancer, to British Columbia, to really try to understand some of those questions around costs, and then I learned also around cost-effectiveness. And so, I did training in Scotland to understand patient preferences and patient values around quality of care, not just quantity of life, but also their quality of life and how that care was provided to them. And then after that, I was at Oxford University at the Nuffield Department of Population Health to understand how that can be incorporated into randomized control trials in children. And so, I did a little bit of learning about RCTs. Of course, during the way I picked up some epidemiology with deep understanding of what I call econometrics, what others might call biostatistics or just statistics. And from there, it was about working with clinicians, working with epidemiologists, working with clinical trialists, working with economists to understand the different approaches or ways of thinking of how to estimate efficacy, effectiveness, safety, and cost-effectiveness. I think this is really important to think through is that we have clinical trialists, we have people with deep understanding of biostatistics, we have genome scientists, we have clinicians, and then you add economists into the mix. What I've really benefited from is that interdisciplinary experience, meaning that when I talk to some of the world's leading genome scientists, I understand where they're coming from, what their hope and vision is. And they start to understand where I'm coming from and some of the tools that I use to understand comparative effectiveness and cost-effectiveness. And then we work together to actually change our methods in order to answer those questions that we're passionate about and curious about better for the benefit of patients. So, the short answer is it's been actually quite a trajectory between Canada, the UK. I spent some time at the University of Washington looking at the Fred Hutch Cancer Research Center, looking at precision oncology. And along the way, it's been an experience about interdisciplinary research approaches to evaluating comparative outcomes. And also really thinking through not just at one point in time on-off decisions—is this effective? Is it safe? Is it cost-effective?—not those on-off decisions, but those decisions across the lifecycle of a health product. What do those look like at each point in time? Because we gain new evidence, new information at each point in time as patients have more and more experience around it. And so what really is kind of driving our research is really thinking about interdisciplinary approaches to lifecycle evaluation of promising new drugs with the goal of having these promising technologies to patients sooner in a way that is sustainable for the healthcare system. Dr. Rafeh Naqash:Awesome. Thank you so much for those insights and also giving us a sneak peek of your very successful career. Thank you for listening to JCO Precision Oncology Conversations. Don't forget to give us a rating or review, and be sure to subscribe so you never miss an episode. You can find all ASCO shows at asco.org/podcast. Thank you. 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.      

Hey Panelers! This episode of the podcast Mark and Becky cover the new movie The Thunderbolts*, which has been out since May 2nd. Keep in mind that this is a spoiler filled podcast about our thoughts on the film. So, if you don't want to be spoiled about the movie? Stop the podcast and go see the movie, come backand listen to us. Join us as we discuss the movie and what we like about the film. Our thoughts of the story and the character development. Plus, our discussion of where we last saw some of these characters and where they are now within theMCU. Check us out on Apple Podcast, Amazon Music, Deezer, Tune In, and Spotify,or whatever podcast player of choice you use. We Can be found on YouTube: Just Search Panels to Pixels Podcast!Subscribe! And just Check the Thumbs up if you like it! We would appreciate it! You can send Feedback at: Facebook.com/PanelsToPixels Email us: Panelstopixels1@gmail.com Instagram: @PanelsToPixelsPodcast

Em Sauter of the All About Beer Podcast and Pints and Panels moderates a conversation on beer and art. She is joined by Eric Tennant, founder head brewer at Benchtop Brewing, Brendon Boudwin. co-founder at Carbon Copy Brewing, Harrison Fahrer, co-owner and general manger of Cellarest Beer Project and Mark Goodwin- co-owner and director of fermentation at Cellarest Beer Project. For more Drink Beer, Think Beer check out All About Beer.SponsorsStomp StickersStomp Stickers is a proud member of the Brewers Association that produces a wide variety of printed brewery products such as beerlabels, keg collars, coasters, beer boxes and much more. Stomp's website features an easy-to-use design tool, low quantity orders, fast turn times, and free domestic shipping. Visit StompStickers.com and use code THINKBEER for 15% off your first order.The 5th IngredientIf you're running a brewery owner or operator, Beer30 by The 5th Ingredient is the ultimate command center. The most powerful brewery management software on the market, Beer30 handles the entire brewing workflow, from recipe development to production. Once your beer is brewed and ready, it seamlessly manages your inventory and streamlines your brewery's sales and distribution--all in the same easy-to-use platform. Beer30 lets you get back to the beer and the people that made you fall in love with this industry in the first place. And no other brewery management software gives you the ability to truly master your business and get the insights that you need to thrive in an increasingly competitive industry. Visit the5thingredient.com/AllAboutBeer today to learn more and receive 3 free months of Beer30.Host: Em SauterGuests:  Eric Tennant, Brendon Boudwin, Harrison Fahrer, and Mark GoodwinSponsors: All About Beer, Stomp Stickers, The 5th Ingredient, Tags: Brewing, Art, Labels, AI, Waggon WheelPhoto: John Holl

Gavin Campbell from HomeTech.fm joins me this week to explore the latest innovations in home technology. From robotic lawn care with the Segway Navimow to smarter energy management through electrical upgrades and real-time monitoring with Emporia Vue. He shares practical insights on enhancing home security with reliable camera systems and highlights the growing momentum behind Home Assistant Community Days. It’s always great to have Gavin on the program. Thanks for listening! In this episode, we sit down with Gavin Campbell for an insightful discussion on emerging technologies transforming the modern home. From smart lawn care solutions to comprehensive energy management

In this episode of My Simplified Life, Michelle Glogovac and Stephanie Hockersmith, Michelle shares her candid reflections from her trip to the L.A. Times Festival of Books — from the chaos of traveling as moms to the unexpected empowerment found in spicy romance novels. They dive into real talk about managing expectations, navigating the pressure of influencer culture, and the importance of honoring your own season of life. Through laughter and honesty, Michelle and Stephanie remind listeners that personal growth doesn't have to look like anyone else's. You don't need to have it all figured out — you just need to stay true to your own path. What We're Talking About... Traveling as a parent can be challenging but rewarding. Spicy romance novels empower women to vocalize their desires. Managing expectations is crucial for personal well-being. Influencer culture can create unrealistic standards. It's important to own your choices and space in life. Everyone's journey is unique; comparison can be harmful. Embrace your season and the changes it brings. Self-improvement is a journey, not a destination. Stay true to yourself and your values.  Chapters 00:00 Introduction and Festival Anticipation 03:41 Experiencing the LA Times Festival of Books 06:37 Connecting with Authors and Panels 09:47 The Spicy Romance Genre 12:32 Empowerment Through Romance 15:35 Diverse Voices in Literature 18:40 Closing Thoughts and Future Reads 20:12 Exploring New Reads and Author Discoveries 23:07 Reflections on Book Festivals and Networking 26:00 Navigating Family Dynamics and Travel Challenges 29:07 Balancing Work and Family Life 32:16 Managing Health and Commitments 35:09 The Pressure of Expectations and Influencer Culture 38:14 Finding Personal Peace and Realistic Goals 41:12 The Reality of Self-Help and Personal Growth 44:09 Embracing Authenticity in Life and Work

Rip discusses peptide hormones and interpretation of lab panels with Dr. Mike Wittmer.