Podcasts about Public health

Jason Gilley walked into adulthood with a fastball, a college roster spot, and a head of curls that deserved its own agent. Cancer crashed that party and took him on a tour of chemo chairs, pediatric wards, metal taste, numb legs, PTSD, and the kind of late night panic that rewires a kid before he even knows who he is.I sat with him in the studio and heard a story I know in my bones. He grew up fast. He learned how to stare down mortality at nineteen. He found anchors in baseball, therapy, and the strange friendships cancer hands you when it tears your plans apart. He owns the fear and the humor without slogans or shortcuts. Listeners will meet a young man who refuses to let cancer shrink his world. He fights for the life he wants. He names the truth without apology. He reminds us that survivorship stays messy and sacred at the same time. This conversation will stay with you.RELATED LINKS• Jason Gilley on IG• Athletek Baseball Podcast• EMDR information• Children's Healthcare of AtlantaFEEDBACKLike this episode? Rate and review Out of Patients on your favorite podcast platform. For guest suggestions or sponsorship email podcasts@matthewzachary.comSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Omari Richins, MPH of Public Health Careers podcast talks with Thelma Thiel. In this conversation, Thelma Thiel shares her personal journey of loss and advocacy for liver health, stemming from her son's struggles with liver disease. She emphasizes the importance of educating the public about the liver, a silent organ often overlooked in health discussions. Thelma discusses the systemic challenges in public health, particularly the lack of funding for education and prevention compared to research and treatment. She highlights her efforts in fundraising and advocacy, aiming to raise awareness about liver health and the need for preventive measures. The conversation culminates in a call to action for better education and understanding of liver health, urging listeners to recognize the liver's critical role in overall health and well-being.

In episode 64 of Going anti-Viral, we look back at the past year and beyond to share highlights from past episodes of the Going anti-Viral Podcast. In this selection of highlights, we share the remarkable outcomes of scientific research, hearing from researchers, clinicians, and survivors. These outcomes are the result of the tremendous work and innovation of our guests and the entire scientific research community and the investment of the American people in scientific research. 0:00 – Introduction 1:29 – Dr Judith Currier – Next-Gen HIV Prevention and Treatment 1:59 – Dr Anthony Fauci – A Conversation with Dr Anthony Fauci 2:33 – Dawn Averitt – A Personal Journey with HIV and Advocacy for HIV Research 3:18 – Rebecca Denison – 40+ Years of HIV: What's Changed, What Hasn't, What Shouldn't, What Must 3:44 – Dr Izukanji Sikazwe – Innovations in HIV Service Delivery: Building a Path Forward with Those Left Behind 4:19 – Dr Joseph Eron – HIV Cure Research: State of the Art and Navigating Presentations at CROI 2025 4:48 – Dr Diane Havlir – Preview of the 2025 Conference on Retroviruses and Opportunistic Infections (CROI) 5:22 – Dr Peter Hotez – The Measles Outbreak and the Role Anti-Science Plays in Threatening Public Health 5:58 – Dr Steven Grinspoon – The Management of Cardiovascular Health in Patients with HIV 6:18 – Dr Ellen Eaton – Treating Substance Use Disorder in an Inpatient Setting 6:41 – Dr Khalil Ghanem – Demystifying Syphilis: Diagnosis and Treatment 7:01 – Dr Carlos del Rio – Providing Healthcare to Foreign-Born and Hard-to-Reach Individuals 7:37 – Dr Yvonne Maldonado – How Vaccines Get Approved in the US: The RSV Story and the Role of the ACIP 8:00 – Dr Demetre Daskalakis – The CDC without Scientific Leadership 8:29 – Dr Rochelle Walensky – The COVID-19 Pandemic and the Current State of Public Health in the US 9:01 – Mary Fisher – Breaking the Silence: An Activist's ApproachFor full episodes, visit the Going anti-Viral Podcast on Spotify and Apple Podcasts__________________________________________________Produced by IAS-USA, Going anti–Viral is a podcast for clinicians involved in research and care in HIV, its complications, and other viral infections. This podcast is intended as a technical source of information for specialists in this field, but anyone listening will enjoy learning more about the state of modern medicine around viral infections. Going anti-Viral's host is Dr Michael Saag, a physician, prominent HIV researcher at the University of Alabama at Birmingham, and volunteer IAS–USA board member. In most episodes, Dr Saag interviews an expert in infectious diseases or emerging pandemics about their area of specialty and current developments in the field. Other episodes are drawn from the IAS–USA vast catalogue of panel discussions, Dialogues, and other audio from various meetings and conferences. Email podcast@iasusa.org to send feedback, show suggestions, or questions to be answered on a later episode.Follow Going anti-Viral on: Apple Podcasts YouTubeXFacebookInstagram...

The world of prehospital medicine is constantly evolving, driven by new research, technological advancements, and a shared commitment to improving patient care and provider well-being. As EMS professionals, staying informed about these developments goes beyond a professional obligation; it is an opportunity to improve our practice, champion our profession, and ultimately make a greater impact on saving lives. In this article, we will explore some of the latest research findings that are reshaping our field, from workplace culture to cutting-edge technology.   The Culture of Care: Supporting EMS Providers Our work is demanding, both physically and emotionally, and the culture within our agencies plays a critical role in our well-being. A recent systematic review in the International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health revealed that many EMS providers avoid using organizational mental health services due to stigma and a perception that these programs lack genuine care. The study emphasizes the need for person-centered support and a cultural shift that normalizes seeking help as a sign of strength (Johnston et al., 2025). This cultural component also impacts retention. Another study in the same journal found that agencies with collaborative, team-oriented "clan" cultures had significantly lower turnover rates compared to those with rigid or chaotic structures. For leaders in EMS, fostering a supportive environment is not just about morale. It is a strategic imperative for retaining skilled clinicians (Kamholz et al., 2025).   Professional Recognition: Breaking Barriers Across the globe, paramedics are striving for recognition as integrated healthcare professionals. A qualitative study in BMC Health Services Research identified common barriers, including outdated legislation, inconsistent regulation, and insufficient funding. While the pandemic temporarily highlighted our capabilities, the momentum has waned. The study calls for targeted policy reforms and investments in education and leadership to solidify our role in the broader healthcare system (Feerick et al., 2025). Physical Demands and Injury Prevention The physical toll of our work is undeniable. A scoping review in Applied Ergonomics confirmed that musculoskeletal injuries, particularly to the back, are rampant in EMS. Tasks like handling stretchers and patient extractions are among the most strenuous. The review also highlighted fitness disparities, with male paramedics generally showing more strength but less flexibility than their female counterparts. These findings underscore the need for targeted injury prevention programs and realistic physical standards to keep us safe throughout our careers (Marsh et al., 2025).   Advancements in Cardiac Arrest Care When it comes to cardiac arrest, every second counts. A study in Resuscitation reinforced the value of bystander CPR, showing that dispatcher-assisted CPR significantly improves outcomes for untrained bystanders. For those with prior CPR training, acting independently yielded even better results. This highlights the importance of public CPR education alongside dispatcher support (Tagami et al., 2025). On the scene, our interventions matter immensely. Research in The Journal of Emergency Medicine found that for traumatic cardiac arrest patients, aggressive interventions like prehospital thoracostomy can be lifesaving (McWilliam et al., 2025). Meanwhile, a study in Critical Care Medicine revealed that extracorporeal CPR (ECPR) significantly improves outcomes for patients with refractory ventricular fibrillation, emphasizing the need for early transport to specialized centers.   The Role of Technology in EMS Technology is poised to revolutionize EMS, from dispatch to diagnosis. A study in The American Journal of Emergency Medicine demonstrated that large language models (LLMs) like ChatGPT could prioritize ambulance requests with remarkable accuracy, aligning with expert paramedic decisions over 76 percent of the time. This proof of concept suggests that AI could one day enhance resource allocation in dispatch centers (Shekhar et al., 2025). On the diagnostic front, machine learning is opening new possibilities. For example, a study in Bioengineering showed that analyzing photoplethysmography waveforms could estimate blood loss in trauma patients, offering a non-invasive way to guide resuscitation (Gonzalez et al., 2025). Similarly, research in Medical Engineering & Physics explored using multidimensional data to differentiate ischemic from hemorrhagic strokes in the field, potentially enabling more targeted prehospital care (Alshehri et al., 2025).   Addressing Disparities in Care Equity in EMS is a cornerstone of our profession, yet recent studies highlight troubling disparities. Research in JAMA Network Open found that ambulance offload times were significantly longer in communities with higher proportions of Black residents (Zhou et al., 2025). Another study in JAMA Surgery revealed that Black and Asian trauma patients were less likely to receive helicopter transport compared to White patients. These findings are a call to action for all of us to examine our systems and biases to ensure equitable care for every patient (Mpody et al., 2025).   Looking Ahead The research discussed here represents just a fraction of the advancements shaping EMS today. From improving workplace culture and injury prevention to leveraging AI and addressing systemic inequities, these findings have real-world implications for our protocols, training, and advocacy efforts. As EMS professionals, we have a responsibility to stay informed and apply these insights to our practice. For a deeper dive into these topics and more, I invite you to listen to the podcast, EMS Research with Professor Bram latest episode, https://youtu.be/rt_1AFzSLIk "Research Highlights and Innovations Shaping Our Field.”   References Alshehri, A., Panerai, R. B., Lam, M. Y., Llwyd, O., Robinson, T. G., & Minhas, J. S. (2025). Can we identify stroke sub-type without imaging? A multidimensional analysis. Medical Engineering & Physics. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.medengphy.2025.104364 Feerick, F., Coughlan, E., Knox, S., Murphy, A., Grady, I. O., & Deasy, C. (2025). Barriers to paramedic professionalisation: A qualitative enquiry across the UK, Canada, Australia, USA and the Republic of Ireland. BMC Health Services Research, 25(1), 993. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-025-10993-7 Gonzalez, J. M., Holland, L., Hernandez Torres, S. I., Arrington, J. G., Rodgers, T. M., & Snider, E. J. (2025). Enhancing trauma care: Machine learning-based photoplethysmography analysis for estimating blood volume during hemorrhage and resuscitation. Bioengineering, 12(8), 833. https://doi.org/10.3390/bioengineering12080833 Johnston, S., Waite, P., Laing, J., Rashid, L., Wilkins, A., Hooper, C., Hindhaugh, E., & Wild, J. (2025). Why do emergency medical service employees (not) seek organizational help for mental health support?: A systematic review. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 22(4), 629. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph22040629 Kamholz, J. C., Gage, C. B., van den Bergh, S. L., Logan, L. T., Powell, J. R., & Panchal, A. R. (2025). Association between organizational culture and emergency medical service clinician turnover. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 22(5), 756. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph22050756 Marsh, E., Orr, R., Canetti, E. F., & Schram, B. (2025). Profiling paramedic job tasks, injuries, and physical fitness: A scoping review. Applied Ergonomics, 125, 104459. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apergo.2025.104459 McWilliam, S. E., Bach, J. P., Wilson, K. M., Bradford, J. M., Kempema, J., DuBose, J. J., ... & Brown, C. V. (2025). Should anything else be done besides prehospital CPR? The role of CPR and prehospital interventions after traumatic cardiac arrest. The Journal of Emergency Medicine. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jemermed.2025.02.010 Mpody, C., Rudolph, M. I., Bastien, A., Karaye, I. M., Straker, T., Borngaesser, F., ... & Nafiu, O. O. (2025). Racial and ethnic disparities in use of helicopter transport after severe trauma in the US. JAMA Surgery, 160(3), 313–321. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamasurg.2024.5678 Shekhar, A. C., Kimbrell, J., Saharan, A., Stebel, J., Ashley, E., & Abbott, E. E. (2025). Use of a large language model (LLM) for ambulance dispatch and triage. The American Journal of Emergency Medicine, 89, 27–29. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajem.2025.05.004 Tagami, T., Takahashi, H., Suzuki, K., Kohri, M., Tabata, R., Hagiwara, S., ... & Ogawa, S. (2025). The impact of dispatcher-assisted CPR and prior bystander CPR training on neurologic outcomes in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest: A multicenter study. Resuscitation, 110617. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resuscitation.2025.110617 Zhou, T., Wang, Y., Zhang, B., & Li, J. (2025). Racial and socioeconomic disparities in California ambulance patient offload times. JAMA Network Open, 8(5), e2510325. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2025.10325  

What is it like to practice public health in ever-changing political climates? Dr. Demetrre Daskalakis reflects on lessons learned at the CDC and the importance of humility, trusted messengers, and coordinated action amidst political pressures and public health challenges.If you have an idea for topics we should discuss, please let us know: PublicHealthNowPodcast@health.ny.gov

Many clinicians quietly wonder if there's a “next chapter” beyond the hospital walls, and an increasing number are stepping into health tech roles that didn't exist a decade ago.Dr. Reena Pande has lived that shift firsthand: from cardiologist at a top academic center, to early employee and CMO at AbleTo, to now leading clinician executive search at Oxeon. She joins us to unpack what it really takes for clinicians to succeed in startups, why these roles matter more than ever, and how AI is reshaping both medical training and leadership.We cover:

Country singer Jellyroll dishes on his triple-digit weight loss odyssey; DGL for GERD—will it raise blood pressure? CBD curbs aggression in dogs; Hundreds of environmental chemicals may imbalance our microbiomes; ADHD isn't just a malady—it may impart unrecognized superpowers; The evolutionary mismatch between our ancient genes and modern artificial environments; Could napping improve cognitive function? Heart attacks, lung problems soared after LA wildfires; HHS Secretary RFK Jr. focuses attention on inadequate testing, treatments for chronic Lyme Disease.

The CDC has reported nearly 2000 measles cases to date in 2025, a number we haven't seen since 1992. Next month, the US faces a critical deadline where we have to prove that we have stopped measles transmission, if not, we could lose our elimination status, something we have maintained for a quarter century. Is it too late? My guest today says losing elimination status isn't inevitable. Joining me today to discuss this public health wake up call in Rodney Rohde, PhD, Dr Rohde is a University Distinguished and Regents' Professor and Chair for the Medical Laboratory Science (MLS) Program in the College of Health Professions (CHP) at Texas State University. He is also the Associate Director for the Translational Health Research Center.

Ralph welcomes RJ Cross from USPIRG to discuss the Trouble in Toyland 2025 report. Then, Ralph speaks with truck safety activist Marianne Karth about the need for stronger truck safety regulation. Plus, the RNRH team has a spirited debate about spectator sports.R.J. Cross is the Director of the Our Online Life program, Don't Sell My Data campaign, and U.S. PIRG Education Fund. Her work as a writer and researcher ranges from the risks of commercialization of personal data, to consumer harms like scams and data breaches, to emerging threats from AI. In her work as a Policy Analyst at Frontier Group, she has authored research reports on government transparency, consumer debt and predatory auto lending, and has testified before Congress.A lot of the toys we found either claim to be or are using one of OpenAI's chatbots. Even though OpenAI has said that its products are not for kids under the age of 13—but they're allowing their chatbots to be used in toys, which are products by definition for children. So there's a real discrepancy here. OpenAI's just not taking nearly as much responsibility for these failures as we think they should be. And then the toymakers are clearly just moving way too fast and really are not putting out products that are ready for primetime.R.J. CrossThat's what the attitude has been: we put it out, we watch what happens, and then we make adjustments as the public or as regulators demand it to happen. So I think that dynamic is terrible. I think it's really harmful. We'd much rather we see the precautionary principle—which is where a company should take safety really, really seriously up front and do more holistic testing before it releases to the public. But so far, that's not really the attitude you see, especially in Silicon Valley.R.J. CrossFor as challenging as working with Congress is these days (and even as across the political spectrum it's hard to find something to agree on) I think “AI-powered teddy bears should not talk to your kids about sex” has been very effective. Everyone can be on the same page about that, right? And so it's been really fun to get to talk to all sorts of decisionmakers and media outlets, who—everyone wants to tell the same story that this is not okay and big tech isn't taking safety seriously. Everyone agrees on that.R.J. CrossMarianne Karth graduated from the University of Michigan School of Public Health with an MPH in Health Behavior and Health Education in 1979. She worked for a variety of nonprofit organizations in program administration before raising and teaching her nine children at home. After losing two of her daughters in a car crash in 2013, Karth and her husband, Jerry Karth, became involved in advocacy for safer trucks and changes to truck underride regulations.There's often a “blame the victim” [narrative] that goes on and [policymakers] say it's not their responsibility. And they'll say it's often the fault of the four-wheeler. They basically do not want to take responsibility for it. And part of the problem is that for underride protection, it's not like crash-worthy features like seatbelts or airbags that are on the vehicle that's being protected. It's on the vehicle that we collide with. By the way, when an underride occurs, it cancels out all the effectiveness of all those crash-worthy features built into cars.Marianne KarthUnderride deaths are very undercounted because there's not even a checkbox in most state crash report forms for underride. So it's very undercounted, but there are, at minimum, 600 per year. And this is a known, unreasonable risk. And engineers who love to solve problems—they've solved the problem. They know how to solve the problem. So it's a preventable problem.Marianne KarthFor years we've been urging our listeners to form these Congress watchdog groups. It can start small and build from a letterhead, really get the attention of their members, summon their members to town meetings created by the citizenry with their own agenda, and confront their Senators and Representatives directly… See what you can do in your congressional district. No one can stop you from doing that, for heaven's sake. You always have to start the struggle for justice in ways that nobody can stop you.Ralph Nader Get full access to Ralph Nader Radio Hour at www.ralphnaderradiohour.com/subscribe

In this episode, Denise J. Jamieson, MD, MPH, Vice President for Medical Affairs and Dean of the Carver College of Medicine at University of Iowa Health Care, shares her journey from the CDC to academic leadership, the mission of serving Iowa, and her priorities around physician workforce development, mentorship, and sustaining impact in healthcare.

What is a call? How does a person know if God is calling them to mission service? Join in a discussion as these and other questions are addressed.

What happens when a mother can’t raise her children? Not out of neglect, but because systems, partners, and survival leave her no real choice? This episode challenges the assumptions we place on “non-custodial mothers.” Rebekah Spicuglia explains how immigration rules, economic pressure, and unequal power led to her relinquishing custody of her son, Oscar, and how she channels her grief after his murder into research on gun violence and family separation. And from Cameroon, Marie Abanga shares why escaping abuse meant leaving her three young sons behind. For a full transcript of this episode, click here. Suggested episodes: Life after Parkland: A victim's dad turns to art and activism The weight of family secrets: Finding freedom in the truth The reality of 'Forever Parenting' when your child needs lifetime care GUESTS: Rebekah Spicuglia: bereaved mother, writer, advocate, and PhD student in Health Policy & Management at Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health. She focuses on gun violence and family separation, drawing on her own lived experience to inform her work Marie Abanga: Cameroonian author and mental health advocate whose 2011 decision to give up custody of her children guides her mission to support others facing loss, stigma, and recovery Support the show: https://www.wnpr.org/donateSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

“Always bear in mind that your own resolution to succeed, is more important than any other one thing,” said Abraham Lincoln in a letter to Isham Reavis dated Nov. 5, 1855. Health and well-being hold high importance for many people, and the approach of the holiday season and the following new year often leaves them wondering about what changes, or resolutions, they might want to implement to improve their lives – and how to make them. In the latest episode of The UC Irvine Podcast, we're leaning on the wisdom of a pair of people who've committed their careers to providing guidance on all those topics: Matthew Landry, assistant professor of population health and disease prevention in UC Irvine's Joe C. Wen School of Population & Public Health, and Theresa Nutt, administrative director of education at UC Irvine's Susan Samueli Integrative Health Institute. Landry's research interests include identifying the optimal diet for chronic disease prevention, and Nutt is a registered and holistic nurse who has also been a health and wellness coach since 2003. In this podcast, they team up to discuss why it's hard to stick to our diets during the holidays and share tips on how to avoid overindulging. In addition, they'll address prioritizing activities that benefit physical fitness and how to reframe thoughts around resolutions to encourage better success. “Fresh Healthy Perspectives,” the music for this episode, was provided by Birocratic via the audio library in YouTube Studio.

In this powerful solo Season 4 finale of The Public Health Joy Podcast, Dr. Joyee Washington shares a deeply personal reflection on what 2025 demanded of her — and what it revealed about all of us in public health.After reaching a long-dreamed-of six-figure milestone, Dr. Joy entered 2025 expecting abundance. Instead, she encountered one of the most challenging years of her life — marked by financial strain, caregiving, spiritual warfare, and the continued dismantling of public health systems. In this episode, Dr. Joyee unpacks the truth many don't talk about: abundance is not accessed without first confronting scarcity.This is a conversation about endurance — not as survival, but as preparation. About joy — not as softness, but as strategy. And about rebuilding public health not from institutions rooted in extraction, but from communities rooted in healing, power, and faith.Key Points From This Episode:Health professionals are burned out, underfunded, and under attack.[1:00]We need more than just another conference; we need restoration. [3:00]Joy is a strategic choice in public health. [5:00]You can't step into abundance until you face scarcity. [6:00]Scarcity mindset affects both mental and physical health. [7:00]Endurance is built through challenges, not ease. [17:00]Abundance and scarcity cannot coexist. [20:00]Choosing joy amidst adversity is an act of resistance. [21:00]Public health is at a reckoning, exposing old systems. [23:00]Community is essential for transformation and healing. [25:00}If you enjoyed this episode, please subscribe, rate and, leave a review! For more transcripts, show notes,and more visit: https://joyeewashington.com/public-health-joy-season-4/ 

For nonprofits, stories matter. But the underlying narratives that shape how people make sense of the world matter even more. As narrative change takes on a larger role in strategic planning, leaders, boards, and funders are asking a critical question: How do we know if it's actually working? In today's episode, Josh Gryniewicz and Brett Davidson discuss ways nonprofits of all sizes can measure the impact of narrative change work and why that measurement matters. Tune in to learn practical frameworks for assessing narrative impact, including how to think collaboratively, how to spot meaningful signals of change, and how to make a stronger case for narrative strategy with funders and decision-makers. Want to suggest a topic, guest, or nonprofit organization for an upcoming episode? Send an email with the subject "NPFX suggestion" to contact@ipmadvancement.com. Additional Resources Measuring Narrative Change: Moving From Theory to Practice by Brett Davidson https://ssir.org/articles/entry/measuring_narrative_change_moving_from_theory_to_practice [NPFX] Co-Creating Solutions: The Next Level of Community Listening https://www.ipmadvancement.com/npfx/co-creating-solutions-the-next-level-of-community-listening-narrative-strategy [NPFX] From Micro-Stories to Meta-Narratives: How to Influence Perception and Drive Change https://www.ipmadvancement.com/npfx/from-micro-stories-to-meta-narratives-how-to-influence-perception-and-drive-change-narrative-strategy [NPFX] Authentic, Ethical, and Effective Messaging — From Theory to Practice https://www.ipmadvancement.com/npfx/authentic-ethical-and-effective-messaging-from-theory-to-practice [NPFX] Flipping the Script: Using Narrative Strategy to Improve Messaging and Prevent Donor Attrition https://www.ipmadvancement.com/npfx/flipping-the-script-using-narrative-strategy-to-improve-messaging-and-prevent-donor-attrition [NPFX] How to Find Authentic Voices That Inspire Action https://www.ipmadvancement.com/npfx/narrative-strategy-how-to-find-authentic-voices-that-inspire-action Guests Josh Gryniewicz is the founder and Chief Narrative Strategist at Odd Duck, a storytelling-for-social-change creative consultancy focused on impact-driven organizations. Josh is the co-author of the award-winning national bestseller, Interrupting Violence. For over a decade, he has worked in nonprofit communication. In 2018, he founded Odd Duck to combine his passions for storytelling and social change. The agency's Navigating Misinformation for Community Health framework has been shared with over a thousand community health organizations. Odd Duck has worked with nearly a hundred change-making organizations and advised hundreds more, including the Centers for Disease Control & Prevention, the Harvard School of Public Health, and the White House. https://www.linkedin.com/in/jgryniewicz/ https://oddduck.io/ https://www.interruptingviolence.com/ Brett Davidson is founder and principal at Wingseed LLC, where he supports social justice changemakers around the world to amplify their impact. Brett also serves as Lead of Narrative Field-Building with IRIS, the International Resource for Impact and Storytelling. Previously he was director of Media and Narratives at the Open Society Public Health Program, where he led an international team focused on changing long-held social narratives impacting health equity. Prior to joining Open Society in 2010, Davidson was a media consultant to civil society organizations in Southern and Eastern Africa. He previously served as program manager at the South African democracy institute Idasa, where he helped community radio stations develop participatory news and current affairs programming. Before that, he worked as a presenter and producer in radio current affairs at the South African Broadcasting Corporation, and in collaboration with the BBC. https://www.linkedin.com/in/brettdav/ https://www.wingseed.org/ https://brettdavidson.substack.com/ Hosts Russ Phaneuf, a co-founder of IPM Advancement, has a background in higher education development, with positions at the University of Hartford, Northern Arizona University, and Thunderbird School of Global Management. As IPM's managing director & chief strategist, Russ serves as lead fundraising strategist, award-winning content creator, and program analyst specializing in applied system dynamics. https://www.linkedin.com/in/russphaneuf/ https://www.ipmadvancement.com/ Rich Frazier has worked in the nonprofit sector for over 35 years. In his roles as senior consultant with IPM Advancement and founder of VisionConnect LLC, Rich offers extensive understanding and knowledge in capital campaigns, fund development, strategic planning, and board of directors development. https://www.linkedin.com/in/richfrazier/ https://www.visionconnectllc.com/

In this episode of PRIM&R's podcast, "Research Ethics Reimagined," we explore the unprecedented wave of federally funded research terminations affecting tens of thousands of study participants. Brandon Brown, MPH, PhD, is a Professor of Medicine at UC Riverside School of Medicine's Department of Social Medicine, Population and Public Health and a Hastings Center Fellow. Dr. Brown discusses the ethical and practical challenges researchers and IRBs face when studies end suddenly due to funding cuts. He examines how IRBs and researchers can collaborate to develop guidance to ensure communication and transparency for impacted researchers and participants.

Please join us at patreon.com/tortoiseshack Dr Niall Conroy is Adjunct Professor of Public Health in UCC, but you'll remember him as the fella who handled the COVID 19 pandemic public health response in Queensland, Australia. He returns to the shack to talk about the worst flu outbreak in years and what we should do to protect ourselves and others. He also talks about the inequalities baked into the health system. The Leilani Farha Podcast is here:https://www.patreon.com/posts/patron-exclusive-144371201 The Sanctuary Runners Donation:https://eventmaster.ie/fundraising/campaign/step-up-for-solidarity-the-12ks-of-christmas Support Dignity for Palestine here:https://www.patreon.com/posts/call-to-stand-143037542

The 2025 year draws to a close with the December episode of RAPM Focus, where RAPM Social Media Editor Alopi Patel, MD, converses with Benjamin S. Brooke, MD, PhD, and Michael “Jay” Buys, MD, following the April 2024 publication of their original research paper, “Postsurgical opioid prescribing among veterans using community care for orthopedic surgery at non-VA hospitals compared to a VA hospital with a transitional pain service: a retrospective cohort study | Regional Anesthesia & Pain Medicine.” The research study looked at opioid prescriptions after orthopedic surgery for veterans, comparing veterans who underwent surgery at the Salt Lake City VA Hospital to those in the community. Dr. Brooke is a Professor of Surgery, Biomedical Informatics (adjunct), Population Health Sciences (adjunct), and Chief of the Division of Vascular Surgery at the University of Utah. He grew up in Salt Lake City, receiving his Doctor of Medicine from the University of Utah before heading east to complete his internship and residency in General Surgery at the Johns Hopkins Hospital. During his surgical residency, Dr. Brooke received his PhD in Clinical Investigation at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health. He then completed a fellowship in Vascular Surgery at the Dartmouth-Hitchcock Medical Center. Dr. Buys is an Associate Professor (Clinical) of Anesthesiology at the University of Utah and Chief of the Acute/Transitional Pain Section at the Salt Lake City VA Medical Center. He completed his medical degree at the University of Iowa and residency in anesthesiology at the University of New Mexico, after which he served as an active duty anesthesiologist in the US Air Force at Wilford Hall Medical Center in San Antonio and at Craig Joint Theater Hospital in Afghanistan. *The purpose of this podcast is to educate and to inform. The content of this podcast does not constitute medical advice, and it is not intended to function as a substitute for a healthcare practitioner's judgement, patient care, or treatment. The views expressed by contributors are those of the speakers. BMJ does not endorse any views or recommendations discussed or expressed on this podcast. Listeners should also be aware that professionals in the field may have different opinions. By listening to this podcast, listeners agree not to use its content as the basis for their own medical treatment or for the medical treatment of others. Podcast and music produced by Dan Langa. Find us on X @RAPMOnline, LinkedIn @Regional Anesthesia & Pain Medicine, Facebook @Regional Anesthesia & Pain Medicine, and Instagram @RAPM_Online.

Marion County Public Health Nurse Judi Van Hulzen talks about holiday food safety and ways to stay healthy heading into the new year.

David Tippie is a researcher and social commentator who examines the rapidly shifting landscape of modern medicine and pharmaceuticals in Collapse of Drugs. In this work, Tippie explores how economic pressures, regulatory failures, overprescription, and the growing influence of corporate interests have contributed to a system increasingly strained by addiction crises, drug shortages, and public mistrust. He also considers the rise of alternative approaches to health and wellness as a response to these failures, questioning whether the traditional pharmaceutical model is sustainable in its current form. Tippie's analysis challenges listeners and readers to rethink how societies define treatment, healing, and responsibility in an era of medical uncertainty.Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-x-zone-radio-tv-show--1078348/support.Please note that all XZBN radio and/or television shows are Copyright © REL-MAR McConnell Meda Company, Niagara, Ontario, Canada – www.rel-mar.com. For more Episodes of this show and all shows produced, broadcasted and syndicated from REL-MAR McConell Media Company and The 'X' Zone Broadcast Network and the 'X' Zone TV Channell, visit www.xzbn.net. For programming, distribution, and syndication inquiries, email programming@xzbn.net.We are proud to announce the we have launched TWATNews.com, launched in August 2025.TWATNews.com is an independent online news platform dedicated to uncovering the truth about Donald Trump and his ongoing influence in politics, business, and society. Unlike mainstream outlets that often sanitize, soften, or ignore stories that challenge Trump and his allies, TWATNews digs deeper to deliver hard-hitting articles, investigative features, and sharp commentary that mainstream media won't touch.These are stories and articles that you will not read anywhere else.Our mission is simple: to expose corruption, lies, and authoritarian tendencies while giving voice to the perspectives and evidence that are often marginalized or buried by corporate-controlled media

Dr. Marissa Russo trained to become a cancer biologist. She spent four years studying one of the deadliest brain tumors in adults and built her entire research career around a simple, urgent goal: open her own lab and improve the odds for patients with almost no shot at survival. In 2024 she applied for an F31 diversity grant through the NIH. The reviewers liked her work. Her resubmission was strong. Then the grant system started glitching. Dates vanished. Study sections disappeared. Emails went silent. When she finally reached a program officer, the message was clear: scrub the DEI language, withdraw, and resubmit. She rewrote the application in ten days. It failed. She had to start over. Again. This time with her identity erased.Marissa left the lab. She found new purpose as a science communicator, working at STAT News through the AAAS Mass Media Fellowship. Her story captures what happens when talent collides with institutional sabotage. Not every scientist gets to choose a Plan B. She made hers count.RELATED LINKSMarissa Russo at STAT NewsNIH F31 grant story in STATAAAS Mass Media FellowshipContact Marissa RussoFEEDBACKLike this episode? Rate and review Out of Patients on your favorite podcast platform. For guest suggestions or sponsorship email podcasts@matthewzachary.comSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

In this episode of Money Tales, our guest is Valerie Ortiz. If money were a muscle, would you treat it like part of your daily training routine, strengthening it with intention, commitment, and care? In this episode, Valerie Ortiz, a registered dietitian nutritionist, health coach and personal trainer shares how she helps people transform their physical health. We discuss how these same patterns, barriers, and breakthroughs show up in our financial lives too. Valerie is passionate about advancing wellness by focusing on nutrition, staying active, practicing mindfulness, and supporting mental health. These core principles guide her daily approach and commitment to improving quality of life. She is dedicated to educating, promoting and supporting others in the adoption of these advantageous practices. In 2010, Valerie earned her certification as a personal trainer, followed by a Health and Wellness Coach Certification from the Institute for Integrative Nutrition in 2011. She continued her academic pursuits at Rutgers University, enrolling in the Nutritional Sciences/Dietetics Program and graduating in December 2018 with a Bachelor of Science. Subsequently, she completed her Master of Science in Nutrition, with a dietetic internship focused on Community and Public Health, at Saint Elizabeth's University in Morristown, NJ. In 2021, Valerie achieved the credential of Registered Dietitian Nutritionist. Valerie is the owner of Focused On Wellness, LLC, a private practice providing medical nutrition therapy, nutrition counseling and personal training services. Valerie is also a Registered Dietitian with Nourish, Fay Nutrition and Kickoff. Nourish Your Financial Well-Being Just as proper nutrition fuels your body, intentional habits and mindful choices can strengthen your financial life over time. If you'd like to explore how aligning your financial habits with your values can support long-term well-being and confidence, connect with an Aspiriant advisor to start the conversation. Subscribe to Money Tales on Spotify, Apple Podcasts, or YouTube Music for more insights on money, mindset, and living well.

“People are not looking for a perfect, polished answer. They're looking for a human to speak to them like a human,” says Jessica Malaty Rivera, an infectious disease epidemiologist and one of the most trusted science communicators in the U.S. to emerge from the COVID-19 pandemic. That philosophy explains her relatable, judgement-free approach to communications which aims to make science more human, more accessible and less institutional. In this wide-ranging Raise the Line discussion, host Lindsey Smith taps Rivera's expertise on how to elevate science understanding, build public trust, and equip people to recognize disinformation. She is also keen to help people understand the nuances of misinformation -- which she is careful to define – and the emotional drivers behind it in order to contain the “infodemics” that complicate battling epidemics and other public health threats. It's a thoughtful call to educate the general public about the science of information as well as the science behind medicine. Tune in for Rivera's take on the promise and peril of AI-generated content, why clinicians should see communication as part of their professional responsibility, and how to prepare children to navigate an increasingly complex information ecosystem.Mentioned in this episode:de Beaumont Foundation If you like this podcast, please share it on your social channels. You can also subscribe to the series and check out all of our episodes at www.osmosis.org/podcast

Public health is political—whether we admit it or not. The What's Really Going On?! crew caught up with Dr. Krystal Redman about her advocacy in the public health field. She breaks down what real public health advocacy looks like from intentional resource allocation to confronting biased systems, Dr. Redman explains why improving health outcomes requires naming inequity and refusing to pacify oppression for comfort. This episode explores how public health policy impacts marginalized communities, why access and accountability matter, and what it means to challenge systems that were never designed to protect everyone equally. Dr. Redman offers a clear-eyed look at how leadership, power, and policy intersect—and what it takes to actually create change.

In this special edition on Adherence to Medications our host, Dr. Neil Skolnik will discuss medication adherence and the role of clinicians, pharmacies and pharmacists in helping with medication adherence. This special episode is supported by an independent educational grant from Amazon. Presented by: Neil Skolnik, M.D., Professor of Family and Community Medicine, Sidney Kimmel Medical College, Thomas Jefferson University; Associate Director, Family Medicine Residency Program, Abington Jefferson Health Susan Kuchera, M.D. - Clinical Assistant Professor of Family and Community Medicine at the Sidney Kimmel Medical College of Thomas Jefferson University and Program Director of the Family Medicine Residency at Jefferson Health Abington. Tess Carey, PharmD, Clinical Advisor for Amazon Pharmacy  Selected references: Better Medications Adherence Lowers Cardiovascular Events, Stroke, and All-Cause Mortality Risk: A Dose-Response Meta-Analysis. Journal of Cardiovascular Development and Disease. 2021, 8, 146. Adherence to antihypertensive medications for secondary prevention of cardiovascular disease events: a dose-response meta-analysis. Public Health 196 (2021) 179e185 Medication nonadherence - definition, measurement, prevalence, and causes: reflecting on the past 20 years and looking forwards. Frontiers in Pharmacology, March 2025. DOI 10.3389/fphar.2025.1465059  

In the 200th episode of Health & Veritas, Harlan offers end-of-the-year reflections on medicine drawn from his editor's notes in JACC (the Journal of the American College of Cardiology), and Howie provides updates on gun violence, flu, measles, and the health benefits of yoga. Show notes: Editor's notes by Harlan Krumholz "The Day I Became a Doctor" "When Your Patient Dies" "Rethinking Physician Certification: A Call for a Modern, Meaningful Standard" Gun violence, flu, and measles "Mass shootings outnumber annual days in U.S., children are missing school due to measles, Covid-19 is peeping around the corner, and some hope" "Measles outbreaks worsen in South Carolina, Arizona and Utah" "Connecticut reports first measles case in years" "New Flu Variant May Be Triggering Spike in Severe Disease" "High-Dose Influenza Vaccine Effectiveness against Hospitalization in Older Adults" "Pfizer Reaffirms Full-Year 2025 EPS Guidance and Provides Full-Year 2026 Guidance" The benefits of yoga "Yoga for chronic non‐specific low back pain" "Yoga-based interventions may reduce anxiety symptoms in anxiety disorders and depression symptoms in depressive disorders: a systematic review with meta-analysis and meta-regression" "Effect of Yoga on Frailty in Older Adults" "Yoga in autoimmune disorders: a systematic review of randomized controlled trials" "Long-term effects of yoga-based practices on neural, cognitive, psychological, and physiological outcomes in adults: a scoping review and evidence map" "Yoga isn't just for flexibility. It may also protect brain health." In the Yale School of Management's MBA for Executives program, you'll get a full MBA education in 22 months while applying new skills to your organization in real time. Yale's Executive Master of Public Health offers a rigorous public health education for working professionals, with the flexibility of evening online classes alongside three on-campus trainings. Email Howie and Harlan comments or questions.

From a mass shooting in Australia that left 15 people dead, to a shooting at Brown University that killed two students, the world has been rocked by gun violence at the end of 2025. In the U.S., 125 people die from a gun injury, and more than 200 people are shot and wounded each day, according to the nonprofit Everytown for Gun Safety. In Connecticut, there were at least 339 incidents of gun violence this year. The outpouring of shock and grief following the shootings was expected and understandable. But what is it like for young people to live with the constant fear of guns in their environments or the threat of mass shootings? Guests: Nelba Márquez-Greene: Mother of Ana Grace, killed in the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting in 2012. Community Scholar, Yale School of Public Health. Renee Beavers: Hospital violence intervention specialist (HVIP), Connecticut Children’s. Stacey Mayer: Director of Advocacy, Policy & Outreach at CT Against Gun Violence. Malini Parikh: Student, Hopkins School, New Haven. President of the CT Against Gun Violence Youth Council. Support the show: http://wnpr.org/donateSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

In this episode, we are joined by Dr. Prabhat Jha, Nuffield Professor at the University of Oxford and Professor of Global Health at the University of Toronto. A world-leading epidemiologist who led the Million Death Study tracking premature deaths across India, he discovered that quitting before age 40 avoids nearly all smoking risks. Vikas & Dr. Jha discussed in detail the massive underestimation of smoking dangers, why cigarettes are lethal, how the tobacco industry engineers addiction, and the surprising speed at which your body repairs itself after quitting.Here are some key takeaways:A typical smoker loses a full decade of life - Worldwide, smoking kills 5-7 million people annually, including a million in India alone. Even light smokers face tripled mortality risk.Duration matters more than quantity - Smoking just 2-5 cigarettes daily for 20 years is far worse than a pack a day for 10 years. Prolonged exposure drives cancer and arterial damage.Quitting works fast and dramatically - Half the excess risk disappears within three years of quitting. Quit by 40 and you avoid 9 years of lost life; even quitting at 60 gives back 4 years.The tobacco industry engineers your addiction - Companies manipulate nicotine pH for maximum brain impact, target specific demographics with customized productsSmoking damages every organ in your body - From mouth to bladder, smoking causes cancer throughout the digestive and urinary systems, destroys lung elasticity, damages arteries causing heart attacks and strokes, and reactivates dormant TB infections.About Vikas Singh:Vikas Singh, an MBA from Chicago Booth, worked at Goldman Sachs, Morgan Stanley, APGlobale, and Reliance before coming up with the idea of democratizing fitness knowledge and helping beginners get on a fitness journey. Vikas is an avid long-distance runner, building fitpage to help people learn, train, and move better.For more information on Vikas, or to leave any feedback and requests, you can reach out to him via the channels below:Instagram: @vikas_singhhLinkedIn: Vikas SinghTwitter: @vikashsingh101Subscribe To Our Newsletter For Weekly Nuggets of Knowledge!

Caredoc's Out of Hours GP services in Carlow, Kilkenny, south Tipperary, Waterford, Wexford and south Wicklow, will not be operating from 6pm this evening as strike action is underway.Joining Ciara to discuss this is Anne Marie Walsh, Industry Correspondent with The Irish Independent and Dr Brendan O'Shea, Kildare GP & Assistant Adjuvant Professor in Public Health and Primary Care at Trinity College Dublin.

This week on Sense by Meg Faure, we close out Season 7 with a raw, honest, and incredibly powerful conversation. Meg is joined by Dr. Katlego Lekalakala (Dr. Kat), a beloved South African doctor and founder of "Clueless Mums," just four days before the birth of her second child. Dr. Kat opens up about her high-risk pregnancy journey, sharing her experience with gestational diabetes, a short cervix, and the profound emotional challenges of antenatal anxiety.This is a must-listen for any expectant mother, offering:Real Talk on Second Pregnancies: Dr. Kat discusses the surprising differences between her first and second pregnancies, from intense nausea and fatigue to the emotional weight of a high-risk diagnosis.Gestational Diabetes Explained: Learn about the causes, risks for both mother and baby, and the best strategies for managing the condition through diet and self-care.Navigating Antenatal Anxiety: A candid conversation about the prevalence of anxiety and depression during pregnancy, the importance of asking for help, and preparing a support system for the postpartum period.Advocacy in Healthcare: Dr. Kat shares how she learned to collaborate with her medical team, feel in control of her pregnancy, and advocate for her own health needs.This episode is a tribute to maternal resilience, offering medical insight, emotional honesty, and a powerful reminder that it's okay to struggle, and it's essential to ask for help.About Our Guest:Dr. Katlego "Kat" Lekalakala is a South African medical doctor specializing in Public Health and the founder of the parenting platform, Clueless Mums. She is a passionate advocate for accessible health education, empowering parents and teens to take control of their well-being. A wife and mother to her daughter Nia, Dr. Kat shares her personal and professional insights with honesty and warmth. You can follow her journey on Instagram at @DrK_Selikane.Episode References and Links:

About this episode: For decades, cosmetics and medicine developers have relied on animal testing to assure product safety for humans. Today, more ethical and accurate alternatives to animal testing are poised to improve this process. In this episode: scientist and lawyer Paul Locke on the new technologies replacing lab animals and how regulators can lead the gradual and necessary transition to these innovative models. Guests: Paul Locke, DrPH, MPH, JD, is a lawyer and scientist who serves as the principal investigator for the JHU Toxicology Program and an advisory board member of the Johns Hopkins Center for Alternatives to Animal Testing. Host: Lindsay Smith Rogers, MA, is the producer of the Public Health On Call podcast, an editor for Expert Insights, and the director of content strategy for the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health. Show links and related content: Transitioning to Human-Centered Science: An Off-Ramp and Transition Plan—JHU Toxicology Program White House slashes medical research on monkeys and other animal testing, sparking fierce new debate—CBS News Animal Models—Harvard Medical School Transcript information: Looking for episode transcripts? Open our podcast on the Apple Podcasts app (desktop or mobile) or the Spotify mobile app to access an auto-generated transcript of any episode. Closed captioning is also available for every episode on our YouTube channel. Contact us: Have a question about something you heard? Looking for a transcript? Want to suggest a topic or guest? Contact us via email or visit our website. Follow us: @‌PublicHealthPod on Bluesky @‌PublicHealthPod on Instagram @‌JohnsHopkinsSPH on Facebook @‌PublicHealthOnCall on YouTube Here's our RSS feed Note: These podcasts are a conversation between the participants, and do not represent the position of Johns Hopkins University.

In this episode of Visible Voices, Dr. Resa E. Lewiss is in conversation with Dr. Claire Wardle, a leading expert on misinformation, media literacy, and public trust in science. Claire is an associate professor at Cornell and co-founder of the Information Futures Lab at Brown University's School of Public Health. She shares her decades of experience working across academia, international news organizations like the BBC, and the United Nations and in community non profits. The conversation explores the intersection of misinformation and public health, from vaccine hesitancy to the rise of AI chatbots and their impact on mental health. Dr. Wardle emphasizes that trust is local and everyone has an emotional relationship to information, explaining why human-centered design and community engagement are essential to combating false narratives. She offers practical advice for healthcare professionals considering social media storytelling, discusses the importance of media literacy education, and reveals what keeps her up at night about the absence of regulatory oversight in the age of personalized AI. The discussion highlights how communities, authentic storytelling, and cross-sector collaboration can help transform the internet into a place of trust while protecting public health and democracy. Follow Claire's work via her website and LinkedIn. If you enjoy the show, please leave a ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐ rating on Apple or a

As health departments modernize their data systems, an unexpected challenge has emerged: traditional public health job classifications no longer match the reality of today's data landscape. In this episode, Ari Whiteman, ASTHO's Senior Advisor for Public Health Data and Informatics Workforce, talks about why the field urgently needs new informatics-focused roles, and what it will take to build them. Whiteman explains how interoperability, electronic health records, and complex data pipelines have outpaced legacy classifications like epidemiologist or public health analyst. Leveraging the Public Health Infrastructure Grant (PHIG), state, local, and territorial health agencies can build classification systems that enhance recruitment and retention of an informatics-savvy workforce. Updating job classifications can help clarify new roles, alleviate pressure on existing roles, and enable health agencies to sustain workforce infrastructure that is flexible and forward-looking. He discusses the hesitancy and bureaucracy that make change difficult, the opportunity cost of doing nothing, and why modernizing job classifications is essential for faster outbreak response, stronger surveillance, and smarter public health decision-making.Data Modernization Primer and Tactical Guides | ASTHOHow to Modernize Data Infrastructure: A Toolkit for Public Health Leaders | ASTHOASTHO Announces Sixth Developing Executive Leaders in Public Health Cohort | ASTHO

In this special year-end episode of The Health Advocates, host Steven Newmark takes a step back to review several of the most significant public health developments of 2025.The episode covers major leadership changes at the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, key meetings and votes of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP), ongoing challenges related to vaccine access and uptake, and continued debates over prescription drug pricing, including “Trump Rx.” Steven also examines the rapid expansion of GLP-1 medications, the implementation of Inflation Reduction Act health provisions, public health workforce pressures, infectious disease monitoring beyond COVID-19, maternal health initiatives, and the evolving role of data and communication in public health.Rather than an opinion piece, this episode offers a straightforward recap of how policy decisions, advisory processes, and healthcare system dynamics shaped public health in 2025 and set the stage for the year ahead.Contact Our Host Steven Newmark, Chief of Policy at GHLF: snewmark@ghlf.orgA podcast episode produced by Ben Blanc, Director, Digital Production and Engagement at GHLF.We want to hear what you think. Send your comments in the form of an email, video, or audio clip of yourself to podcasts@ghlf.orgListen to all episodes of The Health Advocates on our website or on your favorite podcast channel.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Omari Richins, MPH of Public Health Careers podcast discusses the unique challenges faced by public health professionals in setting and achieving personal goals. He emphasizes the importance of intentional goal setting, reflection, and finding one's purpose through the Ikigai framework. Richins provides a structured approach to creating a vision for the upcoming year and turning that vision into actionable SMART goals. He also highlights the significance of accountability and community support in achieving these goals, sharing his personal journey to inspire others.

Anne Zink is a lecturer and senior fellow at the Yale School of Public Health. Stephen Morrissey, the interviewer, is the Executive Managing Editor of the Journal. A.B. Zink, N.C. McCann, and R.P. Walensky. From Crisis to Action — Policy Pathways to Reverse the Rise in Congenital Syphilis. N Engl J Med 2025;393:2388-2391.

Guest Bios: Episode Details: In this powerful episode of the LIFTS Podcast, host Emily Freeman sits down with Callie Trier and Jake Maher to share Ryan's Journey Home — a story of foster care, recovery, and the power of community.When Callie and her family welcomed baby Ryan into their home straight from the NICU, they knew he would need love, stability, and a strong village to help him thrive. What they didn't expect was the friendship that would grow between their family and Ryan's biological father, Jake — who was working hard to rebuild his life through treatment and recovery.Together, Callie and Jake share their perspectives on what it means to show up for a child — and for one another — within Montana's foster care system. Their story is one of grace, second chances, and how systems can work when people lead with empathy, communication, and hope.Topics in this episode include:Navigating the foster care system in MontanaThe power of collaboration between foster and biological parentsHow programs like Medicaid, WIC, and Best Beginnings support children in foster careThe role of treatment, recovery, and community support in family reunificationWhy believing in the possibility of change mattersResources mentioned:LIFTS Online Resource Guide: hmhb-lifts.org Montana Department of Public Health and Human Services – Foster Care: https://dphhs.mt.gov/CFSD/Fosterparent/indexRead their original story in LIFTS Magazine: https://hmhb-mt.org/magazine/Enjoying the podcast? We'd love your feedback and ideas for future episodes! Take our LIFTS Podcast Listener Survey at hmhb-mt.org/survey. Connect with Healthy Mothers, Healthy Babies Website Facebook Instagram For statewide resources to support Montana families in the 0-3 years of parenting, check out the LIFTS online resource guide athttps://hmhb-lifts.org/

Low resource settings require much innovation and streamlining resources to meet set goals. With healthcare becoming more commercial and profit driven, missional healthcare in low resource settings faces many challenges. Sustainability is a big question with people finance , and equipment scarce and hard to come by. Missional models of healthcare often run into hurdles of sustainability, longevity and relevance even as healthcare slowly turns into business. In this setting of multifactorial challenges and increasing compliances how can missional healthcare be relevant and sustainable? Many saints of God have committed their lives to fulfil this great commission in some of the most underserved and unreached areas of the world. With the birth of Emmanuel Hospital Association (EHA) a different model of missional healthcare emerged in India. Over the last 55 years of its existence, EHA has shown that through all the challenges, this may be one of the ways to sustain missional healthcare in areas of need. With increasing divide between the rich and poor, overwhelmed government systems, a ruthless insurance system, and high end corporate healthcare, it is still possible for missional healthcare to provide low cost, high quality, technologically advanced care to people in need while remaining sustainable. We bring lessons from India and our experience with Emmanuel Hospital Association over the last 3 decades.

The Ministry of Health isn't renewing its contract for the country's online FluTracking surveillance tool. Epidemiologist Michael Baker, from Otago University's Department of Public Health, thinks that's a mistake and spoke to Ingrid Hipkiss.

Rachel Maddow reviews how poorly Donald Trump's policies are being received by the American public as Trump continues to appoint laughably unqualified sycophants to top agency roles, and leadership failures mount. As a result, not only are Trump's poll numbers tanking, but even Republican politicians are recognizing that it's not in their interest to tie their fates to Trump's sinking ship.As Donald Trump fills the leadership roles of the U.S. public health system with quacks and kooks, sane states are taking it upon themselves to employ actual experts with real public health administration experience to make sure the public has credible guidance even if that guidance is not coming from the federal government. Dr. Debra Houry, former CDC official and new senior medical adviser to the California Department of Health, talks with Rachel Maddow about this new shift in public health authority as Donald Trump and his clown show are simply ignored.And the FBI is suffering a similar fate, with Trump lackeys in leadership driving out the agency's qualified staff and leaving behind only incompetent Trump loyalists to run the sadly weakened organization. Want more of Rachel? Check out the "Rachel Maddow Presents" feed to listen to all of her chart-topping original podcasts.To listen to all of your favorite MS podcasts without ads, sign up for MS NOW Premium on Apple Podcasts. Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

Scott Capozza and I could have been cloned in a bad lab experiment. Both diagnosed with cancer in our early twenties. Both raised on dial-up and mixtapes. Both now boy-girl twin dads with speech-therapist wives and a lifelong grudge against insurance companies. Scott is the first and only full-time oncology physical therapist at Yale New Haven Health, which means if he catches a cold, cancer rehab in Connecticut flatlines. He's part of a small, stubborn tribe of providers who believe movement belongs in cancer care, not just after it. We talked about sperm banking in the nineties, marathon training during chemo, and what it means to be told you're “otherwise healthy” when your lungs, ears, and fertility disagree. Scott's proof that survivorship is not a finish line. It's an endurance event with no medals, just perspective.RELATED LINKSScott Capozza on LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/scott-capozza-a68873257Yale New Haven Health: https://www.ynhh.orgExercising Through Cancer: https://www.exercisingthroughcancer.com/team/scott-capozza-pt-msptProfiles in Survivorship – Yale Medicine: https://medicine.yale.edu/news-article/profiles-in-survivorship-scott-capozzaFEEDBACKLike this episode? Rate and review Out of Patients on your favorite podcast platform. For guest suggestions or sponsorship email podcasts@matthewzachary.comSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

In this episode, Jamila M. Porter, DrPH, MPH, Chief of Staff and Principal Investigator of MADE for Health Justice at the de Beaumont Foundation, and Aysha Dominguez Pamukcu, JD, Policy Fund Director at the San Francisco Foundation, discuss their new book “Strategic Skills for Public Health Practice: Advancing Equity & Justice”. They share how the field can reclaim its social justice roots, push back against rising attacks on equity, and build a more inclusive and community driven future for public health.

In this episode of the Leading Voices in Food podcast, Norbert Wilson of Duke University's Sanford School of Public Policy speaks with researchers Jean Adams from the University of Cambridge and Mike Essman from Duke's World Food Policy Center. They discuss the mandatory calorie labeling policy introduced in England in April 2022 for large food-away-from-home outlets. The conversation covers the study recently published in the British Medical Journal, exploring its results, strengths, limitations, and implications within the broader context of food labeling and public health policies. Key findings include a slight overall reduction in calorie content offered by food outlets, driven by the removal of higher-calorie items rather than reformulation. The discussion also touches on the potential impacts on different consumer groups, the challenges of policy enforcement, and how such policies could be improved to more effectively support public health goals. Interview Summary Now everyone knows eating out is just part of life. For many, it's a place to make connections, can be a guilty pleasure, and sometimes it's just an outright necessity for busy folks. But it is also linked to poor dietary quality, weight gain, and even obesity. For policymakers, the challenge is identifying what policy changes can help improve population health. Jean, let's begin with you. Can you tell our listeners about the UK's menu labeling intervention and what change did you hope to see? Jean - Yes, so this was a policy that was actually a really long time in coming and came in and out of favor with a number of different governments. So maybe over the last 10 years we've had various different suggestions to have voluntary and/or mandatory calorie labeling in the out-of-home sector. Eventually in April, 2022, we did have new mandatory regulations that came into a force that required large businesses just in England - so not across the whole of the UK, just in England - if they sold food and non-alcoholic drinks and they had to display the calories per portion of every item that they were selling. And then have alongside that somewhere on their menu, a statement that said that adults need around 2000 calories per day. The policy applied just to large businesses, and the definition of that was that those businesses have 250 or more employees, but the employees didn't all have to be involved in serving food and drinks. This might apply also to a large hotel chain who just have some bars or something in their hotels. And the food and drinks covered were things that were available for immediate consumption. Not prepackaged. And then there was also this proviso to allow high-end restaurants to be changing their menus regularly. So, it was only for things that were on the menu for at least 30 days. You mentioned that this policy or a menu labeling might have at least two potential modes of impacts. There's first this idea that providing calories or any sort of labeling on food can somehow provide information for consumers to make what we might hope would be better choices. Might help them choose lower calorie options or healthier options. And then the second potential impact is that businesses might also use the information to change what sort of foods they're serving. It might be that they didn't realize how many calories were in the foods and they're suddenly embarrassed about it. Or as soon as their customers realize, they start to put a little bit of pressure on, you know, we want something a little bit lower calorie. So, there's this potential mechanism that operates at the demand side of how consumers might make choices. And another one at the supply side of what might be available to consumers. And we knew from previous evaluations of these sorts of interventions that there was some evidence that both could occur. Generally, it seems to be that findings from other places and countries are maybe null to small. So, we were thinking that maybe we might see something similar in England. Thank you for sharing that background. I do have a question about the length of time it took to get this menu labeling law in place. Before we get into the results, do you have a sense of why did it take so long? Was it industry pushback? Was it just change of governments? Do you have a sense of that? Jean - Yes, so I think it's probably a bit of both. To begin with, it was first proposed as a voluntary measure actually by industry. So, we had this kind of big public-private partnership. What can industry do to support health? And that was one of the things they proposed. And then they didn't really do it very well. So, there was this idea that everybody would do it. And in fact, we found maybe only about 20% of outlets did it. And then definitely we have had government churn in the UK over the last five years or so. So, every new prime minister really came in and wanted to have their own obesity policy threw out the last one started over. And every policy needs consulted on with the public and then with industry. And that whole process just kind of got derailed over and over again. Thank you. That is really helpful to understand that development of the policy and why it took time. Industry regulated policy can be a tricky one to actually see the results that we would hope. You've already given us a sort of insight into what you thought the results may be from previous studies - null to relatively small. So, Mike, I want to turn to you. Can you tell us what came out of the data? Mike - Thank you, yes. So, we found a small overall drop in average calories offered per item. That amounts to a total of nine calories per item reduction in our post policy period relative to pre policy. And this is about a 2% reduction. It was statistically significant and we do in public health talk about how small effects can still have big impacts. So, I do want to sort of put that out there, but also recognize that it was a small overall drop in calories. And then what we did is we looked at how different food groups changed, and also how calories changed at different types of restaurants, whether it was fast food, restaurants, sit downs that we call pubs, bars, and inns. And then also other different types of takeaways like cafes and things like that where you might get a coffee or a cappuccino or something like that. What we found was driving the overall reduction in calories was a reduction in higher calorie items. So, as Jean mentioned at the outset, one of the things we were trying to identify in this analysis was whether we saw any evidence of reformulation. And we defined reformulation as whether specific products were reduced in their calories so that the same products were lower calories in the post period. We define that as reformulation. And that would be different from, say, a change in menu offering where you might identify a high calorie item and take it off the menu so that then the overall calories offered goes down on average. We found more evidence for the latter. Higher calorie items were removed. We separated into categories of removed items, items that were present in both periods, and new items added in the post period. There were higher calorie items in the removed group. The items that were present in both periods did not change. The new items were lower calorie items. What this says overall is this average reduction is driven by taking off high calorie items, adding some slightly lower calorie items. But we did not find evidence for reformulation, which is a crucial finding as well. We saw that the largest reductions occurred in burgers, beverages and a rather large mixed group called Mains. So, burgers reduced by 103 calories per item. That's pretty substantial. One of the reasons that's so large is that burgers, particularly if they're offered at a pub and might even come with fries or chips, as they say in the UK. And because they have such a high baseline calorie level, there's more opportunity to reduce. So, whether it's making it slightly smaller patty or reducing the cheese or something like that, that's where we saw larger reductions among the burgers. With beverages, typically, this involved the addition of lower calorie options, which is important if it gives an opportunity for lower calorie selections. And that was the main driver of reduction there. And then also we saw in Mains a reduction of 30 calories per item. A couple of the other things we wanted to identify is whether there was a change in the number of items that were considered over England's recommended calories per meal. The recommended calories per meal is 600 calories or less for lunch and dinner. And we saw no statistical change in that group. So overall, we do see a slight reduction in average calories. But this study did not examine changes in consumer behavior. I do want to just briefly touch on that because this was part of a larger evaluation. Another study that was published using customer surveys that was published in Nature Human Behavior found no change in the average calories purchased or consumed after the policy. This evaluation was looking at both the supply and the demand side changes as a result of this policy. Thanks, Mike and I've got lots of questions to follow up, but I'll try to control myself. The first one I'm interested to understand is you talk about the importance of the really calorie-heavy items being removed and the introduction of newer, lower calorie items. And you said that this is not a study of the demand, but I'm interested to know, do you have a sense that the higher calorie items may not have been high or top sellers. It could be easy for a restaurant to get rid of those. Do you have any sense of, you know, the types of items that were removed and of the consumer demand for those items? Mike - Yes. So, as I mentioned, given that the largest changes were occurring among burgers, we're sort of doing this triangulation attempt to examine all of the different potential impacts we can with the study tools we have. We did not see those changes reflected in consumer purchases. So, I think sticking with the evidence, the best thing we could say is that the most frequently purchased items were not the ones that were being pulled off of menus. I think that would be the closest to the evidence. Now, no study is perfect and we did in that customer survey examine the purchases and consumption of about 3000 individuals before and after the policy. It's relatively large, but certainly not fully comprehensive. But based on what we were able to find, it would seem that those reductions in large calorie items, it's probably fair to say, were sort of marginal choices. So, we see some reduction in calories at the margins. That's why the overall is down, but we don't see at the most commonly sold. I should also mention in response to that, a lot of times when we think about eating out of home, we often think about fast food. We did not see reductions in fast food chains at all, essentially. And so really the largest reductions we found were in what would be considered more sit-down dining establishment. For example, sit-down restaurants or even pubs, bars and ends was one of our other categories. We did see average reductions in those chains. The areas you kind of think about for people grabbing food quickly on the go, we did not see reductions there. And we think some of this is a function of the data itself, which is pubs, bars and inns, because they offer larger plates, there's a little bit more space for them to reduce. And so those are where we saw the reductions. But in what we might typically think is sort of the grab and go type of food, we did not see reductions in those items. And so when we did our customer surveys, we saw that those did not lead to reductions in calories consumed. Ahh, I see this and thank you for this. It sounds like the portfolio adjusted: getting rid of those heavy calorie items, adding more of the lower calorie items that may not have actually changed what consumers actually eat. Because the ones that they typically eat didn't change at all. And I would imagine from what you've said that large global brands may not have made many changes, but more local brands have more flexibility is my assumption of that. So that, that's really helpful to see. As you all looked at the literature, you had the knowledge that previous studies have found relatively small changes. Could you tell us about what this work looks like globally? There are other countries that have tried policy similar to this. What did you learn from those other countries about menu labeling? Jean - Well, I mean, I'm tempted to say that we maybe should have learned that this wasn't the sort of policy that we could expect to make a big change. To me one of the really attractive features of a labeling policy is it kind of reflects back those two mechanisms we've talked about - information and reformulation or changing menus. Because we can talk about it in those two different ways of changing the environment and also helping consumers make better choices, then it can be very attractive across the political landscape. And I suspect that that is one of the things that the UK or England learned. And that's reflected in the fact that it took a little while to get it over the line, but that lots of different governments came back to it. That it's attractive to people thinking about food and thinking about how we can support people to eat better in kind of a range of different ways. I think what we learned, like putting the literature all together, is this sort of policy might have some small effects. It's not going to be the thing that kind of changes the dial on diet related diseases. But that it might well be part of an integrated strategy of many different tools together. I think we can also learn from the literature on labeling in the grocery sector where there's been much more exploration of different types of labeling. Whether colors work, whether black stop signs are more effective. And that leads us to conclusions that these more interpretive labels can lead to bigger impacts and consumer choices than just a number, right? A number is quite difficult to make some sense of. And I think that there are some ways that we could think about optimizing the policy in England before kind of writing it off as not effective. Thank you. I think what you're saying is it worked, but it works maybe in the context of other policies, is that a fair assessment? Jean - Well, I mean, the summary of our findings, Mike's touched on quite a lot of it. We found that there was an increase in outlets adhering to the policy. That went from about 20% offered any labeling to about 80%. So, there were still some places that were not doing what they were expected to do. But there was big changes in actual labeling practice. People also told us that they noticed the labels more and they said that they used them much more than they were previously. Like there was some labeling before. We had some big increases in noticing and using. But it's... we found this no change in calories purchased or calories consumed. Which leads to kind of interesting questions. Okay, so what were they doing with it when they were using it? And maybe some people were using it to help them make lower calorie choices, but other people were trying to optimize calories for money spent? We saw these very small changes in the mean calorie of items available that Mike's described in lots of detail. And then we also did some work kind of exploring with restaurants, people who worked in the restaurant chains and also people responsible for enforcement, kind of exploring their experiences with the policy. And one of the big conclusions from that was that local government were tasked with enforcement, but they weren't provided with any additional resources to make that happen. And for various reasons, it essentially didn't happen. And we've seen that with a number of different policies in the food space in the UK. That there's this kind of presumption of compliance. Most people are doing it all right. We're not doing it a hundred percent and that's probably because it's not being checked and there's no sanction for not following the letter of the law. One of the reasons that local authorities are not doing enforcement, apart from that they don't have resources or additional resources for it, is that they have lots of other things to do in the food space, and they see those things as like higher risk. And so more important to do. One of those things is inspecting for hygiene, making sure that the going out is not poisonous or adulterated or anything like that. And you can absolutely understand that. These things that might cause acute sickness, or even death in the case of allergies, are much more important for them to be keeping an eye on than labeling. One of the other things that emerged through the process of implementation, and during our evaluation, was a big concern from communities with experience of eating disorders around kind of a greater focus on calorie counting. And lots of people recounting their experience that they just find that very difficult to be facing in a space where they're maybe not trying to think about their eating disorder or health. And then they're suddenly confronted with it. And when we've gone back and looked at the literature, there's just not very much literature on the impact of calorie labeling on people with eating disorders. And so we're a little bit uncertain still about whether that is a problem, but it's certainly perceived to be a problem. And lots of people find the policy difficult for that reason because they know someone in their family or one of their friends with an eating disorder. And they're very alert to that potential harm. I think this is a really important point to raise that the law, the menu labeling, could have differential effects on different consumers. I'm not versed in this literature on the triggering effects of seeing menu labeling for people with disordered eating. But then I'm also thinking about a different group of consumers. Consumers who are already struggling with obesity, and whether or not this policy is more effective for those individuals versus folks who are not. In the work that you all did, did you have any sense of are there heterogeneous effects of the labeling? Did different consumers respond differentially to seeing the menu label? Not just, for example, individuals maybe with disordered eating? Mike - In this work, we mostly focused on compliance, customer responses in terms of consumption and purchases, changes in menus, and customers reporting whether or not they increase noticing and using. When we looked at the heterogeneous effects, some of these questions are what led us to propose a new project where we interviewed people and tried to understand their responses to calorie labeling. And there we get a lot of heterogenous groups. In those studies, and this work has not actually been published, but should be in the new year, we found that there's a wide range of different types of responses to the policy. For example, there may be some people who recently started going to the gym and maybe they're trying to actually bulk up. And so, they'll actually choose higher calorie items. Conversely, there may be people who have a fitness routine or a dieting lifestyle that involves calorie tracking. And they might be using an app in order to enter the calories into that. And those people who are interested in calorie counting, they really loved the policy. They really wanted the policy. And it gave them a sense of control over their diet. And they felt comfortable and were really worried that if there was evidence that it wouldn't work, that would be taken away. Then you have a whole different group of people who are living with eating disorders who don't want to interact with those numbers when they are eating out of home. They would rather eat socially and not have to think about those challenges. There's really vast diversity in terms of the responses to the policy. And that does present a challenge. And I think what it also does is cause us just to question what is the intended mechanism of action of this policy? Because when the policy was implemented, there's an idea of a relatively narrow set of effects. If customers don't understand the number of calories that are in their items, you just provide them with the calories that are in those items, they will then make better choices as rational actors. But we know that eating out of home is far more complex. It's social. There are issues related to value for money. So maybe people want to make sure they're purchasing food that hasn't been so reduced in portions that now they don't get the value for money when they eat out. There are all sorts of body image related challenges when people may eat out. We didn't find a lot of evidence of this in our particular sample, but also in some of our consultation with the public in developing the interview, there's concern about judgment from peers when eating out. So, it's a very sensitive topic. Some of the implications of that are we do probably need more communication strategies that can come alongside these policies and sort of explain the intended mechanism impact to the public. We can't expect to simply add numbers to items and then expect that people are going to make the exact choices that are sort of in the best interest of public health. And that sort of brings us on to some potential alternative mechanisms of impact and other modes of labeling, and those sorts of things. Mike, this has been really helpful because you've also hinted at some of the ways that this policy as implemented, could have been improved. And I wonder, do you have any other thoughts to add to how to make a policy like this have a bigger impact. Mike - Absolutely. One of the things that was really helpful when Jean laid out her framing of the policy was there's multiple potential mechanisms of action. One of those is the potential reformulation in menu change. We talked about those results. Another intended mechanism of action is through consumer choice. So, if items have fewer calories on average, then that could reduce ultimately calories consumed. Or if people make choices of lower calorie items, that could also be a way to reduce the overall calories consumed. And I would say this calorie labeling policy, it is a step because the calories were not previously available. People did not know what they were eating. And if you provide that, that fulfills the duty of transparency by businesses. When we spoke to people who worked in enforcement, they did support the policy simply on the basis of transparency because it's important for people to understand what they're consuming. And so that's sort of a generally acceptable principle. However, if we want to actually have stronger population health impact, then we do need to have stronger mechanisms of action. One of the ways that can reduce calories consumed by the consumers, so the sort of demand side, would be some of the interpretive labels. Jean mentioned them earlier. There's now a growing body of evidence of across, particularly in Latin America. I would say some of the strongest evidence began in Chile, but also in Mexico and in other Latin American countries where they've put warning labels on items in order to reduce their consumption. These are typically related to packaged foods is where most of the work has been done. But in order to reduce consumer demand, what it does is rather than expecting people to be sort of doing math problems on the fly, as they go around and make their choices, you're actually just letting them know, well, by the way, this is an item that's very high in calories or saturated fat, or sodium or sugars. Or some combination of those. What that does is you've already helped make that decision for the consumers. You've at least let them know this item has a high level of nutrients of concern. And you can take that away. Conversely, if you have an item that's 487 calories, do you really know what you're going to do with that information? So that's one way to have stronger impact. The other way that that type of policy can have stronger impact is it sets clear thresholds for those warnings. And so, when you have clear thresholds for warnings, you can have a stronger mechanism for reformulation. And what companies may want to do is they may not want to display those warning labels, maybe because it's embarrassing. It makes their candy or whatever the unhealthy food look bad. Sort of an eyesore, which is the point. And what they'll do is they can reformulate those nutrients to lower levels so that they no longer qualify for that regulation. And so there are ways to essentially strengthen both of those mechanisms of action. Whereas when it's simply on the basis of transparency, then what that does is leave all of the decision making and work on the consumer. Mike, this is great because I've worked with colleagues like Gabby Fretes and Sean Cash and others on some menu labeling out of Chile. And we're currently doing some work within the center on food nutrition labels to see how different consumers are responding. There's a lot more work to be done in this space. And, of course, our colleagues at UNC (University of North Carolina-Chapel Hill) have also been doing this work. So, this work is really important because it tells us how it can help consumers make different choices, and how it can affect how companies behave. My final question to the two of you is simply, what would you like policymakers to learn from this study? Or maybe not just this study alone, but this body of work. What should they take away? Jean - Well, I think there's lots of information out there on how to do food labeling well, and we can certainly learn from that. And Mike talks about the work from South America particularly where they're helping people identify the least healthy products. And they're also providing messaging around what you should do with that - like choose a product with fewer of these black symbols. But I think even if labeling is optimized, it's not really going to solve our problem of dietary related diseases. And I think I always want policymakers to know, and I think many of them do understand this, that there is no one magic solution and we need to be thinking about labeling as part of a strategy that addresses marketing in its entirety, right? Companies are using all sorts of strategies to encourage us to buy products. We need to be thinking of all sorts of strategies to support people to buy different products and to eat better. And I think that focuses on things like rebalancing price, supporting people to afford healthier food, focusing advertising and price promotions on healthier products. And I also think we need to be looking even further upstream though, right? That we need to be thinking about the incentives that are driving companies to make and sell less healthy products. Because I don't think that they particularly want to be selling less healthy products or causing lots of illness. It's those products are helping them achieve their aims of creating profit and growth for their shareholders. And I think we need to find creative ways to support companies to experiment with healthier products that either help them simultaneously achieve those demands of profit or growth. Or somehow allow them to step away from those demands either for a short period or for a longer period. I think that that requires us to kind of relook at how we do business in economics in our countries. Mike? Yes, I think that was a really thorough answer by Jean. So, I'll just add a couple points. I think most fundamentally what we need to think about when we're doing policy making to improve diet is we need to always think about are we helping to make the healthier choice the easier choice? And what that means is we're not implementing policies that merely provide information that then require individuals to do the rest of the work. We need to have a food environment that includes healthier options that are easily accessible, but also affordable. That's one thing that's come through in quite a lot of the work we've done. There are a lot of concerns about the high cost of food. If people feel like the healthier choices are also affordable choices, that's one of many ways to support the easier choice. And I really just want to reiterate what Jean said in terms of the economics of unhealthy food. In many ways, these large multinational corporations are from their perspective, doing right by their shareholders by producing a profitable product. Now there are debates on whether or not that's a good thing, of course. There's quite a lot of evidence for the negative health impacts of ultra-processed (UPF) products, and those are getting a lot more attention these days and that's a good thing. What we do need to think about is why is it that UPFs are so widely consumed. In many ways they are optimized to be over consumed. They're optimized to be highly profitable. Because the ingredients that are involved in their production means that they can add a lot of salt, sugar, and fat. And what that does is lead to overconsumption. We need to think about that there's something fundamentally broken about this incentive structure. That is incentivizing businesses to sell unhealthy food products with these food additives that lead to over consumption, obesity, and the associated comorbidities. And if we can start to make a little progress and think creatively about how could we incentivize a different incentive structure. One where actually it would be in a food business's best interest to be much more innovative and bolder and produce healthier products for everyone. That's something that I think we will have to contend with because if we are thinking that we are only going to be able to restrict our way out of this, then that's very difficult. Because people still need to have healthy alternatives, and so we can't merely think about restricting. We also have to think about how do we promote access to healthier foods. This is great insight. I appreciate the phrasing of making the healthy choice the easy choice, and I also heard a version of this making the healthy choice the affordable choice. But it also seems like we need to find ways to make the healthy choice the profitable choice as well. Bios: Jean Adams is a Professor of Dietary Public Health and leads the Population Health Interventions Programme at the University of Cambridge MRC Epidemiology Unit. Adams trained in medicine before completing a PhD on socio-economic inequalities in health. This was followed by an MRC Health of the Population fellowship and an NIHR Career Development Fellowship both exploring influences on health behaviours and socio-economic inequalities in these. During these fellowships Jean was appointed Lecturer, then Senior Lecturer, in Public Health at Newcastle University. Jean moved to Cambridge University to join the MRC Epidemiology Unit and CEDAR in 2014 where she helped establish the Dietary Public Health group. She became Programme Leader in the newly formed Population Health Interventions programme in 2020, and was appointed Professor of Dietary Public Health in 2022. Mike Essman is a Research Scientist at Duke University's World Food Policy Center. His background is in evaluating nutrition and food policies aimed at improving diets and preventing cardiometabolic diseases. His work employs both quantitative and qualitative methods to explore drivers of dietary behavior, particularly ultra-processed food consumption, across diverse environments and countries. Mike earned his PhD in Nutrition Epidemiology from the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, where his research focused on evaluating the impacts of a sugary beverage tax in South Africa. He completed MSc degrees in Medical Anthropology and Global Health Science at the University of Oxford through a fellowship. Prior to joining Duke, he conducted research at the MRC Epidemiology Unit at the University of Cambridge, where he evaluated the impacts of calorie labeling policies in England and led a study examining public perceptions of ultra-processed foods.  

Tahoe National Forest is conducting a 37-acre prescribed burn along Conservation Road near Nevada City from Dec 16th to Dec 18th.A Union Pacific train derailed in Colfax this weekend. Union Pacific Railroad representative Jill Micek told KVMR News that approximately 13 rail cars left their tracks near State Highway 174 and Narrow Gauge Road just after 3 a.m. Saturday morning. The California Department of Public Health has issued a warning to the public due to a recent outbreak of amatoxin poisoning tied to the consumption of wild, foraged mushrooms. The cause of these poisonings has been tied to Amanita Phalloides, also known as the Death Cap Mushroom. KVMR News spoke with Daniel Nicholson, a Yuba Watershed Institute board member who has been researching the local mushrooms and documenting their distribution for more than two decades.At last week's Grass Valley City Council Meeting the agenda's big topic of discussion, the Dorsey Marketplace Project, was yet again pushed to a later date. GV City Manager Tim Kiser says the public hearing considering changes and additions to the development is now scheduled for January 13th at 6pm. The meeting's first public comment referenced the repeated incidents of violence throughout Nevada County in the past several months, as well as the demonstration held at the Rood Center in Nevada City on Monday, Dec 8th.

Collective action is the engine of public health transformation. In this episode of the Public Health Insight Podcast, Dr. Vinu Ilakkuvan shares the tactics that turn community frustration into real-world victories, like Pittsburgh's fight for public water. The conversation also explores how building coalitions, fostering local connections, and embracing joy can challenge entrenched power and spark lasting change. References for Our Discussion◼️An overview of the commercial determinants of health◼️Pop Health   ◼️Gaslit Blogs Guest◼️Dr. Vinu Ilakkuvan, DrPH, Founder and Principal Consultant, PoP HealthHost(s)◼️Purva Mehta, BMSc, MScProducer(s)◼️Abhinya Gulasingam◼️Gordon Thane, BMSc, MPH, PMP®Production Notes◼️ Music from Johnny Harris x Tom Fox: The Music RoomSubscribe to the NewsletterSubscribe to The Insight newsletter so you don't miss out on the latest podcast episodes, live events, job skills, learning opportunities, and other engaging professional development content here.Leave Us Some FeedbackIf you enjoy our podcasts, be sure to subscribe and leave us a rating on Apple Podcast or Spotify, and spread the word to your friends to help us get discovered by more people. You can also interact directly with the podcast episodes on Spotify using the new “comment” feature! We'd love to hear what you think.Send us a Text Message to let us know what you think.

In this episode of Skin Anarchy, Dr. Ekta Yadav sits down with Dr. Alexes Hazen—board-certified plastic surgeon, microsurgery specialist, and founder of Zen Essentials—for a thoughtful conversation on skin health, ethical aesthetics, and why real results can never be separated from whole-body well-being. With a background that spans public health, global medicine, and some of the most technically demanding surgical training, Dr. Hazen brings a rare depth to how she thinks about beauty, healing, and care.Her path to medicine was anything but linear. From working with the New York City Department of Health during the AIDS crisis to serving in the Peace Corps in Honduras, Dr. Hazen learned early that medicine isn't just technical—it's human. Those experiences shaped a philosophy she carries into every aspect of her work today: outcomes are influenced as much by mental health, sleep, nutrition, and support systems as they are by surgical skill.Throughout the conversation, Dr. Hazen challenges the surface-level thinking that dominates skincare culture. Skin, she reminds us, is an organ—and it reflects what's happening internally. No product can compensate for chronic stress, dehydration, or exhaustion. When those fundamentals are addressed, skincare finally has the space to work as it should.She also speaks candidly about ethics in aesthetic medicine—why board certification matters, why saying “no” is sometimes the most responsible choice, and how listening to patients should always come before selling solutions.That same restraint and intention led to the creation of Zen Essentials, born from Dr. Hazen's own struggles with severe skin sensitivities. Designed to be effective yet calming, the line reflects her belief that skincare should support the body—not fight it.Listen to the full episode to hear Dr. Alexes Hazen unpack holistic healing, ethical aesthetics, and why real skin health starts with caring for the whole person.SHOP Zen Essentials and learn more on social media!CHAPTERS:(0:02) - Introduction & Guest Welcome(0:46) - A Nonlinear Path Into Medicine(1:26) - Public Health, AIDS Education & the Peace Corps(2:46) - Falling in Love With Surgery & Plastic Surgery Training(3:01) - Early Burn Injury, Scars & Coming Full Circle(4:12) - Why Holistic Care Matters in Surgical Outcomes(8:40) - Skin as a Reflection of Whole-Body Health(11:22) - Ethics, Training & Responsibility in Aesthetic Surgery(26:21) - The Origins of Zen Essentials & Sensitive Skin SciencePlease fill out this survey to give us feedback on the show!Don't forget to subscribe to Skin Anarchy on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, or your preferred platform.Reach out to us through email with any questions.Sign up for our newsletter!Shop all our episodes and products mentioned through our ShopMy Shelf!*This is a paid collaboration Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

About this episode: Attacking health care facilities and providers is becoming a standard strategy of war in places like Colombia, Lebanon, Ukraine, and Gaza, and it is increasingly being perpetrated by state actors. In this episode: Health and human rights lawyer Leonard Rubenstein discusses these disturbing trends, why there's so little accountability for attacks on health care, and what it would take to see meaningful progress. Guests: Leonard Rubenstein, JD, LLM, is a lawyer who has spent his career in health and human rights in armed conflict. He is core faculty of the Johns Hopkins Center for Public Health and Human Rights and the Berman Institute of Bioethics. Host: Dr. Josh Sharfstein is distinguished professor of the practice in Health Policy and Management, a pediatrician, and former secretary of Maryland's Health Department. Show links and related content: How attacking healthcare has become a strategy of war—British Medical Journal Safeguarding Health in Conflict Coalition, 2024 Report Violence Against Health Care in Conflict: 2024 Report—Public Health On Call (June 2025) Transcript information: Looking for episode transcripts? Open our podcast on the Apple Podcasts app (desktop or mobile) or the Spotify mobile app to access an auto-generated transcript of any episode. Closed captioning is also available for every episode on our YouTube channel. Contact us: Have a question about something you heard? Looking for a transcript? Want to suggest a topic or guest? Contact us via email or visit our website. Follow us: @‌PublicHealthPod on Bluesky @‌PublicHealthPod on Instagram @‌JohnsHopkinsSPH on Facebook @‌PublicHealthOnCall on YouTube Here's our RSS feed Note: These podcasts are a conversation between the participants, and do not represent the position of Johns Hopkins University.

Dr. Dominick Shattuck is a public health researcher whose work focuses onreproductive health, technology integration, vaccine uptake, HIV, and engaging men in care. His research examines how men's health-seeking behaviors, masculinity, and gender norms shape outcomes. He has led pioneering studies, including evaluating a mobile contraceptive app (the Dot Study), conducting the first randomized trial of male engagement in reproductive health, developing the first reproductive health mobile games (Nari Paila), and leading Rwanda's national vasectomy scale-up.At Johns Hopkins University, he is a faculty member in the Bloomberg School of Public Health and the OB-GYN Department in the School of Medicine. He's also the CEO of Relational Ground, LLC, on the Advisory Boards of Next Life Science, the Men's Health Network, a member of Global Action on Men's Health, and he's the Men's Health Fellow at the American Institute for Boys and Men.AIBMAIBM HEAL JobsBoys & Men OnlineOutsmart Ovarian CancerDominick's Personal websiteSupport the show

00:08 — John Feffer is Director of Foreign Policy in Focus. 00:33 — Dr. John Swartzberg, clinical professor emeritus of infectious diseases at UC Berkeley's School of Public Health. The post Russia's War in Ukraine; Plus, Corona Call appeared first on KPFA.

Dr. Anita shares her homecoming journey as a multi-gifted person. She is a New York Times bestselling author, trauma therapist, and interim lead pastor of One Church in Los Angeles. Along with discussing her multiple callings, she and Dr. Thema explore her heart's journey post-divorce which includes both healing and re-opening her heart to new possibilities. Widely recognized as a thought leader at the intersection of mental health, faith, and culture, Dr. Anita holds degrees from the University of Maryland and Regent University and completed a postdoctoral fellowship at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health. She is a dynamic speaker and podcast host who adores her family and friends, a good pint of ice cream, and sitting by the ocean. Mixed & Edited by Next Day Podcast info@nextdaypodcast.com