Person who conducts scientific research
POPULARITY
Categories
82 episodes with research scientist
16 episodes with research scientist
19 episodes with research scientist
9 episodes with research scientist
14 episodes with research scientist
5 episodes with research scientist
9 episodes with research scientist
9 episodes with research scientist
13 episodes with research scientist
5 episodes with research scientist
10 episodes with research scientist
14 episodes with research scientist
8 episodes with research scientist
7 episodes with research scientist
4 episodes with research scientist
7 episodes with research scientist
4 episodes with research scientist
6 episodes with research scientist
6 episodes with research scientist
5 episodes with research scientist
5 episodes with research scientist
6 episodes with research scientist
3 episodes with research scientist
4 episodes with research scientist
4 episodes with research scientist
5 episodes with research scientist
4 episodes with research scientist
Waterfowl science is entering a new era — and Ducks Unlimited is right in the middle of it.In this episode, host Dr. Mike Brasher is joined by co‑host Dr. Jerad Henson and guest Dr. Patrick Donnelly, Research Scientist with Ducks Unlimited's Western Region, for a deep dive into how emerging technologies are transforming the way we understand ducks, wetlands, and flyways.Patrick brings decades of experience from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, joint ventures, and academia, and now applies cutting‑edge tools like AI, cloud computing, GPS telemetry, remote sensing, and environmental DNA to answer some of the most important conservation questions at continental scales.In this episode, listeners will hear about:Patrick Donnelly's journey from the Fish & Wildlife Service to Ducks UnlimitedMovement ecology and why scale matters for migratory birdsHow GPS transmitters revolutionized waterfowl researchUsing satellite imagery to map wetlands across 40+ years“Functional wetland loss” and why water matters as much as land protectionThe role of snowpack, hydrology, and climate in western wetlandsDisease risk, botulism, and crowding during molting periodsLinking bird movements, habitat conditions, and timeThe Western Mallard Project and tracking 800 birds across the Pacific FlywaySentinel and Landsat satellites explained in plain languageCloud computing and why conservation can now run at scaleUsing citizen‑science data (eBird) alongside satellite dataNew applications of environmental DNA (yes — duck poop)How AI helps identify patterns humans can't seeTraining the next generation of conservation scientistsWhy this moment feels like a “second revolution” in waterfowl scienceThis episode pulls back the curtain on how Ducks Unlimited is using modern science to maximize conservation return on investment, ensuring that every dollar delivers the greatest benefit for waterfowl now and into the future.Listen now: www.ducks.org/DUPodcastSend feedback: DUPodcast@ducks.orgSPONSORS:Purina Pro Plan: The official performance dog food of Ducks UnlimitedWhether you're a seasoned hunter or just getting started, this episode is packed with valuable insights into the world of waterfowl hunting and conservation.Bird Dog Whiskey and Cocktails:Whether you're winding down with your best friend, or celebrating with your favorite crew, Bird Dog brings award-winning flavor to every moment. Enjoy responsibly.
On this episode of the LPRC CrimeScience Podcast, LPRC Host Tiffany Frison welcomes new LPRC team member Beau Nutter, Research Scientist, for a conversation on the future of real-time intelligence in retail. Beau shares his background, his role at LPRC, and how the fusion of technology signals is helping organizations create smarter, faster, and more informed responses to today's evolving retail challenges.
In this episode of The Dairy Nutrition Blackbelt Podcast, Dr. Renée Petri, Research Scientist at Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, explains how rumen microbiome dynamics influence dairy cow performance, feed efficiency, and environmental outcomes. She explores diet changes, adaptation periods, and microbiome-informed nutrition strategies to improve milk components and sustainability. Discover how managing microorganisms drives production success. Listen now on all major platforms!"Dietary changes influence microbial populations and nutrient availability, creating ripple effects that impact intake behavior, milk components, and overall production efficiency in dairy systems."Meet the guest: Dr. Renée Petri is a Research Scientist at Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada in Sherbrooke. Her work focuses on dairy rumen and gut microbiome research, including interactions during lactation, sustainability, gut health, and feed management in calves and dairy cattle. She holds a PhD in Ruminant Microbiology from the University of Saskatchewan. Learn more about microbiome-driven nutrition with Dr. Renée Petri on The Dairy Nutrition Blackbelt Podcast. Listen now on all major platforms!Liked this one? Don't stop now — Here's what we think you'll love!What will you learn: (00:00) Highlight(01:52) Introduction(03:23) Microbiome study(04:28) Feed changes(06:26) Adaptation time(08:22) Heritability insights(09:13) Informed nutrition(13:01) Closing thoughtsThe Dairy Nutrition Blackbelt Podcast is trusted and supported by the innovative companies:* Barentz* Fortiva* Adisseo* Vetagro* Kemin- Esmilco Inc.- DietForge- Virtus Nutrition
What if the very buildings, roads, and infrastructure we use every day could store energy and act as massive power sources? In this episode, Damian Stefaniuk, Research Scientist at MIT's Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering and the Concrete Sustainability Hub (CSHub), unveils a revolutionary concept: conductive concrete. Damian's pioneering research explores how concrete can be engineered to conduct electricity and store energy—up to 10 times the capacity of traditional materials—while reducing the carbon footprint of cement production. This breakthrough could transform our infrastructure into smart, energy-storing systems, pushing the boundaries of clean energy solutions and emissions reduction. In this conversation, we dive into: · How concrete can be turned into a conductive material for energy storage. · The role of carbon-based conductive cement and nanomaterials in this innovation. · How infrastructure can contribute to renewable energy storage and clean energy goals. Damian's work promises to reshape the future of sustainable construction and energy storage. Tune in to learn more about how smart concrete could change the way we think about energy and infrastructure. Follow Damian and his work at MIT here! Episode also available on Apple Podcasts: https://apple.co/38oMlMr
AI swarms are now considered the most dangerous influence weapons ever created, actively fabricating grassroots consensus and corrupting enterprise AI training data through disinformation. Daniel Thilo Schroeder, Research Scientist at SINTEF, and Jonas R. Kunst, Professor at BI Norwegian Business School, co-authored a study with 22 authors published in Science that maps this threat. They explain how AI swarms operate without human oversight, why traditional detection methods fail, and what governments, platforms, and business leaders must do to fight back. This is CXOTalk episode 915.YOU'LL DISCOVER✅ How AI swarms shift from central command to emergent hive behavior with decreasing human oversight✅ Why AI-generated social media messages now pass the Turing test, rendering individual message detection obsolete✅ The persona-centric architecture: how single AI agents coordinate behavior across email, X, Bluesky, and Facebook simultaneously✅ How swarms fabricate synthetic consensus by hijacking human conformist psychology✅ The perverse incentives of social media business models that profit from AI swarm engagement metrics✅ How AI swarms poison LLM training data, causing future models to output manipulated facts as objective reality✅ The proposed Distributed AI Influence Observatory for decentralized threat intelligence sharing✅ Why malicious actors can deploy self-optimizing AI swarms from a bedroom using existing multi-agent frameworks⏱️ TIMESTAMPS0:00 The Shift from Bot Networks to AI Swarms2:00 Why Cheap AI Inference Enables Long-Term Influence Campaigns4:30 Autonomous Coordination and Emergent Hive Behavior7:00 Persona-Centric Agents Across Multiple Platforms8:30 Weaponizing Disinformation to Fabricate Synthetic Consensus14:15 How AI Swarms Corrupt LLM Training Data18:00 Why Individual Message Detection No Longer Works23:00 The Research Frontier: Coordination Pattern Detection27:00 Platform Business Models and Perverse Incentives32:00 Building Defenses: The AI Influence Observatory39:00 Corporate Risks: Fabricated Boycotts and Targeted Harassment46:00 Can It Be Stopped? The Arms Race Democracies Must Join
The Evolution of AI LearningIn this clip, Martin Riedmiller, Research Scientist & Controls Team Lead at Google DeepMind, reflects on groundbreaking AI projects that shaped his journey.From building end-to-end systems that could learn 50+ Atari games
The International Math Olympiad is a yearly competition for students, most of them high school age, who compete to solve six difficult math problems. They're chosen from a pool of math problems submitted by different countries that participate in the competition. The problems that don't make the cut previously have mostly just been lost; there was no one place you could go to find them.But now a team at MIT's Computer Science and Artificial Intelligence Lab has gathered over 30,000 of those problems together in one dataset so both humans and AI models can look through and study them.Marketplace's Stephanie Hughes spoke with Mark Hamilton, a visiting researcher at MIT CSAIL who has been part of the work to gather problems. He's also a Research Scientist at Google's DeepMind laboratory.
The International Math Olympiad is a yearly competition for students, most of them high school age, who compete to solve six difficult math problems. They're chosen from a pool of math problems submitted by different countries that participate in the competition. The problems that don't make the cut previously have mostly just been lost; there was no one place you could go to find them.But now a team at MIT's Computer Science and Artificial Intelligence Lab has gathered over 30,000 of those problems together in one dataset so both humans and AI models can look through and study them.Marketplace's Stephanie Hughes spoke with Mark Hamilton, a visiting researcher at MIT CSAIL who has been part of the work to gather problems. He's also a Research Scientist at Google's DeepMind laboratory.
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Guest host Robin Gills talks to Kora DeBeck, Research Scientist with the B.C. Centre on Substance Use and Professor in the School of Public Policy at Simon Fraser University Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices
Industrial growth in Louisiana has been good news for jobs, with the construction, chemical, and petroleum industries all benefitting. We break down the new report with Robert Habins, economist and Research Scientist with the Blanco Public Policy Center at the University of Louisiana Lafayette
Joseph Blackman welcomed Kehinde Ojasanya, a research scientist at the University of Vermont and founder of Keloks Technologies, to the podcast where Kehinde described the three essential layers of capability for a research scientist: technical depth, systems thinking, and translational intelligence. Kehinde discussed the critical shift in public works from a reactive to a regenerative model, specifically focusing on wastewater resource recovery to secure US mineral independence and transform waste into valuable agricultural products like fertilizer and clean irrigation water. Key talking points included Kehinde's career journey across Nigeria, South Africa, and the UK, his personal commitment to eliminating microplastics and PFAS from his home, and his leadership philosophy of leveraging mentorship and "first principles" to solve complex global challenges. Give the show a listen and remember to thank your local Public Works Professionals.
In der neuen Folge von Breach FM starten Max Imbiel und ich mit dem Nachklang zur Delve-Compliance-Affäre. Die Gründer haben sich per Videobotschaft zu Wort gemeldet und die Lage damit eher verschlechtert. Sie nennen den Vorfall eine koordinierte Diffamierung, bieten aber gleichzeitig Re-Audits und mehr manuelle Prüfprozesse an. Für eine reine Schmierkampagne eine aufwendige Reaktion. Y Combinator hat sich still von Delve getrennt, und Elizabeth Holmes bot den Gründern öffentlich Hilfe an.Dann zum nächsten Supply-Chain-Fall: Das NPM-Paket Axios – über 100 Millionen wöchentliche Downloads – wurde über einen gezielten Spearphishing-Angriff auf seinen Maintainer kompromittiert. Angreifer tarnten sich als legitimes Unternehmen, luden ihn zu einem gefälschten Teams-Call ein und installierten dabei Malware. Darüber kamen sie an seine NPM-Credentials und schleusten einen Payload in die nächste Version ein. Sarah Gooding beschreibt parallel, wie die Lazarus-Gruppe dieses Muster systematisch gegen hochwertige Open-Source-Maintainer im Node.js-Universum betreibt.Zur wöchentlichen Microsoft-Corner: ProPublica hat einen tiefen Artikel über die GCC High Government Cloud und ihre FedRAMP-Zulassung veröffentlicht. Das Fazit interner US-Regierungsprüfer: Die Bewertung basierte auf unvollständigen Informationen, weil Microsoft zentrale Sicherheitsfragen schlicht nicht beantworten konnte. Ein Auditor bezeichnete das System als "a pile of shit" – nicht mein Zitat. Passend dazu: Commander Reid Wiseman meldete während der Artemis-II-Mission, er habe zwei Outlook-Instanzen an Bord – und keine funktioniere.Zum Abschluss empfehle ich den Vortrag von Nicholas Carlini, Research Scientist bei Anthropic, auf der [un]prompted-Konferenz. Er zeigt, wie aktuelle LLMs autonom Zero-Days in produktivem Code finden – darunter eine SQL Injection in Ghost CMS nach 90 Minuten und ein Linux-Kernel-Bug, der seit 2003 unentdeckt war. Insgesamt hat das Frontier Red Team über 500 validierte High-Severity-Schwachstellen gefunden. Die Fähigkeiten verdoppeln sich laut Carlini etwa alle vier Monate. Den Vortrag verlinken wir – mit dem transparenten Hinweis, dass Carlini für Anthropic arbeitet.Delve sets the record straight on anonymous attackshttps://delve.co/blog/delve-sets-the-record-straight-on-anonymous-attacksFederal Cyber Experts Thought Microsoft's Cloud Was “a Pile of Shit.” They Approved It Anyway.How Axios was compromisedhttps://x.com/flaviocopes/status/2039973060158095827?s=46Nicholas Carlini - Black-hat LLMs | [un]prompted 2026https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1sd26pWhfmgArtemis II crew experienced issues with Outlook this morninghttps://x.com/latestinspace/status/2039763355162812702?s=46
Why have saltwater intrusions in the Mississippi River been getting worse? We talk to Tulane researchers Ahmad Khalifa, Research Scientist in the Dept. of River-Coastal Science & Engineering at Tulane's School of Science & Engineering, and Ehab Meselhe, Department Chair of River-Coastal Science and Engineering at Tulane's School of Science and Engineering, about what their new study has found.
What is Agentic AI — and what can it actually do for your business? In this episode of the podcast, host Bobby Brill brings together three conversations with the people building Agentic AI at ServiceNow into one 20-minute briefing. Whether you're leading a team, managing a platform, or just trying to understand what your company is investing in - this episode gives you the full picture. ━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━ WHAT WE COVER ━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━ RITA CASTILLO — VP of Design, Platform & AI The clearest explainer of Agentic AI you'll find. Rita walks through the full evolution from scripted automation to agentic systems, what makes agentic different, and how the orchestrator-and-agent hierarchy works at ServiceNow. AMRUTHA RAMESH — Visiting Researcher, ServiceNow Amrutha built Agent Ada — a real AI agent designed to turn enterprise data into actionable insights. She explains how Ada understands your goal, adapts to who's asking, and delivers analysis your team can actually use. ISSAM LARADJI & ANITHA RAGHAVAN — Research Scientist & Product Manager, ServiceNow How do you know if your AI's insights are trustworthy? Issam and Anitha built InsightBench — a benchmark that uses AI to evaluate AI — to answer exactly that question. ━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━ CHAPTERS 0:00 Introduction1:30 What Is Agentic AI? — Rita Castillo, VP of AI Design6:00 How Agents Work as a Team10:30 Meet Agent Ada — Amrutha Ramesh, Visiting Researcher16:00 Can You Trust Your AI? — Issam Laradji & Anitha Raghavan21:30 Wrap-Up ━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━ GUESTS ━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━ Rita Castillo — VP, AI Design at ServiceNow Amrutha Ramesh — Visiting Researcher, ServiceNow Issam Laradji — Research Scientist, ServiceNow Anitha Raghavan — Product Manager, ServiceNow ━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━ LEARN MORE ━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━ ServiceNow Agentic AI: https://www.servicenow.com More episodes: Narrative Analytics with Agent Ada: https://youtu.be/k1P9o2glq90 InsightBench & AgentPoirot: https://youtu.be/0_ikQQ82qAk Understanding Agentic AI with Rita Castillo: https://youtu.be/JyFdcQChYLs ━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━ ABOUT THIS PODCAST ━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━ Hosted by Bobby Brill. ServiceNow INsights podcast explores the people, technology, and ideas shaping the future of work. #AgenticAI #ServiceNow #AIAgents #ArtificialIntelligence #FutureOfWork #EnterpriseAI #DataAnalytics #NowAssist #MachineLearning #PodcastSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
What is Agentic AI — and what can it actually do for your business? In this episode of the podcast, host Bobby Brill brings together three conversations with the people building Agentic AI at ServiceNow into one 20-minute briefing. Whether you're leading a team, managing a platform, or just trying to understand what your company is investing in - this episode gives you the full picture. ━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━ WHAT WE COVER ━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━ RITA CASTILLO — VP of Design, Platform & AI The clearest explainer of Agentic AI you'll find. Rita walks through the full evolution from scripted automation to agentic systems, what makes agentic different, and how the orchestrator-and-agent hierarchy works at ServiceNow. AMRUTHA RAMESH — Visiting Researcher, ServiceNow Amrutha built Agent Ada — a real AI agent designed to turn enterprise data into actionable insights. She explains how Ada understands your goal, adapts to who's asking, and delivers analysis your team can actually use. ISSAM LARADJI & ANITHA RAGHAVAN — Research Scientist & Product Manager, ServiceNow How do you know if your AI's insights are trustworthy? Issam and Anitha built InsightBench — a benchmark that uses AI to evaluate AI — to answer exactly that question. ━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━ CHAPTERS 0:00 Introduction1:30 What Is Agentic AI? — Rita Castillo, VP of AI Design6:00 How Agents Work as a Team10:30 Meet Agent Ada — Amrutha Ramesh, Visiting Researcher16:00 Can You Trust Your AI? — Issam Laradji & Anitha Raghavan21:30 Wrap-Up ━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━ GUESTS ━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━ Rita Castillo — VP, AI Design at ServiceNow Amrutha Ramesh — Visiting Researcher, ServiceNow Issam Laradji — Research Scientist, ServiceNow Anitha Raghavan — Product Manager, ServiceNow ━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━ LEARN MORE ━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━ ServiceNow Agentic AI: https://www.servicenow.com More episodes: Narrative Analytics with Agent Ada: https://youtu.be/k1P9o2glq90 InsightBench & AgentPoirot: https://youtu.be/0_ikQQ82qAk Understanding Agentic AI with Rita Castillo: https://youtu.be/JyFdcQChYLs ━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━ ABOUT THIS PODCAST ━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━ Hosted by Bobby Brill. ServiceNow INsights podcast explores the people, technology, and ideas shaping the future of work. #AgenticAI #ServiceNow #AIAgents #ArtificialIntelligence #FutureOfWork #EnterpriseAI #DataAnalytics #NowAssist #MachineLearning #PodcastSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Experts discuss how AI tools can address challenges in the field of criminal justice and how these tools can be used ethically. Guest Biographies Vivian Elliot is the Director of CNA's Center for Justice Research and Innovation. She is an expert in criminal justice and emergency preparedness. She specializes in law enforcement organizational reform; after-action analysis; training and technical assistance; and exercise planning, facilitation and evaluation. L. Cait Kanewske is a Research Scientist in CNA's Center for Justice Research and Innovation.
Send us Fan MailDr. Melisa Buie is a problem solver, author, and operational excellence leader known for making complex systems work better. Her work spans advanced technologies such as lasers and semiconductor equipment, as well as large-scale global manufacturing and business systems.Melisa's career sits at the intersection of engineering innovation and operational performance. She has held key roles with leading organizations in the semiconductor and photonics industries, including Lam Research, Coherent, Applied Materials, and Advanced Energy. As Global Director for Lean Operational Excellence at Coherent, Inc., a $2B global photonics solutions company, she led initiatives that advanced both engineering performance and enterprise-wide transformation. Earlier in her career, she served as a Member of the Technical Staff and Engineering Manager at Applied Materials and Advanced Energy, and as a Research Scientist with Science Applications International Corporation at the Naval Research Laboratory in Washington, D.C., where she focused on theoretical laser systems.In addition to her industry leadership, Melisa is an author and educator. She wrote Problem Solving for New Engineers: What Every Engineering Manager Wants You to Know in 2017, drawing on her experience bridging industry and academia. She also taught graduate-level courses for nearly a decade at San Jose State University in the Department of Biomedical, Chemical, and Materials Engineering, where she helped develop the next generation of engineering leaders and problem solvers.A Few Quotes From This Episode“If it's safe to fail, then it's safe to learn and grow.” “Experimentation is something that leads to a lot of failure.” “Part of the reason we don't like failing is because of all the emotions that come with it.” “You've got to separate the story you make up about the failure.” Resources Mentioned in This Episode Book: Faceplant: Free Yourself From Failure's Funk by Buie and colleaguesBook: Problem Solving for New Engineers: What Every Engineering Manager Wants You to Know by BuieAbout The International Leadership Association (ILA)The ILA was created in 1999 to bring together professionals interested in studying, practicing, and teaching leadership. About Scott J. AllenWebsiteWeekly Newsletter: Practical Wisdom for LeadersMy Approach to HostingThe views of my guests do not constitute "truth." Nor do they reflect my personal views in some instances. However, they are views to consider, and I hope they help you clarify your perspective. Nothing can ♻️ Please share with others and follow/subscribe to the podcast!⭐️ Please leave a review on Apple, Spotify, or your platform of choice.➡️ Follow me on LinkedIn for more on leadership, communication, and tech.
Mexican cartels are known for their illegal drug smuggling…but illegal red snapper harvesting? Yep, they do that too. We talk with Kesley Banks, Research Scientist at the Harte Research Institute at Texas A&M University-Corpus Christi, about the cartel's fishy activity.
This week Clint speaks with Dr. Shawn McNeil & Dr. Donard. In this conversation they explore the latest research and clinical practices in psychiatry, focusing on schizophrenia, genetic testing, early detection, and the impact of AI on mental health. Dr. Shawn McNeil hosts an Apple podcast, "Addiction Medicine: Beyond the Abstract" Addiction Medicine: Beyond the Abstract - Podcast - Apple Podcasts. A quarterly, interactive addiction journal club was discussed, paired with presentation Dr. McNeil discusses on his podcast. https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/addiction-medicine-beyond-the-abstract/id1806152019 Biography Dr. Shawn McNeil is a physician and researcher at LSU Health Shreveport. He is a Clinical Assistant Professor in the Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Medicine and serves as Program Director of the Psychiatry Residency Program and Director of Neuroinformatics Research. He is a diplomate of the American Board of Psychiatry & Neurology and is board-certified in General Psychiatry and Child & Adolescent Psychiatry. He completed his Psychiatry residency at LSU Health Shreveport and is a recipient of the Resident Recognition Award from the American Psychiatric Association (APA). He also completed his fellowship in Child & Adolescent Psychiatry at LSU Health, serving as chief resident of the program. Clinically, Dr. McNeil practices at Louisiana Behavioral Health where he serves as Chief Medical Officer. He also supervises residents at the Ochsner LSU Health Ambulatory Care Center. His primary research is clinical in nature. He is Principal Investigator on a clinical trial (Apathy in Schizophrenia, Intra-Cellular Therapies, Inc.) at the LSU Health Psychiatry Research Clinic which is investigating the use of Lumateperone on motivation in patients with psychotic disorders. He previously worked on the Blüm Autism Study (sponsored by Curemark) and the Tapestry Autism Study (sponsored by Axial Therapeutics). He is also the Director of Clinical Research for the Louisiana Addiction Research Center. Dr. McNeil serves as President of the Louisiana Psychiatric Medical Association (LPMA). He is on the editorial board of the Journal of Addiction Medicine (JAM) and is host of their podcast "Addiction Medicine: Beyond the Abstract". He is a 2018 recipient of the ASAM's Ruth Fox Memorial Endowment Scholarship. He has also served on the editorial board of the APA's American Journal of Psychiatry Resident's Journal and he has been recognized as a Fellow of the APA. Dr. McNeil was previously a staff physician at the Overton Brooks VA Medical Center and treated veterans in the Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder Clinic. He continues to proudly serve as a Deputy Coroner of Caddo Parish, Louisiana. Donard Dwyer, PhD Professor of Psychiatry and Behavioral Medicine Biography Donard Dwyer received his BS degree in Psychology from Tulane University, a Master's degree in education (MEd) from the University of Rochester and his PhD from the University of Alabama at Birmingham (UAB). In addition, to holding positions as a Research Scientist at the Max-Planck Society laboratories in Würzburg, Germany and Director of Immunology at a Cambridge biotechnology company, Dr. Dwyer has spent 32 years in academic research at UAB and LSU Health Shreveport. He is currently professor of Psychiatry and Pharmacology, Toxicology and Neuroscience at LSU Health Shreveport. In addition, he is Vice-Chair for Research in the Department of Psychiatry. His research interests range broadly from the evolution of protein ligand-receptor interactions, the electronic properties of amino acids and regulation of glucose transport in neurons to behavioral genetics of motivation and movement in C. elegans and the genetic basis for schizophrenia and neuropsychiatric disorders. He is currently focused on the role of insulin signaling pathways in regulation of motivation in “suicidal” worms and characterization of the genetic architecture of schizophrenia with mathematical approaches. Finally, his laboratory is searching for drugs that produce neuroenhancement in cultured neurons as potential treatments for an array of neuropsychiatric conditions. Medical Trial: https://www.lsuhs.edu/departments/school-of-medicine/psychiatry-and-behavioral-medicine/research Chapters 00:00 Introduction to the Podcast and Guests 02:27 Overview of Schizophrenia and Motivation Challenges 04:23 The New Drug Adalumid Teparone and Its Potential 07:50 Understanding Schizophrenia: Causes and Risk Factors 12:04 Genetics of Schizophrenia: Myths and Realities 16:20 Enrolling Patients in Clinical Trials 20:49 Genetic Testing and Personalized Medicine in Psychiatry 25:54 Early Signs of Psychosis in Children 30:50 Supporting Families and Community Resources 40:04 The Role of AI in Future Psychiatry 52:17 AI and the Risks of Artificial Relationships 56:35 Conclusion: Hope and the Future of Mental Health Care
Many farmers assume glyphosate is a reliable tool for weed control with minimal downsides, but Dr. Michael McNeill shows how this herbicide quietly disrupts the very foundation of productive farming—from soil biology to crop health and long-term field resilience. In this eye-opening episode, Dr. McNeill explains the hidden journey of glyphosate through the farm system: how it lingers in manure from treated feed, carries over to contaminate even organic fields, and boosts pathogenic fungi and other disease pressures that hit yields hard. He shares research revealing glyphosate's antibiotic-like effects on soil microbes—shifting the microbial balance, weakening natural disease suppression, and making plants more vulnerable to outbreaks that cost farmers in inputs and lost production. You'll hear about practical, farmer-tested ways to fight back, including using raw sauerkraut juice (loaded with beneficial fermentative microbes like Lactobacillus plantarum) to rapidly break down glyphosate residues in soil and feed crops—potentially slashing contamination by 80-90% in just months and freeing up bound nutrients for better plant uptake. The discussion dives deep into proven regenerative strategies to reclaim fields: strategic cover crops, targeted microbial inoculants, balanced soil nutrition, and other biological practices that naturally crowd out weeds, curb pests and diseases, and rebuild robust soil structure—without leaning on chemicals that create dependency and hidden costs over time. This episode lays bare how over-reliance on glyphosate often leads to nutrient lockups, escalating disease pressure, and rising input needs that eat into profits. But it also delivers real hope: a path to more resilient crops, healthier soils, lower long-term costs, and stronger farm sustainability. Ideal for row-crop farmers, livestock producers, agronomists, and anyone managing land who wants to cut through the noise and explore science-backed ways to reduce chemical dependency while boosting productivity and soil vitality. If you're ready to rethink weed management and invest in farming biologically, this conversation is essential listening. Read the journal article here: https://journals.ashs.org/view/journals/hortsci/59/11/article-p1618.xml About Dr. Michael McNeill: Over the past four decades, Dr. McNeill's focus as an agronomist has been in teaching the agricultural community an understanding of soil and plant nutrition, emphasizing its' importance for animal and human health. His emphasis has been placed on developing farming systems that promote soil and plant health, as well as, conducting on farm research to develop efficient bio-remediation of soil and water contaminated with farm chemicals and fertilizer nutrients. Also, a major focus of his has been to teach farmers methods to evaluate soil health by measuring soil microbial life, water infiltration rates, soil density, soil compaction, soil fertility levels and how to develop corrective measures if problems are discovered. Positions, Scientific Appointments 1983 – Present President of Ag Advisory, Ltd. (an agricultural consulting company) 1971 – 1983 Research Scientist and Manager of a regional corn breeding station located in Algona, Iowa. 1969 – 1971 U.S. Army research pathologist, study of soybean and corn disease epiphytology. 1964 – 1969 Iowa State University, research associate. Contributions to Science: Published papers in the following: Crop Science, Horticulture Science, Egyptian Journal of Genetics, Plant Disease Reporter, Journal of Genetics, Journal of Economic Entomology, Agronomy Journal, Iowa State University Extension Service Bulletins Popular Press articles: Farm Journal, Successful Farming, Farm Industry News, Iowa Farmer Today, Soybean Digest, Furrow
Want to improve the quality of your sleep? Of course you do! Joining us to share what's new with the popular Sleep Cycle app is Emil Carlsson, Research Scientist at Sleep Cycle, based in SwedenJust as smartwatches are popular among adults, kids can also benefit from this technology with affordable watches that gives them freedom and at the same time, they can give parents peace of mind. To learn about the JrTrack 5 Kids Smart Watch, we've got on the show Russell York, a parent, tech entrepreneur, cybersecurity expert, and founder/CEO of CosmoSpeaking of wearables, tech and accessibility go hand in hand. We chat with Mike Świątek, who is blind, about how he leverages Meta's AI-powered smart glasses, both personally and professionallyThank you to Visa, Norton, and SANDISK for your incredible support. Get a huge discount on Norton anti-malware at norton.com/techitout
Everyone knows that a big rock wiped out the dinosaurs. But the danger from an asteroid hitting Earth is not limited to ancient history. To deal with this threat, scientists recently ran an experiment to deflect a potential “city killer.” We'll hear the results of that experiment, and about a visit to another asteroid. In the dusty material NASA brought back from the asteroid Bennu, scientists found the chemical building blocks of life, including many of the amino acids that are found in our cells. Could an asteroid have brought the ingredients for life to ancient Earth? In this episode, we look at our paradoxical relationship with the space rocks that taketh way – and may help giveth - life. Guests: Scott Sandford - Astrophysicist and Research Scientist at NASA's Ames Research Center Robin George Andrews - Science journalist, volcanologist, and author of "How to Kill an Asteroid: The Real Science of Planetary Defense" Descripción en español Featuring music by Dewey Dellay and Jun Miyake Big Picture Science is part of the Airwave Media podcast network. Please contact advertising@airwavemedia.com to inquire about advertising on Big Picture Science. You can get early access to ad-free versions of every episode by joining us on Patreon. Thanks for your support! Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices
Everyone knows that a big rock wiped out the dinosaurs. But the danger from an asteroid hitting Earth is not limited to ancient history. To deal with this threat, scientists recently ran an experiment to deflect a potential “city killer.” We'll hear the results of that experiment, and about a visit to another asteroid. In the dusty material NASA brought back from the asteroid Bennu, scientists found the chemical building blocks of life, including many of the amino acids that are found in our cells. Could an asteroid have brought the ingredients for life to ancient Earth? In this episode, we look at our paradoxical relationship with the space rocks that taketh way – and may help giveth - life. Guests: Scott Sandford - Astrophysicist and Research Scientist at NASA's Ames Research Center Robin George Andrews - Science journalist, volcanologist, and author of "How to Kill an Asteroid: The Real Science of Planetary Defense" Descripción en español Featuring music by Dewey Dellay and Jun Miyake Big Picture Science is part of the Airwave Media podcast network. Please contact advertising@airwavemedia.com to inquire about advertising on Big Picture Science. You can get early access to ad-free versions of every episode by joining us on Patreon. Thanks for your support! Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices
On this episode of the AgNext Podcast, Kim and John are joined by Dr. Juan Vargas a Research Scientist at AgNext. Dr. Vargas discusses two of his recent publications where he measured emissions of animals in both confinement and in grazing systems. About AgNext at Colorado State University: AgNext is a research collaborative at Colorado State University dedicated to advancing the science of sustainable animal agriculture. Founded in 2020, AgNext works across disciplines and departments, leveraging expertise from across the university. Through strong partnerships with producers, industry leaders, and policymakers, AgNext identifies and scales science-based innovations that support animal and ecosystem health, economic viability, and resilient food systems. Learn more at agnext.colostate.edu. Credits: Host(s): Dr. Kim Stackhouse-Lawson and Dr. John Ritten Guest: Dr. Juan VargasProducer: Erica Giesenhagen Artwork: Julia Giesenhagen Music: “Dusting the Broom” by Tony Petersen (via Artlist)
Dr. Nanyamka Redmond joins guest host Ruthi Hanchett as they explore how everyday adults — parents, teachers, coaches, and neighbors — can become a powerful protective factor in young people's lives by building the kinds of relationships that help youth thrive and navigate risk.Chapters(00:00) - (00:00) - Introduction: Why Relationships Matter More Than Programs (01:02) - Meet Dr. Nanyamka Redmond and the Search Institute (02:48) - What Are Developmental Assets — and Why Do They Work? (09:27) - Defining Developmental Relationships: The Five Elements (14:57) - How Caring Adults Can Protect At-Risk Youth (20:11) - Building a Culture of Belonging in Schools and Communities (30:13) - Resilience Is Relational: What Adults Need to Hear Right Now (32:35) - Supporting Youth Leadership Without Getting Out of the Way (00:00) - Chapter 10 Dr. Nanyamka RedmondDr. Nanyamka Redmond is a Research Scientist at the Search Institute, a nationally recognized organization dedicated to advancing research and practical frameworks that help young people thrive. She holds a PhD in Applied Developmental Psychology from Fuller Theological Seminary and a Master's Degree in Clinical Psychology, Marriage and Family Therapy from Azusa Pacific University. Her work focuses on developmental relationships, youth resilience, and advancing equitable, relationship-centered approaches to youth development and wellbeing. Dr. Redmond specializes in translating developmental science into practical tools for educators, families, youth-serving professionals, and community organizations, emphasizing culturally responsive and strengths-based approaches that center young people's lived experiences. She has also served as Director of School Partnership for Character Lab, co-founded by Angela Duckworth, and is a keynote speaker at the Global Center for Women and Justice's Ensure Justice Conference.Key PointsAn anti-trafficking program can teach warning signs, but it cannot replace a caring adult — if a young person doesn't feel seen, safe, and valued, information alone won't protect them.The Search Institute's 40 Developmental Assets framework identifies a combination of internal strengths and external supports that young people need to thrive, and research consistently shows that the more assets a young person has, the better their outcomes.Developmental relationships go beyond good relationships — they are defined by five specific elements (express care, challenge growth, provide support, share power, and expand possibilities) that research has shown to directly impact positive youth outcomes and reduce risk.For youth who have experienced trauma, relationships have often been transactional or harmful, so the experience of someone who cares without strings attached can be surprising — which is why consistency and small, repeated moments of connection matter more than grand gestures.Belonging is not just a buzzword — when adults work to help every young person feel genuinely seen and valued in the spaces meant for them, it builds the sense of dignity that serves as a foundation for resilience.Sharing power with young people doesn't mean abandoning guidance; it means entering those relationships with a frame that sees adolescence as an age of opportunity rather than a period of storm and stress.Resilience is relational — it is not something young people build alone, but something that grows when multiple caring adults across their ecosystem show up consistently over time.Adults who want to support youth leadership can start with incremental steps: invite young people to co-create the questions, let them lead the conversation, and hold the barriers gently without squashing the vision.ResourcesSearch InstituteThe 40 Developmental Assets FrameworkGlobal Center for Women and JusticeEnding Human Trafficking PodcastAge of Opportunity: Lessons from the New Science of Adolescence by Laurence Steinberg
Recorded live at the Transportation Research Board Annual Meeting, this special episode of Transit Unplugged tackles a big question: Does research actually improve public transportation?Host Paul Comfort is joined by three leaders who are turning studies into real-world results:Art Guzzetti, Vice President, Policy, American Public Transportation Association (APTA)Kate Ko, PhD, Vice President, WSPMichael Walk, Research Scientist, Texas A&M Transportation InstituteTogether they break down how the Transit Cooperative Research Program (TCRP) moves ideas from problem statements to implementation — and why agencies that use research make faster, smarter, and more rider-focused decisions.You'll hear:The Baltimore bus network redesign that started with a research projectHow automation will reshape — not eliminate — the transit workforceNew funding tools like value capture and congestion pricingThe link between operator culture, health, and retentionWhy accessibility, safety, and customer experience are driving the next wave of studiesThis is a behind-the-scenes look at the evidence, data, and collaboration that quietly power better transit for millions of riders.If you work in transit and aren't using this research — you're leaving solutions on the table.CreditsHost and Producer: Paul ComfortExecutive Producer: Julie GatesProducer: Chris O'KeeffeEditor: Patrick EmileAssociate Producer: Cyndi RaskinTransit Unplugged is brought to you by Modaxo — passionate about moving the world's people.Disclaimer: The views and opinions expressed in this program are those of the guests, and do not necessarily reflect the views or positions of Modaxo Inc., its affiliates or subsidiaries, or any entities they represent (“Modaxo”). This production belongs to Modaxo, and may contain information that may be subject to trademark, copyright, or other intellectual property rights and restrictions. This production provides general information, and should not be relied on as legal advice or opinion. Modaxo specifically disclaims all warranties, express or implied, and will not be liable for any losses, claims, or damages arising from the use of this presentation, from any material contained in it, or from any action or decision taken in response to it.
What if concrete could store energy that turned buildings, roads, and infrastructure into massive power banks? In this episode, we're joined by Damian Stefaniuk, Research Scientist at MIT's Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, the Concrete Sustainability Hub (CSHub), and the Electron-Conductive Cement-based Materials Hub (EC³ Hub). Damian's research explores how concrete can be engineered to conduct electricity and store energy at up to 10x the capacity of traditional materials — while simultaneously reducing the carbon footprint of cement production… Damian is a structural and materials engineering scientist who specializes in the development of sustainable construction materials and structures. His research focuses on science-enabled engineering of cement-based materials, with applications ranging from corrosion-resistant prestressed bridges and carbon-storing pre-cure carbonation to electron-conductive carbon concrete for renewable energy storage. Dive in now to discover: How concrete can be made into a conductive material. Carbon-based conductive cement and nanomaterials. Infrastructure's role in clean energy and emissions reduction. You can follow along with Damian and his work here!
In this conversation, we explore the foundations of artificial intelligence with Ellie Pavlick, Assistant Professor of Computer Science at Brown University, a Research Scientist at Google Deepmind, and Director of ARIA, an NSF-funded institute examining AI's role in mental health support. Ellie's trajectory—from undergraduate degrees in economics and saxophone performance to pioneering research at the intersection of AI and cognitive science—reflects the kind of interdisciplinary thinking increasingly essential for understanding what these systems are and what they mean for us.Ellie represents a generation of researchers grappling with what she calls a "paradigm shift" in how we understand both artificial and human intelligence. Her work challenges long-held assumptions in cognitive science while refusing to accept easy answers about what AI systems can or cannot do. As she observes, we're witnessing concepts like "intelligence," "meaning," and "understanding" undergo the kind of radical redefinition that historically accompanies major scientific revolutions—where old terms become relics of earlier theories or get repurposed to mean something fundamentally different.Key themes we explore:- The Grounding Question: How Ellie's thinking evolved from believing AI fundamentally lacked meaning without embodied sensory experience to recognizing that grounding itself is a more complex and empirically testable question than either side of the debate typically acknowledges- Symbols Without Symbolism: Her recent collaborative work with Tom Griffiths, Brenden Lake, and others demonstrating that large language models exhibit capabilities previously thought to require explicit symbolic architectures—challenging decades of cognitive science orthodoxy about human cognition- The Measurability Problem: Why AI's apparent success on standardized tests reveals more about the inadequacy of our metrics than the adequacy of the systems, and how education, hiring, and relationships have always resisted quantification in ways we conveniently forget when evaluating AI- Intelligence as Moving Target: Ellie's argument that "intelligence" functions as a placeholder term for "the thing we don't yet understand"—always retreating as scientific progress advances, much like obsolete scientific concepts such as ether- The Value Frontier: Why the aspects of human experience that resist quantification may be definitionally human—not because they're inherently unmeasurable, but because they represent whatever currently sits beyond our measurement capabilities- Mental Health as Hard Problem: Why her new institute focuses on arguably the most challenging application domain for AI, where getting memory, co-adaptation, transparency, and long-term human impact right isn't optional but essentialEllie consistently pushes back against premature conclusions—whether it's claims that AI definitively lacks meaning or assertions that passing standardized tests proves human-level capability. Her approach emphasizes asking "are these processes similar or different?" rather than making sweeping judgments about whether systems "really" understand or "truly" have intelligence. As Ellie notes, we're at the "tip of the iceberg" in understanding these systems—we haven't yet pushed them to their breaking point or discovered their full potential.Her work on ARIA demonstrates this philosophy in practice. Rather than avoiding mental health applications because they're ethically fraught, she's leaning into the difficulty precisely because it forces confrontation with all the hard questions—from how memory works to how repeated human-AI interaction fundamentally changes both parties over time. It's research that refuses to wait a generation to see if we've "screwed up a whole generation."
In this episode of Two Bees in a Podcast, Amy Vu and Dr. Jamie Ellis are joined by Dr. Beatrice Nganso, a Research Scientist in commercial insects at the International Center of Insect Physiology & Ecology in Nairobi, Kenya to discuss her research on honey bee colony losses in Sub-Saharan Africa. This episode ends with a Q&A segment. Check out our website: www.ufhoneybee.com for additional resources from today's episode.
Bryan Reimer, Ph.D., is a Research Scientist in the MIT Center for Transportation and Logistics and co-author of the book "How to Make AI Useful: Moving Beyond the Hype to Real Progress in Business, Society and Life." Bryan discusses AI's current trajectory, its impact on transportation, jobs, creativity, and other areas of life. He discusses how to harness AI as a useful tool to fully realise AI's potential in a safe manner.
AI reasoning models don't just give answers — they plan, deliberate, and sometimes try to cheat.In this episode of The Neuron, we're joined by Bowen Baker, Research Scientist at OpenAI, to explore whether we can monitor AI reasoning before things go wrong — and why that transparency may not last forever.Bowen walks us through real examples of AI reward hacking, explains why monitoring chain-of-thought is often more effective than checking outputs, and introduces the idea of a “monitorability tax” — trading raw performance for safety and transparency.We also cover:Why smaller models thinking longer can be safer than bigger modelsHow AI systems learn to hide misbehaviorWhy suppressing “bad thoughts” can backfireThe limits of chain-of-thought monitoringBowen's personal view on open-source AI and safety risksIf you care about how AI actually works — and what could go wrong — this conversation is essential.Resources: Title URLEvaluating chain-of-thought monitorability | OpenAI https://openai.com/index/evaluating-chain-of-thought-monitorability/Understanding neural networks through sparse circuits | OpenAI https://openai.com/index/understanding-neural-networks-through-sparse-circuits/OpenAI's alignment blog: https://alignment.openai.com/
Will AGI happen soon - or are we running into a wall?In this episode, I'm joined by Tim Dettmers (Assistant Professor at CMU; Research Scientist at the Allen Institute for AI) and Dan Fu (Assistant Professor at UC San Diego; VP of Kernels at Together AI) to unpack two opposing frameworks from their essays: “Why AGI Will Not Happen” versus “Yes, AGI Will Happen.” Tim argues progress is constrained by physical realities like memory movement and the von Neumann bottleneck; Dan argues we're still leaving massive performance on the table through utilization, kernels, and systems—and that today's models are lagging indicators of the newest hardware and clusters.Then we get practical: agents and the “software singularity.” Dan says agents have already crossed a threshold even for “final boss” work like writing GPU kernels. Tim's message is blunt: use agents or be left behind. Both emphasize that the leverage comes from how you use them—Dan compares it to managing interns: clear context, task decomposition, and domain judgment, not blind trust.We close with what to watch in 2026: hardware diversification, the shift toward efficient, specialized small models, and architecture evolution beyond classic Transformers—including state-space approaches already showing up in real systems.Sources:Why AGI Will Not Happen - https://timdettmers.com/2025/12/10/why-agi-will-not-happen/Use Agents or Be Left Behind? A Personal Guide to Automating Your Own Work - https://timdettmers.com/2026/01/13/use-agents-or-be-left-behind/Yes, AGI Can Happen – A Computational Perspective - https://danfu.org/notes/agi/The Allen Institute for Artificial IntelligenceWebsite - https://allenai.orgX/Twitter - https://x.com/allen_aiTogether AIWebsite - https://www.together.aiX/Twitter - https://x.com/togethercomputeTim DettmersBlog - https://timdettmers.comLinkedIn - https://www.linkedin.com/in/timdettmers/X/Twitter - https://x.com/Tim_DettmersDan FuBlog - https://danfu.orgLinkedIn - https://www.linkedin.com/in/danfu09/X/Twitter - https://x.com/realDanFuFIRSTMARKWebsite - https://firstmark.comX/Twitter - https://twitter.com/FirstMarkCapMatt Turck (Managing Director)Blog - https://mattturck.comLinkedIn - https://www.linkedin.com/in/turck/X/Twitter - https://twitter.com/mattturck(00:00) - Intro(01:06) – Two essays, two frameworks on AGI(01:34) – Tim's background: quantization, QLoRA, efficient deep learning(02:25) – Dan's background: FlashAttention, kernels, alternative architectures(03:38) – Defining AGI: what does it mean in practice?(08:20) – Tim's case: computation is physical, diminishing returns, memory movement(11:29) – “GPUs won't improve meaningfully”: the core claim and why(16:16) – Dan's response: utilization headroom (MFU) + “models are lagging indicators”(22:50) – Pre-training vs post-training (and why product feedback matters)(25:30) – Convergence: usefulness + diffusion (where impact actually comes from)(29:50) – Multi-hardware future: NVIDIA, AMD, TPUs, Cerebras, inference chips(32:16) – Agents: did the “switch flip” yet?(33:19) – Dan: agents crossed the threshold (kernels as the “final boss”)(34:51) – Tim: “use agents or be left behind” + beyond coding(36:58) – “90% of code and text should be written by agents” (how to do it responsibly)(39:11) – Practical automation for non-coders: what to build and how to start(43:52) – Dan: managing agents like junior teammates (tools, guardrails, leverage)(48:14) – Education and training: learning in an agent world(52:44) – What Tim is building next (open-source coding agent; private repo specialization)(54:44) – What Dan is building next (inference efficiency, cost, performance)(55:58) – Mega-kernels + Together Atlas (speculative decoding + adaptive speedups)(58:19) – Predictions for 2026: small models, open-source, hardware, modalities(1:02:02) – Beyond transformers: state-space and architecture diversity(1:03:34) – Wrap
Automotive manufacturing leaders have no shortage of data, but only those who turn it into action are winning, and AI is the accelerator.In this milestone episode, Jan Griffiths is joined by Sanjay Brahmawar, CEO of QAD, and Dr. Bryan Reimer, MIT Research Scientist and author of How to Make AI Useful, for a grounded conversation about how AI is creating real advantage in automotive manufacturing.The challenge facing automotive manufacturing leaders is not visibility. Leaders know where problems exist. The issue is that action often stalls between insight and execution. Dashboards explain what happened. They do not decide what happens next.Sanjay and Bryan draw a clear distinction between systems of record and systems of action. Systems of record observe. Systems of action decide, execute, and learn. Agentic AI belongs in the second category. It creates value when it removes friction from work, accelerates routine decisions, and gives people better context at the moment action is required.Frontline teams in automotive manufacturing do not resist AI. They adopt it when it respects their expertise and helps them do their jobs better. Adoption follows usefulness, not mandates. When AI amplifies human judgment instead of supervising it, execution speed improves and results follow.This episode challenges automotive manufacturing leaders to stop treating AI as a reporting layer and start using it as an execution engine. The organizations pulling ahead are not waiting for perfect conditions. They are starting small, learning fast, and letting action build confidence.Themes Discussed in this episode:Why data visibility alone does not drive performance in automotive manufacturingSystems of record vs systems of actionHow AI removes friction from automotive manufacturing operationsFrontline-first AI adoption in plantsAgentic AI as an execution multiplierLeadership ownership of decisionsBuilding momentum with 60 to 90-day winsFeatured Guests: Name: Sanjay BrahmawarTitle: CEO of QAD About: Sanjay Brahmawar is the CEO of QAD, a cloud software company delivering cloud-based solutions for manufacturers and global supply chains. With more than two decades of experience leading global technology businesses, he brings deep expertise in digital transformation, AI, IoT, and data-driven platforms, built through senior leadership roles at IBM and Software AG.Connect: LinkedInName: Dr. Bryan ReimerAbout: Dr. Bryan Reimer is a Research Scientist at the MIT Center for Transportation & Logistics and a key member of the MIT AgeLab. He is also the author of How to Make AI Useful: Moving beyond the hype to real progress in business, society and life. His work focuses on how...
In this episode of ACM ByteCast, Rashmi Mohan hosts 2024 ACM A.M. Turing Andrew laureates Andrew Barto and Richard Sutton. They received the Turing Award for developing the conceptual and algorithmic foundations of reinforcement learning, a computational framework that underpins modern AI systems such as AlphaGo and ChatGPT. Barto is Professor Emeritus in the Department of Information and Computer Sciences at the University of Massachusetts, Amherst. His honors include the UMass Neurosciences Lifetime Achievement Award, the IJCAI Award for Research Excellence, and the IEEE Neural Network Society Pioneer Award. He is a Fellow of IEEE and AAAS. Sutton is a Professor in Computing Science at the University of Alberta, a Research Scientist at Keen Technologies (an artificial general intelligence company) and Chief Scientific Advisor of the Alberta Machine Intelligence Institute (Amii). In the past he was a Distinguished Research Scientist at Deep Mind and served as a Principal Technical Staff Member in the AI Department at the AT&T Shannon Laboratory. His honors include the IJCAI Research Excellence Award, a Lifetime Achievement Award from the Canadian Artificial Intelligence Association, and an Outstanding Achievement in Research Award from the University of Massachusetts at Amherst. Sutton is a Fellow of the Royal Society of London, AAAI, and the Royal Society of Canada. In the interview, Andrew and Richard reflect on their long collaboration together and the personal and intellectual paths that led both researchers into CS and reinforcement learning (RL), a field that was once largely neglected. They touch on interdisciplinary explorations across psychology (animal learning), control theory, operations research, cybernetics, and how these inspired their computational models. They also explain some of their key contributions to RL, such as temporal difference (TD) learning and how their ideas were validated biologically with observations of dopamine neurons. Barto and Sutton trace their early research to later systems such as TD-Gammon, Q-learning, and AlphaGo and consider the broader relationship between humans and reinforcement learning-based AI, and how theoretical explorations have evolved into impactful applications in games, robotics, and beyond.
Microplastics, small, micro-sized plastic fragments are showing up in our water sources, rain, drinking water, and beverages like beer. It is in food, salt, and seafood. Moreover, it has recently been found in human breast milk, placentas, human lungs, and blood. One report indicated that blue whales are consuming 10 million pieces of microplastic particles a day. As plastic fragments, it continues to shed fibers smaller than a strand of human hair. Most of the time we are unaware how and when this happens. Did you know, when you open a plastic cap on a bottle, you release thousands of particles. But then there is also our clothing, roads, artificial turf, food packaging, tea bags, or plastic that comes in contact with friction, hot liquid, or hot food. Dr. Scott Coffin [https://scottcoff.in/] joined us in this encore presentation from 2022. As a toxicologist and Research Scientist at California State Water Resources Control Board, he has been studying plastic since 2014. He speaks about how microplastics are entering our environment, what solutions are being put in place to assess risk and implement precautionary solutions, and how we might limit our own exposure. For the extended discussion with Dr, Coffin, click here: www.patreon.com/posts/more-on-and-with-74660652 Dr. Scott Coffin [https://scottcoff.in/] is a research scientist and subject-matter expert for microplastics at the California State Water Resources Control Board, where he leads the agency's efforts to monitor and manage microplastics pollution in drinking water and the environment. Dr. Coffin holds a PhD in environmental toxicology from the University of California, Riverside. Jessica Aldridge, Co-Host and Producer of EcoJustice Radio, is an environmental educator, community organizer, and 15-year waste industry leader. She is a co-founder of SoCal 350, organizer for ReusableLA, and founded Adventures in Waste. She is a former professor of Recycling and Resource Management at Santa Monica College, and an award recipient of the international 2021 Women in Sustainability Leadership and the 2016 inaugural Waste360, 40 Under 40. More Info: https://www.sccwrp.org/about/research-areas/additional-research-areas/trash-pollution/microplastics-health-effects-webinar-series/history-california-microplastics-legislation/ https://www.plastiverse.org/ https://www.springeropen.com/collections/sccwrp Related Show: The EcoJustice Radio Plastic Plague Series: https://wilderutopia.com/ecojustice-radio/the-future-solutions-policy-resistance-around-plastic-plastic-plague-pt-7/ Podcast Website: http://ecojusticeradio.org/ Podcast Blog: https://wilderutopia.com/ecojustice-radio/microplastics-are-everywhere-whats-the-risk/ Support the Podcast: Patreon https://www.patreon.com/ecojusticeradio PayPal https://www.paypal.com/donate/?hosted_button_id=LBGXTRM292TFC&source=url Guest: Dr. Scott Coffin Executive Producer: Jack Eidt Host and Producer: Jessica Aldridge Engineer and Original Music: Blake Quake Beats
Skunks can stink, no doubt about it. But that stink is actually a superpower! Join Molly and co-host Diya as they find out how these critters use their smell to scare away enemies, what the smell is made of, and how to make your own de-skunking potion. Plus, Wombat Pete drops by to promote his new music festival, we speak to some skunk experts, and we try our best to guess a new Mystery Sound. Don't forget the de-skunking potion mnemonic: 4 Cats Had Problems Queen Coughed Beside Suzie's Tenth Lasagna, Don't Sneeze Translation: 4 Cups hydrogen peroxide Quarter Cup baking soda Teaspoon Liquid Dish Soap Guest: Marie Tosa, Research Scientist with the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. Guest: Ted Stankowich, Professor in the Department of Biological Sciences and CSU Long Beach. Want to support Brains On and all of the shows in the Brains On Universe? Sign up for Smarty Pass. You'll get ad-free episodes of all our shows, bonus content, virtual hangouts, discounts on merch and more! Click here for a transcript of this episode.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
You interact with about two-thirds of the elements of the periodic table every day. Some, like carbon, oxygen, and nitrogen, make up our bodies and the air we breathe. Yet there is also a class of elements so unstable they can only be made in a lab. These superheavy elements are the purview of a small group stretching the boundaries of chemistry. Can they extend the periodic table beyond the 118 in it now? Find out scientists are using particle accelerators to create element 120 and why they've skipped over element 119. Plus, if an element exists for only a fraction of a second in the lab, can we still say that counts as existing? Guests: Mark Miodownik – professor of materials and society at the University of College London and the author of “It's a Gas: The Sublime and Elusive Elements That Expand Our World.” Kit Chapman – Science historian at Falmouth University, author of “Superheavy; Making and Breaking the Periodic Table.” Jennifer Pore – Research Scientist of Heavy Elements at Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory. Featuring music by Dewey Dellay and Jun Miyake Big Picture Science is part of the Airwave Media podcast network. Please contact advertising@airwavemedia.com to inquire about advertising on Big Picture Science. You can get early access to ad-free versions of every episode by joining us on Patreon. Thanks for your support! Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices
In this episode of the AgNext Podcast, Kim and Pedro welcome Dr. Bianca da Costa, a Research Scientist at AgNext. Dr. da Costa specializes in dairy sustainability and works closely with Dr. Diego Manriquez. Tune in to hear her share her professional background, discuss her current research, and highlight the Dairy Science Club she co-founded with Dr. Manriquez to support student engagement in dairy science.About AgNextAgNext is at the forefront of research in animal and ecosystem health, dedicated to enhancing the profitability of the supply chain. Serving as a crossroads for producers, industry partners, and researchers, AgNext drives innovation in sustainable animal agriculture. Our research focuses on advancing the science of animal agriculture to ensure a safe, secure, and nutritious food supply. Our mission is to identify and scale innovations that foster animal and ecosystem health, promoting profitable industries that support vibrant communities. Learn more at agnext.colostate.edu. Music Credit, Producer, and Artwork Song: Tony Petersen - Dusting the Broom (downloaded from Artlist)Producer: Erica GiesenhagenArtwork: Julia Giesenhagen
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.
For this episode, we were joined by Scott Spillias, who is a Research Scientist at CSIRO and affiliated with the Centre for Marine Socioecology at the University of Tasmania, and Beth Fulton, who is Chief Research Scientist with CSIRO and the Deputy Director of the Center for Marine Socioecology. We spoke about their recent BioScience article "The Future of Artificial Intelligence in Ecosystem Modeling."
Register NOW for the UHY 2026 Annual Automotive Supplier Outlook - click hereSometimes a conversation hits so deeply that it demands a part two , and that's exactly what happened after our episode with MIT's Dr. Bryan Reimer. The response was immediate, and the very first message came from CADIA CEO Cheryl Thompson, who had been quietly diving deep into AI for months. Her reaction captured what so many leaders are feeling right now: excitement, overwhelm, fear, and possibility all at once.This episode brings Cheryl and Bryan together to talk about what AI is really doing inside companies — not the hype, but the human impact. The emotional truth? AI is forcing us to look hard at our culture, our trust levels, and our willingness to unlearn the habits that hold us back. That's where transformation starts.Cheryl shares how AI has changed the way she works, creates, leads, and even manages her daily life. But she's honest about the trap many leaders fall into: using AI to produce more… instead of stepping back to breathe, think, and lead. Bryan brings the research lens, grounding the conversation in what AI can do, what it can't, and how leaders must shift from delegation to collaboration if they want AI to be truly useful.Together they unpack psychological safety, generational differences, the rise of agentic AI, and the cultural tension AI exposes inside legacy automotive. And they remind us that AI will not replace leaders — but leaders who use AI well will absolutely outpace those who don't.This isn't a conversation about technology. It's a conversation about courage, trust, and the future of leadership in an industry that desperately needs to move faster while staying true to its values.Themes Discussed in This EpisodeHow trust and culture determine whether AI succeeds or stallsWhy leaders must collaborate with AI instead of delegating blindlyWhat the Wow, Whoa, Grow framework reveals about human behaviorHow generational differences shape AI adoption and comfort levelsWhy AI in automotive demands unlearning old processes, not just adding toolsThe risk of locking down AI too tightly — and the risk of letting it run wildHow small businesses and startups are using AI to outrun traditional OEMsWatch the Full Video on YouTube - click hereThis episode is sponsored by Lockton, click here to learn more Featured GuestsCheryl Thompson, CEO, CADIACheryl leads the CADIA: Culture Evolved, where she equips organizations to build equitable, high-performing cultures. A former manufacturing engineering leader in the automotive industry, Cheryl is known for her human-centered approach to leadership, her commitment to psychological safety, and her skillful integration of AI into learning and development. She helps teams work smarter, remove friction, and accelerate change by pairing technology with deep emotional awareness.Dr. Bryan Reimer, Research Scientist, MITDr. Bryan Reimer is a Research Scientist at the MIT Center for Transportation & Logistics and a founding member of the MIT AgeLab. His work examines how humans and automation interact in real-world conditions, including driving, attention, decision-making, and safety. He leads three major academic–industry consortia focused on
Join us for a deep dive into all things gut health with Christina Beer, Sr. Research Scientist, and Lisa Barnes, VP of R&D and Regulatory. In this episode, they break down why your gut plays such a pivotal role in overall wellness, what throws it out of balance, and the simple steps you can take to keep it functioning at its best. *This statement has not been evaluated by the Food and Drug Administration. This product is not intended to diagnose, treat, cure, or prevent any disease.
We dive into the latest paper from Google and a team of academic researchers: "TUMIX: Multi-Agent Test-Time Scaling with Tool-Use Mixture."Hear from one of the paper's authors — Yongchao Chen, Research Scientist — walks through the research and its implications. The paper proposes Tool-Use Mixture (TUMIX), an ensemble framework that runs multiple agents in parallel, each employing distinct tool-use strategies and answer paths. Agents in TUMIX iteratively share and refine responses based on the question and previous answers. In experiments, TUMIX achieves significant gains over state-of-the-art tool-augmented and test-time scaling methods.Learn more about AI observability and evaluation, join the Arize AI Slack community or get the latest on LinkedIn and X.
Send us a textJoin us as we explore the fascinating topographies that play a crucial role in enhancing myopia management success.Randy Kojima, with years of experience and a wealth of knowledge, guides us through the intricate landscapes of myopia management strategies. From innovative technologies to strategic interventions, we uncover the topographical nuances that can make a significant impact on effectively managing myopia.Discover the latest advancements in myopia research and gain valuable insights into the importance of personalized approaches. Randy shares real-world case studies and success stories, shedding light on how topographies have transformed the landscape of myopia management for both practitioners and patients alike.Whether you're a seasoned optometrist, a curious researcher, or someone affected by myopia, this episode provides a comprehensive exploration of the tools and techniques that contribute to successful myopia management outcomes.Tune in as we navigate through the multifaceted terrains of myopia management with Randy Kojima, unraveling the complexities and discovering the topographical keys to achieving success in the field. Don't miss this insightful conversation on The Myopia Podcast!About Randy Kojima:Randy Kojima is the Clinical Research and Development Director for Precision Technology based in Vancouver, Canada. He also serves as Research Scientist and Clinical Instructor at the Pacific University College of Optometry in Forest Grove, Oregon. Additionally, he is a clinical advisor to Medmont Instruments in Melbourne, Australia.Randy has published numerous articles and submitted posters on various contact lens related topics as well as been a contributing author in a number of text book chapters. He lectures globally and enjoys sharing insights, methods and research with eye care colleagues from around the world.Randy is a Fellow of the American Academy of Optometry, the British Contact Lens Association, the Scleral Lens Education Society and the International Academy of Orthokeratology.Review for Myopia Management: https://reviewofmm.com/------If you're considering or have ever considered getting a virtual team member for your practice check out hiredteem.com, mention The Myopia Podcast when signing up for a $250 dollar discount off of your first month's teem member.https://hireteem.com/myopia-podcast/
Danijar Hafner was a Research Scientist at Google DeepMind until recently.Featured References Training Agents Inside of Scalable World Models [ blog ] Danijar Hafner, Wilson Yan, Timothy LillicrapOne Step Diffusion via Shortcut ModelsKevin Frans, Danijar Hafner, Sergey Levine, Pieter AbbeelAction and Perception as Divergence Minimization [ blog ] Danijar Hafner, Pedro A. Ortega, Jimmy Ba, Thomas Parr, Karl Friston, Nicolas Heess Additional References Mastering Diverse Domains through World Models [ blog ] DreaverV3l Danijar Hafner, Jurgis Pasukonis, Jimmy Ba, Timothy Lillicrap Mastering Atari with Discrete World Models [ blog ] DreaverV2 ; Danijar Hafner, Timothy Lillicrap, Mohammad Norouzi, Jimmy Ba Dream to Control: Learning Behaviors by Latent Imagination [ blog ] Dreamer ; Danijar Hafner, Timothy Lillicrap, Jimmy Ba, Mohammad Norouzi Video PreTraining (VPT): Learning to Act by Watching Unlabeled Online Videos [ Blog Post ], Baker et al
Zoe Harcombe didn't set out to become a controversial figure in nutrition science. With a background working inside both Mars candy company and pharmaceutical giant GlaxoSmithKline, she witnessed firsthand how corporate interests shape public health messages. But when she decided to pursue her PhD, what she discovered about the origins of our dietary guidelines shocked even her.In this revealing conversation with Dr. Philip Ovadia, Harcombe breaks down her groundbreaking research showing that America's low-fat dietary guidelines - the foundation for nutritional advice affecting hundreds of millions of people - were based on just six randomized controlled trials involving fewer than 2,500 exclusively sick men. No women. No healthy people. Yet these became the blueprint for what we're told to eat.Harcombe traces how Senator George McGovern's 1977 committee, influenced by his recent experience at a Pritikin bootcamp, essentially ignored the available scientific evidence and pushed through recommendations that had no solid research foundation. The ripple effects created our modern processed food epidemic and contributed to skyrocketing rates of obesity, diabetes, and metabolic dysfunction.But this isn't just about diet. Harcombe also shares her five-year legal battle against a major UK newspaper that attempted to silence her criticisms of statin research through personal attacks rather than scientific debate. Her victory in court has implications for free speech in scientific discourse and establishes important precedents for researchers challenging medical orthodoxy.From her unique insider perspective having worked at the highest levels of both big food and big pharma, Harcombe offers an unflinching look at how corporate interests have hijacked public health policy. She explains why the Mediterranean diet isn't what Harvard researchers claim it is, why an apple affects your body similarly to a candy bar, and why real change has to come from individuals taking control of their own health rather than waiting for institutions to reform themselves.This conversation cuts through decades of nutritional mythology to reveal the uncomfortable trSend Dr. Ovadia a Text Message. (If you want a response, you must include your contact information.) Dr. Ovadia cannot respond here. To contact his team, please send an email to team@ifixhearts.com Like what you hear? Head over to IFixHearts.com/book to grab a copy of my book, Stay Off My Operating Table. Ready to go deeper? Talk to someone from my team at IFixHearts.com/talk.Stay Off My Operating Table on X: Dr. Ovadia: @iFixHearts Jack Heald: @JackHeald5 Learn more: Stay Off My Operating Table on Amazon Take Dr. Ovadia's metabolic health quiz: iFixHearts Dr. Ovadia's website: Ovadia Heart Health Jack Heald's website: CultYourBrand.com Theme Song : Rage AgainstWritten & Performed by Logan Gritton & Colin Gailey(c) 2016 Mercury Retro RecordingsAny use of this intellectual property for text and data mining or computational analysis including as training material for artificial intelligence systems is strictly prohibited without express written consent from Dr. Philip Ovadia.
Dr. Kristol Stenstrom was raised in Central Kansas. She did her undergraduate and veterinary studies at Kansas State University, graduating with her DVM in 1994.After graduation, she moved to Kansas City and did relief work before working as a Research Scientist in companion animal clinical trials.Looking to make a change, she earned her certification in Veterinary Medical Acupuncture in 2003 and started a house call acupuncture practice. She also became a teaching assistant in the Veterinary Medical Acupuncture program.She currently has both a mobile and in clinic acupuncture practice and is a teacher in a different veterinary acupuncture program. She and her veterinarian husband also own a four doctor small animal allopathic practice.Please enjoy this conversation with Dr. Kristol Stenstrom as we discuss her education, research career, pivot into veterinary acupuncture, and her current practice.
Researcher Sarah King joins us to discuss her fascinating work feral horses and donkeys and how they differ. Glenn and Auditor Nicola finally watched “Princess Bride” and gave their review. Plus, some Realli BAD Adz, listen in…HORSES IN THE MORNING Episode 3764 – Show Notes and Links:Hosts: Jamie Jennings of Flyover Farm and Glenn the GeekTitle Sponsor: Kentucky Performance ProductsGuest: Sarah R. B. King, Ph.D., KPA CTP, Research Scientist and Joint Faculty, Colorado State University and Co-chair, IUCN/SSC Equid Specialist GroupLink: Sarah King's Papers on Feral Horses and DonkeysGuest: Auditor NicolaAdditional support for this podcast provided by: Care Credit, Equine Network and Listeners Like YouTime Stamps:09:20 - Daily Whinnies16:20 - Dr. Sarah King34:00 -Nicola and Glenn on Princess Bride49:45 - Realli BAD Adz
© 2020-2026 Ivy Podcast Discovery LLC
