Podcasts about science based medicine

In this episode of Ditch the Lab Coat, Dr. Mark Bonta is joined by Dr. Robert C. Smith, University Distinguished Professor Emeritus of Medicine and Psychiatry at Michigan State University, to tackle one of modern healthcare's biggest blind spots: mental health care in the medical system.Dr. Smith—renowned educator, author, and advocate—pulls back the curtain on how, despite mental health problems being the most common health condition seen in practice, most doctors are dangerously undertrained to diagnose or treat them. He explains that medicine's longstanding “mind-body split” traces back centuries, shaping medical education, health systems, and even our billing codes to treat mental and physical health as separate entities. The result? Nearly 75% of mental health care is provided in primary care settings by clinicians who received only about 2% of their training in mental health.The conversation is both a critique and a call to action. Dr. Smith advocates for a revolution in medical education—a new “Flexner Report”—to fully integrate mental health teaching and the biopsychosocial model at every level of training. He shares lessons from history, the cultural and structural forces behind the mind-body divide, and practical examples from the clinic—like why lifestyle factors and trauma histories are so often ignored.Dr. Bonta and Dr. Smith also offer practical advice for both clinicians and patients: how to advocate for better care, what questions to ask, and the importance of seeing patients as whole people rather than a sum of body parts or checklists.If you've ever felt that your mental health concerns weren't taken seriously, or if you're a healthcare provider frustrated by a broken system, this episode offers both context and hope—a blueprint for creating a healthcare system that truly sees and treats the whole person.Episode HighlightsBiopsychosocial Model's Limits : Treating biological, psychological, and social factors as separate fails patients; true integration is essential for holistic care.Insufficient Mental Health Training : Most doctors get minimal mental health education, despite facing these issues daily in primary care settings.Systemic Checkboxes Over People: Medical culture prioritizes checklists and protocols, often neglecting patients' real experiences and interconnected life factors.Chronic Disease and Mental Health : Overlooking mental health and lifestyle factors worsens outcomes for chronic illnesses like heart disease and diabetes.PTSD as Teaching Tool : Post-traumatic stress highlights how physical and psychological symptoms are deeply entwined and inseparable in patient care.Need For Top-Down Reform : Only policy-level, systemic changes can mandate integration of mental health into mainstream medical education and practice.Patient Advocacy Is Crucial : Change won't arrive without active voices from patients and the public demanding better, more integrated care.Actionable Lifestyle Advice : Regular exercise, good diet, mindfulness, and honest self-reflection can support both mental and physical resilience.Communication Beats Technology : As artificial intelligence advances, true human connection in healthcare—listening, understanding, empathy—remains irreplaceable.Episode Timestamps04:53 – Biopsychosocial Model Critique07:32 – PTSD: Linking Mental and Physical Health10:20 – “Mind-Body Split in Medicine”15:53 – Mind-Body Connection in Chronic Care17:40 – Lifestyle-Induced Health Complications21:32 – “Reforming Medicine: A Systems Approach”26:25 – Biopsychosocial Model in Healthcare29:35 – Mental Health Training Shortfall30:41 – Integrated Biopsychosocial Medical Training35:20 – Interdisciplinary Approach to Trauma Inquiry37:44 – Lifestyle Hacks for Mental and Physical Resilience43:24 – Healthcare System's Training Limitations45:11 – Prioritize Mental Health AwarenessDISCLAMER >>>>>>    The Ditch Lab Coat podcast serves solely for general informational purposes and does not serve as a substitute for professional medical services such as medicine or nursing. It does not establish a doctor/patient relationship, and the use of information from the podcast or linked materials is at the user's own risk. The content does not aim to replace professional medical advice, diagnosis, or treatment, and users should promptly seek guidance from healthcare professionals for any medical conditions.   >>>>>> The expressed opinions belong solely to the hosts and guests, and they do not necessarily reflect the views or opinions of the Hospitals, Clinics, Universities, or any other organization associated with the host or guests.    

In this episode of Ditch the Lab Coat, Dr. Mark Bonta takes us into the underappreciated world of medical documentation—and the burnout it breeds—by shining a spotlight on two disruptors aiming to change the status quo. Joined by Dr. Kyle Fortinsky, a gastroenterologist and self-proclaimed tech enthusiast, and serial entrepreneur Jay Gilbert, the discussion pulls back the curtain on the all-too-familiar struggle of physicians, nurses, and healthcare workers documenting late into the night while real life passes them by.Together, they unpack the daily grind of charting and how the current EMR landscape keeps clinicians glued to screens, often at the expense of patient care and personal well-being. Jay and Kyle reveal the origin story of their innovative startup, Clever Consult, born from both firsthand medical experience and the intimate view of a spouse disappearing into late-night charting marathons. Listeners get a candid look at their journey from scribbled napkin ideas to building a privacy-first AI assistant that actually understands clinical nuance.Beyond the tech talk, this episode explores everything from the high-risk realities of endoscopy procedures to the frustrating hunt for vital information buried in endless patient charts. The conversation also delves into the real fears—and hurdles—of integrating AI into healthcare, from privacy concerns to the challenge of building tech that truly lightens clinicians' workloads.With humor and humility, Dr. Fortinsky and Jay Gilbert make the case that “doctor-built, doctor-focused” AI can finally start to reclaim the cognitive energy clinicians lose to admin overload. Rather than replace clinicians, this technology aims to empower them, helping doctors spend less time as scribes and more time as healers, problem-solvers, and humans.Tune in to hear how the marriage between entrepreneurial grit and frontline medical experience is forging a new path—one where AI does the heavy lifting behind the scenes, so healthcare professionals can get back to what truly matters: caring for people.Episode HighlightsWhy We NEED This: Kyle and Jay share horror stories of never-ending notes, missed dinners, and knowing your patient is safe to scope only after 20 minutes combing PDFs for hidden warfarin doses.The Product: An AI tool designed not to replace doctors, but to free them from scribal servitude. Clever Consult ingests mountains of charts, consults, labs, and more—then gifts you the focused summary you need, before you see the patient.Built by Doctors, for Doctors: "If physicians don't look after themselves, they can't look after patients.” That's the mantra guiding Clever Consult's development.Privacy FIRST: With patient confidentiality sacred, the team spent more money on privacy law than anything else. All data's in Canada, nothing is retained by AI vendors, and legal experts guide every tech decision.The Human Touch: While some fear robots will take the stethoscope, Jay and Kyle see AI as an assistant—not a replacement—to boost diagnostic accuracy, flag hidden dangers, and (finally!) give us more one-on-one time with patients.The Future: Imagine charting in a fraction of the time, cognitive energy reserved for real-life problem-solving (not formatting notes on endless EMR screens), and leaving “scut work” to the machines.Episode Timestamps03:35 – Revolutionizing Healthcare with Tech09:13 – Streamlining Medical Data Management12:52 – “Improving Medical Efficiency with AI”16:21 – Serendipitous Developer Collaboration17:14 – Building & Validating the Business Model20:57 – “Balancing AI's Strengths and Weaknesses”25:36 – AI Legal Consultation for Data Compliance28:27 – Bridging Software and Medical Expertise32:27 – AI Revolution in Medical Diagnostics34:33 – AI‑Enhanced Medical Diagnosis40:29 – Deep AI Solutions for Medical Documentation42:06 – “AI‑Driven Healthcare Documentation”47:33 – AI Revolutionizes Healthcare DocumentationDISCLAMER >>>>>>    The Ditch Lab Coat podcast serves solely for general informational purposes and does not serve as a substitute for professional medical services such as medicine or nursing. It does not establish a doctor/patient relationship, and the use of information from the podcast or linked materials is at the user's own risk. The content does not aim to replace professional medical advice, diagnosis, or treatment, and users should promptly seek guidance from healthcare professionals for any medical conditions.   >>>>>> The expressed opinions belong solely to the hosts and guests, and they do not necessarily reflect the views or opinions of the Hospitals, Clinics, Universities, or any other organization associated with the host or guests.    

In today's episode of Ditch the Lab Coat, we dive into the raw, real-world chaos of trauma that unfolds beyond the controlled environment of a hospital. Dr. Mark Bonta is joined by Dr. Andrew Petrosoniak, a trauma director and emergency medicine expert who specializes in designing effective healthcare systems, to explore the unpredictable nature of street-level emergencies.Throughout the episode, the duo unpacks the reality of responding to accidents in real-world settings, where medical tools are limited and the stakes are high. From discussing the importance of overcoming the bystander effect to the critical role of tourniquets in stopping a traumatic bleed, Dr. Petrosoniak shares actionable insights that go beyond traditional medical scenarios.Dr. Petrosoniak reflects on his experience with high-stress situations, emphasizing the power of a calm presence and strategic communication to provide reassurance until professional help arrives. The conversation highlights how anyone, not just medical professionals, can make a significant difference during emergencies through basic actions like calling for help and offering reassurance.Listeners are encouraged to rethink what being prepared means, urging them to consider keeping essential items like a tourniquet, defibrillator, and first aid kit nearby. This episode serves as a poignant reminder that life-saving efforts often start not in the ER but at the scene of an accident, where immediacy, intuition, and courage can have the most profound impact.Join Dr. Bonta and Dr. Petrosoniak as they explore the instinctual side of emergency response, sharing both practical advice and engaging anecdotes from the frontline of trauma care.Episode HighlightsApplying Tourniquets Properly Apply a tourniquet tightly enough to stop bleeding below the site. This is crucial in emergencies to prevent excessive blood loss.Understanding Trauma's Reality Trauma doesn't happen in a controlled environment. Real-life situations require quick thinking and improvisation with limited resources.Importance of the Bystander Effect Overcome the bystander effect by taking charge in emergency situations. Your presence and action can make a significant difference.Street-Level Medical Preparedness Real-life medical emergencies demand an understanding of how to act without hospital tools – a phone call and support can be vital.Interpreting Blood Loss Know signs of severe blood loss—confusion and cold extremities—rather than estimating based on visible blood alone.Role of First Responders Sometimes non-medical professionals, like St. John Ambulance volunteers, are better prepared for emergencies due to their specific training.Communication in Crisis In emergencies, communicate clearly, outlining the plan to provide comfort, rather than giving false assurances of safety.Understanding Electrical Injuries High-voltage injuries are extremely dangerous. Never approach if there's a risk of being electrocuted. Safety should be our top priority.Value of Proper Equipment Keeping simple equipment like a tourniquet and blanket in your car can be life-saving during an unforeseen emergency.Preparedness Beyond Hospitals Being prepared for emergencies means more than medical skills. It's about readiness to act and show compassion, no matter where you are.Episode Timestamps04:44 — Thrill-seeking risks and physiological reactions08:12 — Managing stress and preparedness in emergencies11:54 — Immobilization advice after falls15:55 — Survival odds after high falls18:20 — Crisis communication in prehospital care22:35 — Ski injury first-aid and bystander concerns26:09 — Tourniquet use: prioritize stopping bleeding27:01 — Emergency situational awareness tips31:29 — Assessing blood loss in hospital settings33:31 — Understanding the impact of blood loss36:38 — Electrocution safety and response challenges39:56 — “Mark's Power Room Dilemma”43:58 — Simplifying trauma response protocols45:48 — Compassion in crisis: the human side of trauma careDISCLAMER >>>>>>    The Ditch Lab Coat podcast serves solely for general informational purposes and does not serve as a substitute for professional medical services such as medicine or nursing. It does not establish a doctor/patient relationship, and the use of information from the podcast or linked materials is at the user's own risk. The content does not aim to replace professional medical advice, diagnosis, or treatment, and users should promptly seek guidance from healthcare professionals for any medical conditions.   >>>>>> The expressed opinions belong solely to the hosts and guests, and they do not necessarily reflect the views or opinions of the Hospitals, Clinics, Universities, or any other organization a

In today's episode of Ditch the Lab Coat, we're delving into the often overlooked world of long Covid and post-viral syndromes. Ever wondered why the medical community wasn't fully prepared for the enduring effects of post-viral conditions despite its potential impact?Dr. Mark Bonta talks with Dr. Funmi Okunola, a family physician and advocate for patients with Long Covid. Dr. Okunola discusses the challenges and frustrations surrounding the medical community's response to Long Covid and highlights her work in educating both the public and healthcare professionals about the condition.Throughout the episode, Dr. Okunola shares her journey from practicing family medicine to focusing on patient advocacy through digital education platforms. She aims to bridge the gap between medical evidence and public understanding, providing accessible and credible information to combat misinformation.Dr. Okunola emphasizes the lack of preparedness in the medical field for post-viral syndromes and the need for a shift in medical education to include complex chronic diseases like Long Covid, fibromyalgia, and ME/CFS as core parts of the curriculum. The conversation is rich with insights on how to better support patients with Long Covid and calls for a more proactive approach in the healthcare system to recognize and address complex chronic diseases. Dr. Okunola's passion for advocacy and education is a central theme in this episode, urging both healthcare providers and the public to acknowledge and act on the realities of Long Covid.Episode HighlightsUnprepared for Post-Viral Syndromes The medical community wasn't ready to tackle long-term effects of viral infections like Long Covid.Dr. Funmi Okunola's Journey From family medicine to Long Covid advocacy, Dr. Okunola founded educational initiatives during the pandemic to address patients' unmet needs.Navigating Healthcare for Long Covid Dr. Okunola and colleagues highlight the need for ongoing, informed care for Long Covid, often overlooked by the health system.Complexity in Diagnosis Treating conditions without clear tests or markers requires a multifaceted approach and reliance on patient narratives.Educational Gaps in Medicine Dr. Okunola argues for integrating complex chronic disease education in medical training as a part of core curriculum.Global Health Crises Insight Long Covid research offers a broader understanding of immune response and the impacts of viral infections on public health.Call for Systemic Change Dr. Okunola emphasizes that Long Covid is a public health issue needing urgent attention in both medical practice and policymaking.Episode Timestamps04:17 — Interprofessional approach for complex diagnoses10:01 — Urgent need for Long COVID recognition12:18 — Physician frustration with healthcare system15:56 — Misinformation & public health concerns17:48 — Somatic Symptom Disorder explained23:27 — Effective management strategies for Long COVID26:37 — Evidence vs. belief in diagnostics27:29 — Discussion on Long COVID & POTS33:28 — Long COVID exercise recommendations debunked37:28 — Causes and effects of Long COVID40:13 — Long COVID as an ignored immune threat42:43 — Public health vs. individual freedom47:13 — Campaigning for chronic disease education49:59 — Embracing complexity in healthcareDISCLAMER >>>>>>    The Ditch Lab Coat podcast serves solely for general informational purposes and does not serve as a substitute for professional medical services such as medicine or nursing. It does not establish a doctor/patient relationship, and the use of information from the podcast or linked materials is at the user's own risk. The content does not aim to replace professional medical advice, diagnosis, or treatment, and users should promptly seek guidance from healthcare professionals for any medical conditions.   >>>>>> The expressed opinions belong solely to the hosts and guests, and they do not necessarily reflect the views or opinions of the Hospitals, Clinics, Universities, or any other organization associated with the host or guests.    

Today, we're diving into the captivating world where cardiology meets cutting-edge technology. Ever wondered how your smartwatch could potentially save your life or how wearable tech is revolutionizing heart rhythm monitoring? You're in for a treat! Joining us is Dr. Yaariv Khaykin, an internationally renowned expert in rhythm disorders. He's a self-proclaimed "heart electrician" with a knack for gadgets and tech, and he's here to guide us through the intersection of traditional cardiology and modern advancements. From exploring the 100-year-old ECG technology to discussing breakthrough wearable devices, this episode is packed with insights that will transform the way you think about heart health. So whether you're a medical professional, a tech enthusiast, or someone just curious about how wearables could benefit your health, stay tuned for a fascinating conversation that proves science fiction is quickly becoming present-day medicine.Episode HighlightsWearables Catch Fleeting Symptoms Wearables effectively detect fleeting health symptoms that traditional monitors might miss, especially heart rhythm abnormalities.ECG's Long-Standing Role ECGs have been crucial in cardiology for over 100 years, providing insight into heart's electrical activity.Technology Elevates Heart Monitoring Advanced tech offers multi-channel monitoring, improving safety and precision in diagnosing heart conditions like arrhythmias.Smartwatches: Medical Utility Evolving Smartwatches like Apple Watch are now FDA-approved for heart monitoring, offering reliable data for clinical decisions.Data in Wearables: Double-Edged Sword While empowering users, wearables can increase anxiety without proper context. Interpretation is key.Improving Life Through Wearables Devices encourage healthy behaviors, tracking sleep, steps, and exercise to guide lifestyle choices for longevity.Heart Rate Variability's Importance High heart rate variability indicates fitness and longevity, while low variability can signal health issues.Non-Invasive Monitoring Innovations Textile-based ECGs provide comfort, easy use, and continuous heart monitoring without traditional discomforts.Bridging Clinical and Consumer Tech The integration of wearables in daily life advances proactive healthcare, offering diagnostic-level insights easily accessible to all.Episode Timestamps00:00 - Ditch the Lab Coat Podcast06:09 - AI enhances ECG interpretation07:03 - Advanced cardiac mapping vest10:30 - Wearables revolutionize heart monitoring14:39 - Wearables' role in health monitoring18:58 - Assessing Apple Watch for heart rhythms21:00 - Atrial fibrillation detection limitations23:49 - Wearable limitations in symptom detection28:41 - Wearable ECG tech achieves 99.9% accuracy29:46 - Medical device risk and standards34:38 - "Tech bros & longevity obsession"38:17 - Wearables: balancing peace and anxiety42:32 - Heart rate variability explained46:02 - Heart tech: ECGs and innovation47:20 - Future of wearable cardiac technologyDISCLAMER >>>>>>    The Ditch Lab Coat podcast serves solely for general informational purposes and does not serve as a substitute for professional medical services such as medicine or nursing. It does not establish a doctor/patient relationship, and the use of information from the podcast or linked materials is at the user's own risk. The content does not aim to replace professional medical advice, diagnosis, or treatment, and users should promptly seek guidance from healthcare professionals for any medical conditions.   >>>>>> The expressed opinions belong solely to the hosts and guests, and they do not necessarily reflect the views or opinions of the Hospitals, Clinics, Universities, or any other organization associated with the host or guests.       Disclosures: Ditch The Lab Coat podcast is produced by (Podkind.co) and is independent of Dr. Bonta's teaching and research roles at McMaster University, Temerty Faculty of Medicine and Queens University. 

In this episode of "Ditch the Lab Coat, where we delve into health issues with a grounded, scientifically skeptical eye. Today, we're diving deep into the world of cholesterol science and statins with our special guest, Dr. Malcolm Kendrick, an acclaimed skeptic and thought provoker in the medical community. Dr. Kendrick, known for turning conventional wisdom on its head, will be sharing his insights on how statins really affect our health, stretching beyond the common narrative and challenging the status quo of the pharmaceutical-medical industry complex.In this episode, Dr. Kendrick shares his perspective on the actual benefits and risks associated with statins, exploring their history and the modern-day data controversies surrounding them. Are they truly the heart-protecting wonder drugs we have been led to believe? Prepare for a dialogue that ventures into the realm of medical guidelines, research transparency, and, most critically, how independent thinking can lead us to better healthcare decisions.Grab your headphones, get comfortable, and join us as we embark on this eye-opening journey to dissect the truths about statins and explore what might actually lie at the heart of cardiovascular health. This is an episode you won't want to miss.Episode HighlightsStatins and Life Extension Statins make you feel older, not necessarily extend life by 15 years.Challenge Conventional Wisdom Dr. Kendrick challenges mainstream cholesterol views, sparking debates and insights in the medical community.Studying Only Specific Populations Original statin studies lacked diversity, mostly involving young males, not reflecting today's patient demographics.Relative vs. Absolute Risk Be mindful of how risk reductions are presented; sometimes it's more about misleading percentages.Medical Research Conflicts Industry connections can bias studies. We must demand independent verification of data.Independent Medical Thinking Doctors should critically evaluate guidelines, balancing them with individual patient needs and circumstances.Cost of Conformity in Guidelines Blind adherence to guidelines, due to fear of malpractice, might not always benefit the patient.Lifestyle Over Medication Managing chronic conditions through lifestyle changes can often be more effective than medication.Potential of Lp(a) Lp(a) might provide clearer heart disease risk markers. However, it's crucial, to accurately interpret its significance.Empowering Patient Decisions Encourage patients to actively participate in their health decisions, weighing the true benefits and risks of treatments.Episode Timestamps04:18 - Prescription practices for elderly patients08:24 - Coenzyme Q10's role in energy11:44 - "Uncommon statin side effects"16:28 - Statins' minimal life extension19:59 - Statins: worth the effort?23:55 - Overprescription of statins debate26:02 - Reevaluating statins' efficacy and bias29:40 - Oxford data transparency concerns33:27 - Pharma-research funding influence34:16 - Challenging medical system norms40:09 - NICE's influence and conflict concerns43:19 - Human nature and medical conflicts45:58 - Advocating lifestyle over medication48:00 - Lifestyle over statins51:05 - Reevaluating statin use in elderly55:13 - Rethinking statins and patient care58:00 - Challenging healthcare's status quoLet me know if you need any modifications!DISCLAMER >>>>>>    The Ditch Lab Coat podcast serves solely for general informational purposes and does not serve as a substitute for professional medical services such as medicine or nursing. It does not establish a doctor/patient relationship, and the use of information from the podcast or linked materials is at the user's own risk. The content does not aim to replace professional medical advice, diagnosis, or treatment, and users should promptly seek guidance from healthcare professionals for any medical conditions.   >>>>>> The expressed opinions belong solely to the hosts and guests, and they do not necessarily reflect the views or opinions of the Hospitals, Clinics, Universities, or any other organization associated with the host or guests.       Disclosures: Ditch The Lab Coat podcast is produced by (Podkind.co) and is independent of Dr. Bonta's teaching and research roles at McMaster University, Temerty Faculty of Medicine and Queens University. 

In this episode of "Ditch the Lab Coat, where we delve into health issues with a grounded, scientifically skeptical eye. This week's conversation is truly special as we sit down with two giants in the field of medicine: Dr. David Carr and Dr. Sumon Chakrabarti. Join us as we unpack the essentials of travel medicine. From crafting the ultimate travel medical kit to knowing when to panic about that mysterious fever after your Southeast Asian adventure, these experts bring humor, experience, and a wealth of knowledge to the table. Whether you're planning a family vacation or a solo expedition, this episode promises to equip you with the wisdom you need to travel smart. Get ready to learn about must-have medications, the truth about travel vaccines, and how to handle those daunting, "Is there a doctor on board?" moments on a plane. Sit back, relax, and let us turn you into the savvy traveler you've always wanted to be. Let's get into it! and prepare to have your preconceptions about medicine and holistic care turned upside down.Episode HighlightsTravel Kits Essentials: Dr. Carr and Dr. Chakrabarti shared their must-have items for medical travel kits, including antiemetics like Zofran for nausea and glue (Dermabond) for minor injuries. They also discussed the importance of carrying Imodium for emergencies but warned against using it as a solution for diarrhea with fever.Medical Travel Tips: They emphasized preparing for potential health issues depending on the destination, especially in places with known diseases, such as malaria in certain regions. Pepto Bismol was highlighted as an effective preventive measure for traveler's diarrhea.Vaccination Advice: Dr. Chakrabarti recommended vaccinations based on the destination, particularly focusing on hepatitis A, typhoid, and yellow fever in certain regions. They also discussed the malaria prophylaxis options available today, like Malarone.Emergency Situations on Airplanes: Dr. Carr shared his experiences responding to medical emergencies on flights, describing the airplane's medical kits as adequate but limited, emphasizing the importance of an EpiPen and defibrillator.Healthcare Access While Traveling: They talked about how healthcare access varies by destination and shared personal stories of needing medical attention abroad, such as Dr. Bonta's trip to the Amazon.Safety Precautions: Emphasized no pills and no powders, especially for teenagers on trips. They suggested considering Narcan kits due to the prevalence of opioids tainting other substances and the importance of preventative measures like condoms to avoid STDs in areas with higher rates.Returning Traveler's Fever: Both guests stressed the importance of not dismissing a fever on returning from a tropical trip, as this could signify a serious condition like malaria.Episode Timestamps04:13 - Travel medical essentials insights.09:32 - Emergency eye and ear care prep.10:51 - Ducorel: Cholera vaccine limitations.14:33 - Plane medical emergencies: doctor's role?18:21 - Vaccine recommendations for Caribbean travel.20:46 - Essential travel vaccines and malaria prevention.22:56 - Avoiding travel health mistakes.27:27 - Check fever after tropical travel.31:45 - Essential travel health tips.32:41 - Gratitude and safe travels.DISCLAMER >>>>>>    The Ditch Lab Coat podcast serves solely for general informational purposes and does not serve as a substitute for professional medical services such as medicine or nursing. It does not establish a doctor/patient relationship, and the use of information from the podcast or linked materials is at the user's own risk. The content does not aim to replace professional medical advice, diagnosis, or treatment, and users should promptly seek guidance from healthcare professionals for any medical conditions.   >>>>>> The expressed opinions belong solely to the hosts and guests, and they do not necessarily reflect the views or opinions of the Hospitals, Clinics, Universities, or any other organization associated with the host or guests.       Disclosures: Ditch The Lab Coat podcast is produced by (Podkind.co) and is independent of Dr. Bonta's teaching and research roles at McMaster University, Temerty Faculty of Medicine and Queens University. 

In this episode of "Ditch the Lab Coat," host Dr. Mark Bonta welcomes a groundbreaking guest who is reshaping how we understand gut health and integrative care. Dr. Kim Bretz, a naturopathic doctor with a unique approach, joins the conversation to challenge traditional frameworks and introduce innovative solutions for conditions like irritable bowel syndrome and reflux. With her expertise in the gut-brain connection, microbiome diversity, and holistic patient care, Dr. Bretz breaks down complex concepts and offers evidence-based insights into treating digestive disorders. Together, they explore the limitations of the conventional medical system, shed light on the often-overlooked gut-brain interaction, and discuss how interdisciplinary collaboration can enhance patient outcomes. Whether you're a healthcare provider or someone dealing with unexplained digestive symptoms, this episode is packed with knowledge and tools to expand your understanding of gut health beyond the typical medical approach. Tune in and prepare to have your preconceptions about medicine and holistic care turned upside down.Episode HighlightsGut Health Significance The importance of gut health to overall quality of life compared to serious conditions like heart failure.Collaborative Healthcare Approach The benefits of collaboration between MDs, naturopathic doctors, and other specialists.Patient-Centered Care Emphasizing care that considers patients' holistic needs, not just symptoms.Gut-Brain Connection Exploring the link between mental health and gastrointestinal symptoms.Role of the Microbiome Understanding how bacteria in our gut impact our health.Visceral Hypersensitivity Why some people feel digestion more keenly than others, impacting IBS symptoms.Low FODMAP Diet Dietary considerations for IBS symptoms management.Holistic Treatment Options Combining traditional and alternative treatments like gut-directed hypnotherapy.Skeptical Scientific Approach Navigating the balance between evidence-based medicine and alternative approaches.Building a Diverse Diet How plant-based foods and variety support gut health and microbiome diversity.Episode Timestamps05:38 - Traditional system failing gut health.07:13 - Longevity clinic benefits: beyond procedures.10:22 - Rethinking diet safety and microbiota.15:03 - Exploring IBS and brain-gut link.18:15 - Gut sensitivity and cognitive therapies.20:02 - Central sensitization impact on pain.23:53 - Managing IBS stress: techniques & therapies.29:04 - Gut issues: acute vs. chronic.29:57 - Gut-brain interaction and microbiota insights.35:47 - Balancing diet and microbiome connection.37:21 - Pro-bacteria gut health diet.40:38 - Dietary focus in Crohn's treatment.45:04 - System challenges to healthy eating.47:59 - Spontaneous career pivot to collaboration.52:04 - Addressing misinformation in healthcare.55:54 - Exploring complementary alternative medicine.59:29 - Rethinking gut health approaches.DISCLAMER >>>>>>    The Ditch Lab Coat podcast serves solely for general informational purposes and does not serve as a substitute for professional medical services such as medicine or nursing. It does not establish a doctor/patient relationship, and the use of information from the podcast or linked materials is at the user's own risk. The content does not aim to replace professional medical advice, diagnosis, or treatment, and users should promptly seek guidance from healthcare professionals for any medical conditions.   >>>>>> The expressed opinions belong solely to the hosts and guests, and they do not necessarily reflect the views or opinions of the Hospitals, Clinics, Universities, or any other organization associated with the host or guests.       Disclosures: Ditch The Lab Coat podcast is produced by (Podkind.co) and is independent of Dr. Bonta's teaching and research roles at McMaster University, Temerty Faculty of Medicine and Queens University. 

In this episode of "Ditch the Lab Coat," Dr. Mark Bonta hosts Dr. Jane Thornton, an Olympian, world champion, and leading sports medicine physician. Known as the Olympian doc, Dr. Thornton brings a unique perspective to the intersection of elite sport, health, and science due to her dual experiences as an athlete and a healthcare professional.Dr. Thornton delves into the myth of athletic prodigies, emphasizing that while some genetic factors can contribute to success in sports, it is the environment, work ethic, and mental performance that truly create elite athletes. She shares her personal journey from being a sedentary teenager to competing in the Olympics, highlighting how sports can transform lives beyond athletic achievements by enhancing focus, motivation, and social connections.The discussion explores issues like gender disparities in sports, particularly how cultural pressures and a lack of supportive environments cause many adolescent girls to drop out of sports. Dr. Thornton underscores the need for environments where athletes can be open about their symptoms and the importance of preventing early sport specialization to promote long-term athlete health.Dr. Thornton also touches upon safeguarding in sports, which involves creating safe, supportive environments free from harassment and abuse. She explains the complexities involved in balancing athletes' desires to compete despite injuries with the duty of care healthcare professionals owe them.Finally, Dr. Thornton and Dr. Bonta address the transition of athletes from sports to other life phases, noting the importance of a supportive community and maintaining physical activity as key to positive long-term health outcomes.Tune in for an episode filled with insights on developing and sustaining a healthy relationship with sports while exploring the broader implications for athlete health.Episode HighlightsMental Health and Performance Creating supportive environments boosts performance and wellbeing. Open communication is key to reducing anxiety about symptoms and injuries.The Role of Genetics in Sports Genetics isn't destiny in sports. While genetics influence certain attributes, work ethic, mental performance, and enjoyment are crucial.Early Specialization Risks Early specialization can harm long-term health. Diverse sports experiences during youth promote holistic growth and prevent burnout.Safe Sporting Environments Safe sport ensures fairness, respect, and freedom from harassment. Preventing injuries and illness involves creating a positive training culture.Transition After Sports Identity shifts post-career can impact athletes' mental health. Support and social belonging help in reintegration to non-athletic life.Balanced Athletic Training A structured, well-planned workload minimizes injuries. Sleep and recovery are essential in maintaining peak performance and health.Parent-Child Dynamics in Sport Cultivating joy is key. Encouraging kids to love their sport nurtures long-term engagement and potential elite performance.Ethical Considerations in Athletics Decision-making involves balancing risks. Safe return-to-play protocols are vital, especially in ambiguous injury scenarios.Episode Timestamps04:03 - Building an Elite Athlete08:20 - Early specialization vs. holistic development.10:55 - Addressing barriers for girls in sport.17:15 - Positive messaging for young athletes.18:18 - Social media's impact on youth athletes.22:53 - Injury prevention and safe sport.27:06 - Athlete injury decision-making factors.30:48 - Preventing injuries through workload management.33:37 - Olympic athletes: long-term health impacts.36:14 - Olympian lifespan: beyond the sport.40:30 - Post-sport transition and psychological impact.43:43 - Embrace joy in pursuit.47:07 - Insightful athlete podcast highlights.48:24 - Insightful sports and life tips.DISCLAMER >>>>>>    The Ditch Lab Coat podcast serves solely for general informational purposes and does not serve as a substitute for professional medical services such as medicine or nursing. It does not establish a doctor/patient relationship, and the use of information from the podcast or linked materials is at the user's own risk. The content does not aim to replace professional medical advice, diagnosis, or treatment, and users should promptly seek guidance from healthcare professionals for any medical conditions.   >>>>>> The expressed opinions belong solely to the hosts and guests, and they do not necessarily reflect the views or opinions of the Hospitals, Clinics, Universities, or any other organization associated with the host or guests.       Disclosures: Ditch The Lab Coat podcast is produced by (Podkind.co) and is independent of Dr. Bonta's teaching and research roles at McMaster University, Temerty Faculty of Medicine and Queens University. 

Welcome to another insightful episode of Ditch the Lab Coat with Dr. Mark Bonta. In today's conversation, we're diving deep into the intricate world of chronic pain with the renowned Dr. Andrea Furlan, a global authority in pain management. With a career dedicated to understanding and conquering chronic pain, Dr. Furlan sheds light on the misconceptions surrounding pain as we age, the role of stress, and how our modern virtual lifestyles are influencing our health. We'll explore the significance of the mind-body connection, the impact of stress on muscle pain, and the manifold strategies that can help alleviate chronic pain, from mindful techniques and lifestyle changes to the benefits of proper sleep and diet. Whether you're a healthcare professional, enduring chronic pain, or simply curious about how to manage pain more effectively, this episode is packed with valuable insights and practical advice informed by Dr. Furlan's extensive career and research. I apologize, but I notice you're asking for key takeaways about fetal alcohol spectrum disorder, but the transcript provided is actually about chronic pain and features Dr. Andrea Furlan discussing pain management. Let me provide the key takeaways from this actual transcript:Key Takeaways:1. Mind-Body ConnectionDr. Furlan emphasizes that chronic pain often has strong connections to stress, mental state, and emotional wellbeing, with the body using pain as a way to communicate underlying issues.2. Parasympathetic Nervous SystemA major focus is placed on activating the parasympathetic nervous system through techniques like mindful breathing, meditation, and mindful walking to help manage chronic pain.3. Modern Lifestyle ImpactWhile modern behaviors like prolonged sitting and screen use are often blamed for pain, Dr. Furlan notes that similar sedentary behaviors existed 100 years ago without the same pain complaints, suggesting other factors are involved.4. Nutrition's RoleUltra-processed foods are identified as "poison" for the body, potentially contributing to various health issues including chronic pain. The importance of natural, whole foods is emphasized.5. Treatment ApproachRather than relying solely on medications, Dr. Furlan advocates for a comprehensive approach including:- Sleep improvement- Proper nutrition- Exercise- Stress management- Mind-body techniques6. Validation of PainFor chronic pain patients, Dr. Furlan emphasizes the importance of validating their experience and understanding that their pain is real, even when not visible on medical imaging.06:01 - Chronic pain across all ages.09:43 - Rethinking pain management approaches.11:20 - Muscle pain and nociception origins.13:55 - Breaking the fear avoidance cycle.18:06 - Processed vs. natural foods awareness.23:14 - Jaw massage experience and benefits.24:26 - Massage: Temporary relief for muscle pain.30:19 - Overwhelmed and Overheating Connections.30:59 - Rethinking pain and treatment.34:39 - Managing pain with parasympathetic activation.41:06 - Chronic pain and central sensitization.42:14 - Overcoming recovery challenges.47:57 - Healing trauma: Brain and emotions.49:51 - Stress, trauma, and health connection.54:31 - Chronic pain management tools.DISCLAMER >>>>>>    The Ditch Lab Coat podcast serves solely for general informational purposes and does not serve as a substitute for professional medical services such as medicine or nursing. It does not establish a doctor/patient relationship, and the use of information from the podcast or linked materials is at the user's own risk. The content does not aim to replace professional medical advice, diagnosis, or treatment, and users should promptly seek guidance from healthcare professionals for any medical conditions.   >>>>>> The expressed opinions belong solely to the hosts and guests, and they do not necessarily reflect the views or opinions of the Hospitals, Clinics, Universities, or any other organization associated with the host or guests.       Disclosures: Ditch The Lab Coat podcast is produced by (Podkind.co) and is independent of Dr. Bonta's teaching and research roles at McMaster University, Temerty Faculty of Medicine and Queens University. 

In this episode of "Ditch the Lab Coat," Dr. Mark Bonta sits down with Dr. Jeff Alfonsi, an internal medicine and obesity medicine doctor with a focus on nutrition. The conversation revolves around the impact of nutrition on health and the importance of moving away from ultra-processed foods.Dr. Alfonsi explains that the modern diet often prioritizes convenience over health, leading to increased consumption of processed foods laden with additives that can have various negative health impacts. He emphasizes that significant health benefits can be achieved even with incremental improvements in diet quality. For instance, decreasing the consumption of ultra-processed foods and increasing the intake of whole foods can improve various health metrics, including blood pressure, blood glucose levels, and cognitive function.The episode delves into how the food industry focuses on factors like taste, convenience, and consumption rather than the nutritional value and health benefits of food. Dr. Alfonsi points out that this disconnect between the food industry and health guidelines contributes to poor dietary habits and chronic diseases.One of Dr. Alfonsi's major ventures, Rx Food, aims to address this issue by using technology to help individuals track their food intake and get personalized dietary assessments. He emphasizes the importance of using both subjective and objective measures to monitor progress and make sustainable dietary changes.The episode concludes with practical advice on how to implement healthier eating habits, such as preparing healthy snacks in advance and keeping less-healthy options out of easy reach. Dr. Alfonsi advocates for balance and moderation rather than perfection in dietary changes.Overall, the episode sheds light on the critical role of nutrition in overall health and offers actionable insights for individuals looking to make sustainable improvements in their diet.Key Takeaways:The Inconvenient Truth About Ultra-Processed FoodsDr. Alfonsi discusses the hidden dangers of additives found in everyday ultra-processed foods and how they can impact our health. From changes in taste buds to cognitive function, the impacts are far-reaching.Red Food Dye ControversyWhat's the deal with Red Food Dye Number 2? Dr. Alfonsi explains the risks associated with food additives and why moderation is crucial.The Power of Personalized NutritionLearn about Rx Food, a groundbreaking technology co-founded by Dr. Alfonsi, that transforms how we view our dietary habits. This tool helps individuals make smarter, more sustainable food choices.Cheat Days: Yay or Nay?Dr. Alfonsi shares his nuanced view on cheat days and how they can fit into a balanced diet, depending on the individual.From Numbers to NutritionUnderstand the importance of measuring dietary intake and how it can help you make informed choices about your health. Discover how Dr. Alfonsi uses technology to create detailed food logs for better healthcare outcomes.(https://www.rxfood.ca/)05:55 - Impacts of food additives on health.09:53 - Challenges surrounding processed food safety.13:37 - The rise of convenience foods in modern diets.14:21 - Busy lives driving the demand for fast food.19:26 - Benefits of shifting to a healthy diet.21:13 - How sodium-potassium imbalance affects health.25:37 - "Complex Impact of Food Additives" discussion.30:36 - Undervalued non-medical solutions to health issues.34:24 - Analyzing dietary composition and quality.35:53 - "Stepwise Health Strategy" for sustainable changes.39:08 - The importance of transparent nutritional education.42:21 - Objective vs. subjective metrics in evaluating health.47:31 - "Comforting snacks during a snowstorm commute."50:44 - Exploring antidepressants and medication deprescribing.52:05 - Rethinking diet and its environmental harms.DISCLAMER >>>>>>    The Ditch Lab Coat podcast serves solely for general informational purposes and does not serve as a substitute for professional medical services such as medicine or nursing. It does not establish a doctor/patient relationship, and the use of information from the podcast or linked materials is at the user's own risk. The content does not aim to replace professional medical advice, diagnosis, or treatment, and users should promptly seek guidance from healthcare professionals for any medical conditions.   >>>>>> The expressed opinions belong solely to the hosts and guests, and they do not necessarily reflect the views or opinions of the Hospitals, Clinics, Universities, or any other organization associated with the host or guests.       Disclosures: Ditch The Lab Coat podcast is produced by (Podkind.co) and is independent of Dr. Bonta's teaching and research roles at McMaster University, Temerty Faculty of Medicine and Queens University. 

Welcome to another insightful episode of Ditch the Lab Coat, the podcast where we explore life, medicine, and everything in between. I'm your host, Dr. Mark Bonta, and today's episode promises to leave you inspired and ready to perform at your peak.Our guest today is Dr. David McDuff, a retired Army Colonel with extensive combat and special operations experience who has transitioned into a leading sports psychiatrist and mental skills trainer. With over 30 years of experience, Dr. McDuff has helped athletes from youth leagues to professional teams like the NFL's Baltimore Ravens and the MLB's Baltimore Orioles unlock their full potential.In this episode, Dr. McDuff shares his unique insights into the evolution of mental health in sports, drawing from his military service and extensive work with elite athletes. He dives into practical strategies for achieving balance, resilience, and peak performance, emphasizing the importance of mental training, breath control, and positive self-talk. Whether you're an athlete, coach, or someone striving to thrive under pressure, this conversation is packed with wisdom and actionable tips that can benefit everyone.So sit back, relax, and get ready to expand your knowledge on the critical intersections between mental health, sports performance, and everyday life. Let's dive right in!Key Episode Highlights:Background and Experience:Dr. McDuff shares his unique journey from military psychiatry to sports psychiatry, highlighting his transition and the relevance of military principles like immediacy and proximity in providing mental health care to athletes.Impact and Evolution:He discusses how mental health support has evolved in professional sports, noting increased acceptance and integration, with leagues like the NBA and NFL mandating on-site mental health services.Mental Skills and Techniques:Breathing Techniques:Dr. McDuff explains the importance of breath control in physical performance and stress management. He provides examples using stretching and running, emphasizing how proper breathing aids muscle relaxation and reduces tension.Mental Visualization:The episode delves into the concept of mental rehearsal and how visualization can enhance performance, citing examples like free throw routines in basketball.Practical Strategies:Dr. McDuff offers insights into fostering mental resilience and peak performance, underscoring the importance of staying grounded and focusing on process goals over outcome goals.Translating Skills to Younger Athletes:The discussion covers coaching young athletes, suggesting methods for parents and coaches to use positive reinforcement and avoid emphasizing negative feedback. Dr. McDuff uses anecdotes from his own coaching experiences to illustrate effective strategies.Key Takeaway:One major takeaway for athletes at any level is the significance of staying grounded in how they play the game and maintaining a love for their sport. He suggests focusing on the intrinsic joy and pride in mastery rather than solely on outcomes.09:35 - Ravens' trainer finds psychiatric relief through innovative methods.14:05 - Mental health awareness in the pre-woke era.15:47 - A holistic approach to mental health in the military.24:13 - The importance of trust in doctor-patient relationships.31:14 - The role of breath control in sports performance.34:22 - Facing fears during SEAL training.41:21 - Pitching focus and breathing techniques for athletes.43:03 - Coaching young athletes to build resilience.50:48 - Keeping instructions crisp and quick.53:29 - Visualization techniques enhance tennis performance.01:02:07 - Bringing positivity and checking in with others.DISCLAMER >>>>>>    The Ditch Lab Coat podcast serves solely for general informational purposes and does not serve as a substitute for professional medical services such as medicine or nursing. It does not establish a doctor/patient relationship, and the use of information from the podcast or linked materials is at the user's own risk. The content does not aim to replace professional medical advice, diagnosis, or treatment, and users should promptly seek guidance from healthcare professionals for any medical conditions.   >>>>>> The expressed opinions belong solely to the hosts and guests, and they do not necessarily reflect the views or opinions of the Hospitals, Clinics, Universities, or any other organization associated with the host or guests.       Disclosures: Ditch The Lab Coat podcast is produced by (Podkind.co) and is independent of Dr. Bonta's teaching and research roles at McMaster University, Temerty Faculty of Medicine and Queens University. 

DISCLAMER >>>>>>    The Ditch Lab Coat podcast serves solely for general informational purposes and does not serve as a substitute for professional medical services such as medicine or nursing. It does not establish a doctor/patient relationship, and the use of information from the podcast or linked materials is at the user's own risk. The content does not aim to replace professional medical advice, diagnosis, or treatment, and users should promptly seek guidance from healthcare professionals for any medical conditions.   >>>>>> The expressed opinions belong solely to the hosts and guests, and they do not necessarily reflect the views or opinions of the Hospitals, Clinics, Universities, or any other organization associated with the host or guests.       Disclosures: Ditch The Lab Coat podcast is produced by (Podkind.co) and is independent of Dr. Bonta's teaching and research roles at McMaster University, Temerty Faculty of Medicine and Queens University. Welcome to another episode of "Ditch the Labcoat," the podcast that brings a critical, science-based perspective to healthcare discussions. I'm your host, Dr. Mark Bonta, and today we dive deep into the intersection of nutrition and surgery. Joining us are Dr. Sagar Desai, an orthopedic surgeon, and Dr. Kyle Waldman, an anesthesiologist.We'll explore the influence of pharmaceutical companies in medicine, the importance of non-drug interventions, and how nutritional modifications can offer significant patient benefits. Our focus will be on immuno and pharmaco nutrition—innovative approaches combining amino acids, omega-3s, vitamins, and other nutrients to improve surgical outcomes and patient recovery.Sagar and Kyle will share their entrepreneurial journey with Proven Therapeutics, aiming to provide better perioperative care. We'll discuss the challenges of patient compliance, the evidence supporting these nutritional strategies, and the practicalities of implementing them in both academic and community settings.Plus, for a bit of levity, we'll be addressing some of the common stereotypes in the medical profession and the humorous side of our intense, life-saving work.So, grab your headphones and get ready to ditch the labcoat. Let's jump into a conversation that blends serious science with a touch of humor, all in the pursuit of better healthcare.06:21 - Unexpectedly switched career focus from orthopedics to internal medicine.09:32 - Steroids and diet significantly impact bowel surgery recovery.10:39 - Oral immunonutrition reduces the risk of anastomotic leaks.16:33 - Nutritional changes can outperform medications after heart attacks.17:26 - Nutrition data from general surgery applies to orthopedics as well.22:44 - Challenges and strategies for managing surgical anesthesia effectively.23:53 - Perioperative immunonutrition addresses the surgical stress response.28:12 - Evidence-based nutritional products are underutilized despite proven benefits.32:08 - Healthcare workers are genuinely dedicated to helping patients.37:18 - Thorough research ensures positive feedback on nutritional products.43:52 - Low financial risk, careful work, and significant patient benefits.45:29 - Enjoyable interviews with intellectual, humorous, and influential guests.47:28 - Evidence-based treatments are often overlooked in medical prescriptions.

DISCLAMER >>>>>>    The Ditch Lab Coat podcast serves solely for general informational purposes and does not serve as a substitute for professional medical services such as medicine or nursing. It does not establish a doctor/patient relationship, and the use of information from the podcast or linked materials is at the user's own risk. The content does not aim to replace professional medical advice, diagnosis, or treatment, and users should promptly seek guidance from healthcare professionals for any medical conditions.   >>>>>> The expressed opinions belong solely to the hosts and guests, and they do not necessarily reflect the views or opinions of the Hospitals, Clinics, Universities, or any other organization associated with the host or guests.       Disclosures: Ditch The Lab Coat podcast is produced by (Podkind.co) and is independent of Dr. Bonta's teaching and research roles at McMaster University, Temerty Faculty of Medicine and Queens University. Welcome back to another episode of "Ditch the Lab Coat," where we tackle health issues with scientific skepticism and bring you the latest insights straight from the experts. Today, we have the pleasure of hosting Dr. Christine Suess, a seasoned ophthalmologist with over two decades of experience and a former Chief of Ophthalmology at Cornwall Community Hospital. Dr. Suess will shed light on the intricate world of eye health, from common conditions like presbyopia and myopia to the impacts of screen time on children's vision. We'll delve into the importance of regular eye exams, the realities of eye surgeries, and essential tips on preventing retinal damage with proper UV protection. Tune in as we bust some myths, discuss ocular emergencies, and explore the evolving role of technology in eye care. Plus, you'll get some unique insights, including how eye health can reflect overall body wellness and why a career in ophthalmology might just be the perfect blend of precision and patient care. This episode is packed with valuable information to help you keep your vision clear and your eyes healthy. Stay with us as we uncover these fascinating topics!01:00 – Dr. Christine Seuss discusses her ophthalmology expertise.04:48 – Chose career for balance; nurses' supportive advice.08:54 – How to connect with an ophthalmologist or optometrist?11:55 – Glasses ease presbyopia; adaptation or denial, discussed.13:43 – Screen time may increase myopia risks in children.18:47 – Crusting on eyelids may indicate blepharitis.22:00 – Use artificial tears and cool compresses; consult ophthalmologist.23:02 – Medical specialties attract people with specific traits.28:21 – Handling ocular emergencies and managing glaucoma remotely.32:33 – Wear sunglasses with 100% UVA, UVB protection.35:00 – Eye surgeries now use topical drops for numbing.37:09 – No patch, use shield; hydrate wound closure.39:18 – Serious eye injuries require urgent specialist care.43:22 – Limited experience with ophthalmology as a student.48:07 – Discussing teeth and vision care with an empathetic expert.

DISCLAMER >>>>>>    The Ditch Lab Coat podcast serves solely for general informational purposes and does not serve as a substitute for professional medical services such as medicine or nursing. It does not establish a doctor/patient relationship, and the use of information from the podcast or linked materials is at the user's own risk. The content does not aim to replace professional medical advice, diagnosis, or treatment, and users should promptly seek guidance from healthcare professionals for any medical conditions.   >>>>>> The expressed opinions belong solely to the hosts and guests, and they do not necessarily reflect the views or opinions of the Hospitals, Clinics, Universities, or any other organization associated with the host or guests.       Disclosures: Ditch The Lab Coat podcast is produced by (Podkind.co) and is independent of Dr. Bonta's teaching and research roles at McMaster University, Temerty Faculty of Medicine and Queens University. Welcome back to "Ditch the Labcoat," the podcast where we cut through the medical jargon to bring you clear, actionable insights on health and wellness. I'm your host, Dr. Mark Bonta, and today, we're diving deep into the complex world of type 2 diabetes with our esteemed guest, Dr. Satya Dash.In this episode, we'll explore how even simple changes, like short bursts of post-meal activity, can significantly improve insulin sensitivity and control blood glucose levels. We'll also bust the myth that sugary snacks are the real culprits behind kids going hyper on Halloween, and instead, look at the role excitement and events play.From the multi-faceted approach required for managing type 2 diabetes, including lifestyle changes, advanced medications, and the promising role of bariatric surgery, to the future trends in diabetes treatment with groundbreaking hormonal modulators, this episode has it all. Dr. Dash will also share insights from an intensive 12-week program based on the UK's Direct Study that has shown impressive diabetes remission rates.We'll discuss the role of caloric surplus in weight gain, the effectiveness of early intervention, and the challenges of sustaining long-term weight loss—touching on everything from genetic predispositions to the importance of individualized treatment plans.So hunker down and get ready to ditch that lab coat mentality as we uncover the truths about managing and potentially reversing type 2 diabetes. Stay tuned for an informative and unscripted dialogue designed to bring a scientific skepticism to the latest healthcare trends. Let's get started!05:28 – Excess calories cause organ fat, leading to insulin resistance.06:41 – Excess calories are stored differently by genetics.10:11 – Various tests diagnose diabetes and prediabetes status.14:13 – Does healthcare prioritize prevention or immediate treatment?16:06 – Meal replacement aids type 2 diabetes remission.20:20 – Weight loss primes overeating; habits revert easily.23:13 – Diabetes management improves health, despite temporary remissions.27:58 – Managing diabetes requires medication beyond conversation.31:43 – Surgery aids health; underutilized yet validated.34:18 – Various procedures offer health benefits for diabetes.37:29 – Tirzepatide reduces A1C; costly but effective.39:38 – Oral drugs may surpass injections, surgery options.46:07 – Episodes are unscripted, conversational, occasionally require guidance.47:25 – Simplifying complex topics for understanding diabetes management.

In the true crime space, we have noticed the creep of misinformation and conspiratorial thinking. It's not always easy to spot, though. Critical thinking can help us all engage better with stories about law and crime. But how can we start engaging in critical thinking around our favorite genre? Today's guest, Dr. Steven Novella, can help. Dr. Novella is a clinical neurologist at Yale University School of Medicine. He's also one of the hosts of the podcast The Skeptics' Guide to the Universe. We'll talk to him about how to spot a con job, our adversarial criminal justice system, Occam's razor, and the appeal of conspiracy theories. Learn more about Dr. Novella and his podcast The Skeptics' Guide to the Universe here: https://www.theskepticsguide.org/Check out the Science-Based Medicine website here: https://sciencebasedmedicine.org/The Skeptics' Guide to the Future: What Yesterday's Science and Science Fiction Tell Us about the World of Tomorrow by Dr. Steven Novella, Jay Novella, and Bob Novella: https://bookshop.org/p/books/the-skeptics-guide-to-the-future-what-yesterday-s-science-and-science-fiction-tell-us-about-the-world-of-tomorrow-steven-novella/18588557?ean=9781538709542Read the other book from the Novella brothers: The Skeptics' Guide to the Future: What Yesterday's Science and Science Fiction Tell Us about the World of Tomorrow: https://bookshop.org/p/books/the-skeptics-guide-to-the-future-what-yesterday-s-science-and-science-fiction-tell-us-about-the-world-of-tomorrow-steven-novella/18588557?ean=9781538709542Read the other books that Dr. Novella mentioned!The Demon-Haunted World: Science as a Candle in the Dark by Carl Sagan: https://bookshop.org/p/books/the-demon-haunted-world-science-as-a-candle-in-the-dark-ann-druyan/6315853?ean=9780345409461Why People Believe Weird Things: Pseudoscience, Superstition, and Other Confusions of Our Time by Michael Shermer: https://bookshop.org/p/books/why-people-believe-weird-things-pseudoscience-superstition-and-other-confusions-of-our-time-michael-shermer/11054136?ean=9780805070897Nonsense on Stilts by Massimo Pigliucci: https://bookshop.org/p/books/nonsense-on-stilts-massimo-pigliucci/8283291?ean=9780226495996Support The Murder Sheet by buying a t-shirt here: https://www.murdersheetshop.com/Send tips to murdersheet@gmail.com.The Murder Sheet is a production of Mystery Sheet LLC .See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

DISCLAMER >>>>>>    The Ditch Lab Coat podcast serves solely for general informational purposes and does not serve as a substitute for professional medical services such as medicine or nursing. It does not establish a doctor/patient relationship, and the use of information from the podcast or linked materials is at the user's own risk. The content does not aim to replace professional medical advice, diagnosis, or treatment, and users should promptly seek guidance from healthcare professionals for any medical conditions.   >>>>>> The expressed opinions belong solely to the hosts and guests, and they do not necessarily reflect the views or opinions of the Hospitals, Clinics, Universities, or any other organization associated with the host or guests.       Disclosures: Ditch The Lab Coat podcast is produced by (Podkind.co) and is independent of Dr. Bonta's teaching and research roles at McMaster University, Temerty Faculty of Medicine and Queens University. Welcome to "Ditch the Lab Coat," the podcast where we dive deep into health issues and medical discussions with leading experts.In today's episode, Dr. Mark Bonta chats with psychiatrist Dr. Nik Grujich, who specializes in mood and anxiety disorders and directs mental health programs at the University of Toronto.Together, they'll explore the intricacies of prolonged exposure therapy for PTSD, the evolutionary roots of anxiety, and the line between normal and abnormal behavior. They'll also tackle the impact of modern technology on children's mental health, delve into the complexities of diagnosing mental health conditions using the DSM and ICD, and highlight the resilience of the human mind.From personal stories and cultural insights to professional perspectives on mental well-being, this conversation promises a comprehensive look at the ways our minds cope with adversity and how therapeutic techniques can foster resilience. Plus, hear their engaging discussion on the role of cognitive behavioral therapy and the promising future of biomarkers in mental health diagnosis and personalized care.Get ready for an enlightening and thought-provoking episode that underscores the importance of holistic health and the powerful intersection between our minds, behavior, and physical well-being. Join us for this compelling conversation on "Ditch the Lab Coat" with Dr. Nik Grujich!Timestamps :06:52 Immigrant upbringing, limited discussion, led to psychiatry.11:11 Socialization and nurturing have evolutionary and practical aspects.19:40 Anxiety leads to checking and relief.20:34 Obsessive compulsive disorder: intrusive thoughts, rituals, distress.27:11 Anxiety linked to evolution and survival instincts.36:39 Anxiety disorders, specific phobias, and PTSD.38:15 Specific phobias may not be relevant.43:53 Parents struggle to address their children's anxiety.52:08 Anxiety treatment involves trust, support, and challenge.57:07 Flooding therapy works, especially for PTSD treatment.01:01:35 Rick Arsenault, a specialist in internal medicine, leads advanced training for unexplained symptoms nationwide. His approach integrates mind and body, with remarkable results, including lower recurrence of heart attacks compared to medication use.01:05:26 Fascination with normal and abnormal human behavior.

DISCLAMER >>>>>>    The Ditch Lab Coat podcast serves solely for general informational purposes and does not serve as a substitute for professional medical services such as medicine or nursing. It does not establish a doctor/patient relationship, and the use of information from the podcast or linked materials is at the user's own risk. The content does not aim to replace professional medical advice, diagnosis, or treatment, and users should promptly seek guidance from healthcare professionals for any medical conditions.   >>>>>> The expressed opinions belong solely to the hosts and guests, and they do not necessarily reflect the views or opinions of the Hospitals, Clinics, Universities, or any other organization associated with the host or guests.       Disclosures: Ditch The Lab Coat podcast is produced by (Podkind.co) and is independent of Dr. Bonta's teaching and research roles at McMaster University, Temerty Faculty of Medicine and Queens University. Welcome to another episode of "Ditch the Lab Coat with Dr. Mark Bonta," where we critically examine health issues with a scientific lens, always reminding our listeners that this podcast does not replace professional medical services. Today, we delve into Part 2 of our conversation with Dr. Ric Arseneau, an expert on chronic conditions like fibromyalgia and chronic fatigue syndrome.In this episode, Dr. Arseneau tackles the many misconceptions medical students and residents often hold about fibromyalgia and chronic fatigue syndrome, two conditions frequently dismissed as mere psychological issues. He highlights the importance of recognizing these ailments as legitimate medical conditions and discusses the challenges patients face, both from the healthcare system and societal perceptions.Dr. Arseneau provides an in-depth look at the nature of central sensitivity syndromes and their treatments, advocating cognitive behavioral therapy and other behavioral therapies. He notes the crucial role of attitude over mere labeling of conditions, emphasizing a treatment approach focusing on remission.The conversation also covers the fight or flight system's influence on these conditions and highlights the importance of neuroplasticity, stress management, and self-care. Both Dr. Arseneau and Dr. Bonta discuss the significant impacts of small traumas, administrative burdens, and legal stresses on physician burnout and overall health.Moreover, Dr. Arseneau shares his initiatives, such as setting up neuroplasticity support groups, underscoring the power of group therapy despite the lack of extensive evidence. They discuss systematic issues within the healthcare system, the importance of good evidence-based interventions, and the hope for improved access to care for conditions like long COVID.In this informative installment, we also touch on the widespread benefits of mental care for physical health, the effects of neuroinflammation and neuroplasticity, and the low-cost, low-risk interventions like cyclic sighing. Dr. Bonta thoughtfully reflects on applying these insights to his practice and daily life to help patients and listeners alike build mental resilience.Join us as we explore how understanding, evidence-based treatment, and compassion can greatly improve the quality of life for patients with chronic conditions, challenging the existing healthcare paradigms and cultural misconceptions. Don't miss this enlightening discussion that promises to leave you with practical tips and hope for a brighter, more inclusive future in healthcare.Episode Timestamps :00:00 Healthcare expert discusses fibromyalgia and chronic fatigue.03:25 Insightful interview with Dr. Rick Arsenault.07:12 Somatic symptom disorder misdiagnosed for unexplained symptoms.11:22 Impaired physical capacity affects societal support.15:48 Support groups provide crucial validation and understanding.17:40 Changing attitudes towards fibromyalgia treatment is crucial.22:48 Refrains from using "cure," emphasizes "remission."24:37 Inadequate support for central sensitivity syndromes in Canada.27:19 Zebra-escape prompts return to neurobaseline, program options.30:22 Vagal system, tone, and nerve for alternative treatments.34:00 Be cautious of costly, invasive health recommendations.37:25 Physician burnout due to non-clinical challenges.42:47 Early stress leads to serious health issues.46:56 Future of patient care for syndromes discussed.50:32 Remote recording lacks personal in-person nuances.54:29 Promote mental resilience and physical well-being. 

Dr. Jonathan Howard and Wendy Orent tackle the contentious issue of school closures during the COVID-19 pandemic. They explore the narrative that school closures were merely a choice influenced by cautious politicians and unions, contrasting it with the reality that the virus itself forced many schools to shut down. The hosts discuss the devastating effects on students, teachers, and families, highlighting cases of illness, death, and the rise in COVID orphans.    They also criticize certain medical professionals for advocating mass infection strategies and collaborating with child labor proponents. The episode aims to debunk pandemic revisionism and emphasize the real costs of the pandemic on education and public health.   Resources "COVID has left thousands of U.S. children orphans. Few states are addressing the crisis," The Guardian, 2023. "New York City students are missing school in record numbers," The New York Times, 2021. "Child COVID deaths more than doubled in Florida as kids returned to the classroom," Politico, 2021. "Teen Suicide Plummeted During COVID-19 School Closures, New Study Finds," Forbes, 2023. "Let the Kids Work," Jeffrey Tucker, 2016. "Was Closing Schools an Obvious and Colossal Mistake?" Science-Based Medicine, 2022. "We Want Them Infected: The Realities of COVID-19 School Policies," We Want Them Infected Podcast, 2024. "The case against COVID tests for the young and healthy," Jay Bhattacharya and Martin Kulldorf, 2020. "Should we let children catch Omicron?" Vinay Prasad, 2022. "Leak Brownstone Institute Emails Reveal Support for Child Labor and Underage Smoking," Walker Bragman, 2022. Connect with us further on https://sciencebasedmedicine.org/author/jonathanhoward/  The Fine Print: The content presented in the "We Want Them Infected" Podcast and associated book is intended for informational and educational purposes only.    The views and opinions expressed by the speakers, hosts, and guests on the podcast do not necessarily reflect the views of the creators, producers, or distributors. The information provided in this podcast should not be considered as a substitute for professional medical, scientific, or legal advice. Listeners and readers are encouraged to consult with relevant experts and authorities for specific guidance and information.   The creators of the podcast and book have made reasonable efforts to ensure that the information provided is accurate and up to date. However, as the field of medical science and the understanding of the COVID-19 pandemic continue to evolve, there may be new developments and insights that are not covered in this content.   The creators are not responsible for any errors or omissions in the content or for any actions taken based on the information provided. They disclaim any liability for any loss, injury, or damage incurred by individuals who rely on the content.   Listeners and readers are urged to use their judgment and conduct their own research when interpreting the information presented in the "We Want Them Infected" podcast and book. It is essential to stay informed about the latest updates, guidelines, and recommendations related to COVID-19 and vaccination from reputable sources, such as government health agencies and medical professionals. By accessing and using the content, you acknowledge and accept the terms of this disclaimer.   Please consult with appropriate experts and authorities for specific guidance on matters related to health, science, and the COVID-19 pandemic.  

DISCLAMER >>>>>>    The Ditch Lab Coat podcast serves solely for general informational purposes and does not serve as a substitute for professional medical services such as medicine or nursing. It does not establish a doctor/patient relationship, and the use of information from the podcast or linked materials is at the user's own risk. The content does not aim to replace professional medical advice, diagnosis, or treatment, and users should promptly seek guidance from healthcare professionals for any medical conditions.   >>>>>> The expressed opinions belong solely to the hosts and guests, and they do not necessarily reflect the views or opinions of the Hospitals, Clinics, Universities, or any other organization associated with the host or guests.       Disclosures: Ditch The Lab Coat podcast is produced by (Podkind.co) and is independent of Dr. Bonta's teaching and research roles at McMaster University, Temerty Faculty of Medicine and Queens University. Introduction to our guestToday, we dive deep into the world of cardiac surgery with our esteemed guest, Dr. Bobby Yanagawa, Division Head of Cardiac Surgery at St. Michael's Hospital. This episode unpacks the thrilling, yet demanding life of a heart surgeon, exploring everything from the adrenaline of emergency surgeries to the finesse required for elective procedures. Dr. Yanagawa, distinguished for his mastery in the realm of heart health, shares his insights on managing heart disease risk factors and the advances in surgical technology like transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR). We'll also touch on the emotional weight of decision-making in life-threatening treatments, and how surgeons like Dr. Yanagawa navigate the complexities of patient care. Moreover, beyond the scalpel and sutures, we discuss the critical balance between personal life and professional dedication, aiming to unearth the reality of medical practice in contrast to its often sensationalized portrayals. So, tune in as we explore the heart of the matter on "Ditch the Labcoat."Episode Breakdown : The discussion opens with Dr. Yanagawa comparing the intensive concentration required in the operating room to entering a martial arts dojo, a place where focus is paramount and the external world fades away. This analogy extends into a broader discussion on the parallels between martial arts and medical education, emphasizing humility, continual learning, and respect for expertise.Moving through the intricacies of heart health, the conversation covers a wide array of topics, from the technological advancements in procedures like Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement (TAVR) to the challenges of maintaining a work-life balance in such a demanding field. Dr. Yanagawa shares insights into the surgical intricacies of managing acute emergencies like aortic dissections and the bread-and-butter of elective coronary bypass procedures.A significant portion of the dialogue focuses on the ethical and emotional dimensions of heart surgery, particularly regarding patient interactions and the decision-making process concerning surgical risks and life expectancy. The emotional weight of conveying the realities of heart surgery to patients and their families highlights the profound impact of medical professionalism and empathy in clinical practice.Moreover, Dr. Yanagawa reflects on the broader implications of modern lifestyle choices on health, contrasting today's sedentary habits with the more active, hunter-gatherer past, and how these shifts contribute to chronic health issues. This serves as a springboard into a deeper discussion on the interplay between genetics, lifestyle, and preventive health care.As the episode winds down, both doctors discuss the future of heart surgery, including the potential for growing organs in labs and the evolving role of artificial hearts. The conversation also touches on the use of different heart valves, from pig and cow valves to mechanical options, outlining the considerations that guide their use in different patient scenarios.Throughout the episode, Dr. Bonta and Dr. Yanagawa repeatedly circle back to the importance of deriving purpose from their work and the intrinsic motivation needed to navigate the pressures of the medical field. The episode not only sheds light on the technical and ethical facets of cardiac surgery but also humanizes the surgeons behind the scalpel, revealing their passions, challenges, and the delicate balance they maintain between saving lives and living their own.Topics Covered 1. Introduction to Guest and Episode Focus   - Introduction of Dr. Bobby Yanagawa, a division head of cardiac surgery at St. Michael's Hospital   - Overview of the episode's focus on heart surgery, health management, and the reality of healthcare.2. The Reality of a Surgical Career   - Dr. Yanagawa's excitement for elective and emergency procedures.   - Challenges and rewards of being a cardiothoracic surgeon and internist.3. Impact of Modern Lifestyle on Health   - Discussion on how modern living contrasts with hunter-gatherer lifestyles.   - Evolutionary lifestyle effects on human health.4. Handling Medical Emergencies and Procedures   - The thrill and pressures of dealing with medical emergencies.   - Mortality risks and emotional dimensions of discussing life-threatening treatments.5. Surgical Decision-Making and Ethics   - Patient reactions and emotional impacts when facing serious health decisions.   - Consulting with colleagues on borderline cases and ethical considerations in healthcare.6. Advancements in Medical Technology   - Discussion on the potential of growing blood vessels and organs in labs.   - Technological advancements like transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR).7. Education and Mentorship in Medicine   - Importance of providing proper feedback and support to medical learners.   - Drawing parallels between martial arts training and medical education.8. Personal Motivations and Career Choices   - Dr. Yanagawa's personal reasons for becoming a heart surgeon.   - The day-to-day realities and the diversities within the medical field.9. Health Management and Chronic Diseases   - Importance of medication adherence in managing diabetes.   - The role of lifestyle modifications in managing chronic diseases.10. Work-Life Balance and Burnout    - Importance of balancing professional obligations with personal life.    - Strategies to avoid burnout and maintain a fulfilling career.11. Discussion on Heart Valves and Prostheses    - Different types of heart valves and their suitability for various patients.    - Future possibilities and current limitations of artificial heart technology.12. Concluding Thoughts    - Reflections on deriving purpose from work and making a difference.    - Recap of the importance of a real understanding of the healthcare profession beyond media portrayals.This sequence offers a structured breakdown of the episode's discussion, providing a clear roadmap for listeners to understand the complexities and nuances of a career in heart surgery as well as broader healthcare issues.

Hosts Jonathan Howard and Wendy Orent critically examine the strategy of intentionally infecting unvaccinated populations to reach herd immunity. The discussion revisits predictions made by health experts in the early stages of the pandemic, highlighting how optimistic expectations often fell short in the face of evolving challenges, such as the emergence of new variants. The conversation covers significant dates and statements from various health experts, analyzing their implications and the reality of their outcomes. The hosts discuss the ethical and practical considerations of exposing children and young adults to the virus, questioning the morality and feasibility of such approaches. Reflecting on the journey of the pandemic, the episode emphasizes the complexity of herd immunity as a concept and its role in public health strategy. It calls for a nuanced understanding of herd immunity, recognizing the importance of vaccination and the limitations of natural infection in controlling the spread of COVID-19. Through this detailed examination, "We Want Them Infected" provides listeners with a comprehensive understanding of herd immunity, challenging previous assumptions and advocating for a more cautious and evidence-based approach to ending the pandemic.   List of Resources Articles by health experts mentioned in the podcast (e.g., Dr. John Ioannidis, Marty McCary, Monica Gandhi, Dr. Lucy McBride). Science-Based Medicine website for articles on herd immunity and COVID-19 predictions. Johns Hopkins resources on herd immunity and vaccination strategies. The Great Barrington Declaration and its frequently asked questions for perspectives on herd immunity. CDC and WHO guidance on COVID-19, vaccination, and herd immunity. Research studies on the effectiveness of natural immunity and vaccination against COVID-19 variants.   Connect with us further on jonathanhowardmd.com  The Fine Print: The content presented in the "We Want Them Infected" Podcast and associated book is intended for informational and educational purposes only.    The views and opinions expressed by the speakers, hosts, and guests on the podcast do not necessarily reflect the views of the creators, producers, or distributors. The information provided in this podcast should not be considered as a substitute for professional medical, scientific, or legal advice. Listeners and readers are encouraged to consult with relevant experts and authorities for specific guidance and information.   The creators of the podcast and book have made reasonable efforts to ensure that the information provided is accurate and up to date. However, as the field of medical science and the understanding of the COVID-19 pandemic continue to evolve, there may be new developments and insights that are not covered in this content.   The creators are not responsible for any errors or omissions in the content or for any actions taken based on the information provided. They disclaim any liability for any loss, injury, or damage incurred by individuals who rely on the content.   Listeners and readers are urged to use their judgment and conduct their own research when interpreting the information presented in the "We Want Them Infected" podcast and book. It is essential to stay informed about the latest updates, guidelines, and recommendations related to COVID-19 and vaccination from reputable sources, such as government health agencies and medical professionals. By accessing and using the content, you acknowledge and accept the terms of this disclaimer.   Please consult with appropriate experts and authorities for specific guidance on matters related to health, science, and the COVID-19 pandemic.  

Dr. Jonathan Howard takes a solo dive into the rationale behind some medical professionals' controversial endorsement of natural COVID-19 infection over vaccination to achieve herd immunity. Addressing a query from a listener, the podcast episode aims to uncover the motivations behind such a high-risk strategy, beyond the commonly cited reasons of greed and political influence. Throughout the episode, Howard examines the stance of several respected doctors from prestigious institutions who surprisingly supported the notion of purposeful exposure to the virus among the unvaccinated, particularly children and young adults. This approach starkly contrasts with the global push for vaccination and stringent public health measures. Central to the discussion is Dr. John Ioannidis, known for his early pandemic research that suggested COVID-19's infection fatality rate was significantly lower than initially feared, likening it to that of seasonal influenza. Ioannidis's viewpoints, including skepticism towards lockdowns and the emphasis on the severe potential side effects of pandemic containment measures, are dissected to understand the underpinning logic of the pro-infection movement. Howard critically navigates through Ioannidis's and others' assertions, contrasting them with the devastating impact of COVID-19 as it unfolded, highlighting the dangers of underestimating the virus's lethality and overestimating herd immunity's achievability without vaccines. The episode concludes on a reflective note, pondering the lessons learned from this pandemic approach and the importance of humility and adaptability in the face of evolving scientific evidence.   List of Resources: Perspectives on the Pandemic, Dr. John Ioannidis Interview on YouTube. COVID-19 Antibody Seroprevalence in Santa Clara County, California - Study by Dr. John Ioannidis. The Great Barrington Declaration website. Science-Based Medicine blog - Analysis and critique of pandemic responses. CDC COVID-19 Response - Official data and guidelines. WHO COVID-19 Dashboard - Global statistics and research updates. "Coronavirus Disease 2019: The Harms of Exaggerated Information and Non-Evidence Based Measures" - Article by Dr. John Ioannidis. The Washington Post - Articles discussing Dr. Ioannidis's pandemic viewpoints. Stat News - "A Fiasco in the Making? As the Coronavirus Pandemic Takes Hold, We Are Making Decisions Without Reliable Data" by Dr. John Ioannidis. Fareed Zakaria GPS - Interviews discussing the pandemic response. Connect with us further on jonathanhowardmd.com  The Fine Print: The content presented in the "We Want Them Infected" Podcast and associated book is intended for informational and educational purposes only.    The views and opinions expressed by the speakers, hosts, and guests on the podcast do not necessarily reflect the views of the creators, producers, or distributors. The information provided in this podcast should not be considered as a substitute for professional medical, scientific, or legal advice. Listeners and readers are encouraged to consult with relevant experts and authorities for specific guidance and information.   The creators of the podcast and book have made reasonable efforts to ensure that the information provided is accurate and up to date. However, as the field of medical science and the understanding of the COVID-19 pandemic continue to evolve, there may be new developments and insights that are not covered in this content.   The creators are not responsible for any errors or omissions in the content or for any actions taken based on the information provided. They disclaim any liability for any loss, injury, or damage incurred by individuals who rely on the content.   Listeners and readers are urged to use their judgment and conduct their own research when interpreting the information presented in the "We Want Them Infected" podcast and book. It is essential to stay informed about the latest updates, guidelines, and recommendations related to COVID-19 and vaccination from reputable sources, such as government health agencies and medical professionals.   By accessing and using the content, you acknowledge and accept the terms of this disclaimer.   Please consult with appropriate experts and authorities for specific guidance on matters related to health, science, and the COVID-19 pandemic.  

Welcome to Ditch the Lab Coat with Dr. Mark Bonta, the podcast that delves into science-based medicine and health skepticism. In this episode, we'll explore the question of whether your doctor practices what they preach when it comes to health advice. From diet tips to exercise routines and vaccination choices, we'll uncover what's really happening behind the scenes. Join us as top healthcare experts engage in lively debates on the latest medical issues and make complex concepts accessible to all. Don't miss out on the new episode every Wednesday, available on your favorite streaming platform or at Labcoat FM.DISCLAMER >>>>>>    The Ditch Lab Coat podcast serves solely for general informational purposes and does not serve as a substitute for professional medical services such as medicine or nursing. It does not establish a doctor/patient relationship, and the use of information from the podcast or linked materials is at the user's own risk. The content does not aim to replace professional medical advice, diagnosis, or treatment, and users should promptly seek guidance from healthcare professionals for any medical conditions.                                                  >>>>>> The expressed opinions belong solely to the hosts and guests, and they do not necessarily reflect the views or opinions of the Hospitals, Clinics, Universities, or any other organization associated with the host or guests.                                                                                  Disclosures: Ditch The Lab Coat podcast is produced by (Podkind.co) and is independent of Dr. Bonta's teaching and research roles at McMaster University, Temerty Faculty of Medicine and Queens University. © 2024 ditchthelabcoat.com - All Rights Reserved 

Jonathan Howard is a neurologist and psychiatrist who practices at NYU-Bellevue and posts frequently on Science Based Medicine.Transcript, unedited, with links to audioEric Topol (00:05):Well, hello, Eric Topol with Ground Truths and I'm really pleased to have the chance to talk with Jonathan Howard today, who is a neurologist and psychiatrist at NYU at Bellevue and has written quite an amazing book published a few months months ago called We Want Them Infected, so welcome Jonathan.Jonathan Howard (00:27):Hey, thanks so much for having me. I really appreciate it.Eric Topol (00:30):Yeah, I mean, there's so much to talk about because we're still in the throes of the pandemic with this current wave at least by wastewater levels and no reason to think it isn't by infections at least the second largest in the pandemic course. I guess I want to start off first with you being into the neuropsychiatric world. How did you become, obviously caring for patients with Covid, but how did you decide to become a Covidologist?Jonathan Howard (00:59):Well, I developed a strong interest in the anti-vaccine movement of all things about a decade ago when a doctor who I trained with here at NYU in Bellevue morphed into one of the country's biggest anti-vaccine doctors a woman by the name of Dr. Kelly Brogan. I knew her well and we were friends; She was smart and after she left NYU in Bellevue, she became one of the country's most outspoken anti-vaccine doctors and really started leaving off the wall things that germ theory didn't exist, that HIV doesn't cause AIDS. When Covid struck, she felt that SARS-CoV-2 was not killing people because she doesn't believe any virus kills people and so I became very fascinated about how smart people can believe strange, incorrect things and I dedicated myself to learning everything that I could about the anti-vaccine movement. In 2018, I wrote a book chapter on the anti-vaccine movement with law professor Dorit Reiss.(02:01):And so when the pandemic came around, I was really prepared for all of their arguments, but I got two very important things wrong. I thought the anti-vaccine movement would shrink. I was wrong about that and I was also really caught off guard by the fact that a lot of mainstream physicians started to parrot pandemic anti-vaccine talking points. So all of the stuff that I'd heard about measles and the HPV vaccine, these are benign viruses, the vaccines weren't tested, blah, blah, blah. I started hearing from professors at Stanford, Harvard, UCSF, Johns Hopkins, all about Covid and the Covid vaccine.Eric Topol (02:40):Yeah, we're going to get to some of the leading institutions and individuals within them and how they were part of this, and surprisingly too, of course. Before we do that in the title of your book, We Want Them Infected, it seems to bring in particularly the Great Barrington Declaration that is just protect the vulnerable elderly and don't worry about the rest. Can you restate that declaration and whether that's a core part of what you were writing about?Jonathan Howard (03:21):Yeah, the title of the book is to be taken literally. It comes from a quote by Dr. Paul Alexander, who was an epidemiologist in the Trump administration and he said in July 4th, 2020, before anyone had been vaccinated, infants, kids, teens, young people, young adults, middle age with no conditions, et cetera, have zero to little risk so we want to use them to develop herd, we want them infected. This was formalized in the Great Barrington Declaration, which was written by three doctors, our epidemiologist, none of whom cared for Covid patients, Jay Bhattacharya at Stanford, Martin Kulldorf who at the time was at Harvard, and Sunetra Gupta who is at Oxford. If I could state their plan in the most generous terms, it would be the following that Covid is much more dangerous for certain people, but we can relatively easily identify older people and people with underlying conditions.(04:19):It's much more benign for a healthy 10-year-old, for example and their idea was that you could separate these two groups, the vulnerable and the not vulnerable. If the not vulnerable people were allowed to catch the virus develop natural immunity that would create herd immunity. They said that this would occur in three to six months and in that time, once herd immunity had been achieved, the vulnerable people who have been in theory sheltering at home are in otherwise safe places could reenter society. So it was really the best of both worlds because lives would be saved and schools would be open, the economy would be open. It sounded very good on paper, kind of like my idea of stopping crime by locking up all the bad guys. What could go wrong? It was a very short document. It took about maybe an hour to write.(05:17):I imagine there were some nefarious forces behind it. One of the main instigators of it was a man by the name of Jeffrey Tucker, who sounds like a cartoon villain and he worked at the, I forget, is the American Enterprise Research Institute. It was some right-wing think tank and he is a literally pro child labor. He wrote an article in 2016 called Let the Kids Work, which suggested that children drop out of school to work at Walmart and Chick-fil-A I'm not making that up and he's overtly pro child smoking. He feels that children, teenagers should smoke because it's cool and then they can quit in their twenties before there are any bad harms from it. Needless to say, the Great Barrington's premises that one infection led to permanent immunity didn't really work out so well, but they were very influential. They had already met with President Trump in August of 2020 and the day after their Great Barrington Declaration was signed, they were invited to the White House. This was October 5th, 2020 to meet with Secretary Human Health and Secretary Services, Alex Azar, and they are advisors to Ron DeSantis. They became mini celebrities over the course of the pandemic and it was a very pro infectious movement. As I said, the title of the book, We Want Them Infected, and they did.Eric Topol (06:42):Right. In fact, I debated Martin Kulldorf, one of the three principals of the Great Barrington Declaration. It was interesting because if you go back to that debate we brought out, at least I tried to highlight the many flaws in this. You've mentioned at least one major flaw, which was to this virus. There's not a long-term immunity built by infections. It's just, as we say with vaccines the immunity for neutralizing antibody production and protection from infections and severe Covid is limited duration for four to six months, and at least for the antibodies and maybe the T-cell immunity is longer, but that doesn't necessarily kick in and quickly. So that was one major flaw, but there are many others, so maybe you could just take that apart further. For example, I like your analogy to lock up all the bad guys, but compartmentalizing people is not so easy in life and I think this is a significant concern of the idea that is, while you indicated there may be some merits if things went as planned, but what else was a flaw of that argument or proposition?Jonathan Howard (08:11):So yeah, this could be a 10-hour conversation and I think importantly, we don't have to speak hypothetically here. A lot of defenders of the Great Barrington Declaration will say, oh, we never tried it, but they promised that herd immunity would arrive in three to six months after lockdowns ended. So we don't have to speak theoretically about what would've happened had we done it. Lockdowns ended a while ago and we don't have herd immunity. They were very clear on this. Dr. Kulldorf tweeted in December 2020 that if we use focus protection, the pandemic will be over in three to six months. So, what could have gone wrong if about 250 million unvaccinated Americans contracted Covid simultaneously in October and November of 2020? A lot of things, as we said, they dichotomized people into vulnerable and not vulnerable, but of course it exists on this. The only bad outcome they recognized was death.(09:11):They felt that either you died or you had the sniffle for a few days and you emerged unscathed. Separating vulnerable people from not vulnerable people is a lot easier than it sounds and I think by way of comparison, look at the mRNA vaccine trials. You can read their protocols and the protocols for these trials were 300-400 pages of dense policies and procedures. The Great Barrington Declaration, if you go to their frequently asked questions section, they made some suggestions, which sound great, like older people should have food delivered at home during times of high transmission, but setting up a national or even statewide food delivery program, that's a lot harder than it sounds. When asked about that later, Dr. Bhattacharya has said they could have used DoorDash, for example. So it was just very clear that no serious thought went into this because it was really an unactionable thing.(10:21):It's not as if public health officials had billions of dollars at their disposal and they weren't many dictators. They couldn't set up home food delivery programs overnight like they suggested and two months after the Great Barrington Declaration was published, vaccines became available so it became obsolete. Not that vaccines have turned out to be the perfect panacea that we had hoped for, unfortunately, but the idea that young people should continue to try to get natural low immunity in favor instead of vaccination became at that point obscene, but they still are anti-vaccine for young people and for children, which I find despicable at this point.Eric Topol (11:07):Right, the data is unequivocal that there's benefit across the board. In fact, just last week in JAMA two senior people at FDA, Peter Marks and Robert Califf published the graphs of how across all ages there was reduction in mortality with the vaccines. That gets us to, as you say now into the vaccine era of Covid and one of the things that the anti-vax community jumped on was when we moved from Delta to Omicron where previous Omicron, there was exceptionally good protection from infections, 95%. It was rare for people to get to have spread with the up-to-date vaccine with the third original strain booster. But with Omicron that fell apart and if infections were breakthroughs were exceedingly common, this led to tremendous fodder for the anti-vax saying the vaccines don't work beyond the false claims that they were, whether they're killing people or gene therapy or microchips or all these other crazy notions. But can you talk to that? Because if you still protect against deaths, Long Covid and hospitalizations, that seems to be pretty important. It's disappointing, and obviously we need ways to prevent infections or otherwise we don't really have an effective exit strategy for the pandemic. This was used and still is used today as a reason that vaccines are worthless if indeed, they're not even dangerous.Jonathan Howard (12:55):The vaccines when they were initially came out, as we all know, were 95% effective, but the vaccines were brand new and the virus was brand new. All of this was less than a year old and what's interesting is, unfortunately, I realized this after I wrote my book, but I published an article about this on Science-Based Medicine where I've been blogging throughout the pandemic. So, if anyone can go there, I wrote an article on October 1st, 2023, called over-hyping vaccines it wasn't pro-vaccine it was pro stop worrying about Covid. So almost all of the doctors that I mentioned in this book vastly overhyped vaccines as soon as they came out saying they were 100% effective against severe disease, that they completely blocked transmission and just really overselling the vaccine saying that they're going to definitely end the pandemic and mocking anyone who disagreed. Now these doctors are saying, oh, there's a lack of trust in the medical community.(13:57):We need to rebuild trust without holding a mirror to their statements. Dr. Bhattacharya, for example, participated in a round table discussion with Governor Ron DeSantis at the very end of July. On August 1st, 2021, Ron DeSantis tweeted out a quote by Dr. Bhattacharya that said, we have protected the vulnerable by vaccinating the older population. We have provided them with enormous protection against severe disease and death. That's why you see, even as the cases have risen in Sweden, blah, blah, blah, we've protected the vulnerable. The number of deaths have not risen proportionally and this was right when the Delta wave was taking off within. This is the one thing that was interesting, this pandemic, because you had people make prediction and within days their predictions were falsified. That was a tragic thing to see, but that's 20,000 Floridians or some number like that died during the Delta wave in Florida. More Floridians died after Dr. Bhattacharya said the vulnerable have been protected than before that. So I think there was a lot of over-hyping in the vaccines, and I get where this came from. We as doctors, we wanted everyone to get the vaccines. We wanted to encourage everyone to get the vaccine. I probably did this myself at some times, but I do think that that was a problem, but the same doctors who are now saying that the vaccines were overhyped and were often guilty of them.Eric Topol (15:35):Right. Well, I mean, I think as you said, we didn't know the virus is going to evolve with this Omicron event with well over 35 new mutations in the spike protein, no less other parts of the virus and then of course, recently we saw another superimposed Omicron event with this BA.2.86 or JN.1 variant. The problem with this of the vaccine takedown, and as you well know because you've been studying this for more than Covid, is that it extended to many other parts of the pandemic, such as masks, such as there's no such thing as Long Covid or it's exceptionally rare and it bleeds through other areas. So could you comment about that? That is the anti-science. It's not just anti-vax.Jonathan Howard (16:30):No, you're absolutely right. I don't talk a lot about Long Covid just because I think a lot of other people do a much better job of that. I have a hard time grasping the numbers myself. You'll read one study, it's one in a thousand, you'll read another study. Oh, 50% of people have Long Covid. My attitude towards Long Covid is I don't know exactly how many people have it, but some people are severely affected by it. We have a lot to learn about it, this is a brand new virus. We are going to be learning about this the rest of our lives, especially the consequences of repeat infections. A baby born today is going to be infected, what? 10 times by the time they go away to college. Who knows what are going to be the consequences of that? What does this mean for autoimmunity?(17:15):So my attitude with Long Covid and the long-term consequences are we just have to be very humble about this and again, all of the doctors who I discussed were very arrogant about this. They were writing in as early as March 2020 that school closures may prevent children from developing herd immunity. They spoke about infections as being beneficial for children, but you're right as well that these doctors cast doubt on all in any measures that were used to stop the virus masks, testing, ventilation, lockdowns. One of their core objections wasn't that they didn't feel that these were ineffective necessarily. They objected to lockdowns precisely because they stopped the spread of the virus, so you can read some articles from Scott Atlas in April 2020. He wrote several articles in the Hill, that publication saying it's time to stop the panic, et cetera. If people were as if panic was a bad reaction to Covid, as morgues were overflowing with dead bodies, panic was the right action. He said that the lockdowns have stopped Covid from spreading and stopped natural immunity from developing, which prevents us from reaching herd immunity. So again, these guys and the authors of the Great Barrington Declaration objected to lockdown saying they just postponed the inevitable, which there may be some truth to that. Probably everyone here has been infected by Covid at least one time, but postponing the inevitable, that's what I go to work every day trying to do.Eric Topol (19:04):And you could say a lot for putting off an infection, of course, as long as possible. And of course, even trying to put it off forever, because as you know very well, as we went on in the pandemic, we learned a lot then there was treatments such as paxlovid and far better treatments that were available for severe Covid, many randomized trials to help prevent deaths for people who were of high risk. The other thing that I guess I can't emphasize enough, and you had a whole chapter in the book, which is about children, kids, they're not so intrinsically protected. They can die, they can be hospitalized and there have been many deaths among them from Covid, even those who don't have coexisting conditions. So maybe you could talk a little bit about that, the flaw in that it's only people of advanced age or immunocompromised and that young people are bulletproof. That doesn't seem to be the case in reviewing all the data throughout the pandemic.Jonathan Howard (20:12):I mean, just to reemphasize the point that you made, that someone who gets Covid today, especially if they're vaccinated and boosted is in much better shape than someone who gets Covid, who got Covid in March or April 2020. The same way I hope someone who gets Covid in the year 2030 is going to be in better shape than we are today. But yes, back to pediatric Covid, the risk to any individual child is very small. So my kids have it, my nieces and nephews had it. I wasn't particularly worried and they fortunately had very mild disease, but there's 73 million children in the United States, and when you multiply a rare event by 73 million children, the numbers began to add up. So far around 2,000 children have died of Covid, which is comparable to what measles used to do before. In the pre pandemic days, hundreds of thousands of children have been hospitalized, and depending on the variant, about a third have needed ICU care.(21:15):And five to 10% have been intubated. Some children have had strokes, some children have had amputations. So it's not as bad, it's not as bad as car deaths. It's not as bad as bullets, but we don't have vaccines for those conditions and the vaccine is not a panacea for children. Some vaccinated children have died, but it's like wearing a seatbelt. You can die in a car crash wearing a seatbelt, but your odds are greatly enhanced if you are wearing a seatbelt, but all of these doctors who in 2020 state to their name, to the idea that we could get rid of Covid by spreading Covid be the purposeful infection of children, were unwilling to recognize that the vaccine can help them. They use many different techniques to minimize the benefits of the vaccine. One was to say that it never demonstrated efficacy against hospitalizations and deaths in randomized controlled trials, which is true in as far as it goes because it is very hard to detect rare events in randomized controlled trials unless you do a study of 200 to 300,000 children as was done with the polio vaccine.(22:36):And they suggested that this should have been done, that we should have re-enrolled hundreds of thousands of children in these trials, which would've taken, I don't know, five, ten years. So that's number one. We now have about 30 observational studies, and they all show the same. And by the way, there were six randomized controlled trials of the vaccine in children involving about 25,000 children. So they're not small trial. As I said, there are about 30 trials from around the world showing that the vaccine observational trials, so observational studies, I should say, showing that the vaccine is not perfect, but it's very good at preventing rare but serious side effects or serious harms of Covid. As you know, there was just a large study out of Penn a couple days ago showing that the vaccine during the Delta in the Omicron wave was extremely effective at preventing children from entering the ICU.(23:36):They also treated rare mild vaccine side effects as a fate worse than death and I mean that very literally, the vaccine in young men can cause myocarditis, which is mild in about 90-95% of people with it. I'm unaware of a single American who has been known to have died from vaccine myocarditis. These doctors made dozens of YouTube videos and editorials and commentaries all saying what a catastrophe vaccine myocarditis was. How dare you minimize vaccine myocarditis. When they also wrote editorials saying, young people should not fear death from Covid, and they spoke about death from Covid as milder than vaccine myocarditis when talking about deaths from Covid, they would say, oh, it's less than suicide. More children drown every year. They would just all sorts of crazy double standards.Eric Topol (24:38):Right. One of the things that's extraordinary in the book, Jonathan, is that you have, it isn't like you're just writing text about it. You have all the quotes, you have all the tweets, you have all the articles. I don't know how you did that. I mean, were you keeping an active list of everything that was, I mean, I liken it to remember during in the Trump administration, there was a guy in CNN, I'm trying to remember his name.Jonathan Howard (25:09):Dale something.Eric Topol (25:10):Dale, yeah. And he had a fact check every day, and he kept track of everything. That was his job full time, but it seemed like you were the only one that has this record of every statement written on the topics that we're discussing. How did you do it?Jonathan Howard (25:35):Well, I did it through the blog at Science-Based Medicine is that I'd been collecting these statements starting in May 2021, and it just grew out of that. And so basically, the book is sort of a reorganization, everything that I've been writing on that blog and I will say that the fact that I have so many direct quotes has made it impossible for these doctors to refute me, because if I'm wrong, then they're right. If they're right, then we'll have herd immunity in three to six months once the lockdowns are lifted, reinfections are very rare. Variants are nothing to worry about and so they have to make that case. What they've tried to do is they've tried to do some revisionist history. So, for example, Dr. Jerome Adams, who was Trump's surgeon general, and turned out to be very reasonable guy, recently posted on Twitter, I'll still call it that, that Scott Atlas wanted to, and he was right, wanted to infect people to achieve herd immunity.(26:49):And Dr. Jay Bhattacharya and Dr. Vinay Prasad, who's a misinformation oncologist at UCSF, we're a gas. They said, oh no, he didn't want to purposely infect children. We just wanted schools open. The harms of school closures were just so great. So they cast themselves as these very benevolent, we were just looking out for the children. We never wanted them infected. I never said that, I never thought that, but all you have to do is just read their own words. The ones who have responded to me have responded just by childish insults, really just calling me names. I'm a schmuck, I'm a grifter, I'm a B-list Covid influencer. None of them have ever tried to engage with any of the content and all that would require them to do is stand up for their own words, which they won't.Eric Topol (27:46):Alright. Now, we touched on it early in our conversation, but what was one of the surprising things on the one hand there are anti-vaxxers, like RFK Jr. and people, as you mentioned, the person that you knew at NYU who went on, but then there were these surprise people who were at top academic medical centers in the country that went into misinformation campaigns, whether it was deliberate because it was associated with all sorts of attention, or whether it was misinterpretation of data. I don't understand, but can you speculate what's going on there and whether or not the universities involved should have been somehow engaging with these individuals?Jonathan Howard (28:39):Yeah, so it's tough for me to understand their motives. I do think that what made them more dangerous than someone like Kelly Brogan or RFK Jr. By the way, these two worlds, which I kind of treated as separate, they're beginning to merge with people like Joseph Ladapo, for example. So they're not as separate as they once were and Dr. Vinay Prasad has praised RFK Jr. saying he would destroy Dr. Peter Hotez, a hero of vaccines in the debate. I mean, it's crazy, crazy stuff up, but I think the guys who I write about were more dangerous in that they mixed good advice with bad advice. So they would say very sensible things like, yes, you have to protect grandma. Grandma has to get vaccinated with bad advice, that the vaccine is more dangerous than Covid for children, for example. They also are very good, eloquent speakers who can speak in scientific jargon and use the language of evidence-based medicine, someone like Kelly Brogan, for example, would say that she uses intuition and higher ways of knowing, and crystals and tarot cards, these guys don't do that.(29:51):If we were to discuss our general approach to medicine, it would be no different than ours, than anyone's. They would say, we try to use science, evidence, data, logic, and reason to reach the best conclusions. So I think that that made them more dangerous. Again, what do I think their motivations were? I think a lot of it is some of these guys are natural born contrarians, which means that they just have to be a little bit different, that when everyone else is saying X, they got to say Y and that served them well in the beginning, in most of their careers and we need people like that In medicine, I would say that Nobel Prize winner, Katalin Kariko, I am probably butchering her name, but the Hungarian woman who developed the mRNA vaccines maybe fits that profile and so we need people like that in medicine.(30:39):I also think they had a hard time admitting air when they drastically underestimated Covid at the start of the pandemic, and all of them did predicting 10,000 people would die predicting that it would be less severe than the flu. They had a hard time saying, oops, I was wrong. Some doctors did that. Famously, Dr. Paul Offit, another vaccine hero, said at the beginning of March, I believe, or early February 2020, that he thought the flu was going to be more dangerous than Covid and when he turned out to be wrong, he said, oops, I was wrong. You might as well make an ass of yourself in front of a million people. But I think these guys couldn't admit air and once they had committed themselves to a policy, the purposeful mass infection of unvaccinated youth, it was hard to backtrack from that. What are you going to say?(31:26):Oops, I was wrong, and young people suffered and died because of what I said. No, I'm not going to say that. I'm going to say the vaccine is more dangerous than the virus so I think it was a lot of that. In terms of what universities should do, they're at a bind because if they speak out against these people, they're experts at weaponizing their delusions of self-persecution. I've been silenced, I've been censored. We need, even though, like I said, they became mini celebrities and met with Trump and DeSantis and advised Governor Glenn Youngkin and they were all over the news. They're huge social media presences. They were everywhere, but where I was in a hospital with Covid patient. So I think that if universities speak out, they run the risk of the Streisand effect. It's called amplifying people inadvertently and allowing them to claim their precious victim status, but if they don't speak out, which they really haven't done, they run the risk of what they're saying is this person carries the aperture. Am I pronouncing that word of our university, that we feel that this person is competent to speak on our behalf which is a problem.Eric Topol (32:38):No, I think we've just seen that, of course, with the three institutions that the presidents were brought in about a whole different matter, and how they didn't necessarily speak out as they could have a totally different matter, of course. This is a real tough one as you've outlined as to whether leaders of university, for example, at Stanford, the faculty did stand up and say, we're not supporting Scott Atlas or this or that. This didn't really happen at other universities that we've touched on at least. So the individuals now going forward here, there's a much bigger story than just Covid, and it's the anti-science, anti-vax movement, which is very dangerous. I think most people who are reasonable reviewing the data would say vaccines are just extraordinary for preserving health, but we're seeing now this movement has gotten legs, it's gotten funding, it's organized, and you're well familiar with Peter Hotez's book who gets through some of that substantiates where this has been with autism and where it's going.(33:59):So one of the problems is that there hasn't been much in the way of any antidote, any aggressive response to basically you have the corrections, the real time, the hall of shame, if you will, of this misinformation to have fact checkers, to get the story straight and perhaps not governmental sponsored because that's also an area of uncertainty of trust in public health, but some type of agency that could take on a corrective effort for the public to know what's fact and what's not. What are your thoughts of how we can get out of this mess?Jonathan Howard (34:46):Oh, I think it's going to get worse before it gets better. I think skepticism about the Covid vaccines, we're already seeing this as going to bleed into other vaccines. States are doing everything they can to get rid of what were once considered normal vaccine mandates. So I don't know how we're going to get out of it and I think any government agency designed to combat misinformation would become itself as, first of all, you got to be a little bit careful. We don't know who's going to be running that in 2025, right? I mean, Joseph Ladapo might be in charge of the government industry of misinformation depending on who wins election next. So we got to be careful with handing government that sort of, but I do think that more doctors need to do what I have done, what Dr. Peter Hotez has done, what you've done, what my mentor(35:37):Dr. David Gorski, who runs Science-Based Medicine and Steve Novella have done, which is to just speak out and to call out doctors. When we say, when we hear this misinformation, I think a lot of doctors are what we call shruggy, meaning they sort of shrug it off like, that person's kind of wacky. What are you going to do about it? But I think that we need to not tolerate it. We don't have to give them the victim status by saying, oh, you should be fired, you should be censored, this sort of thing, but just when these doctors make absurd statements by saying that the flu is more dangerous for children than Covid, we need to say no. Over the past three years, Covid has killed 2,000 children. The flu has killed about 300. 2,000 is bigger than 300. If I told you in 2019 virus A kills 2,000 people, virus B kills 300, you would not have a hard time answering that question and if you are trying to tell me now that the virus that killed 200 children is worse than the one that killed 2,000, that's absurd and we just shouldn't tolerate that sort of nonsense. I think that's the attitude that we need to have.Eric Topol (36:51):Yeah, I mean, I think it's very scary where we're headed, and it's ironic because we're seeing vaccine progression to pathogens never seen before, whether it's malaria, obviously, we have RSV vaccines and so many more that are coming. In addition, these same vaccines on the platform, whether it be mRNA and nanoparticles or proteins or whatnot, are being directed now to help amp up the immune response to cancer or to create vaccines that could help achieve tolerance to the immune system, an area that you work in multiple sclerosis and many other neurologic type one diabetes and on and on autoimmune conditions. So if we don't get this right, that if vaccines are trashed, we got some problems going forward.Jonathan Howard (37:46):We shouldn't call those vaccine. That's my suggestion number one. I'm half joking about that. We shouldn't. Sorry to cut you off, but yeah, we do have problems going forward, and like I said, I think it's going to get worse before it gets better and look at the Covid booster vaccination rates. I don't know what they are off the top of my head, but they're in the garbage.Eric Topol (38:08):19% in all Americans and we're one of the few countries that has it widely available for all adults, and only 35% in people 70 years and older, where there's a spike in hospitalizations right now that's comparable to the other waves of BA.2 and BA.5, and it's still rising. So yeah, the booster uptake has been very poor, especially in people at high risk. Absolutely right.Jonathan Howard (38:37):I think people have been influenced by the anti-vaccine movement, even when they don't recognize it. I think it's kind of permeated the culture because people have a very different attitude towards vaccines than they have to almost anything else in their life. I wouldn't say, for example, I don't need to go to the dentist again, because I went in 2020 and 2021 and 2022, I wouldn't say I don't need to go to the gym anymore because I went 10 times last year, for example. We recognize that there are certain things that we have to do for our health that have to be done on a frequent basis, and it's too bad that vaccination doesn't fit that bill. Again, I think one reason for this is that the vaccines were overhyped at the start of the pandemic, or at least in 2021, they were pitched as this panacea. This we're definitely going to solve things, and in retrospect, that was a mistake. We needed to proceed with a little bit more humility just about a brain. This is everyone's first pandemic, right?Eric Topol (39:35):Yeah. I mean, I think the unpredictability of the virus's evolution, which was very slow at first, and then of course it accelerated, was unforeseen and changed the entire profile of the protection forwarded by vaccines. I guess to wrap it up, Jonathan, I want to thank you for all the hard work you did to put this book together and your efforts to try to stand up for the evidence, the science that supports vaccines and the things that we can do to help preserve human health in a pandemic and beyond. I mean, in your practice of medicine that goes well, different and beyond a pathogen in caring for patients with neurologic conditions. I also, I guess would say I'm more hopeful that we will have oral nasal vaccines that do block infections, maybe just for a few months per spray or per inhalation and more durable vaccines that don't only last four to six months if we put our efforts and resources and priorities into it.(40:44):But I'm also worried that, as you say, the V word is a bad word now to many people. So I don't know that we've come up with any solution here outside of your idea of not calling vaccines, but it seems to me we have to be much more direct at dealing with the miss and disinformation movements that have grown so profoundly in the last few years and taking advantage of course of the pandemic fatigue and all the holes in our current tools that obviously there are no things that are fully protected, whether it's a vaccine or N95 mask or you name it. Any last comments about where are you headed? Are you still going to track this or are you had enough of it, or what's your next chapter in your work?Jonathan Howard (41:42):I'm going to still continue to write at Science-Based Medicine on this theme because I think that it's important as doctors that we regulate our own profession and that we hold our public communications to high standards, and I include myself in that. So in my book, I include several really stupid things that I said, and that might be the subject of a future article of dumb things I said, because I did say some dumb things. So I think we have to hold ourselves to a high standard when communicating with the public in a pandemic. So that's what I'm going to continue to do. I'm going to continue to do what I always do at Bellevue psych and NYU treat MS patients around on the inpatient service at Bellevue Hospital wouldn't trade it for the world.Eric Topol (42:29):Well, I want to thank you, and Bellevue is a tough place to work. I know it well, and that in itself says a lot about you. You're a person who I had not met before, only having read your work, but I don't detect one scintilla of hubris. You come across as a genuine person who is really interested in facts and evidence. I want to thank you for all of your work and look forward to future conversation.Jonathan Howard (42:58):Well, thanks for the kind words. I really appreciate it. It means a lot, and I appreciate all you've done on your Twitter feed. Whenever there's a new story. I get it from you first, and so I appreciate it.Eric Topol (43:08):Thanks so much, Jonathan.Commentary on this book's significance by Gregg Gonsalves, Associate Professor, Yale School of Public HealthOne of the untold stories of the COVID pandemic in the US is the role of medical and public health professionals in spreading disinformation, pushing for policies that exacerbate the virus' spread, and drive people away from important interventions, particularly vaccines, which blunt the deadly effects of SARSCOV2. Because of professional courtesy, solidarity or just sheer cowardice, many inside the professions have refused to take on these frauds, egomaniacs, purveyors of sickness and suffering in white coats. Jonathan Howard's book We Want Them Infected, though, names names. In painstaking detail, he builds an indictment of these men and women who have blood on their hands, abusing the trust of millions to peddle lies and falsehoods. This book is one for the ages, making it hard to sweep the complicity of these individuals with the virus under the carpet, leaving a record for the future, a cautionary tale for all of us. Get full access to Ground Truths at erictopol.substack.com/subscribe

Episode 2 - Latest Update on Urgent Virus Outbreaks, August 2023 Dialogue on Urgent Viral Diseases     This episode of Going anti-Viral features an IAS–USA Dialogue titled "Latest Update on Urgent Virus Outbreaks," which is a panel discussion held on August 1, 2023. Dr Paul A. Volberding from the University of California San Francisco serves as the moderator and welcomes three distinguished panelists: Dr Carlos del Rio from Emory University, Yvonne Maldonado from Stanford University and Dr Michael Saag from the University of Alabama Birmingham. discuss recent developments in COVID-19, MPOX, RSV, and HIV. This includes the the paradigm-shifting results of the REPRIEVE study, current hurdles in COVID-19 vaccination and antiviral treatment, and trends in RSV and MPOX. They also discuss the overall impact of COVID-19 on education and child development. 00:08 Introduction and Panel Discussion Overview 01:56 Discussion on the REPRIEVE Study 05:59 COVID-19 Updates and Vaccination Challenges 13:35 The Role of Antivirals in COVID-19 Treatment 20:39 Future of COVID-19 Vaccines and Age Group Considerations 27:20 The Importance of Transparency28:18 The Need for Open Discussions on COVID-19 Vaccines 29:47 The Existential Threat to Science-Based Medicine 31:49 The Challenge of Testing for RSV 33:11 The Potential Impact of RSV Vaccines 36:45 The Ongoing Struggle with Long COVID-19 42:46 The Increasing Cases of MPOX 48:27 The Tragic Impact of the Pandemic on Education 53:42 The Importance of In-Person Interactions 54:10 Closing Remarks __________________________________________________Produced by IAS-USA, Going anti–Viral is a podcast for clinicians involved in research and care in HIV, its complications, and other viral infections. This podcast is intended as a technical source of information for specialists in this field, but anyone listening will enjoy learning more about the state of modern medicine around viral infections. Going anti-Viral's host is Dr Michael Saag, a physician, prominent HIV researcher at the University of Alabama at Birmingham, and volunteer IAS–USA board member. In most episodes, Dr Saag interviews an expert in infectious diseases or emerging pandemics about their area of specialty and current developments in the field. Other episodes are drawn from the IAS–USA vast catalogue of panel discussions, Dialogues, and other audio from various meetings and conferences.

This episode is sponsored by KyurMD.com – technically advanced medical apparel.  In the second part of the "We Want Them Infected" series, Dr. Jonathan Howard delves into the allure of the anti-vaccine movement among doctors. He explores the psychological factors, including the pursuit of fame and financial gain, that drive some doctors to embrace contrarian views. Audience capture, a phenomenon where public personalities echo the sentiments of their followers, is discussed as a key factor that reinforces extreme stances and perpetuates misinformation. The episode draws parallels to how public figures like Donald Trump can also fall prey to audience capture. Looking for something specific? Here you go! 00:01 - Introduction to Part Two of "We Want Them Infected" 00:26 - Discussion on the allure of contrarianism and audience capture 01:56 - Comparing audience capture to Donald Trump's changing stances 03:01 - Strategies to prevent falling into the trap of audience capture 03:43 - The importance of humility and openness to correction 06:16 - Engaging respectfully in disagreements on social media 08:12 - The "IKEA effect" and recognizing biases in our ideas 10:07 - Examining arguments used by anti-vaxxers against COVID vaccines 14:15 - Critiquing the demand for more randomized controlled trials 16:01 - The shifting goalposts of critics 18:14 - Reactions of doctors mentioned in the book 20:53 - The consequences of misinformation and what gives hope 24:43 - Encouragement for doctors to speak out against medical misinformation More on Dr. Howard: A distinguished author, Dr. Howard has penned several authoritative textbooks on neurology. Notably, he is the writer behind Cognitive Errors and Diagnostic Mistakes: A Case-Based Guide to Critical Thinking in Medicine. Well before the pandemic emerged, Dr. Howard had a deep-rooted interest in vaccines and the counter-vaccine movement. Preceding the global health crisis, he was a co-author for a book chapter titled The Anti-Vaccine Movement: A Litany of Fallacy and Errors. Throughout the pandemic, he has been actively contributing to the discourse on the mainstream acceptance of anti-vaccine sentiments within the medical field.  His writings on this matter can be found on Science Based Medicine. Moreover, he has collaborated on research papers focused on the neurological implications of COVID-19 patients and the vaccination process for individuals with multiple sclerosis. Find Dr. Howard on his LinkedIn.  Did ya know…  You can also be a guest on our show? Please email me at brad@physiciansguidetodoctoring.com to connect or visit www.physiciansguidetodoctoring.com to learn more about the show! Socials: @physiciansguidetodoctoring on FB  @physicianguidetodoctoring on YouTube @physiciansguide on Instagram and Twitter

Back in the early days of the podcast, we tried to take a rest from the wearisome repetition of polemical partisan gurus by covering JP Sears- an alternative-health self-help coach with a sideline in 'comedic parody'. Sadly, we soon discovered he was a red-pilled Roganite 'just asking questions' about all the usual right-wing partisan topics, but with an added dollop of pseudo-profound, self-indulgent spiritual blather.JP Sears wasn't an isolated case; he exemplified a disturbingly prevalent trend. One that was supercharged during the pandemic and can be observed clearly in figures like Russell Brand, Aubrey Marcus, RFK Jnr and a whole slew of QAnon and anti-vaccine influencers.To help us disentangle this quagmire and the dynamics at play, we are joined by the three co-hosts of the popular Conspiritualty podcast: Matthew Remski, Julian Walker, and Derek Beres.We've spoken with them many times over the past few years about a variety of topics but in today's conversation, we explore the contemporary state of the Conspirituality sphere and discuss broader themes they have observed (& how they relate to the gurus we cover). We also examine whether they view activism as core to their podcast, how they handle attacks or engage with legitimate criticism, and how they feel about their own place in the ecosystems they discuss.We hope you enjoy the conversation as much as we did!Also covered in the opening segment is a cursed guru-sphere crossover between the Triggernometry guys and our old favourite, Scott Adams.LinksThe new Conspirituality Book!Our recent appearance on Conspirituality to hear the tables get turned!Review of Conspirituality at Science Based Medicine by Jonathan HowardNY Times: Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and the Coalition of the Distrustful'Why I quit the Conspirutality Podcast' by Be ScofieldMedium article referenced on the Defamation caseTriggernometry: Trump Must Win to Avoid Prison - Scott AdamsOther LinksOur PatreonContact us via email: decodingthegurus@gmail.comThe DTG Subreddit

This episode is sponsored by Charm Economics.  Dr. Jonathan Howard once again joins the podcast to talk about his new book, "We Want Them Infected." The book examines a movement led by doctors during the COVID-19 pandemic who advocated for intentionally infecting unvaccinated individuals to develop herd immunity. Dr. Howard discusses how this idea influenced the national pandemic response and the real-world consequences that ensued. He also acknowledges the harms caused by lockdowns but emphasizes the flawed assumptions and lack of consideration for collateral damage in the proposed strategy. Looking for something specific? Here you go! 00:01:06 Book explores dangerous COVID strategy.  00:05:32 Misinformation about COVID and vaccines.  00:12:10 Contrarians mix good and bad advice.  00:17:24 Contrarians react defensively to criticism.  00:26:52 Lockdowns had negative consequences. Bio/links! A distinguished author, Dr. Howard has penned several authoritative textbooks on neurology. Notably, he is the writer behind Cognitive Errors and Diagnostic Mistakes: A Case-Based Guide to Critical Thinking in Medicine. Well before the pandemic emerged, Dr. Howard had a deep-rooted interest in vaccines and the counter-vaccine movement. Preceding the global health crisis, he was a co-author for a book chapter titled The Anti-Vaccine Movement: A Litany of Fallacy and Errors. Throughout the pandemic, he has been actively contributing to the discourse on the mainstream acceptance of anti-vaccine sentiments within the medical field.  His writings on this matter can be found on Science Based Medicine. Moreover, he has collaborated on research papers focused on the neurological implications of COVID-19 patients and the vaccination process for individuals with multiple sclerosis. Find Dr. Howard on his LinkedIn.  Did ya know…  You can also be a guest on our show? Please email me at brad@physiciansguidetodoctoring.com to connect or visit www.physiciansguidetodoctoring.com to learn more about the show! Socials: @physiciansguidetodoctoring on FB  @physicianguidetodoctoring on YouTube @physiciansguide on Instagram and Twitter

The Non-Prophets, Episode 22.32.1 featuring Phoebe Rose, Dr. Ben, Scott Dickie and Helen GreeneRichard Dawkins used his new podcast to promote more transphobic lies, Friendly Atheist.com, By Hemant Mehta, July 31, 2023 https://www.friendlyatheist.com/p/richard-dawkins-used-his-new-podcast The Science of Biological Sex, Science Based Medicine.org, By Steven Novella, July 13, 2022 https://sciencebasedmedicine.org/the-science-of-biological-sex/

Seemingly-reliable sources give you diametrically-opposed views on vaping. Are e-cigarettes “95% less harmful” than cigarettes, or aren't they? Are vapes gateway drugs that lead people to smoke, or are they a great way to give up smoking? Is it both? Neither?In Episode 5 of The Studies Show, Tom and Stuart look into the research on the health effects of vaping and try to answer these questions - as well as explaining the origin of the fabled “popcorn lung”.The Studies Show is brought to you by the i, the UK's best daily newspaper. For the next 7 days only, you can take advantage of the i's current deal: 50% off a full digital subscription + the physical weekend paper. Thanks to the i for their support!If you like the sound of The Studies Show, then please consider becoming a subscriber. You can join as a free subscriber and get an email whenever we release an episode. If you join as a paid subscriber, you'll be able to access some features like ask-me-anything chats with Tom and Stuart, and (soon) paid-only episodes. Either way, you can subscribe right here:Show Notes* The WHO praises India for banning vapes* Article on The Conversation arguing the “vaping is 95% less harmful than cigarettes” claim has been debunked* Long UK Government/King's College London report defending the “95% less harmful” claim (2022)* Earlier (2018) Public Health England report with similar conclusions* New Nicotine Alliance (unaffiliated anti-smoking charity) report with useful references on addictiveness, risk, etc.* Popcorn lung: Science-Based Medicine piece illustrated with lungs full of popcorn; Johns Hopkins piece saying popcorn lung is a concern; American Lung Association piece agreeing; Cancer Research UK piece saying no cases ever linked to vaping* Study retracted for erroneously comparing different age groups; study retracted for time-travelling heart-attacks* UK cigarette smoking rate dropping in adults; dropping in children* Tom's article on this from 2017* 2017 study showing vaping and cigarette smoking correlate in teenagers* 2022 Cochrane review on vaping and smoking cessation* Study of vaping in pregnant mice; press release; article in The Sun with scary headline* Study on vaping vs. nicotine patches for smoking cessation in pregnant women* People's beliefs about vaping: increasing belief that it's as dangerous as smoking in adults; in adults again; in childrenCreditsThe Studies Show is produced by Julian Mayers at Yada Yada Productions. This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.thestudiesshowpod.com/subscribe

Although the numbers may be low, COVID-19 and other illnesses remain a significant threat to patients. The role of masks in preventing SARS-CoV-2 spread has been politicized since the beginning. A new meta-analysis purports to answer the question of mask effectiveness. Join host Geoff Wall, with guest Jake Galdo, as they deep dive into the article and evaluate the science.The GameChangerA new meta-analysis suggests that mask mandates do not affect the prevention and spread of COVID-19. However, the study has numerous limitations and errors, making its interpretation difficult.Show Segments00:00 - Introductions01:31 - Pros and Cons of a Meta-Analysis06:31: Looking at the Analysis10:24 - The GameChanger: Jefferson et al. Results11:24 - Connecting to Practice: Recognizing Limitations28:43 - Closing Remarks HostGeoff Wall, PharmD, BCPS, FCCP, CGPProfessor of Pharmacy Practice, Drake UniversityInternal Medicine/Critical Care, UnityPoint HealthJake Galdo, PharmD, MBA, BCPS, BCGPCourse Content and Developer, CEimpactManaging Network Facilitator, CPESN Health EquityCEO, SeguridadReferences and ResourcesJefferson T, Dooley L, Ferroni E, et al. Physical interventions to interrupt or reduce the spread of respiratory viruses (Review). Cochrane Library.  Novella S. Masks Revisited. Science Based Medicine. Redeem your CPE hereCPE (Pharmacist) Get a membership & earn CE for GameChangers Podcast episodes (30 mins/episode)Pharmacists: Get a membershipCE InformationLearning ObjectivesUpon successful completion of this knowledge-based activity, participants should be able to:1. Discuss the pros and cons of a meta-analysis2. Describe the limitations of the Jefferson et al meta-analysis0.05 CEU/0.5 HrUAN: 0107-0000-23-119-H01-PInitial release date: 03/22/2023Expiration date: 03/22/2024Additional CPE and CME details can be found here.Follow CEimpact on Social Media:LinkedInInstagramDownload the CEimpact App for Free Continuing Education + so much more!

What does the body of evidence say on the topic of healthcare-acquired infections? Plus: CBD is put on trial to see how well it does against the symptoms of advanced cancer, and the world's elites reveal their most damning secret: they don't think COVID is just a bad cold.   Block 1: (2:02) Nosocomial infections: what they are, difference from iatrogenic infections, what the US did to reduce them, types of infections   Block 2: (9:51) Nosocomial infections: hand hygiene, disposable equipment, single-patient rooms, bed cleaning, ventilation, antibiotic-resistant bacteria (MRSA, VRE), decolonization protocols, C. difficile, #DeathToAllSinks, UV light, copper   Block 3: (32:13) Clinical trial of cannabidiol against placebo for the symptoms of advanced cancer [We briefly mention the Hawthorne effect. It turns out to be a phrase we probably shouldn't use. See here.]   Block 4: (42:13) Davos' COVID measures   * Jingle by Joseph Hackl * Theme music: “Fall of the Ocean Queen“ by Joseph Hackl * Assistant researcher: Nicholas Koziris   To contribute to The Body of Evidence, go to our Patreon page at: http://www.patreon.com/thebodyofevidence/.   To make a one-time donation to our show, you can now use PayPal! https://www.paypal.com/donate?hosted_button_id=9QZET78JZWCZE   Patrons get a bonus show on Patreon called “Digressions”! Check it out!     References:   1) Chris' proof that you can, in fact, live a perfectly normal life after donating a kidney: https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/nejmoa0804883   2) Nosocomial infections are particularly prevalent in ICUs: https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/184963   3) Medicare no longer pays for hospital-acquired infections: https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/184963   4) Hospital-wide hand hygiene programs do work to reduce hospital infections: https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(00)02814-2/fulltext   5) Washing hands properly for 30 seconds is necessary to kill bacteria like VRE: https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/infection-control-and-hospital-epidemiology/article/abs/recovery-of-vancomycinresistant-enterococci-on-fingertips-and-environmental-surfaces/FBFBC3EABFA22A7A28420AFB2CCACC51   6) The REACH study found that hospitals implementing a new cleaning bundle reduced VRE but not C. difficile infections: https://www.thelancet.com/journals/laninf/article/PIIS1473-3099(18)30714-X/fulltext   7) MRSA decolonization with chlorhexidine baths does reduce infections in the ICU: https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/nejmoa1207290 & https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30850112/     8) Basic infection control measures do work for C. difficile as well, even if regular alcohol disinfectants do not: https://www.cochranelibrary.com/central/doi/10.1002/central/CN-01604607/full   9) Ultraviolet light can also be used as an adjunctive disinfection agent: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5935446/   10) UV-C light can also be caused to clean the air as a COVID mitigation strategy: https://ghdcenter.hms.harvard.edu/keeping-public-spaces-safe   11) Sinks as a source of outbreaks: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34438134/   12) Scott Gavura's Science-Based Medicine article: https://sciencebasedmedicine.org/cbd-oil-fails-to-improve-symptom-control-in-advanced-cancer/   13) The clinical trial on CBD for advanced cancer symptoms: https://doi.org/10.1200/jco.22.01632   14) World Economic Forum's Guidance on Health Measures: https://www3.weforum.org/docs/AM23_Health_and_Safety_Measures.pdf   15) “Billionaires at Davos Don't Think COVID Is a Cold:” https://slate.com/technology/2023/01/davos-covid-precaution-uv-lights-air-filters.html   16) “The Last Holdouts:” https://www.nytimes.com/2022/12/26/us/covid-masks-risk.html   17) What Bonnie Henry said about masking: https://twitter.com/frozen/status/1614053203800383489   18) Gregg Gonsalves' article in The Nation: https://www.thenation.com/article/society/orwellian-white-house-covid-policy/     It's Not Twitter, But It'll Do:   1) Jonathan talking about so-called complementary and alternative medicine on the Yoga Meets Movement Science podcast: https://www.jennirawlings.com/podcast/whats-the-deal-with-complementary-alternative-medicine   2) Jonathan's article on the low-oxalate diet: https://www.mcgill.ca/oss/article/critical-thinking-health-and-nutrition/demonization-dietary-oxalate-has-begun   3) Death Panel podcast, “COVID Year Three:” https://www.stitcher.com/show/the-death-panel/episode/covid-year-three-unlocked-210210266   4) Chris' Gazette article about Canada's new alcohol guidelines: https://montrealgazette.com/opinion/columnists/christopher-labos-new-guidelines-reflect-fact-that-alcohol-isnt-good-for-you   5) Chris on CTV talking about alcohol: https://montreal.ctvnews.ca/video?clipId=2591451   Time Machine:   1) Our episode on fibromyalgia: https://bodyofevidence.ca/073-fibromyalgia-mixing-vaccines-myocarditis-risk   2) Our interview on CPR: https://bodyofevidence.ca/interview-trysha-gellis-and-jacqueline-joza-on-cpr-and-sudden-cardiac-arrest  

0:00:00 Introduction Richard Saunders 0:04:22 You Can Count on Adrienne. With Adrienne Hill Vale 'SkepDoc' Dr Harriet Hall MD Adrienne pays tribute to Harriet, who was a retired family physician, former U.S. Air Force flight surgeon, author, science communicator and skeptic of international acclaim, who wrote about alternative medicine and quackery for magazines and articles discussing evidence-based medicine for the Science-Based Medicine blog. She usually wrote under her own name or used the pseudonym "The SkepDoc". She was also a frequent speaker at science and skepticism related conventions in the US and around the world. https://tinyurl.com/skepdocseries https://skepticzone.libsyn.com/size/5/?search=Harriet 0:17:42 Sydney Skeptics in the Pub At long last Sydney Skeptics in the pub is back and looking forward to 2023. We hear from new pubber Stephen Bavaro, who was a recent speaker at the Australian Skeptics convention. Also from Tim Mendham and Richard Saunders as they address the crowd to talk about the Bent Spoon Award and more. 0:32:00 Australian Skeptics Newsletter What skeptical news has caught the eye of Tim Mendham this week? Read by Adrienne Hill. http://www.skeptics.com.au 0:40:28 A Dive into a Trove A wander through the decades of digitised Australian newspapers on a search for references to "Medical Quackery". http://www.trove.nla.gov.au Also https://pintofscience.com.au/eoi 10 Years Ago The Skeptic Zone #222 - 21.Jan.2013 Maynard's Spooky Action.. An interview with Dr Krissy Wilson about talking to the dead - Danger 5. Just for fun, Richard Saunders checks in with Maynard as he hosts a public Q & A with the cast of this Australian TV show - Skeptical BBQ. Richard Saunders travels to Canberra for a screening of "Here be Dragons" by Brian Dunning and enjoys a chat with Kevin Davies, the president of Canberra Skeptics - The Think Tank. Join a host of Canberra Skeptics as they chat about Conspiracy Theories. https://skepticzone.libsyn.com/the-skeptic-zone-222-21-jan-2013

Chris and Jonathan welcome back Dr. Jonathan Howard to talk about the doctors who repeatedly said the pandemic was ending and who became anti-vaccine in the process. When doctors become brands, narcissism can easily lead them and their fans astray, as these media figures chase an ever elusive limelight. Dr. Howard has been tracking their claims and predictions and brings the receipts.   (2:38) Dr. Vinay Prasad, pre-pandemic (8:41) ZDoggMD, Marty Makary, and Vinay Prasad on vaccine boosters (12:01) Paediatric COVID vaccines (15:00) An appeal to civility on the one hand, mockery on the other (16:56) Dr. John Ioannidis and basic math (27:22) “You have to accept it” (32:27) Classic anti-vaccine talking points (36:10) “Where's the RCT?” (39:37) Jonathan Howard's connection to the anti-vaccine movement (41:53) Audience capture (44:49) Charisma and credibility (49:33) New York City denialism (51:36) Ron DeSantis' Vaccine Accountability Roundtable (55:41) Self-reflection   A quick note on sound quality: the clicking sound on Dr. Howard's end very quickly disappears. The rest of the audio is not up to our usual standards, and for this we apologize. Audio engineering is closer to magic than science, it seems.   * Theme music: “Fall of the Ocean Queen“ by Joseph Hackl.   To contribute to The Body of Evidence, go to our Patreon page at: http://www.patreon.com/thebodyofevidence/.   Patrons get a bonus show on Patreon called “Digressions”! Check it out!     Links: 1) The ZDoggMD Show episode you hear at the beginning: https://youtu.be/cNcVCFLhbAs?t=42 2) Dr. Jonathan Howard's articles on Science-Based Medicine: https://sciencebasedmedicine.org/author/jonathanhoward/ 3) Dr. Jonathan Howard on Twitter: https://twitter.com/19joho  

With pediatric covid vaccination levels stalled and no big programs on the horizon to change that, Bea speaks to Dr. Jonathan Howard about the figures who have stepped in to fill that void with a series of false claims about vaccine side effects in children. Read Dr. Howard's latest piece in Science Based Medicine here: https://sciencebasedmedicine.org/framing/ As always, support Death Panel at www.patreon.com/deathpanelpod Pre-orders are now live for Bea and Artie's book! Pre-order HEALTH COMMUNISM here: bit.ly/3Af2YaJ Death Panel merch here (patrons get a discount code): www.deathpanel.net/merch join our Discord here: discord.com/invite/3KjKbB2 Find the Kaiser Family Foundation report Bea cites in this episode here: "COVID-19 Vaccination Rates Among Children Under 5 Have Peaked and Are Decreasing Just Weeks Into Their Eligibility" https://www.kff.org/coronavirus-covid-19/issue-brief/covid-19-vaccination-rates-among-children-under-5-have-peaked-and-are-decreasing-just-weeks-into-their-eligibility/

Chris and Jonathan welcome back to the show Paul Ingraham, the founder of PainScience.com. He charts his early days as a woo believer, his transformation into a skeptic, and the thing that got him in trouble with his massage therapy regulatory body: tone. Do healthcare regulators care for snark? Is it their role to tone-police their members? The Internet took many regulators by surprise and some overreacted. How do you kick the foxes out of the henhouse of massage therapy if the rule is that foxes should be treated as hens?   No time stamps for this one. It's a story that goes from “crack” addiction to growing out of the adolescent phase of skepticism to the difference between evidence-based medicine and science-based medicine. And for the first time ever, our podcast has been turned all the way up to 11.     * Theme music: “Fall of the Ocean Queen“ by Joseph Hackl.   To contribute to The Body of Evidence, go to our Patreon page at: http://www.patreon.com/thebodyofevidence/.   Patrons get a bonus show on Patreon called “Digressions”! Check it out!     Links: 1) Paul Ingraham's website: https://www.painscience.com/ 2) Paul Ingraham's Science-Based Medicine post on why he quit being a massage therapist: https://sciencebasedmedicine.org/why-i-quit-my-massage-therapy-career/

In this episode I was joined by Dr. David Gorski, managing editor and prolific writer at the thoroughly indispensable website, Science-Based Medicine. Dr. Gorski earned his MD at the University of Michigan and a PhD in cellular physiology at Case Western Reserve University. He is both a professor of surgery at Wayne State University as well as a surgical oncologist at the Barbara Ann Karmanos Cancer Institute where he specialises in breast cancer surgery. Near the beginning of our conversation, I asked Dr. Gorski for his view on the scientific method and how skepticism is one of its central characteristics. My guest explained how science-based medicine is related to, but still in important respects distinct from, evidence-based medicine, which is itself a fairly new approach dating back only a few decades. We discussed an excellent essay from earlier this year in which he argued that all examples of science denial are essentially a form of conspiracy thinking. While his argument is largely persuasive, I ventured to propose a yet deeper analytical layer involving the high degree of religiosity in American society, as compared to other developed nations, that serves as another crucial driver for the pervasive conspiratorial ideation so prevalent in the United States. We then spoke about the highly frustrating asymmetry between those trying to assiduously gather reliable information and rectify inaccuracies and those who effortlessly churn out misleading and false claims. Dr. Gorski mentioned Brandolini's Law, which states that it takes an order of magnitude more to refute bullshit than it does to create bullshit, that perfectly summarise this dilemma, and one the Covid pandemic has brought into horribly stark relief. I asked him about his first forays into skepticism in the late 1990s when he grappled with Holocaust deniers, before moving onto discussing fallacious ideas about Covid-19, the anti-vaccine movement, the breakthrough new MRNA technology used in some Covid vaccines, the efficacy of vaccines developed against the virus, and the often unethical behaviour of pharmaceutical companies witnessed during this unprecedented global pandemic. We also spoke about how the Republican Party has become the party of choice for anti-vaxxers, some prominent figures in this movement, including Mike Adams of Natural News infamy and Joseph Mercola, what might motivate these players, and ways to counter the tidal wave of irrationality, idiocy, disinformation, and propaganda to which we are incessantly subjected, particularly on social media. In light of this seemingly inexorable multi-pronged tsunami of lunacy, I averred that we sadly appear to live in an age of Endarkment, rather than one of Enlightenment. Science-Based Medicine: https://sciencebasedmedicine.org/ Dr Gorski's essay, ‘All science denial is a form of conspiracy theory': https://sciencebasedmedicine.org/all-science-denial-is-a-form-of-conspiracy-theory/ Dr. Gorski's Respectful Insolence blog: https://respectfulinsolence.com/ Dr. Gorski's Twitter account: @gorskon Twitter account for Skeptically Curious: https://twitter.com/SkepticallyCur1 Patreon page for Skeptically Curious: https://www.patreon.com/skepticallycurious

John reports that the Justice Centre is being inundated with calls from around the country of people who are facing the prospect of being forced to take a Covid shot or being terminated. He gives Canadians some good advice on what to do if you find yourself in that situation. We also take a look at a few more stories from the previous week as well.Epoch Times, Sep 2, 2021: COVID-19 Vaccine Passport Expires 6 Months After 2nd Dose as Booster Shots Mandated: Israeli OfficialsThe Hill, Aug 3, 2021: Coming soon: America's own social credit systemAmerican Thinker, Sep 10, 2021: Biden's vaccine mandate speech!Justice Centre: Mandatory Covid Vaccine FAQs (scroll down to "My employer says take the vaccine or lose my job, what do I do?")Direct link to the Justice Centre's Employer Vaccine Requirement TemplateMarty Moore in the Western Standard, Sep 8, 2021: BC needs to cancel vaccination passport planJustice with John Carpay, Sep 10, 2020:  Ep. 36 Revisiting the "Vaccinate Or Mask" Controversygreatawakening.win, Sep 10, 2021: Another poll: Do you support limiting the rights of the unvaccinated?CBC, Sep 7, 2021: Alberta mayors demand the government step up with vaccine passports, school maskingEdmonton Journal, Sep 9, 2021: Leduc County mayor says she never agreed to sign letter calling for vaccine passports in AlbertaNew York Post, May 1, 2021: Powerful teachers union influenced CDC on school reopenings, emails showenVolve, Sep 7, 2021: Rolling Stone Forced To Issue Retraction After It's Discovered Their Ivermectin Overdose Story Was Completely MADE UPNicole Bogart in CTV News, Sep 7, 2021: No, COVID-19 vaccines do not violate the Nuremberg CodeDavid Gorski in Science Based Medicine, Aug 30, 2021: Yes, the FDA really HAS given full approval to the Pfizer/BioNTech COVID-19 vaccineF. William Engdahl in New Eastern Outlook, Aug 30, 2021: Scandal Behind the FDA Fake Approval of Pfizer JabTheme Music "Carpay Diem" by Dave StevensSupport the show (https://www.jccf.ca/donate/)

Abigail Shrier is a lawyer, a reporter and author of Irreversible Damage. One way to describe her book would be: controversial. She has been accused of spreading misinformation by GLAAD. A prominent ACLU lawyer called for her book to be banned. A favorable review of the book in Science-Based Medicine ignited an online mob, which led to the journal disappearing that first review and replacing it with a negative one. Amazon and Target have also been pressured to stop carrying Shrier's book. But it hasn't worked. Despite being ignored by outlets like the New York Times Book Review, Irreversible Damage is an enormous bestseller. Some readers felt so passionately about this book that they took out billboards advertising it on their own dime. Both the subject that Abigail writes about and the treatment of her book deserve your attention. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

This week Tina is joined by ICU nurse and educator Justin Alves with DKB Med. Together, they discuss the troubling story of Dr. Sam Chachoua, a trained medical doctor who turned to alternative medicine and lied about the results. Made infamous over claims he cured a famous Hollywood actor, his dangerous, unproved methods almost killed the famous actor and could have impacted countless other people. We will also talk about the incredible story of Mary Magee, the first U.S. medical provider to accidentally contract HIV from a patient. Known as “Jane Doe” for many years, Mary has been an advocate for nurses, the LGBTQ+ community, and worked to end the stigma associated with HIV. Please support our show by supporting our sponsors!   Thank you to the American Nurses Credentialing Center for sponsoring our podcast. If you are thinking about getting certified in your nursing specialty, please go to https://pages.nursingworld.org/gnbn for more information! Thank you to Trusted Health for sponsoring this episode. Please go to https://www.trustedhealth.com/gnbn and fill out a profile to help support our podcast and see what opportunities are out there for you! Thank you to our new sponsor Samuel Merritt University. If you're interested in getting more information on their MSN and DNP programs and scholarships visit them at https://smumsn.com and show them how much you appreciate them for sponsoring our podcast! Thank you to CBD Stat for continuing to sponsor our podcast! If you're interested in CBD, go to https://www.cbdstat.care/goodnursebadnurse and check them out! And of course our latest sponsor, Eko! Please visit them at https://ekohealth.com and use promo code GNBN for $20 off your purchase of the new Littmann Cardiology IV stethoscope with Eko technology! Credits Alexander, S. (2019, September 27). 4 lessons from the beginning of the AIDS crisis. ONE. https://www.one.org/us/blog/4-lessons-aids-crisis-5b/ Allday, E. (2011, December 10). Nurse who contracted HIV with jab sheds anonymity. SFGATE; San Francisco Chronicle. https://www.sfgate.com/news/article/Nurse-who-contracted-HIV-with-jab-sheds-anonymity-2394068.php CBR Staff Writer. (2000, September 24). $10m awarded to AIDS and cancer researcher in lawsuit - Tech Monitor. Tech Monitor. https://techmonitor.ai/techonology/10m_awarded_to_aids_and_cancer_researcher_in_lawsuit Chachoua, S. (2021). @samchachoua. Twitter. https://twitter.com/samchachoua Char Adams. (2016, February). Charlie Sheen Blasts Doctor Who Claims to Have Cured Him of HIV and Even Injected Himself with Star's Blood. PEOPLE.com; PEOPLE.com. https://people.com/celebrity/charlie-sheen-blasts-doctor-who-claims-to-have-cured-him-of-hiv-on-twitter/ Deerwester, J. (2016, June 21). Charlie Sheen gives “Today” an HIV status update. USA TODAY; USA TODAY. https://www.usatoday.com/story/life/people/2016/06/21/charlie-sheen-gives-today-status-update/86171076/ DoctorOz. (2016). Dr. Oz and Charlie Sheen Debunk Dr. Sam Chachoua's Claims [YouTube Video]. On YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0YbjvsK8xRY Dr Sam Chachoua. (2021). Archive.org. https://web.archive.org/web/20001026171952/http://www.nexusmagazine.com/chachoua.html Gorski, D. (2016, February). When antivaccine pseudoscience isn't enough, Bill Maher fawns over Charlie Sheen's HIV quack. Science-Based Medicine. https://sciencebasedmedicine.org/when-antivaccine-pseudoscience-isnt-enough-bill-maher-embraces-goat-milk-hiv-quackery/ Haglage, A. (2019, June 13). “Screw you and all your fear and homophobia”: Nurse reveals what it was like to work at San Francisco's first AIDS ward. Yahoo.com; Yahoo. https://www.yahoo.com/now/screw-you-and-all-your-fear-and-homophobia-nurse-reveals-what-it-was-like-to-work-at-san-franciscos-first-aids-ward-185306242.html Juzwiak, R. (2016, January 30). Supposed Doctor Who Injected Himself With Charlie Sheen's HIV-Positive Blood: “I've Cured Countries!” Gawker. https://www.gawker.com/supposed-doctor-who-injected-himself-with-charlie-sheen-1756141228 Knockin' Doorz Down. (2021). Charlie Sheen | Sober living, “Tigers Blood”, “Winning”, Two and a Half Men and The Road To Recovery [YouTube Video]. On YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mZ1v7h7MBqE Kreidler, M. (2019, November). Induced Remission Therapy (Sam Chachoua) | Quackwatch. Quackwatch.org. https://quackwatch.org/related/cancer/chachoua/ Lang, M. E. (2016, March 7). The Goats' Milk Cure and Other Fables. The Well Project. https://www.thewellproject.org/a-girl-like-me/aglm-blogs/goats-milk-cure-and-other-fables Living into the Lessons of 5B with HIV/AIDS Nurse Guy Vandenberg. (2019, September 18). Discover Nursing. https://nursing.jnj.com/nursing-news-events/nurses-leading-innovation/living-into-the-lessons-of-5b-with-hiv-aids-nurse-guy-vandenberg Oz Exclusive: Charlie Sheen Heads to Mexico and Comes Face-to-Face With the Doctor Who Claims He Has the Cure For HIV. (2016, February 6). The Dr. Oz Show. https://www.doctoroz.com/episode/oz-exclusive-charlie-sheen-heads-mexico-and-comes-face-face-doctor-who-claims-he-has-cure PEOPLE.com. (2016, January 12). Charlie Sheen Temporarily Went Off HIV Medications to Seek Alternative Treatment in Mexico: “So What? I Was Born Dead.” PEOPLE.com; PEOPLE.com. https://people.com/celebrity/charlie-sheen-off-hiv-meds-seeking-alternative-treatment/ PolitiFact - No, arthritic goat milk cannot cure HIV. (2020). @Politifact. https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2016/feb/23/samir-chachoua/no-arthritic-goat-milk-cannot-cure-hiv/ Sam Chachoua - Top podcast episodes. (2018, December 8). Listen Notes. https://www.listennotes.com/top-episodes/sam-chachoua/ SEIU. (2019, August 5). SEIU Nurse Mary Magee in new “5B” documentary talks about revolutionary care, pioneering nurses and working in union. SEIU - Service Employees International Union. https://www.seiu.org/blog/2019/8/seiu-nurse-mary-magee-in-new-5b-documentary-talks-about-revolutionary-care-pioneering-nurses-and-working-in-union Unbliveble 99. (2016). Supposed Doctor Who Injected Himself With Charlie Sheen's HIV-Positive Blood: I've Cured Countries! [YouTube Video]. On YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=31eJZKFO2NQ Walker, M. (2003). German cancer therapies : natural and conventional medicines that offer hope and healing (pp. 168–181). Kensington. https://www.google.com/books/edition/German_Cancer_Therapies/e9smPCEn2xIC?hl=en&gbpv=1  

"While we still lack a complete cause and effect model of Alzheimer's disease, there is no doubt that the etiology is multifaceted and nonlinear. This accounts for the fact that it takes an incredibly long time for Alzheimer's disease to develop. I mention this because one of the major problems with FDA approval has always been that it insists on utilizing the same framework and methodology of approving drugs designed to treat long-term diseases as it would with short-term diseases." Robert Trent is a graduate student who blogs at Medaphysics. He shares his story and discusses his KevinMD article, "Does the FDA approval of aducanumab mark the return of science-based medicine?" (https://www.kevinmd.com/blog/2021/07/does-the-fda-approval-of-aducanumab-mark-the-return-of-science-based-medicine.html)

This is a replay of an episode from 2019 that speaks pretty well to the emails we get asking for discussion of alternative "remedies" -- and why the podcast doesn't (or does so with heavy heaps of caution). Here's the writeup that accompanied the original airing: For Episode 10 of Season 3, we've called a doctor. (Yes, one with TS.) Clay Jones, M.D., is a pediatrician with a frequent byline on the widely read Science-Based Medicine (SBM) blog and is co-host of The Prism Podcast, which explores science, skepticism and the perils of not being an informed or careful seeker of what should be life-improving solutions. That's kind of an uncomfortable subject to dig into sometimes, particularly within the Tourette community. I've heard from Touretters asking whether I've tried certain alternative "remedies" or "healing" practices, or if I know anyone who has. What's tough about that is we as Touretters don't have a wholesale, go-to, zap-it-away solution presently. And as noted in a previous post here, current insurance protocols don't make it any easier. That may lead individuals searching for relief wherever hope might be -- which, sadly, is the scenario that swindlers love. That's not to say there's no merit in looking outside the mainstream for a solution that might work for you when all else has failed. Just be careful. Really careful. Ask questions. Ask for the science behind it, and don't accept feelgood anecdotes as a substitute. Some listeners I've heard from are desperate -- the word used -- for relief from complicated TS. Clay, on this episode, discusses his own TS before helping us develop our defenses against peddlers of illegitimate answers. Clay Jones, M.D., on Science-Based Medicine https://sciencebasedmedicine.org/author/clayjones/ On Twitter https://twitter.com/SBMPediatrics New Tourette's Podcast website https://www.tourettespodcast.com Support the show https://www.patreon.com/tourettespodcast Tourette's Podcast is made possible by the Tourette Association of America, tourette.org. Support! You can give Tourette's Podcast individual support at https://www.patreon.com/tourettespodcast Tourette's Podcast Discussion Group on Facebook

"Learning to Loath GMOs": A Critical Response to the New York Times   Richard Gale and Gary Null PhD Progressive Radio Network, July 27, 2021   In its July 19th issue, the New York Times Magazine published a brilliant piece of twisted pseudo-scientific propaganda. The essay, entitled “Learning to Love GMOs,” is truly stunning. Its author, journalist Jennifer Kahn, takes readers who would have little to no understanding of genetic engineering and genetically modified organisms (GMO) through a fictional labyrinth of out-dated and conflated GMO similitudes to an end point where readers might believe GMOs are really cool and there is nothing to be frantically worried about.    Kahn spins the story of Cathie Martin's research to develop a genetically engineered purple tomato high in the anti-oxidant anthocyacin as the work of a solo humanitarian to improve consumers' health by providing nutrient-rich GMO produce. What is missing from Kahn's equation is that the research was conducted at one of the world's oldest and most prestigious independent centers for plant science, the Johns Innes Centre (JIC) in the UK. The Centre, which is registered as a charity, lists over 500 employees and is funded by some of the largest proponents of genetic-modified plants, including the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and the Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council. JIC's website includes purple tomatoes as one of its projects that combines “transcription factors, biosynthetic genes and iRNA [interference RNA] with the availability of natural tomato mutants.”  iRNA, or Post-Transcriptional Gene Slicing, is a method to silence certain genes the researchers desire to curtail their expression.     The Times article makes an effort to advance the flawed agro-chemical mantra of “substantial equivalence” without citing the term. The early acceptance of GMOs was largely based upon the unproven hypothesis of “substantial equivalence.” The USDA's adoption of this concept during Bill Clinton's first term in the White House gave GM seed companies a free pass to avoid submitting trial evidence to prove the environmental and health safety of genetically modified crops. Since the ruling claims that GMOs are fundamentally identical genetically to their natural counterparts, no compliance of safety regulations should necessarily apply. Therefore Big Ag firms did not have to worry over strict regulatory hurdles, which otherwise apply to other products such as pharmaceutical drugs, processed foods, pesticides, cosmetics and chemical additives.    However, during the past decade a flurry of research has shown that the “substantial equivalence” hypothesis is patently false. Alexandria University in Egypt, the Permaculture Research Institute and the Norwegian Center for Biosafety each found genetically modified crops to be fundamentally different. In addition, studies have confirmed that nutrient levels in traditional, organically raised grown crops are substantially higher than GM varieties. New technological methods to create concise profiles of a food's molecular composition, notably “omics,” were not available in the early 1990s when Clinton wore the mantle as America's first biotech president. Omic technology destroyed the Big Ag's industry's arguments to support the lie about substantial equivalence. For example, Kings College London published a study in Scientific Reports of Nature revealing unquestionable genetic consequences between GMO Roundup and non-GMO corn. The differences include changes in 117 proteins and 91 metabolites.[1]   Despite “substantial equivalence” having been debunked, the erroneous hypothesis continues to linger in pro-GMO propaganda. However, in Kahn's recent essay, she attempts to shift attention away from the early generation of GMOs, which were engineered solely to sell more toxic pesticides, and emphasize GMO's potential for increasing nutritional health and to advance medicine. In order to add a bit of balance, Kahn quotes James Madison University professor Alan Levinovitz who accurately described one fundamental criticism, among many others, against GMOs. “With genetic engineering there's a feeling that we're mucking about with the essential building blocks of reality,” Levinovitz stated. “We may feel OK about rearranging genes, the way nature does, but we're not comfortable mixing them up between creatures.”     But most disturbing is Kahn's failure to make any mention o the trail of environmental disasters and disease risks due to consuming genetically modified foods. She completely whitewashes the matter; she prefers we may forget that Monsanto's soy and corn, which now represent the majority of these crops grown in the US, was developed solely to allow farmers to spray highly toxic pesticides without injuring the crops. These crops contain notable concentrations of the pesticides that then find their way into numerous consumer food products including baby foods. Nor should we forget that Round-Up grown foods may be destroying people's microbiome.  Last year, researchers at the University of Turku in Finland reported a “conservative estimate that approximately 54% of organisms in our microbiome are “potentially sensitive” to glyphosate. Despite her pro-GMO advocacy, if Kahn's conscience had led her to take a moral high road, she could have at least apologized on Monsanto's behalf for the trail of death and disease the company's glyphosate has left in its wake. The company has yet to atone despite losing three trials with $2.4 billion fines, repeated appeal losses, and being ordered to pay $10.5 billion in settlements. To date Monsanto's glyphosate poisoning has been identified with the suppression of essential gut enzymes and amino acid synthesis, gluten intolerance, disruption of manganese pathways, neurological disease, cancer, amyloidosis and autoimmune disease. Her New York Times article would have better served the improvement of public health as a warning rather than an applause to appease companies such as Bayer/Monsanto and Syngenta. And shame on the New York Times' editors for permitting such biased misinformation to find its way into print.    Kahn is eager to cite findings showing GMO benefits without indicating her sources. She tells us that environmental groups have “quietly walked back their opposition as evidence has mounted that GMOs are both safe to eat and not inherently bad for the environment.” Kahn doesn't mention who these groups might be. She reframes the Philippine story of the destruction of genetically engineered Golden Rice; yet around that time even the pro-industry magazine Forbes published an article questioning Golden Rice's viability and noting that its benefits are only based upon unfounded hypotheses. As for its risks to health, GM Watch in the UK points out the work conducted by David Schubert at the Salk Institute that the rice might potentially generate Vitamin A derivatives that could “damage human fetuses and cause birth defects.”   Kahn, who should be acknowledged as a highly respected science journalist and teaches journalism at the University of California's Berkeley campus, happens to be a contributing author for the Genetic Literacy Project (GLP) at the University of California at Davis, a public relations operation sponsored by the agro-chemical industry.  Monsanto/Bayer, Syngenta and DuPont are among GLP's industry partners.  It is one of the most frequently quoted sources of cherry-picked information by pro-GMO advocates and journalists. In our opinion, it is perhaps one of the most financially compromised and scientifically illiterate organizations, founded and funded to disseminate pro-GMO propaganda in order to prop up public support for GMOs and genetic engineering in general. In effect, some universities now act as private industry's lobbyists. This becomes a greater scandal when the university is a public institution receiving public funding.  GLP and its east coast partner, Cornell University's Alliance for Science, largely funded by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, serve as the GMO industry's clearing houses for public relations to spin science into advertising, propaganda and character assassination of GM opponents.   The Genetic Literacy Project is a key collaborator with another food industry front organization, the American Council on Science and Health (ACSH). ACSH has nothing to do with actual health science. It has been described by the independent corporate financial watchdog organization Sourcewatch as a thinly veiled corporate front that holds “a generally apologetic stance regarding virtually every other health and environmental hazard produced by modern industry, accepting corporate funding from Coca-Cola, Syngenta, Proctor Gamble, Kellogg, General Mills, Pepsico, and the American Beverage Association, among others.” ACSH also favors toxic pesticides, the use of biphenol A in products, cigarettes and hydrofracking.  It is closely aligned with pseudo-medical front organizations that criticize alternative and natural health modalities, such as Quackwatch and the Science Based Medicine network.    GLP sources a couple thousand corporate-friendly studies favoring GMO safety.  One review of over 1,700 studies, known as the Nicolia Review, for a time was the most cited source making the broadest claims for GMO safety.  However subsequent independent and unbiased reviews of Nicolia's analysis concluded that many of these studies were tangential at best and barely took notice of anything related to crop genetic engineering or GMOs. Many studies are completely irrelevant from a value-added perspective because they have nothing to do with GMO safety. Furthermore, other studies in Nicolia's collection conclude the exact opposite of their intention and give further credibility to GMOs environmental and animal and human health risks. When Nicolia published his review, he intentionally omitted and ignored scientifically sound research that directly investigated GMO safety and found convincing evidence to issue warnings.  For example, one peer-reviewed publication by over 300 independent scientists declared that there is no scientific consensus that GM crops and food are safe.  Not surprisingly, there is no mention of this study in the Nicolia Review.   It is no secret that Monsanto and Big Ag have significant influence over UC-Davis's agricultural department and divisions.  The bogus economic studies trumped up by the Big Ag cartel to defeat California's GMO labeling bill Prop 37 were performed at UC-Davis and then publicized through the GLP. Gary Ruskin, who has been filing Freedom of Information Act requests, has publicly expressed deep concerns that UC Davis is acting as a financial conduit for private corporations and interests to develop and launch PR attacks against academics, professors, activists and other institutions who oppose those same corporate interests.     For GMO opponents, the name Mark Lynas, may send shivers down the spine. As soon as any journalist or researcher mentions Lynas' name approvingly, one can be certain which camp the author represents.  You can be assured you will be reading words on dirty laundry washed in even dirtier water. Therefore when Kahn quotes Lynas as if he were an unbiased authority about GMOs, we know we have boarded the wrong train and will reach a destination of distorted scientific facts and self-righteous corporate praise.    The public watchdog group US Right to Know describes Lynas as “a former journalist turned promotional advocate for genetically engineered foods and pesticides who makes inaccurate claims about those products from his perch at the Gates Foundation-funded Cornell Alliance for Science (CAS).” Lynas has accused those who would inform the public about Round-Up's carcinogenic properties as conducting a “witch hunt” by “anti-Monsanto activists” who “abused science.”  Lynas has denied his role as a shill for Big Ag. However, a decade ago, The Guardian acquired a private memo from the pro-biotechnology organization EuropaBio about its initiative to recruit “ambassadors” to preach the GMO gospel. Mark Lynas was specifically named in the document alongside then UN Secretary General Kofi Annan as a prime candidate to pressure European agencies who were skeptical about GMO claims, promises and health and environmental risks. In short, Lynas has been one of Big Ag's most invaluable foot soldiers for over a dozen years.    Similar to the Genetic Literacy Project, the Cornell Alliance for Science does not conduct any agricultural research; yet its tentacles to attack GMO opponents are far reaching in the media. CAS was launched in 2014 after the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation granted the alliance $5.6 million in start-up monies. The public relations Alliance makes the unfounded claim to represent “balanced” research about genetic engineered products.  One of its missions is to influence the next generation of agricultural scientists to embrace GMO science. For CAS, as for Bill Gates, GMOs are the only food solution for Africa's future. Five years ago, organic New York farmers mobilized to pressure the Trustees of Cornell University to evict CAS from the campus and halt its influence over the school's prestigious College of Agriculture and Life Sciences.   One argument Kahn wants us to buy into is that there were mistakes made during the early roll out of GMOs in the 1990s. But, somehow, mysteriously and without any solid evidence, we are supposed to believe that these same companies now engineering new generations of crops have learned their lessons. All that has really changed has been the genetic technology for altering plant genomes. The same mind-set that only technology and the quest for food dominance remain. After hundreds of thousands of dollars were flushed away during a genetically modified wheat project, a retired professor of plant agriculture at the University of Guelph in Canada remarked:   "We – scientists and the public – are so malleable and gullible (or is it because researchers and research administrators are just desperate for money?), that we swallow and become promoters of the mantra that GM is somehow going to feed the world: by resolving the monumental threat of burnt toast? Or browning in cut apples? Or flower color in carnations? Really? For shame. Let's be honest. The one and only reason these people, corporations, and governments are funding this sorry use of [lab] bench space is because it may yield a proprietary product."   Following Lynas' lead, Kahn wants us to believe that genes exchanged between different plants is common in nature and therefore manipulating genes between species with genetic engineering tools, such as CRISPR, should not worry us. Yes, plants have acquired genes from other organisms in the past – the far distant past – according to the Union of Concerned Scientists. However, it is so exceedingly rare that these should be regarded as anomalies without any correlation whatsoever to the millions of different genes available to bio-engineer new plant organisms. This has been one of Lynas' pet arguments on his bully pulpit since turning traitor on his former Greenpeace activists and joining Monsanto's legions.    It may also be noted that Jennifer Kahn is an active participant in CRISPRcon, a forum dedicated to “the future of CRISPR and gene editing technology applications in agriculture, health, conservation and more.” Among the organization's supporters are Bayer, the Innovative Genomics Institute, Cornell Alliance for Science, Corteva Agriscience and the United Soybean Board.  A mission noted on its website is expressed in one of its mottos, “The public doesn't trust GMOs. Will it trust CRISPR?” This is a public relations pitch that permeates her Times article.    It is important for independent investigators and researchers to identify and publicize the background of cloaked public relations shills posing as unbiased journalists in mainstream news sources. Kahn's New York Times piece is an example of a propaganda effort without credibility; it is an attempt to disingenuously manipulate the narrative so more Americans will love GMOs. In the wake of the agrichemical industry's efforts to bolster favorable images of GMOs and more recently CRISPR editing technologies, the mainstream media willingly rolls out a red carpet. No equal publishing space is awarded to the scientific critics of genetic engineering who uncover the flaws in the industry's public research. Consequently, journalists such as Mark Lynas and Jennifer Kahn are the norm rather than exception. Today the lesson is clear that money, power and influence sustain the lies and deceit of private industry.  Take on any cause critical of GMOs and agro-chemical agriculture, and Big Ag will come after you. Kahn is seemingly just one of many other journalists the GLP and Cornell Alliance can turn towards to advance genetic engineering's mythologies.    Seven years ago, 70 percent of Americans, according to a Consumer Reports National Research Center survey, did not want genetically modified organisms in their food. In 2018, the Pew Research Center reported that only five percent of Americans said GM foods were better for one's health – which about makes up the number of people who are in one way or another invested in the agrichemical industry. Still over half believe they endanger health. Yet too much has been invested into agro-biotechnology to expect GMOS to disappear at any time. As the public increasingly turns away from genetically modified organisms in their produce, we will expect new volleys of industry propaganda like that penned by Jennifer Kahn to dangle new carrots. For Kahn, one of these rotten carrots is to improve nutritional content. Yet, similar to the Golden Rice, this will need to be proven beyond being an infomercial. We can also expect to hear ever wilder and more irrational claims about how GMO-based agriculture might reduce CO2 greenhouse pollution and save humanity. And we expect much of this PR campaign to be backed by the World Economic Forum's full-throttle Great Reset invasion. In other words, out of desperation to reach global food dominance, the agro-chemical industry backed by western governments will be declaring a full food war against the peoples of the world.  It is time for us to unlearn any illusory attachment we might have to Big Agriculture and learn to loath GMOs.

The hosts issue a major boob-related correction, talk about TikTok influencers who (appear to) have dissociative identity disorder, and discuss the recent meltdown of a site that (claims that it) is "science-based." Plus: Some other, often-cringeworthy recent skepticism/atheism history, including Elevatorgate (tm). Maria Taylor out: https://www.si.com/media/2021/07/21/maria-taylor-espn-split-nbc-likely-next (https://www.si.com/media/2021/07/21/maria-taylor-espn-split-nbc-likely-next) Scott Lilienfeld and Hal Arkowitz, a bit skeptical of Dissociative Identity Disorder in Scientific American: https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/can-people-have-multiple-personalities/ (https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/can-people-have-multiple-personalities/) Input on the DID subculture on TikTok: https://www.inputmag.com/culture/dissociative-identity-disorder-did-tiktok-influencers-multiple-personalities (https://www.inputmag.com/culture/dissociative-identity-disorder-did-tiktok-influencers-multiple-personalities) @theasystem and @systemspouse: https://www.tiktok.com/@theasystem/video/6987819970646265094 (https://www.tiktok.com/@theasystem/video/6987819970646265094) https://www.tiktok.com/@systemspouse/video/6987084259601157382 (https://www.tiktok.com/@systemspouse/video/6987084259601157382) https://www.tiktok.com/@systemspouse/video/6985581388808473862 (https://www.tiktok.com/@systemspouse/video/6985581388808473862) One of the stranger subreddits you'll see: https://www.reddit.com/r/DIDCringe/ (https://www.reddit.com/r/DIDCringe/) Science-Based Medicine's very bad and error-riddled coverage of Irreversible Damage: Novella and Gorski: https://sciencebasedmedicine.org/the-science-of-transgender-treatment/ (https://sciencebasedmedicine.org/the-science-of-transgender-treatment/) Lovell: https://sciencebasedmedicine.org/abigail-shriers-irreversible-damage-a-wealth-of-irreversible-misinformation/ (https://sciencebasedmedicine.org/abigail-shriers-irreversible-damage-a-wealth-of-irreversible-misinformation/) Eckert: https://sciencebasedmedicine.org/irreversible-damage-to-the-trans-community-a-critical-review-of-abigail-shriers-book-irreversible-damage-part-one/ (https://sciencebasedmedicine.org/irreversible-damage-to-the-trans-community-a-critical-review-of-abigail-shriers-book-irreversible-damage-part-one/) https://sciencebasedmedicine.org/irreversible-damage-to-the-trans-community-a-critical-review-of-abigail-shriers-book-irreversible-damage-the-transgender-craze-seducing-our-daughters-part-two/ (https://sciencebasedmedicine.org/irreversible-damage-to-the-trans-community-a-critical-review-of-abigail-shriers-book-irreversible-damage-the-transgender-craze-seducing-our-daughters-part-two/) Jesse's responses: https://jessesingal.substack.com/p/how-science-based-medicine-botched (https://jessesingal.substack.com/p/how-science-based-medicine-botched) https://jessesingal.substack.com/p/science-based-medicines-coverage (https://jessesingal.substack.com/p/science-based-medicines-coverage) Leaked email about Jesse that treats Gorcenski and James as credible sources: https://twitter.com/jessesingal/status/1412511853067051010 (https://twitter.com/jessesingal/status/1412511853067051010) Gorcenski: "If you wonder if there's anyone who I dislike more than the Nazis who assaulted me and nearly killed me, there is at least one person and his name is Jesse Singal." https://cdn.substack.com/image/fetch/fauto,qauto:good,flprogressive:steep/https%3A%2F%2Fbucketeer-e05bbc84-baa3-437e-9518-adb32be77984.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fpublic%2Fimages%2F9eed6bf4-fa8c-4802-80ea-282818a0b26d952x419.png (https://cdn.substack.com/image/fetch/f_auto,q_auto:good,fl_progressive:steep/https%3A%2F%2Fbucketeer-e05bbc84-baa3-437e-9518-adb32be77984.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fpublic%2Fimages%2F9eed6bf4-fa8c-4802-80ea-282818a0b26d_952x419.png) Jesse on Gorcenski: https://jessesingal.substack.com/p/a-sorta-quick-response-to-the-errors (https://jessesingal.substack.com/p/a-sorta-quick-response-to-the-errors) Some background on Andrea James: http://alicedreger.com/in_fear (http://alicedreger.com/in_fear) Longer but free, and tells the whole story: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3170124/ (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3170124/) Rebecca Watson Wikipedia page with some information on Elevatorgate: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rebecca_Watson (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rebecca_Watson) Her account of what happened: https://slate.com/human-interest/2012/10/sexism-in-the-skeptic-community-i-spoke-out-then-came-the-rape-threats.html (https://slate.com/human-interest/2012/10/sexism-in-the-skeptic-community-i-spoke-out-then-came-the-rape-threats.html)

The hosts issue a major boob-related correction, talk about TikTok influencers who (appear to) have dissociative identity disorder, and discuss the recent meltdown of a site that (claims that it) is "science-based." Plus: Some other, often-cringeworthy recent skepticism/atheism history, including Elevatorgate (tm).Maria Taylor out: https://www.si.com/media/2021/07/21/maria-taylor-espn-split-nbc-likely-nextScott Lilienfeld and Hal Arkowitz, a bit skeptical of Dissociative Identity Disorder in Scientific American: https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/can-people-have-multiple-personalities/Input on the DID subculture on TikTok: https://www.inputmag.com/culture/dissociative-identity-disorder-did-tiktok-influencers-multiple-personalities @theasystem and @systemspouse:https://www.tiktok.com/@theasystem/video/6987819970646265094https://www.tiktok.com/@systemspouse/video/6987084259601157382https://www.tiktok.com/@systemspouse/video/6985581388808473862One of the stranger subreddits you'll see: https://www.reddit.com/r/DIDCringe/Science-Based Medicine's very bad and error-riddled coverage of Irreversible Damage:Novella and Gorski: https://sciencebasedmedicine.org/the-science-of-transgender-treatment/ Lovell: https://sciencebasedmedicine.org/abigail-shriers-irreversible-damage-a-wealth-of-irreversible-misinformation/ Eckert: https://sciencebasedmedicine.org/irreversible-damage-to-the-trans-community-a-critical-review-of-abigail-shriers-book-irreversible-damage-part-one/ https://sciencebasedmedicine.org/irreversible-damage-to-the-trans-community-a-critical-review-of-abigail-shriers-book-irreversible-damage-the-transgender-craze-seducing-our-daughters-part-two/ Jesse's responses:https://jessesingal.substack.com/p/how-science-based-medicine-botched https://jessesingal.substack.com/p/science-based-medicines-coverage Leaked email about Jesse that treats Gorcenski and James as credible sources: https://twitter.com/jessesingal/status/1412511853067051010 Gorcenski: "If you wonder if there's anyone who I dislike more than the Nazis who assaulted me and nearly killed me, there is at least one person and his name is Jesse Singal."https://cdn.substack.com/image/fetch/f_auto,q_auto:good,fl_progressive:steep/https%3A%2F%2Fbucketeer-e05bbc84-baa3-437e-9518-adb32be77984.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fpublic%2Fimages%2F9eed6bf4-fa8c-4802-80ea-282818a0b26d_952x419.png Jesse on Gorcenski: https://jessesingal.substack.com/p/a-sorta-quick-response-to-the-errors Some background on Andrea James: http://alicedreger.com/in_fear Longer but free, and tells the whole story: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3170124/ Rebecca Watson Wikipedia page with some information on Elevatorgate: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rebecca_Watson Her account of what happened:https://slate.com/human-interest/2012/10/sexism-in-the-skeptic-community-i-spoke-out-then-came-the-rape-threats.html  This is a public episode. Get access to private episodes at www.blockedandreported.org/subscribe

Bret and Heather and Ivermectin.  Oh my. IDSG returns from it's 17 year absence with a banger of an episode in which Daniel dishes out THE FUCKING TEA on Bret Weinstein & Heather Heying (again) and their irresponsible spreading (in hushed, reasonable voices) of potentially lethal conspiracy theories and bad science re Covid, Wuhan, vaccines, and Ivermectin.  Content Warnings. Podcast Notes: Please consider donating to help us make the show and stay independent.  Patrons get exclusive access to one full extra episode a month. Daniel's Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/danielharper Jack's Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/user?u=4196618 IDSG Twitter: https://twitter.com/idsgpod Daniel's Twitter: @danieleharper Jack's Twitter: @_Jack_Graham_ IDSG on Apple Podcasts: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/i-dont-speak-german/id1449848509?ls=1 Show Notes: Bret Weinstein Odysee Bret interviews Yuri Deigin. Yuri Deigin, Lab Made? SARS-CoV-2 Geneaology Through the Lens of Gain of Function Research Indeed, virologists, including the leader of coronavirus research at the Wuhan Institute of Virology, Shi Zhengli, have done many similar things in the past — both replacing the RBM in one type of virus by an RBM from another, or adding a new furin site that can provide a species-specific coronavirus with an ability to start using the same receptor (e.g. ACE2) in other species. In fact, Shi Zhengli's group was creating chimeric constructs as far back as 2007 and as recently as 2017, when they created a whole of 8 new chimeric coronaviruses with various RBMs. In 2019 such work was in full swing, as WIV was part of a $3.7 million NIH grant titled Understanding the Risk of Bat Coronavirus Emergence. Under its auspices, Shi Zhengli co-authored a 2019 paper that called for continued research into synthetic viruses and testing them in vitro and in vivo: Bret and Heather on Real Time with Bill Mahr on the Lab-Leak Hypothesis CLIP (Bret and Heather on BIll Maher Lab Leak) – starts at beginning of clip. Andersen, et al. The proximal origin of SARS-CoV-2 SARS-CoV-2 is the seventh coronavirus known to infect humans; SARS-CoV, MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV-2 can cause severe disease, whereas HKU1, NL63, OC43 and 229E are associated with mild symptoms6. Here we review what can be deduced about the origin of SARS-CoV-2 from comparative analysis of genomic data. We offer a perspective on the notable features of the SARS-CoV-2 genome and discuss scenarios by which they could have arisen. Our analyses clearly show that SARS-CoV-2 is not a laboratory construct or a purposefully manipulated virus. Garry, Robert. [Early appearance of two distinct genomic lineages of SARS-CoV-2 in different Wuhan wildlife markets suggests SARS-CoV-2 has a natural origin](https://virological.org/t/early-appearance-of-two-distinct-genomic-lineages-of-sars-cov-2-in-different-wuhan-wildlife-markets-suggests-sars-cov-2-has-a-natural-origin/691 This Week in Virology 762: SARS-Cov-2 origins with Robert Garry CLIP (Two Covid Lineages in Wuhan Market) – Starts about 39:00 in TWIV762 potholer54, Did SARS-Cov-2 start in a Chinese Lab? potholer54, More “man-made” SARS-CoV-2 lab-leak malarky Scott Gavura, Science Based Medicine, “Ivermectin is the New Hydroxychloroquine” There has been interest in ivermectin since the early days of the COVID-19 pandemic, because it was observed that at high concentrations it had antiviral properties against the SARS-CoV-2 virus. However, there was an important red flag in that finding. A few weeks after the initial finding was published, a short paper appeared in the British Journal of Clinical Pharmacology that described the considerations for using ivermectin as an antiviral. While it acknowledged the antiviral properties of high concentrations of the drug in laboratory (in vitro) experiments, it noted that it would likely not be possible to achieve the same concentrations of the drug in the plasma of the blood, because the drug itself is tightly bound to blood proteins. Even giving 8.5 x the FDA-approved dose (1700mcg/kg) resulted in blood concentrations far below the dose identified that offered antiviral effects: [[Ivermectin-Cmax.png]] This Week in Virology 766: The Corona Project with David Fajgenbaum CORONA project 18:58, 46:32 “How To Save the World in Three Easy Steps” Clip “Ivermectin End the Pandemic” – starts around 3:30 Bret Weinstein, “COVID, Ivermectin, and the Crime of the Century - DarkHorse Podcast with Pierre Kory & Bret Weinstein” With Dr. Robert Malone (invented mRNA vaccine technology) and Mr. Steve Kirsch. Clip “Bret Doctors as Scientists from CotC” – Starts around 19:00 With Pierre Kory Science Based Medicine, Ivermectin is the new hydroxychloroquine, take 2 Last week, über-quack Joe Mercola published an article entitled “COVID, Ivermectin and the Crime of the Century“, naming it after an episode of Bret Weinstein's podcast. It features an interview with Dr. Pierre Kory, one of the most prominent proponents of ivermectin for COVID-19 by evolutionary biologist Bret Weinstein, who has become prominent as a COVID-19 contrarian and spreader of disinformation, particularly about the “lab leak theory” of SARS-CoV-2 origins and now likes to Tweet about “persecution” by Twitter: It also turns out that Dr. Pierre Kory is president of the Frontline COVID-19 Critical Care Alliance (FLCCC) and has testified before Congress. During that testimony, Dr. Kory claimed that ivermectin, used with other medicines such as vitamin C, zinc and melatonin, could “save hundreds of thousands of people,” and cited more than 20 studies. The narrative of Mercola's article is eerily similar to the narratives we heard about hydroxychloroquine a year ago, namely that ivermectin is a cheap, safe, and effective drug that “they” don't want you to know about that could have saved hundreds of thousands of lives if not for doctors' fetish for randomized clinical trials. Ivermectin is the new hydroxychloroquine, part three Before I move on to more of the ivermectin conspiracy theorists and potential reasons for them, I can't help but repeat what I've been saying all along about ivermectin. Combining preclinical studies that show antiviral activity against SARS-C0V-2, the coronavirus that causes COVID-19 in vitro (cell culture) but only at much higher concentrations of ivermectin than can be achieved with safe doses in the bloodstream with the equivocal clinical trial results lead to a conclusion that this drug almost certainly does not work to treat COVID-19. This is particularly likely given that the highest quality existing randomized controlled clinical trials of ivermectin are all basically negative. I note that when I discussed how poor the evidence for hydroxychloroquine for COVID-19 was, I routinely received criticism that I “wanted patients to die” and was “hoping” that the drug didn't work. I'm getting some of the same nonsense now that I've finally been prodded to write about ivermectin. Nothing could be further from the truth. Even though, now that there are safe and effective COVID-19 vaccines, the need for a cheap and effective drug that can treat COVID-19 is not as desperate as it was a year ago, it is still acute given how large swaths of the globe still do not have access to the vaccines. Moreover, now that Oxford University has added ivermectin to the protocol of its massive PRINCIPLE Trial of treatments for COVID-19, it is possible that there might turn out to be a benefit due to ivermectin in treating COVID-19, clearly just not as massive as claimed by advocates and conspiracy theorists. I'd be just fine with that, as I would have been overjoyed if hydroxychloroquine had been shown to be as effective as its advocates had claimed it was. It's just that, right now, the evidence is trending strongly in favor of the conclusion that ivermectin, like hydroxychloroquine before it, doesn't work against COVID-19 in humans. Gideon M-K; Health Nerd What this means is that, if you exclude some of the low-quality research on ivermectin, the paper goes from showing a massive benefit to no benefit at all. On top of this, there's an interesting point — even if you don't agree with these assessments, taking the only three studies that the authors of the meta-analysis considered to be at a “low risk of bias” (i.e. high-quality), you find that these high-quality studies have failed to find any benefit for ivermectin. In other words, while the conclusions the authors came to are very positive, the results section of the paper seems to show that the evidence for ivermectin might not be strong after all. The devil really is in the details with research like this. Jack Lawrence aka TimPoolClips Why Was a Major Study on Ivermectin for COVID-19 Just Retracted? Even if the paper's authors end up providing an innocent explanation for all this it would be puzzling why it took them so long to notice their error. Whether the final story is one of purposeful fabrication or a series of escalating mistakes involving training or test datasets, this research group has still screwed up in a big way. Although science trends towards self-correction, something is clearly broken in a system that can allow a study as full of problems as the Elgazzar paper to run unchallenged for seven months. Thousands of highly educated scientists, doctors, pharmacists, and at least four major medicines regulators missed a fraud so apparent that it might as well have come with a flashing neon sign. That this all happened amid an ongoing global health crisis of epic proportions is all the more terrifying. For those reading this article, its findings may serve as a wake-up call. For those who died after taking a medication now shown to be even more lacking in positive evidence, it's too late. Science has corrected, but at what cost? Ivermectin is the new hydoxychloroquine, take four Of course, as Meyerowitz-Katz observed, just the results of the study raised a lot of red flags. Elgazzar 2020, if you take the authors at their word, enrolled over 400 people with COVID-19 and 200 close personal contacts and allocated them either to ivermectin or placebo groups, reporting that ivermectin treatment decreased mortality from COVID-19 by a whopping 90%. As Meyerowitz-Katz observed, if this were true, that would make ivermectin the “most incredibly effective treatment ever to be discovered in modern medicine.” While as a physician I might quibble about that a bit (we do have treatments that are greater than 90% effective at eliminating the diseases or conditions that they treat, especially a number of vaccines), he is correct if you restricted this to antiviral drugs. If this study's results were accurate and generalizable, ivermectin would be the most most incredibly effective antiviral treatment ever to be discovered. That result alone should have raised a number of red flags, and it did among authors doing meta-analyses who were not ivermectin advocates from the BIRD Group or the FLCCC, which is why they excluded it from their analyses. Meilssa Davey at The Guardian Huge sttudy supporting ivermectin as Covid treatment withdrawn over ethical concerns A medical student in London, Jack Lawrence, was among the first to identify serious concerns about the paper, leading to the retraction. He first became aware of the Elgazzar preprint when it was assigned to him by one of his lecturers for an assignment that formed part of his master's degree. He found the introduction section of the paper appeared to have been almost entirely plagiarised. It appeared that the authors had run entire paragraphs from press releases and websites about ivermectin and Covid-19 through a thesaurus to change key words. “Humorously, this led to them changing ‘severe acute respiratory syndrome' to ‘extreme intense respiratory syndrome' on one occasion,” Lawrence said. The data also looked suspicious to Lawrence, with the raw data apparently contradicting the study protocol on several occasions. “The authors claimed to have done the study only on 18-80 year olds, but at least three patients in the dataset were under 18,” Lawrence said. Dark Horse 85: YouTube and The Truman Faux Medical Show CLIP “DH85 Save Three Kill Two” – Starts Around 50:00 Dark Horse 86: They've Got That Covered CLIP “DH86 Retraction” – Starts around 19:00 “Scientists quit journal board, protesting ‘grossly irresponsible' study claiming COVID-19 vaccines kill” Several reputed virologists and vaccinologists have resigned as editors of the journal Vaccines to protest its 24 June publication of a peer-reviewed article that misuses data to conclude that “for three deaths prevented by [COVID-19] vaccination, we have to accept two inflicted by vaccination.” Since Friday, at least six scientists have resigned positions as associate or section editors with Vaccines, including Florian Krammer, a virologist at the Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, and Katie Ewer, an immunologist at the Jenner Institute at the University of Oxford who was on the team that developed the Oxford-AstraZeneca COVID-19 vaccine. Their resignations were first reported by Retraction Watch. “The data has been misused because it makes the (incorrect) assumption that all deaths occurring post vaccination are caused by vaccination,” Ewer wrote in an email. “[And] it is now being used by anti-vaxxers and COVID-19-deniers as evidence that COVID-19 vaccines are not safe. [This] is grossly irresponsible, particularly for a journal specialising in vaccines.” The paper is a case of “garbage in, garbage out,” says Helen Petousis-Harris, a vaccinologist who directs the Vaccine Datalink and Research Group at the University of Auckland and who also resigned as a Vaccines editor after reading the paper. Diane Harper, an epidemiologist at the University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, who was founding editor-in-chief of Vaccines, also resigned, as did Paul Licciardi, an immunologist at Murdoch Children's Research Institute in Parkville, Australia, and Andrew Pekosz, a respiratory virologist at the Johns Hopkins University Bloomberg School of Public Health. Epoch Times, Dr. Bret Weinstein, “Perverse Incentives in the Vaccine Rollout and the Censhorship of Science” * Anna Merlan at Vic; two excellent summaries: 1. 'Why Is the Intellectual Dark Web Suddenly Hyping an Unproven COVID Treatment?' https://www.vice.com/en/article/wx5z5y/why-is-the-intellectual-dark-web-suddenly-hyping-an-unproven-covid-treatment 2. 'The Ivermectin Advocates' War Has Just Begun' https://www.vice.com/en/article/y3d5gv/ivermectin-covid-treatment-advocates-rogan-weinstein-hecker Jef Rouner at Houston Press on Bret https://www.houstonpress.com/news/a-possible-new-anti-vaccine-scam-is-on-the-rise-11591162 Decoding the Gurus on Bret & Heather and Ivermectin https://decoding-the-gurus.captivate.fm/episode/brett-heather-weinstein-why-are-they-suppressing-ivermectin-the-miracle-cure Bret platforms Geert Vanden Bossche https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BNyAovuUxro&t=6s Vaxopedia on Geert Vanden Bossche https://vaxopedia.org/2021/03/14/who-is-geert-vanden-bossche/?fbclid=IwAR3u1myW15pERVxvcopv5NlWBr12QakfzVMHsoHHopLuJWKSUGfockqYhBo ZDoggMD on Geert Vanden Bossche https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NEyQi__zTuo Potholer54 on Covid and vaccines etc https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL82yk73N8eoWneZjR0wiidhGkAMOeIYAS QAnon Anonymous feat. scientist on 'Lab Leak' theory https://soundcloud.com/qanonanonymous/unlocked-premium-episode-129-lab-leak-hypothesis-feat-dr-alex-greninger Citations Needed Pod vaccine inequality https://citationsneeded.libsyn.com/size/5/?search=vaccine Clip from start; Charlie Kirk cites Bret to Tucker Carlson https://twitter.com/uberfeminist/status/1418033997398020102 Eiynah's panel on 'Mergegate' (feat. D. Harper) Part 1 https://soundcloud.com/politeconversations/panel-24-defending-new-atheism-maybe-just-dont-pt-1 Daniel's guest appearance on Decoding the Gurus https://decoding-the-gurus.captivate.fm/episode/special-episode-interview-with-daniel-harper-on-the-far-right-idw-criticism  

Welcome viewers! The Topic for tonight's episode is Critical Thinking. In this episode we discuss: Jenny McCarthy, Oprah Winfrey, Dr. Jay Gordon, Dr. Phil, Wonder Woman, Vaccines, Socrates, Plato and how all this stuff combines to help us explore critical thinking and logical fallacies. We'll explore it all on tonight's episode of Topic - Discuss #topicdiscuss You Tube

After we failed to release an episode last week, it may have been your reflex to assume we were on an indefinite hiatus again. But we managed to massage our schedules enough to make the most of our recording time and here it is!   Reflexology "Reflexology: Panacea or placebo" from The Conversation: https://theconversation.com/reflexology-panacea-or-placebo-10527 "Modern Reflexology: Still as bogus as pre-modern reflexology" from Science-Based Medicine: https://sciencebasedmedicine.org/modern-reflexology-still-as-bogus-as-pre-modern-reflexology/ "Revisiting reflexology: Concept, evidence, current practice and practitioner training" from Journal of Traditional and Complementary Medicine: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4624523/ "Reflexology: an update of a systematic review of randomised clinical trials" from Maturitas: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/21111551/ "Reflexology in the management of low back pain: a pilot randomised controlled trial" from Complementary Therapies in Medicine: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/18346622/ eJTCM Peer Review Standards: https://www.elsevier.com/__data/promis_misc/ejtcm-peer-review.pdf Other links Wholesome Doctor post: https://www.instagram.com/p/CRJJYmKnyt7/?utm_medium=share_sheet "Do Ear Candles Work To Remove Earwax? | Ear Candling Proof!" from Doctor Cliff, AuD: https://youtu.be/CQJt1LWH32k  

What does the body of evidence have to say on the topic of fibromyalgia? Plus: assorted topical discussions about mixing COVID vaccines, the tiny/maybe/it's nothing increased risk of myocarditis and pericarditis with the RNA vaccines, and long-term immunity following COVID vaccination.   Block 1: Fibromyalgia: what could be causing it? (3:00)   Block 2: Fibromyalgia: diagnosing and treating it (10:02)   Block 3: Mixing and matching COVID vaccines (28:20)   Block 4: Myocarditis and pericarditis with the RNA vaccines (38:40) Long-term immunity from COVID vaccines (51:35)   If you want to apply to be our social media manager, you find the details here: https://bodyofevidence.ca/looking-for-part-time-social-media-manager   * Jingle by Joseph Hackl * Theme music: “Fall of the Ocean Queen“ by Joseph Hackl. * Assistant researcher: Nicholas Koziris   To contribute to The Body of Evidence, go to our Patreon page at: http://www.patreon.com/thebodyofevidence/.   To make a one-time donation to our show, you can now use PayPal! https://www.paypal.com/donate?hosted_button_id=9QZET78JZWCZE   Patrons get a bonus show on Patreon called “Digressions”! Check it out!     References:   1) Prevalence of fibromyalgia: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/23203795/   2) Diagnostic criteria for fibromyalgia: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/20461783/   3) Misdiagnosis of fibromyalgia, comparing physicians to criteria-based diagnosis: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/acr.23731   4) FM/a blood test for fibromyalgia (Science-Based Medicine post): https://www.skepdoc.info/a-blood-test-for-fibromyalgia/   5) FM/a blood test for fibromyalgia (AAFP article): https://www.aafp.org/afp/2021/0501/p566.html   6) Economic benefits after receiving a fibromyalgia diagnosis: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/18311794/ and https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/23024016/   7) Exercise for fibromyalgia: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/28636204/   8) UK preprint on mixing and matching COVID vaccines (Com-COV trial): https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3874014   9) Ed Yong's article on how the immune system is where intuition goes to die: https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2020/08/covid-19-immunity-is-the-pandemics-central-mystery/614956/   10) Nature paper on long-term immunity after receiving a COVID vaccine: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-021-03738-2  

Dr. David Gorski is a surgical oncologist at the Barbara Ann Karmanos Cancer Institute, specializing in breast cancer surgery and a professor of surgery at Wayne State University School of Medicine. Dr. Gorski attended the University of Michigan, where he received an MD in 1988. In 1989, he entered a residency in general surgery at the University Hospitals of Cleveland. Gorski left residency for a PhD in cellular physiology at Case Western Reserve University, completed in 1994. Dr. Gorski continued his residency (1993–96) and completed a surgical oncology research fellowship (1996–99) at The University of Chicago. He is the author of a blog, Respectful Insolence, and the managing editor of the website Science-Based Medicine, which are both “ science skeptic “ sites. Dr. Gorski has been writing about vaccine misinformation and other pseudoscience topics since 2004- prior to that, he fought Holocaust denialism. This podcast is powered by JewishPodcasts.org. Start your own podcast today and share your content with the world. Click jewishpodcasts.fm/signup to get started.

Dr. David Gorski is a surgical oncologist at the Barbara Ann Karmanos Cancer Institute, specializing in breast cancer surgery and a professor of surgery at Wayne State University School of Medicine. Dr. Gorski attended the University of Michigan, where he received an MD in 1988. In 1989, he entered a residency in general surgery at the University Hospitals of Cleveland. Gorski left residency for a PhD in cellular physiology at Case Western Reserve University, completed in 1994. Dr. Gorski continued his residency (1993–96) and completed a surgical oncology research fellowship (1996–99) at The University of Chicago. He is the author of a blog, Respectful Insolence, and the managing editor of the website Science-Based Medicine, which are both “ science skeptic “ sites. Dr. Gorski has been writing about vaccine misinformation and other pseudoscience topics since 2004- prior to that, he fought Holocaust denialism.

Jonathan and Chris delve into the world of newborns and medical care for children with Dr. Clay Jones, a paediatrician who practices in Massachusetts and who regularly writes for the Science-Based Medicine blog. From preventing SIDS to treating a fever (or not), we go through our listeners' questions. In a week, our patrons will get a bonus episode with more from Clay!   2:04 COVID-19 vaccines in kids 6:27 “I'm not anti-vaccine but…” says Texas paediatrician 12:17 Chiropractic in children and babies 20:07 Best temperature for newborns (in Fahrenheit!) 22:36 Are diapers bad for the baby? 25:25 Safe sleeping 30:00 What predisposes to SIDS? 32:16 Do newborns dream? (An Inception on Elm Street) 37:37 Baby slings and hip dysplasia 42:57 Long-term outcome of very premature babies 45:44 Apgar scores (to get into daycare) 48:28 Fever 51:49 Teething 54:44 Recurring infections in kindergarten 57:16 RyRy's impossible question     * Theme music: “Fall of the Ocean Queen“ by Joseph Hackl.   To contribute to The Body of Evidence, go to our Patreon page at: http://www.patreon.com/thebodyofevidence/.   Patrons get a bonus show on Patreon called “Digressions”! Check it out!     Links: 1) Clay Jones at Science-Based Medicine: https://sciencebasedmedicine.org/author/clayjones/ 2) Clay Jones on Twitter: https://twitter.com/SBMPediatrics  

Paul Ingraham, author of the amazing website PainScience.com, discuses his career writing evidence-based articles and e-books about musculoskeletal pain, including: his involvement in the skeptic community; his work as an editor at the Science Based Medicine blog; his own experience with chronic pain; his recent studies into neuroinflammation and its potential role in medically unexplained symptoms. 

We've all heard of dieting documentaries such as "What the Health" and "Supersize me", but I'm going to ask you to do something for me. Stop watching dieting documentaries! They are absolutely terrible, completely unscientific, and a plague upon mankind. As you can imagine, this podcast is going to involve a high degree of ranting. Stop Watching Dieting Documentaries I actually did quite a bit of research for this podcast. During the podcast, I talk about the importance of citing sources and discussing where you are getting your information from. So here are several websites and one YouTube video that I used. Harriet Hall wrote an amazing deconstruction of "What the Health" for Science-Based Medicine. Check it out here. Julia Belluz wrote an excellent piece for Vox on What the Health. Check it out here. There is also a great piece in Time Magazine by Alexandra Siffelin. Check it out here. For those of you who don't want to read, there's a really good YouTube summary by Dr Zubin Damania You might also want to check out my podcast on vegan dieting, where I talk about some drawbacks, and why a plant-based diet is different (and potentially better) to a vegan diet. Splice of Heaven by Moon Dog Brewery This beer was described as a Pine-Lime ice cream IPA, which is rather terrifying. Apparently, pine-lime means pineapple and lime, and ice cream just means vanilla flavouring. During the podcast, I said that I couldn't really taste the pineapple or lime, or vanilla for that matter. But afterwards, me and the Mrs continued to taste it, and I feel that I could taste the pineapple, and perhaps the lime. The vanilla taste completely escaped me though. My Mrs said she tasted mango, but I'm not 100% sure I've ever seen her eat a mango or a pineapple, so I have taken her input with a pinch of salt. Moon Dog Brewery is an Australian brewery based in Melbourne. I couldn't find too much information about them, their website doesn't seem to have an about section. So I can't say when they started or what their plans are for the future. They definitely seem to have a quirky sense of humour though, and they brew the best pine-lime ice cream IPA I've ever had. Dog Stopped Play Finally, I think I should offer an explanation as to why I finished this week's podcast on such an abrupt note. My dog Bailey was beginning to whine, and in my experience that gives me a 20-second window to open the door before he progresses to full-on barking. There is nothing worse on earth than random barking in a podcast, and I don't know how to edit, so I decided a tactical retreat was the best option. After the podcast I gave him the requisite 30 strokes and 10 "good boys" and he decided that barking was unnecessary. To be honest, I'm surprised he didn't interrupt me earlier, and am massively thankful! Have a great week guys. This is Bailey in a rare moment between barks

On this episode Dr. Serenity talks about how to be a savvy health consumer in our current, confusing, capitalist health care system. She discusses important ways to make informed health choices, and some of the things that can make it challenging to prioritize health day-to-day. Explore what it means to find good health information and qualified experts to help you along the way, whether you want to maintain good health or are facing chronic health concerns.We all know how frustrating it can be to deal with health issues. Any person who has gone through our health care system in any significant way knows that our version of modern medicine can present us with repetitive, frustrating, expensive, confusing, and emotionally draining experiences. In other words, getting help isn't easy. American health care costs us time and money, and can be a real pain to navigate.The dynamics of doctor-patient relationships push us to only discuss physical aspects of health, which as we know is only a part of our health story. It misses some really important information. Leaving out the psychosocial aspects of our health inhibits doctors from being able to treat the whole individual. It is hard to know how to best empower patients to make healthy choices on their own, when they are out of the doctor's office. Doctors are historically used to patients relying upon their expert evaluation of the evidence to determine the diagnosis and method of treatment. But when treatment recommendations are made without any explanation as to why this is the best course of action, which is often the case in doctor-patient relationships, the patient is left relying on the doctor to make their decisions rather than being brought on board with that decision. They are treated as a passive recipient rather than a valued partner, and the underlying assumption becomes that for patients to achieve health they must simply adhere to their doctors' recommendations. This paternalistic nature of medicine is dysfunctional and problematic. Ultimately, it creates health consumers who are largely unable to advocate for themselves. Many doctors today work hard to try and avoid paternalism, but it is baked into the system itself. They must work against the system. Doctors and patients must commit to a system of shared decision making where both are active participants in choosing treatment options.Ideally, our health choices would be informed by evidence. We have more information than ever before to help us make good health choices. Doing this requires being very savvy, however, because there is also more misinformation than ever before. Savvy health consumers need to have basic scientific literacy, but they need not be fully trained scientists. A big part of being savvy is also being able to find good professionals to rely on, and how to spot when a seemingly good professional throws up some red flags.Savvy health consumers use competent experts and scientific resources to make health choices that are most likely to be beneficial and move them toward their goals. This means knowing your goals, generally speaking, and being clear about your health values. Each of us will have different things that matter most to us. People need to be properly taught how to question things and think critically using reasoning and evidence. Being savvy means asking why a particular set of health advice is being given or evaluating the evidence for oneself when you have good scientific literacy. But this can lead us down the wrong path when seeming experts or what passes as science is pawned off on unknowing consumers as being legitimate. What is an average health consumer to do when even physicians disagree about the evidence or apparent experts present persuasive but contrasting opinions?A huge weakness in our current system is that consumers are often unable to discern which self-proclaimed experts have valid qualifications and are deserving of their trust versus which are simply trying to profit or who have no legitimate expertise at all. Often, the true experts on a particular topic are siloed in their professional or academic communities, while pseudo-experts flood social media and local communities claiming to have mastered complex health topics.Lots of people attempt to sell health because they are personally interested in it. You can find a gazillion wellness influencers who combine tips and tricks for eating well, staying active, and practicing self-care. Their advice may be sound in principle but is much better sourced from trained physicians, psychologists, dietitians, occupational and physical therapists, or other properly trained allied health professionals who have the training and education to understand the evidence and theories underlying their advice. A savvy health consumer must carefully evaluate the qualifications of any professional before handing over money for a health-related service or product. You deserve health professionals who are properly trained. Take the time to review the qualifications of any potential or current health professional. Given how many highly qualified people now offer affordable and accessible services like weekly newsletters, apps, blogs, or consultations, why would you waste your time and money on someone who is underqualified?When you want to work with someone one-on-one regarding your health, ask yourself these kinds of questions: Does this health professional possess the proper expertise and clinical experience necessary to understand and evaluate my health and advise me? What evidence is this person using to make their recommendations? Is this person more committed to science and integrity or making money? Can this person clearly articulate why this is the best course of action for me using an evidence-based approach? How much will this cost me in terms of time, money, energy, and emotional distress? How invasive are the recommended treatments? (The more invasive the higher your bar for evidence should be.)There are some wonderful resources for people who want to improve their ability to advocate for themselves and make informed health choices. One initiative I like because it is straightforward and easy to remember is the Ask Me 3 campaign. There's a great channel on YouTube called The Psych Show that teaches many things about psychology and mental health. There's an organization called the Society for Participatory Medicine that works to empower doctors and patients to work together as active participants in medical care. There is another website called Science Based Medicine featuring thoughtful and informed articles on a variety of topics written by legitimate scientific experts. These are just a few of the resources available to you that come from highly educated and properly trained professionals. There are many well trained and passionate people from a variety of professional and educational backgrounds who have the proper skills to help you understand and improve your health. Find a health professional who can clearly explain how their recommendations are made using clinical expertise and best available evidence, and who can tailor their recommendations to your personal goals and values.

In this episode, Jonathan is speaking with David Gorski about science, skepticism, and conspiracy theories. They discuss: •His science journey and how he became a skeptic. •How debunking Holocaust denialists eventually lead him to found his blog Respectful Insolence. •The anti-vaccination movement, the movie Vaxxed, and how correlation doesn't imply causation. •What confounding factors are in scientific studies and why it's so important that they must be accounted for. •The difference between a genuine conspiracy and a conspiracy theory. •How all science denial is based in conspiracy theory. •How the anti-vaccination community is recycling old anti-science tropes and aiming them now at the COVID-19 vaccines. •And other topics. Dr. David Gorski is an American surgical oncologist, professor of surgery at Wayne State University School of Medicine, and a surgical oncologist at the Barbara Ann Karmanos Cancer Institute, specializing in breast cancer surgery. He is an outspoken skeptic, and a critic of alternative medicine and the anti-vaccination movement. He is the author of the blog Respectful Insolence and the managing editor of the website Science-Based Medicine. You can find the websites mentioned in the episode here: Respectful Insolence: https://respectfulinsolence.com/ Science-Based Medicine: https://sciencebasedmedicine.org/ You can find David on Twitter here: https://twitter.com/gorskon You can find this episode on our YouTube channel as well: https://bit.ly/2M6gWXV This show is supported and produced by Final Stretch Media. Final Stretch believes in creating something that disrupts attention spans and challenges the marketing status quo. They do this by creating high quality visual content that captivates your audience. You can find them on: Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/fsmedia2020 Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/finalstretch_media/ This show is also supported by QuikLee; the creators of Brain Racers. The world's first ever live racing competition for the brain. Download their app and play live on the weekends on an iOS device against the world. We have raced and it's a blast! App Download: https://apple.co/33n8aJs Our last sponsor creates survival technology as well as camping and other outdoor gear. Outer Wild's ultimate goal is to provide clean technologies for everyday devices as they are driven to create a more sustainable world. Use the code IS on your next purchase and receive an additional 10% off! Website: https://www.outer-wild.com/

Rumor Flies Podcast joins Blurry Photos to talk about the ins-and-outs of homeopathy! A method to treat disease by the principle of "like cures like," homeopathy is an often-misunderstood and controversial practice. Ryan, Josh, and Greg from the Rumor Flies Podcast stop by to help David with this interesting topic. The boys go over the history, claims, figures, and science behind it all. When did it start? How does it work? Does it really work? Listen and find out in this giant pill of an episode! Don't forget to join the Blurry Photos Discord Server! Watch me stream games on Twitch! Music Myst on the Moor, Political Ad, Beginning f Conflict, Motions, Danse Macabre - Kevin MacLeod (incompetech.com) Licensed under Creative Commons: By Attribution 3.0 Homeopathy Sources ACHS. Homeopathy and Its Founder: Views of a British Researcher. American Council on Science and Health. October 1, 1999. Web. https://www.acsh.org/news/1999/10/01/homeopathy-and-its-founder-views-of-a-british-researcher Jones, Clay. Belief in Homeopathy Results in the Death of a 7-Year-Old Italian Child. Science Based Medicine. June 14, 2019. Web. https://sciencebasedmedicine.org/belief-in-homeopathy-results-in-the-death-of-a-7-year-old-italian-child/ Cukaci, Cemre, et al. Against All Odds - the persistent popularity of homeopathy. Wien Klin Wochenschr 132, 232–242 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00508-020-01624-x Loudon, Irvine. A Brief History of Homeopathy. J R Soc Med. 2006 Dec; 99(12): 607–610. doi: 10.1258/jrsm.99.12.607 PMCID: PMC1676328. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1676328/ Kaplan, Sheila. Hundreds of Babies Harmed by Homeopathic Remedies, Families Say. Scientific American. Feb. 21, 2017. Web. https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/hundreds-of-babies-harmed-by-homeopathic-remedies-families-say/ Robinson, Chris. Cancer Victim Penelope Dingle 'in awe of homeopath' - husband. Perth Now. June 16, 2010. https://www.perthnow.com.au/news/cancer-victim-penelope-dingle-in-awe-of-homeopath---husband-ng-7c51c3e2f263eb5e4e530d5cb0a8b152 Discover Homeopathy. 2010-2021. Web. https://www.discoverhomeopathy.co.uk/victims-2/ AHIMA. Homeopathy and Covid-19. Arizona Homeopathic. July 12, 2020. Web. https://arizonahomeopathic.org/homeopathy-and-covid-19/

Taped in front of a live audience at Baruch College in New York, this episode of Rationally Speaking features special guest Steve Novella: neurologist, author of the blogs NeuroLogica and Science Based Medicine, and co-host of the Skeptic's Guide to the Universe (SGU) podcast. Steve, Massimo, and Julia discuss the recent lawsuit facing the SGU, share their gripes about the ways that skeptics sometimes oversimplify the issues, and answer audience questions such as, "Is anything off-limits to skeptical activism?" Sped up the speakers by ['1.0', '1.0']

America’s Sacrificial Altar for Google, Wikipedia and the Pharmaceutical Empire   Richard Gale and Gary Null PhD Progressive Radio Network, December 3, 2020   Weekly, millions of people do Google searches for advice about their personal health, a large variety of illnesses, such as heart disease, cancer, diabetes, dementia, etc., drug and vaccine safety, and scores of other topics affecting physical and mental health.  They depend upon speed and accuracy to find the current scientifically based and clinically proven information. For the large majority of people, a personal medical condition or health crisis begins by turning exclusively to established medical, drug-based protocols. However, these treatments do not always relieve symptoms and very rarely reverse disease. Certainly they have not shown success to prevent them.    Consequently, increasingly people are seeking second and third opinions. More often than not Google will take a person immediately to Wikipedia. Wikipedia’s co-founder Jimmy Wales acknowledges that “60 to 70 percent of Wikipedia’s traffic originates from Google.  There is an assumption and a reasonable expectation that the information we find on Wikipedia is 1) accurate, 2) soundly researched and referenced from high quality and reliable resources, 3) written by credentialed writers and editors with expertise in the subject, 4) unbiased, and finally 5) objective and neutral. At a minimum it is assumed that content is scientifically validated and on matters of health and disease from the National Institutes of Health PubMed database. Whether it regards a pharmaceutical, surgical or radiological approach, or perhaps a more natural medical modality such as lifestyle change, nutrition, medical botanicals, Chiropractic and Chinese Medicine, information is expected to be accurately described. Then using our freedom of choice and informed consent, we can select the medical route that we believe would be most safe and effective.    Unfortunately, our four-year investigation into Wikipedia's treatment of health issues reveals exactly the opposite. Many individuals with outstanding credentials are terrified of having their biographies appear on the open-source encyclopedia. Once a person's biography is added she or he will no longer have control over its content. Often they will be faced with character assassination and denigration about their careers and life's work. Their biographies are frozen as if confined in a Russian gulag for a political crime. They may seek redress by reaching out to the media; but the media also is fully compromised.  They may seek open hearings on Wikipedia's backside to expose unfair behavior and misinformation but will be met either by deafening silence, ridicule or censorship. They may even seek redress from the IRS or state's attorney generals for Wikipedia's gross serial violations of its non-profit status. You enter a highly politicized ideological war and the encyclopedia’s parent organization, the Wikimedia Foundation (WMF), will do essentially nothing to correct errors or reprimand belligerent senior administrators and editors.    Much of Wikipedia’s chaos over unreliable health information is due to a relatively small group of non-credentialed, hate-filled individuals, popularly known as Skeptics. With Wikipedia’s co-founder Jimmy Wales’ full support, Skeptics have hijacked the site and converted it into their personal social media platform to condemn all non-conventional and alternative medical therapies and its practitionersand voices who are critical of the dominant drug and vaccine based medical paradigm.   Since its founding certain editors realized that Wikipedia was prime game for writing entries and reshaping content as a means to proselytize their personal ideological agendas. This is due to the encyclopedia’s systemic vulnerabilities and its naïve belief that truth can emerge by reaching a faux democratic consensus.  In 2006 Wikipedia editor Paul Lee, a physical therapist in California’s Central Valley and an avowed Skeptic, started to reach out to internet Skeptic groups to recruit editors to advance the Skeptic mission to ridicule and discredit all forms of complementary and alternative medicine, marginalize those who question vaccination safety and efficacy, and attack critics of corporate commercial interests adversely impacting the nation’s health such as genetically modified crops, fluoridation, sugar and junk food, etc.    That year Lee posted on the International Skeptic Forum:   “I would like to invite webmasters and site owners to begin editing Wikipedia and SkepticWiki. There are many subjects for skeptics to get involved with, and we really need help. There are plenty of loons out there doing the editing right now, and far too few skeptics to keep them at bay. Any coordination of efforts should be done by private email, since Wikipedia keeps a very public history and “every” little edit, and you can’t get them removed. We don’t need any accusations of a conspiracy… I hope to see more skeptics in action!”   Lee also lists the subjects Skeptics should focus on, which include the National Vaccine Information Center, vaccine critics Barbara Loe Fisher and Viera Scheibner, Chiropractic, and complementary and alternative medicine. Lee happens to be the former list master for the pro-pharmaceutical and junk food friendly Quackwatch, a personal blog founded by a psychiatrist Dr. Stephen Barrett. Over time, Quackwatch and its Skeptic allies such as the Center for Inquiry and the Science Based Medicine blog have exponentially increased their presence on Wikipedia to become the single most cited references in the Skeptics’ arsenal to attack alternative medical therapies and the critics of conventional medicine’s power base. The consequence is that personal bias has trumped Wikipedia’s rules of objectivity and neutrality.   New York Times best-selling human rights author Edwin Black described the dangers Wikipedia poses for social progress in his article “Wikipedia: The Dumbing Down of World Knowledge” published on the History News Network:   “…. Wikipedia, the constantly changing knowledge base created a global free-for-all of anonymous users, now stands as the leading force for dumbing down the world of knowledge. If Wikipedia’s almost unstoppable momentum continues, critics say, it threatens to quickly reverse centuries of progress… In its place would be a constant cacophony of fact and falsity that Wikipedia critics call a “law of the jungle.”[16]   Writing for the Huffington Post, journalist Sam Slovick posed a question we might ask ourselves every time we click into Wikipedia. "Has Jimmy Wales' marauding encyclopedic beast finally corrupted the Internet? Has Wikipedia lost all credibility, its purported neutral system compromised by toxic editors?” The most toxic Wikipedia editors now terrorizing the encyclopedia’s pages more often than not are the anonymous non-experts and computer hacks who identify themselves with this extreme militant form of scientific materialism. They also fiercely protect their own Skeptic pages from any citable truths that may cast them in a poor light.   Indeed commercial science is constantly attempting to develop new technological solutions through genetic engineering of crops, vaccines and novel patentable drugs, artificial intelligence, 5G wireless technology, etc. These are held up in the public's eyes as great achievements. On the other hand, you will rarely find Wikipedia or the mainstream media ever highlighting these technologies’ flaws and greater risks that undermine their commercial benefits; and certainly private corporations will never leak evidence about these risks and dangers.    For example, we accessed Wikipedia pages for each of the vaccines recommended on the CDC's childhood immunization schedule. In every case, adverse effects were undermined and the vaccines’ benefits were inflated. Not a single entry had a complete list of adverse effects as printed on the vaccine maker's manufacturing package insert – literature that is easily accessible on the CDC's website. Nor was there to be found a list of vaccine ingredients, many of which are scientifically shown to be toxic. Consequently a visitor to any given Wikipedia vaccine page accesses a very incomplete and twisted understanding of the vaccines' actual safety and efficacy profile.    We are also led to believe that if a scientific invention or a study for a new drug or vaccine appears in the peer-reviewed literature, it represents a gold standard. Consequently it is assumed that any controversy has been settled. A peer-reviewed paper becomes a scientific law unto itself if it favors tendentious interests. However, repeatedly the peer-reviewed journal system has proven to be unreliable. No decisive effort has been made to reform it. It is simply too profitable to disrupt.    But the Skeptics’ distorted and biased narratives about medicine and health are only one reason to be deeply worried about the WMF’s long-term mission to bring all medical knowledge to the inhabitable world.  By and large, Wikipedia Skeptics are not motivated by financial gain nor is there strong evidence of conflicts of interest with either the pharmaceutical industry or our federal health agencies.  Rather the Skeptic movement is more likely motivated by a cult-like ideology that is fanatically embraced by its followers with religious zeal.  Yet on the backside, WMF also has deep ties with the pharmaceutical industry and this takes us to its close relationship with Google for over a decade.    The Google-WMF association is no secret. There is plenty of evidence confirming Google’s preferential treatment of Wikipedia aside from the millions of daily Google searches that bring users directly to the encyclopedia.    Although Wikipedia editors take full advantage of flawed medical literature if the conclusions serve their purpose and agenda, Google, through its algorithmic modeling to censor voices challenging the medical regime’s status-quo, ignores efforts to determine whether the medical literature is bogus or not. Google’s mission is to protect the global medical regime -- not just private drug companies but also government health bodies and international organizations such as the World Health Organization.    No longer should Google be perceived solely as a technological platform to promote the pharmaceutical industry’s agenda. It is also a drug company itself. During the past seven years, Google's parent company Alphabet has launched two pharmaceutical companies. In 2013, it founded Calico, headed by Genentech's former CEO Arthur Levinson. Calico operates an R&D facility in the San Francisco Bay Area for the discovery of treatments associated with age-related diseases.  Two years later, Alphabet founded Verily Life Sciences (previously Google Life Sciences).  Both companies partner with other drug firms, including Johnson and Johnson, Novartis, and vaccine giants Pfizer and Sanofi. In October Verily launched an aggressive multimillion dollar campaign to expand Covid-19 testing in California’s most distressed communities in 28 counties. However, some counties are starting to sever their ties with the company. In order to qualify for the program’s Covid test people are required to have a Gmail account and provide highly sensitive personal information. Alphabet’s drug companies therefore are intricately linked to Google’s ambition to gather, control and own everyone’s personal information.   In 2016, Verily collaborated with the European pharmaceutical giant GlaxoSmithKline to form a third company, Galvani Bioelectronics, for the development of "bioelectronic medicines." Among its initiatives are nanotechnology for drug delivery and the development of “miniaturized, implantable devices that can monitor nerve signals in the body.” Galvani’s Chairman is Moncef Siaoui, Glaxo's former chairman of its global vaccines business who now serves as Trump’s appointed chief science adviser for Operation Warp Speed.    Nor should it be forgotten that Google’s co-founder Sergey Brin’s former wife Anne Wojcicki also co-founded the biotech company 23andMe to develop personal DNA testing kits. In 2018 it entered a partnership with Glaxo to expand into drug development.    In January 2019, Google's president of Customer Solutions Mary Ellen Coe joined Merck's Board of Directors. Formerly working at the corporate consulting firm McKinsey and Company, her role at Google includes overseeing the firm's global advertising for contracted companies. Merck's chairman Kenneth Frazier remarked in a press release that Coe "will be a significant asset to Merck."   To better appreciate the enormity of the global pharmaceutical regime now unfolding, we need to fully acknowledge this nightmarish marriage between the tech and information-based companies, such as Google and the WMF, and Big Pharma. As the world's most advanced search engine, Google has gained control over the internet's most technically sophisticated surveillance systems and algorithms. Therefore the company has positioned itself to perhaps be the greatest potential threat to human health via the flow of information and data viewed on our laptops and mobile phones.    During the past five years, the pharmaceutical industry has shown a growing interest in the concept of virtual pharmacies, whereby drug companies can leverage their influence over consumers. Social media, notably Wikipedia, has become the consumer’s most utilized resource for gaining knowledge about disease, drugs and health. In a University of Sydney survey, Wikipedia was the first source of choice for gaining information about unfamiliar health topics, even among medical professionals. According to a 2013 joint analysis of this emerging trend, conducted by the University of Zurich and Johnson and Johnson, drug companies can use these virtual platforms to tackle the challenges they face in the financial market and even within medical communities. However, the analysis also recommended that the best strategy would be for Big Pharma to invest heavily in virtual companies and secure partnerships. This strategy is gaining steam whereby tech and social media companies such as Google and WMF are being absorbed into the pharmaceutical machinery and vice versa. The dire results from this marriage are already being felt as we now witness Wikipedia morphing into another mouthpiece for Big Pharma.    If Google's transformation into a drug company is not alone disturbing, the world's largest open source knowledge site is acutely entangled with the Silicon Valley giant and its pharmaceutical agenda. In early 2019, Google dumped $3.1 million into WMF’s coffers, which brings total contributions from Google and Sergey Brin to over $7.5 million. Curiously, the announcement of Google's endowment was made at the World Economic Forum at Davos. The donation also includes Google's intention to provide Wikipedia editors with its high tech learning tools. Wired Magazine published an article that further defines the Google-WMF relationship over the years. With respect to Google's generous contribution, journalist Louise Matsakis writes, "but the decision isn’t altruistic... Google already uses Wikipedia content in a number of its own products.... The company also has used Wikipedia articles to train machine learning algorithms, as well as fight misinformation on YouTube." Now with Jimmy Wales' intention to take on the cause of fighting "fake news" – a cause also aligned to his personal Skeptic ideology as the ultimate arbitrator that determines what is real or fake -- Skeptic editors have free access to advanced algorithmic apps to proceed with their agenda to scrub Wikipedia of content favorable towards alternative medicine or content critical of the pharmaceutical empire.    Yet Google’s and Jimmy Wales’ mutual interests go beyond the construction of a pharmaceutical ruled society.  Brin and Wales first sealed a close relationship during their early efforts to counter the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA). Together both executives, among others, signed a joint Open Letter to the federal government opposing SOPA, which was coincidently around the same time as Brin’s half-million dollar donation. In 2014, in a reaction against legal issues over privacy matters, Google created an “Advisory Council.” Wales was one of its founding members.    In 2012, Google’s charitable arm, Google.org, initiated a collaboration with WMF’s WikiProject Medicine “to further improve the quality of articles” by recruiting and hiring “professional medical editors.”  Dr. James Heilman, a Canadian emergency room physician and a seasoned senior Wikipedia administrator who frequently comes to the defense of Skeptic Wikipedians, sits on the WMF’s Board of Trustees. Heilman is one of the founders of the Wiki Project Med Foundation (WPMF) to advance its mission to give “every single person free access to the sum of all medical knowledge.” WPMF now has collaborative relationships with the National Institutes of Health, Cancer Research UK, Cochrane Collaboration, the University of California at San Francisco, the Wellcome Trust and several open-access medical journals.    Recently during the Covid-19 pandemic, WMF has strengthened its ties with the global medical establishment. Last October it entered a collaboration with the World Health Organization to assure that public health information and data about Covid-19 is regulated in accordance with the latest pronouncements made by the anointed authorities in the institutional medical establishment. Wikipedia already contains over 5,200 Covid-related entries in 175 languages and these are largely based upon WHO sources. It is estimated that this content is accessed at least a million times a day.  Part of the WMF’s commitment is to monitor and censor “the spread of misinformation” according to the WHO’s criteria.  In a New York Times article reporting on the new partnership, if this initial pilot Covid-19 project succeeds, it will be expanded to launch additional efforts “to counter misinformation regarding AIDS, Ebola, influenza, polio and dozens of other diseases.”   So where exactly in the cesspool of modern medicine and the toxic food, vaccine and the agro-chemical industries are we to discover truth. Few in the scientific and federal health agencies can be trusted anymore. Most are compromised and this distortion of truth for global leverage clearly extends throughout Google and Wikipedia. Rarely is a mainstream journalist trustworthy, and no one can be certain whether a paper appearing in a peer-reviewed science journal or an medical entry on Wikipedia is reliable or not. Even clinical physicians on the front lines of healthcare work in the dark. It is only after large numbers of injuries and deaths due to Agent Orange, DDT, life-threatening vaccine adverse reactions, a Vioxx scandal, or an epidemic of corporate liable opiate drug overdoses that a light bulb eventually goes on. But only for a limited time before it is quickly forgotten and goes dark again.    The reason for American medicine turning into the nation's largest and deadliest battlefield is because scientific corruption is legally protected to proceed with impunity. The Surgeon General, the heads of federal health agencies, drug makers, the insurance industry, medical schools and professional associations, Google and WMF, and the media operate as a single voice that the American health system is the best in the world when it is surely not. Corporate interests and massive profiteering control everything. Modern medicine has morphed into a religious cult that is incapable of self-reflection about its own vulnerabilities and failures. This hubris of power and domination plagues Google and the WMF equally. And numerous patients are being played for fools.      The fact is that all players in the architecture of our medical system are vulnerable to corruption. Private industry and government know this perfectly. The checks and balances between private and public interests have collapsed. Today, the medical regime is a single entity. All of its parts are consolidated and entwined into a monolithic behemoth to protect its bottom line. In our opinion Google and WMF have been co-opted to serve as the guardians of this culture of corruption. Therefore they both are equally culpable in the widespread destruction of the nation’s public health.    Yet we mustn’t expect that the trajectory of an emerging global pharmaceutical hegemony will experience a collapse anytime soon. Rather, with the aid of Google and WMF, it will increasingly monopolize the medical discourse and define the national policies shaping public health. And this requires greater efforts to censor and silence the medical critics and honest investigative journalists bringing light to the medical and scientific flaws upon which health policies and laws are based through the virtual technological apparatus and information control Google and WMF provides. In short, tech companies now control and dictate orders to the morally-deficient incompetents in Washington.   Yet the emergence of a pharmaceutical regime as a natural consequence of humanity being in the midst of the Fourth Industrial Revolution is unfolding to the delight of Jimmy Wales and his Skeptic denizens who worship his messianic mission to make all knowledge free to the world’s population. But the question has always been “whose knowledge?” Skepticm’s “pseudo-knowledge,” of course. It is not uncommon to find Skeptics acknowledging Wales as one of their own. Wales has provided plenty of assistance to Skeptics and on occasion has come to their defense in discussion groups. Replying to comments Wales wrote on Quora to offer his assistance to rid the world of homeopathy, the co-founder of Guerrilla Skeptics on Wikipedia Susan Gerbic replied:   “Jimmy you have already done more than anyone could possibly dream that can be done. You created the most amazing resource in the world. I mean that, not only in English but in every language possible…. Thank you. Allowing us editors to ‘do our job’ and keep these articles honest and correctly cited is enough. I can’t imagine what else you can do, my brain is teeny tiny compared to your mighty brain, if you come up with something please oh please let us in on it, we want to help.”   The pharmaceutical industry has no need to attack the competition of non-conventional and natural medicine on Wikipedia. Nor is there a need to hire or pay off Wikipedians to do this dirty work for them since Skeptics are already doing so freely or involuntarily, and Skeptic administrators receive the perks of being provided with Google’s algorithmic tools and apps to protect their message. It is a completely rigged game and Wales and the WMF seem to have every intention to keep it that way.   America’s 21st century technological god with a silicon-crafted body demands the sacrifice of the world’s children and elderly and persons for profit in its furnace of drugs and vaccines. John Milton and Beat poet Allen Ginsberg would surely agree. If alive we might hear Ginsberg howling against this devouring techno-Pharma empire on YouTube. From its humble beginnings, and with the technological resources and generous funding received from Google, Wikipedia has morphed into a chaotic war between truth and falsehoods amusingly ruled over by this postmodern Moloch. The dangerous fallout is that objectivity and ethics are being increasingly sacrificed on a cold virtual altar devoted to a perverted metaphysical realism disguised as medical science and fact.  

Our Guest, Dr. Steven Novella discusses a recent article in The Atlantic in which researcher John Ioannidis shows that 40% of papers published in top medical journals are either wrong or make exaggerated claims (and those are the top journals!). He also discusses the difference between Science and Evidence based medicine. Also, Zombies: are they epidemiologically possible? Steven Novella is an academic clinical neurologist at the Yale University School of Medicine. He is the host of the Skeptics Guide to the Universe podcast, author of the Neurologica blog, and co-editor of the Science Based Medicine blog. Sped up the speakers by [1.0416666666666667, 1.0]

Episode #002 - In this episode, we'll talk about the mechanics of tattoos, and a surprising discovery made just in the last couple of years about WHY they are so hard to remove. You'll also get to hear about the year I turned 18, which means I'm...oh heck I"ll do the math for you! 45 in 2020.Links to articles I mention in the podcast:The tattoo clinical study by Baranska, et al 2018: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/29511065/Christopher Lynn: https://www.cnn.com/2019/10/03/health/tattoo-immune-system-conversation-wellness/index.htmlThe dissenting view on Science-Based Medicine: https://sciencebasedmedicine.org/tattoos-wont-boost-your-immune-system/

In this episode of Point of Inquiry, cohost Leighann Lord talks with famous skeptic and Assistant Professor of Neurology, Steven Novella, MD. Novella is also the founder and current Executive Editor of Science-Based Medicine which explores issues and controversies between science and medicine and works to expose dangerous medical scams and practices. He is also the host of the popular weekly podcast, The Skeptics’ Guide to the Universe. Novella also has a series of insightful courses on critical thinking that he has published through Great Courses. In this week's interview, Lord and Novella speak about the ongoing battle to fight scientific ignorance especially during the current Covid-19 outbreak, how Novella's Science-Based Medicine has stepped up to counter vast amounts of misinformation about the disease, the relationship between doctors and patients when there's hard news to deliver, how we all have blind spots in our thinking that hinder our curiosity and skepticism, and the importance of not being too comfortable with information that confirm our biases. You can follow Leighann on twitter @LeighannLord.

Science-Based Medicine is a website with articles covering issues in science and medicine, especially dangerous medical scams and practices. Science-Based Medicine is noted as an influential and respected source of information about medical controversies and alternative medicine See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

Верить в детокс — все равно что верить в пользу ожерелья из чеснока при ОРВИ. Почему его польза однозначно сомнительна и как можно себе навредить с помощью недельного курса смузи? По материалам Science Based Medicine Текстовая версия: https://newochem.io/detokse/ Озвучил: Тарасов Валентин Переводила: Вера Баскова Редактировала: Анастасия Железнякова Хочешь слушать наши подкасты чаще? Поддержи проект: Patreon https://www.patreon.com/join/newochem Сбербанк 5469 4100 1643 3207 Тинькофф 5536 9137 8391 1874 Рокетбанк 5321 3003 1271 6181 Альфа-Банк 5486 7328 1231 5455 Яндекс.Деньги 410015483148917 PayPal https://paypal.me/vsilaev

When considering how to balance freedom of speech with attempts to manage the effects of misinformation, it’s reasonable to consider the fact that some types of misinformation cause direct demonstrable harm. Vaccine-preventable diseases, such as measles, are on the rise recently due partly to active campaigns of clear misinformation about vaccines (poverty and lack of access still remain a huge challenge as well).A recent study out of Denmark quantifies the potential harm, this time regarding the HPV vaccine. The HPV vaccine provided protection from multiple strains of the Human Papilloma Virus, which is responsible for many cases of cervical cancer. As I noted when I discussed HPV vaccine previously, Dr. Heidi Larson points out that:Every year brings 528,000 new cases of cervical cancer and 266,000 deaths, linked to human papillomavirus (HPV). We have a highly effective HPV vaccine, but suspicion stands in the way of its adoption in many countries. See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

Не только в нашей стране есть серьезные проблемы со внедрением в здравоохранение принципов доказательной медицины и контролем за эффективностью препаратов. В сегодняшнем выпуске мы расскажем об особенностях канадской медицины на примере абсолютно бесполезного БАДа, который благодаря лазейкам в законодательстве рекомендуют подросткам для лечения тревожности. По материалам Science Based Medicine Автор: Скотт Гавура Текстовая версия: https://newochem.io/badah/ Озвучил: Тарасов Валентин Переводил: Булингир Надвидов Редактировала: Анастасия Железнякова Хочешь слушать наши подкасты чаще? Поддержи проект: Patreon https://www.patreon.com/join/newochem Сбербанк 5469 4100 1643 3207 Тинькофф 5536 9137 8391 1874 Рокетбанк 5321 3003 1271 6181 Альфа-Банк 5486 7328 1231 5455 Яндекс.Деньги 410015483148917 PayPal https://paypal.me/vsilaev

This episode: Engineered bacteria could help people digest an essential nutrient when they can't digest it themselves! Download Episode (8.5 MB, 9.3 minutes) Show notes: Microbe of the episode: Kadipiro virus News item (paywall) Science-Based Medicine blog article about phenylketonuria, Synlogic, and engineering bacteria to treat this disorder, with lots of good detail Takeaways Treating genetic disorders can be very difficult. Sometimes they can be managed, with lifestyle, diet, or medication, but cure has almost always been out of the picture. With a disorder such as phenylketonuria (PKU), for example, in which the body is unable to fully metabolize the amino acid phenylalanine, diet and medication may work to some extent. In an effort to provide better options for PKU, scientists at Synlogic, Inc have created a strain of Escherichia coli that produces phenylalanine-degrading enzymes in the gut. The hope is that ingesting this bacterium could allow PKU patients to be less restrictive with their diet. Journal Paper: Isabella VM, Ha BN, Castillo MJ, Lubkowicz DJ, Rowe SE, Millet YA, Anderson CL, Li N, Fisher AB, West KA, Reeder PJ, Momin MM, Bergeron CG, Guilmain SE, Miller PF, Kurtz CB, Falb D. 2018. Development of a synthetic live bacterial therapeutic for the human metabolic disease phenylketonuria. Nat Biotechnol 36:857–864. Other interesting stories: Probiotic molecule induces protection in mice against viral brain infection E. coli growing with artificially synthesized genome (Extra information)   Email questions or comments to bacteriofiles at gmail dot com. Thanks for listening! Subscribe: Apple Podcasts, RSS, Google Play. Support the show at Patreon, or check out the show at Twitter or Facebook

Clay Jones, M.D., on Science-Based Medicine https://sciencebasedmedicine.org/author/clayjones/ On Twitter https://twitter.com/SBMPediatrics New Tourette's Podcast website https://www.tourettespodcast.com/ Support the show https://www.patreon.com/tourettespodcast

------------------Support the channel------------ Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/thedissenter PayPal: paypal.me/thedissenter ------------------Follow me on--------------------- Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/thedissenteryt/ Twitter: https://twitter.com/TheDissenterYT Dr. David Gorski is a surgical oncologist at the Barbara Ann Karmanos Cancer Institute specializing in breast cancer surgery, where he also serves as the Medical Director of the Alexander J. Walt Comprehensive Breast Center. He's also Professor of Surgery and Oncology at the Wayne State University School of Medicine, and faculty of the Graduate Program in Cancer Biology. He's also the Managing Editor of Science-Based Medicine (https://sciencebasedmedicine.org/). In this episode, we talk about the great online publication, Science-Based Medicine, founded by Dr. Steven Novella, and the history of it, and the motivation behind its creation; the many deceiving ways complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) has to further its agenda; if there is any alternative medicine worth trying, and some of the most its dangerous proposals; and some very good advice for people to avoid getting into CAM, and wasting their money. Time Links: 00:44 The history of Science-Based Medicine 08:53 Is alternative medicine politically and academically stronger nowadays? 13:53 Why “Science-Based Medicine”? 22:30 The manipulation with the term CAM/integrative medicine 29:22 Is any alternative medicine worth trying? 31:21 What are the most dangerous things alternative therapists advocate for? 37:03 Have Dr. Gorski ever changed his mind about some alternative medicine? 39:15 Do we already know about all alternative therapies that exist? 42:11 The best advice for people to avoid CAM 44:21 Why do people so easily get into CAM 48:43 Follow Mr. Gorski's work -- Follow Dr. Gorski's work: Personal page on Science-Based Medicine: https://tinyurl.com/y8robxod Twitter handle: @gorskon -- A HUGE THANK YOU TO MY PATRONS: KARIN LIETZCKE, ANN BLANCHETTE, JUNOS, SCIMED, PER HELGE HAAKSTD LARSEN, LAU GUERREIRO, RUI BELEZA, MIGUEL ESTRADA, ANTÓNIO CUNHA, CHANTEL GELINAS, JIM FRANK, JERRY MULLER, FRANCIS FORD, AND HANS FREDRIK SUNDE! I also leave you with the link to a recent montage video I did with the interviews I have released until the end of June 2018: https://youtu.be/efdb18WdZUo And check out my playlists on: PSYCHOLOGY: https://tinyurl.com/ybalf8km PHILOSOPHY: https://tinyurl.com/yb6a7d3p ANTHROPOLOGY: https://tinyurl.com/y8b42r7g

The MythWits talk with Mark Crislip, a practicing Infectious Disease physician in the Great Pacific NW. He blogs and podcasts on Infectious Diseases and is a former blogger for Science-Based Medicine.http://www.edgydoc.com

Lost on the highway, the boys look for a cell phone signal and wonder about the potential dangers of their lifeline. Comedian Jacob Meza explores the possibilities of groin cancer while learning that some people may be scared of cell phones but are unwilling to give them up. Back in the studio, Chris and Jonathan discuss fava beans; the Larry King Show and brain cancer; subgroup analyses (which lie, they always lie); what male rats got that other rodents didn't; infertility; ICQ; and pacemakers. Also: how prevalent are peanut allergies and do peanut bans in school really work? Plus an interview with Dr. David Gorski on the U.S.' right-to-try laws: how they compare to compassionate use and what is the link to libertarianism.   For more on right-to-try laws, David Gorski's blog post from June 4th: https://sciencebasedmedicine.org/right-to-try-is-now-law-let-patients-beware/   David Gorski writes for Science-Based Medicine and Respectful Insolence.   Vox pop by comedian Jacob Meza. His podcast is So It Is Told.   Jingle by Jillian Kate.   Additional music by Seth Donnelly and Kevin MacLeod.   Theme music: "Troll of the Mountain Swing" by the Underscore Orkestra.   To contribute to The Body of Evidence, go to our Patreon page at: http://www.patreon.com/thebodyofevidence/.

Gabe Ignetti & Eric Schmitz speak with Dr. Steve Novella and Dr. David Gorski, representing the Society for Science-Based Medicine about the onslaught of psuedoscience coming out of the natural medicine industry. 

Jung, eloquent und wortgewandt. So präsentiert sich Natalie Grams in dem Interview mit Anton Schwibbe. #PhysioChange #ThinkTherapy Auch auf YouTube: https://youtu.be/urxBFWgsxuI Die beiden Gesprächspartner unterhalten sich über die verschiedenen Rollen im Gesundheitswesen. Vor allem sind die folgenden Themen ein zentraler Teil des Gesprächs: - Homöopathie - Heilpraktiker - Sektoraler Heilpraktiker Physiotherapie - Osteopathen - Patientenversorgung - Gründe für komplementäre Behandlungsmethoden Zur Vita von Frau Grams ist folgendes zu Sagen: Sie hat es in sich! Es wurden dabei Ansichten verworfen und neu betrachtet. "(* 12. April 1978 in München) ist eine deutsche Ärztin und Autorin. Sie wurde aufgrund ihres 2015 erschienenen homöopathiekritischen Buchs Homöopathie neu gedacht – Was Patienten wirklich hilft bundesweit bekannt, insbesondere, weil sie bis dahin praktizierende Homöopathin gewesen war. Seit 2016 ist sie im Wissenschaftsrat und seit Januar 2017 Kommunikationsmanagerin der Gesellschaft zur wissenschaftlichen Untersuchung von Parawissenschaften (GWUP). Ferner gehört sie seit Mai 2017 dem Beirat der Giordano-Bruno-Stiftung an. Seit Oktober 2017 ist Natalie Grams ehrenamtlich Vizepräsidentin des Humanistischen Pressedienst (hpd) e. V." Der First German Physiotherapy Podcast bedankt sich bei Natalie Grams für Ihre Redefreiheit und diese wertvollen Gedanken. First German Physiotherapie Podcast #FGPTP Der Podcast für anspruchsvolle Hörer Fotografin Gudrun-Holde Ortner Quellen: https://www.natalie-grams.de https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natalie_Grams#cite_note- 4http://www.muensteraner-kreis.de https://www.amazon.de/Homöopathie-neu-gedacht-Patienten-wirklich/dp/3662555484/ref=sr_1_3?ie=UTF8&qid=1523304542&sr=8-3&keywords=natalie+Grams https://www.amazon.de/Die-Homöopathie-Lüge-gefährlich-weißen-Kügelchen/dp/3492055362/ref=sr_1_5?ie=UTF8&qid=1523304542&sr=8-5&keywords=natalie+Grams https://www.amazon.de/Gesundheit-Buch-nicht-ohne-Nebenwirkungen/dp/3662547988/ref=pd_sim_14_3?_encoding=UTF8&pd_rd_i=3662547988&pd_rd_r=f334d574-3c31-11e8-bcb3-e77f92a35220&pd_rd_w=vYlnq&pd_rd_wg=G6jzz&pf_rd_i=desktop-dp-sims&pf_rd_m=A3JWKAKR8XB7XF&pf_rd_p=1672214127&pf_rd_r=9PH9N1VSSP6DS0PSP71M&pf_rd_s=desktop-dp-sims&pf_rd_t=40701&psc=1&refRID=9PH9N1VSSP6DS0PSP71M https://www.bah-bonn.de/bah/?type=565&file=redakteur_filesystem/public/BAH_Zahlenbroschuere_2016_web.pdf http://www.deutschlandfunk.de/kritik-an-heilpraktikern-therapie-wissenschaftlich-nicht.709.de.html?dram:article_id=394571 https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homöopathie https://www.comparis.ch/krankenkassen/leistungen/aktuelles/komplementaermedizin-grundversicherung Anlauf, Manfred et al: Komplementäre und alternative Arzneitherapie versus wissenschaftsorientierte Medizin; GMS German Medical Science, 2015 Aust, Norbert: In Sachen Homöopathie; Verlag 1-2-Buch, 2013 Bergmann, Helge: Wasser, das Wunderelement?: Wahrheit oder Hokuspokus Carstens-Stiftung: Naturheilkunde und Homöopathie, http://www.carstens-stiftung.de European Academies’ Science Advisory Council (EASAC): Homeopathic products and practices: assessing the evidence and ensuring consistency in regulating medical claims in the EU, 2017 Ernst, Edzard: http://edzardernst.com/2017/04/official-verdicts-on-homeopathy/ Gorski, David H; Novella, Steven P: Clinical trials of integrative medicine: Testing whether magic works? Trends mol. med. 20 (9), 473-476, 2014 Hahnemann, Samuel: Hahnemanns Arzneimittellehre, Narayana Verlag, 2011 Hahnemann, Samuel: Organanon der Heilkunst; matrixverlag, 2005, nach der Ausgabe Leipzig, 1921 Hopff, Wolfgang H.: Homöopathie kritisch betrachtet, Thieme, 1991 Informationsnetzwerk Homöopathie: Homöopedia – Informationen zur Homöopathie; http://www.homöopedia.eu Informationsnetzwerk Homöopathie: http://www.homöopedia.eu/index.php/Artikel:Statistische_Signifikanz Informationsnetzwerk Homöopathie: http://www.homöopedia.eu/index.php/Artikel:Systematische_Reviews_zur_Homöopathie_-_Methodik Novella, Steven et al: Science-Based Medicine; https://sciencebasedmedicine.org Riker, Ulf; Evidenz und Erfahrung; in: Homöopahie, Winter 2017/2018 Weymayr, Christian: Hippokrates, Dr. Röntgen & Co., Bloomsbury, 2007 http://www.cochrane.org/de/CD003399/homoeopathie-zur-geburtseinleitung https://scilogs.spektrum.de/detritus/gesamtschau-der-studien-zur-hom-opathie/