Podcasts about Science

In an interview last weekend, Iran's ambassador to the UN said his country's nuclear enrichment ‘will never stop' because it is permitted for ‘peaceful energy' purposes. It is the latest development in an escalation of tensions over Iran's nuclear programme, which erupted when Israel targeted the country's nuclear facilities in June. To understand why enrichment is so important, Madeleine Finlay talks to Robin Grimes, professor of materials physics at Imperial College London. He explains what goes into creating a nuclear weapon, and why getting to the stage of weaponisation is so difficult. Help support our independent journalism at theguardian.com/sciencepod

In this episode of The Brainy Business podcast, Melina Palmer welcomes Dr. Ingrid Nieuwenhaus, head of Science at alpha.one, to explore the fascinating intersection of machine learning and neuroscience. This insightful conversation, originally recorded live at Greenbook's IIEX behavior conference, delves into how advanced technologies are reshaping our understanding of consumer behavior and advertising effectiveness. Ingrid shares her extensive background in neuroscience and how it informs her work in applying predictive eye tracking and neural networks to measure brand value and consumer attention. The discussion highlights the importance of small changes in marketing materials that can dramatically influence consumer perception and engagement. Listeners will learn about the concept of "attention vampires"—elements that unintentionally draw focus away from the intended message—and how machine learning can help identify and optimize these aspects. In this episode: Discover how machine learning techniques are used to predict consumer attention in advertising. Learn about the role of interdisciplinary teams in advancing research and marketing strategies. Explore real-world examples, including the Heineken ad study, showcasing the impact of subtle design changes. Understand the balance between storytelling and brand visibility in marketing campaigns. Gain insights into the future of branding and creativity in an increasingly automated world. Get important links, top recommended books and episodes, and a full transcript at thebrainybusiness.com/510. Looking to explore applications of behavioral economics further?  Learn With Us on our website. Subscribe to Melina's Newsletter Brainy Bites.  Let's connect: Send Us a Message Follow Melina on LinkedIn The Brainy Business on Youtube The Brainy Business on Instagram

Dr. Jessica Hehmeyer is a physician and founder of Well Empowered, where she practices data driven and heart centered Functional Medicine. Dr. Jessica skillfully guides her patients in creating a level of health and vitality which transforms their lives by using a root-cause natural approach.     She shares her own personal journey of struggling with her own health issues at a young age, trying many options offered to her in traditional medicine, and never receiving the results she was looking for. Intuitively understanding that there had to be a better way to better health, Dr. Jessica pursued higher education, earning a Master of Science in Human Nutrition and Functional Medicine from the University of Western States, a Doctorate in Chiropractic Medicine from National University of Health Sciences, and a Bachelor of Arts from UCLA. She is also an IFM Certified Practitioner, Licensed Dietitian Nutritionist (LDN), and a Certified Nutrition Specialist (CNS). She is also an expert in the fitness industry as a Certified Yoga Instructor and Master Level Certified SuperSlow High-Intensity Strength Trainer.  Dr. Jessica busts the many myths of health, wellness, weight loss, dietary issues, heart health, and so much more. She explains the importance of getting to the root cause of every health issue and how to reverse it with natural healing, by looking at a variety of different lab values to help provide her patients with valuable information and tools to achieve ultimate health and healing.  She also emphasizes the power of self-love, love of others, and love of life, which are key components to help each of us step into harmony with our body, our lives, and our health. Download this information packed, positive and uplifting episode and discover how we can all heal naturally and enjoy vibrant health and vitality, for life!   Connect with Dr. Jessica:  https://www.wellempowered.com/contact/ https://www.wellempowered.com/ https://www.facebook.com/YouWellEmpowered https://www.youtube.com/@wellempoweredweightlossmastery https://www.instagram.com/wellempowered https://www.linkedin.com/in/jessicahehmeyer/  

The Cognitive Crucible is a forum that presents different perspectives and emerging thought leadership related to the information environment. The opinions expressed by guests are their own, and do not necessarily reflect the views of or endorsement by the Information Professionals Association. During this episode, Dr. James Giordano discusses a broad range of topics related to national security from biopsychology to complexity to neurotechnology to enactivism. Recording Date: 25 Jun 2025 Research Question: James Giordano suggests an interested student or researcher examine: “How might the convergence of neurotech, big data, and AI lead to improved human and multinational relations, and in these ways, contribute to avoiding conflict and warfare?” Resources: Cognitive Crucible Podcast Episodes Mentioned #72 Noah Komnick on Cybernetics and the Age of Complexity James Giordano NDU Website Enactivism Architectonics Heilmeier Catechism N3: Next-Generation Nonsurgical Neurotechnology Bioethics and Brains, published by MIT Press, which I co-authored with my longtime colleague Dr John Shook Neuroscience, Neuroculture and Neuroethics, published by Springer, which I co-authored with John Shook and Dr Roland Benedikter Link to full show notes and resources Guest Bio:  Dr. James Giordano is the Director of the Center for Disruptive Technologies and Future Warfare of the Institute for National Strategic Studies at the National Defense University. He is Professor Emeritus in the Departments of Neurology and Biochemistry, and Senior Scholar Emeritus of the Pellegrino Center for Clinical Bioethics of Georgetown University Medical Center, Washington, DC. Dr. Giordano has served as Senior Scientific Advisory Fellow of the Strategic Multilayer Assessment Branch of the Joint Staff, Pentagon; Senior Bioethicist of the Defense Medical Ethics Center; Distinguished Fellow in Science, Technology and Ethics of the Stockdale Center for Ethics at the United States Naval Academy; and as an appointed member of the Neuroethics, Legal and Social Advisory Panel of the Defense Advanced Research Project Agency (DARPA), and an appointed member of the Department of Health and Human Services' Secretary's Advisory Committee for Human Research Protections.  Dr Giordano is internationally recognized for his research on the use – and ethical guidance and governance - of neurocognitive sciences and technology in military, intelligence and global security operations A widely published author of over 350 peer-reviewed papers in the international scientific literature, 25 governmental reports, 37 book chapters, and 10 books - which most recently include Bioethics and Brains; Neuroscience, Neuroculture and Neuroethics; and Neurotechnology in National Security and Defense: Technical Considerations, Neuroethical Concerns. Dr. Giordano is a former Fulbright Fellow; an elected Fellow of the Hastings Center for Ethics; the European Academy of Science and Arts; and the Royal Society of Medicine (UK); and frequently lectures in German and Italian. A former United States Naval officer, he was winged as a Naval Aerospace Physiologist, co-designated as a Research Physiologist and Psychologist, and served with US Navy and US Marine Corps. About: The Information Professionals Association (IPA) is a non-profit organization dedicated to exploring the role of information activities, such as influence and cognitive security, within the national security sector and helping to bridge the divide between operations and research. Its goal is to increase interdisciplinary collaboration between scholars and practitioners and policymakers with an interest in this domain. For more information, please contact us at communications@information-professionals.org. Or, connect directly with The Cognitive Crucible podcast host, John Bicknell, on LinkedIn. Disclosure: As an Amazon Associate, 1) IPA earns from qualifying purchases, 2) IPA gets commissions for purchases made through links in this post.

What if the next virus isn't natural, but deliberately engineered and used as a weapon? As geopolitical tensions rise and biological threats become more complex, health security and life sciences are emerging as critical pillars of national defense.In the special edition episode from our new series, “The Ripple Effect: Investing in Life Sciences”, host Dan Riskin is joined by two leading voices at the intersection of biotechnology and defense: Dawn Meyerriecks, former CIA Deputy Director for Science and Technology and current member of the National Security Commission on Emerging Biotechnology, and Jason Kelly, co-founder and CEO of Ginkgo Bioworks. Together, they explore the dual-use nature of biotechnology and the urgent need for international oversight, genetic attribution standards, and robust viral surveillance. From pandemic preparedness and fragile supply chains to AI-driven lab automation and airport biosurveillance, their conversation highlights how life science innovation strengthens national resilience and strategic defense.This timely conversation follows the June 25th, 2025 Hague Summit Declaration, where NATO allies pledged to invest 5% of GDP in defense by 2035—including up to 1.5% on resilience and innovation to safeguard critical infrastructure, civil preparedness, networks, and the defense industrial base. This limited series, produced by GZERO's Blue Circle Studios in partnership with Novartis, examines how life science innovation plays a vital role in fulfilling that commitment. Subscribe to “The Ripple Effect: Investing in Life Sciences” series on your preferred podcast platform.Look for the next episode of the GZERO World with Ian Bremmer podcast when we kick off our eighth season on July 5, 2025.Host: Dan RiskinGuests: Jason Kelly, Dawn Meyerriecks Subscribe to the GZERO World with Ian Bremmer Podcast on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, or your preferred podcast platform, to receive new episodes as soon as they're published.

What if everything you've been told about aging and muscle growth is wrong?   In this powerhouse episode, Coach Frank sits down with Stan Efferding—world record-holding powerlifter, IFBB pro bodybuilder, and creator of the Vertical Diet—to dismantle the lies about fitness after 40 and reveal what it actually takes to build a strong, high-performing body for life.   They dive deep into recovery, hormones, diet, and the brutal truth behind why most men fall off track. Whether you've been out of the gym for a decade or are grinding through plateaus, this episode is your wake-up call to get serious about your health span, not just your lifespan.   Forget gimmicks. Stan brings real science, real experience, and a relentless focus on what works.  

We're exploring what it means to put Hope in Action. And today, I'm excited to welcome a guest who has dedicated his career to understanding hope not just as a feeling, but as a measurable, teachable strength that transforms lives and communities. Dr. Chan Hellman is recognized as one of the world's leading hope scholars, with more than 25 years of research, training and teaching experience. His groundbreaking work has shown that hope isn't just a nice concept—it's a powerful predictor of well-being that can be built intentionally. As the Founding Director of the Hope Research Center at the University of Oklahoma-Tulsa and a professor at the school's Anne & Henry Zarrow School of Social Work, Dr. Hellman has authored over 150 scientific publications and co-authored the bestselling book "Hope Rising: How The Science of Hope Can Change Your Life." In this episode, we explore what hope actually is, how it's different from wishful thinking, and most importantly—how we can build it in ourselves and our communities through intentional action. EPISODE SHOWNOTES: Read more. BE AFFIRMED. Get the Good Words email series. JOIN THE HOPEFULS. Get inside the group. WHAT'S YOUR CAUSE? Take our quiz. BE INSPIRED. Follow us on Instagram. DO GOOD. Give to The Salvation Army.

Discover the transformative power of sleep science in this insightful episode featuring Dr. Elie Gottlieb, Head of Applied Sleep Science at SleepScore Labs. Host Mark Kinsley explores how cutting-edge research and technology are not only helping people sleep better—but also driving innovation and growth for businesses in the sleep industry.What You'll Learn:* How SleepScore Labs validates product claims with data* The connection between personalized sleep solutions and business performance* Why pillow fit can make or break your sleep* How to build “sleep pressure” during the day for better rest at night* The role of consistency in healthy sleep habits* Eye-opening insights into social jet lag and sleep hygiene* What the future holds for personalized mattress shoppingWhether you're a sleep-deprived professional or a brand looking to improve your product's credibility, this episode is packed with practical advice and fascinating science.Timestamps:00:01 – Introduction to Dr. Elie Gottlieb and SleepScore Labs01:18 – How SleepScore Labs Drives Business Growth03:03 – The Importance of Evidence-Based Sleep Science05:20 – The Science of Pillow Fitting and Sleep Quality09:51 – Sleep as a Daytime Issue: Building Sleep Pressure14:04 – Overcoming Biases to Prioritize Sleep21:21 – Understanding Individual Sleep Needs and Consistency24:27 – The Impact of Social Jet Lag on Health30:39 – Essential Sleep Hygiene Practices40:57 – Future of Mattress Shopping: Personalized Sleep SolutionsReady to sleep smarter? Tune in now and wake up to what's possible. #SleepScience #SleepScoreLabs #ElieGottlieb #BetterSleep #HealthTech #MarkKinsley #MattressIndustry #SleepInnovation #Podcast

Prolific river protector Gary Wockner gives us the straight scoop on the state of the Colorado River (and others), and the growth obsession that keeps southwest states and cities from responding rationally to increasingly scarce water resources.   TODAY, nearly half the world's population experiences severe water shortages at least part of the year. So far, fresh water issues in the American Southwest amount – mostly - to first world problems – like “I can't water my lawn whenever I want,” “it's hard to keep the golf course lush and green with less water,” or “How can I develop my next residential project if there's no water?” But the future could be grim, if we can't get the cities and states into a 12-step program to break the growth addiction habit. Our guest, Gary Wockner, works globally as an advocate and consultant for protection of rivers. He founded and directs: Save the Colorado Save the Poudre Colorado River chapter of CASSE He also cofounded Tell the Dam Truth, a nonprofit that supports river-protection groups by engaging with federal and state agencies to make sure that the greenhouse gas emissions caused by dams and reservoirs are counted, reported, and then considered during policy making, rulemaking, and legislation. He most recently led opposition to the Northern Integrated Supply Project. He filed a lawsuit to stop it, and recently settled the suit. He shares about the settlement in this episode. Gary is also author of numerous books, including: River Warrior: Fighting to Protect the World's Rivers Comeback Wolves Pulse of the River LINKS:   News stories, opinion pieces, books and more related to Gary Wockner's work: https://garywockner.com/all-garys-writing-advocacy/    Disaster Capitalism on the Colorado River - Column by Gary Wockner: https://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2016/03/27/colorado-river-drought-destruction-interior-moonshot-disaster-capitalism-column/80468488/   Save the Colorado: https://savethecolorado.org/   Save the Poudre: https://www.savethepoudre.org/   Tell the Dam Truth: https://tellthedamtruth.com/ Colorado River Chapter of CASSE (Center for the Advancement of the Steady State Economy): https://steadystate.org/meet/chapters/   Colorado River Basin Climate and Hydrology: State of the Science: https://wwa.colorado.edu/resources/colorado-river-resources/CRBreport   Colorado River States Still Have No Unified Long-Term Management Plan and ‘Are Just About Out of Time,' Experts Warn – May 31, 2025 Denver Post story: https://www.denverpost.com/2025/05/31/colorado-river-negotiations-2026-deadline/   Water Supply Uncertainty Could Slow Growth in Colorado Springs – May 2024 news story KRDO13 Colorado Springs: https://youtu.be/rvGGqZHwHdM?si=bimFT2BSWlCq_c5C   Officials Fear 'Complete Doomsday Scenario' for Drought-Stricken Colorado River -  The Washington Post, December 1, 2022: https://www.yahoo.com/news/officials-fear-complete-doomsday-scenario-202316932.html?guccounter=1   Give Us Feedback: Record a voice message for us to play on the podcast: 719-402-1400 Send an email to podcast at growthbusters.org The GrowthBusters theme song was written and produced by Jake Fader and sung by Carlos Jones. https://www.fadermusicandsound.com/ https://carlosjones.com/ On the GrowthBusters podcast, we come to terms with the limits to growth, explore the joy of sustainable living, and provide a recovery program from our society's growth addiction (economic/consumption and population). This podcast is part of the GrowthBusters project to raise awareness of overshoot and end our culture's obsession with, and pursuit of, growth. Dave Gardner directed the documentary GrowthBusters: Hooked on Growth, which Stanford Biologist Paul Ehrlich declared “could be the most important film ever made.” Co-host, and self-described "energy nerd," Stephanie Gardner has degrees in Environmental Studies and Environmental Law & Policy. Join the GrowthBusters online community https://growthbusters.groups.io/ GrowthBusters: Hooked on Growth – free on YouTube https://youtu.be/_w0LiBsVFBo Join the conversation on Facebook https://www.facebook.com/GrowthBustersPodcast/ Follow us on Instagram https://www.instagram.com/growthbusting/ Follow us on Bluesky https://bsky.app/profile/growthbusters.bsky.social Make a donation to support this non-profit project. https://www.growthbusters.org/donate/ Archive of GrowthBusters podcast episodes http://www.growthbusters.org/podcast/ Subscribe to GrowthBusters email updates https://lp.constantcontact.com/su/umptf6w/signup Explore the issues at http://www.growthbusters.org View the GrowthBusters channel on YouTube Follow the podcast so you don't miss an episode:

James Kimmel, Jr., lawyer, Yale psychiatry lecturer, and author of The Science of Revenge, joins us in the Strategy Skills podcast to explore the neuroscience and behavioral dynamics of revenge. Drawing on law, psychiatry, and over two decades of research, Kimmel offers a sobering view: revenge is not a form of justice, it's a “pleasure-seeking behavior” that operates like an addiction, fueled by unresolved pain.   He opens the conversation with a deeply personal story: as a teenager, after years of bullying, he chased down his aggressors with a loaded revolver. In a pivotal moment, he recalls, “The cost of getting the revenge I wanted was far more than I was willing to pay.” That flash of insight redirected his life and seeded a lifelong investigation into how grievance, retribution, and healing operate in the human mind.   Key insights from the discussion include: Revenge Mimics Addiction in the Brain Kimmel explains that “your brain on revenge looks like your brain on drugs.” The cycle begins when a grievance activates the brain's pain network, followed by a surge of dopamine in the reward system. Over time, the craving for retaliation can become compulsive, forming habits akin to substance abuse. Grievance Retention Impairs Judgment Unchecked rumination can degrade executive function. “If that prefrontal cortex does not stop you,” Kimmel warns, “and you really crave it… it doesn't matter how many laws there are.” This impaired self-control is what allows otherwise rational individuals to commit extreme acts of violence. Social Exclusion Can Be a Form of Revenge “If you're ending a relationship not for present harm, but to punish someone for a past wrong, that's retaliation,” he explains. Even subtle acts like ghosting or ostracism can activate the same pain circuitry in the brain as physical harm. Forgiveness Interrupts the Revenge Cycle Neuroscience shows that imagining forgiveness “shuts down the brain's pain network, silences addiction circuits, and reactivates executive control.” Kimmel calls forgiveness a “human superpower… It doesn't just cover up the pain like revenge does, it takes the pain away altogether.” Revenge Can Be Prevented, Like a Heart Attack Kimmel proposes a new public health framework: treat revenge attacks like cardiac events. “There are warning signs,” he says, grievance fixation, revenge fantasies, acquiring weapons, and they demand the same level of emergency attention. Legal Systems Often Deliver Revenge, Not Justice Kimmel reflects on his time as a litigator: “Lawyers get paid to sell revenge under the brand name ‘justice.'” He urges professionals to be aware of how sanctioned systems can enable and normalize compulsive retribution.   For leaders in high-stakes environments, the message is clear: understanding the mechanics of grievance and retaliation isn't just psychological, it's strategic. Kimmel's work offers actionable frameworks to recognize revenge-seeking before it becomes destructive, and calls for a deeper integration of neuroscience into how we define justice, manage risk, and lead with compassion.   Get The Science of Revenge here: https://www.jameskimmeljr.com/   Here are some free gifts for you:   Overall Approach Used in Well-Managed Strategy Studies free download: www.firmsconsulting.com/OverallApproach   McKinsey & BCG winning resume free download: www.firmsconsulting.com/resumepdf   Enjoying this episode? Get access to sample advanced training episodes here: www.firmsconsulting.com/promo

In one brutal sentence: **Eric Kim just slammed a 547 kg rack‑pull—7.55 × his own 72.5 kg mass—obliterating the “5 × body‑weight” myth, nuking every strength leaderboard since Lamar Gant, and lighting the internet's algorithms on fire.

Peoples & Things host, Lee Vinsel, talks with Matt Wisnioski, Professor of Science, Technology, and Society at Virginia Tech, about his new book, Every American an Innovator: How Innovation Became a Way of Life. The pair talk about how the new book connects to Matt's earlier book, Engineers for Change; how what Matt calls “innovation expertise” first emerged; how government played a key role in promoting the idea of innovation; how the idea of innovation was democratized from focusing on elite white men to focusing on women, people of color, children, and, well, everyone; and much more. Vinsel and Wisnioski also talk about Matt's current book project with Michael Meindl, Associate Professor of Communication at Radford University - a history of the television show and multimedia product, The Magic School Bus. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

'Gyan Sarita' is a captivating exploration of spiritual truths simplified by narrator Sr. Jagdish Bhai ji who made significant contributions to the Brahma Kumaris Institution, simplifying complex spiritual concepts like Rajyoga for a wider audience. He wrote over 200 Hindi, English, and Urdu books on ‘Spiritual' knowledge, Yoga, Religions, Science, etc. Jagdish Bhaiji was also the Chief Spokesperson and Chief Editor of three monthly magazines: ‘Gyan Amrit' (Hindi), ‘The World Renewal', & ‘Purity' (English) of Brahma Kumaris organization. Gyan Sarita now brings inspiring stories and practical wisdom to life, offering a transformative journey of self-discovery. Join us as we unlock the secrets of the soul and connect with the divine within.

This morning we discuss just one element of the destruction caused by Iranian missiles recently, the damage to the Weizmann Institute in Rehovot, Israel. Thank God no one was killed there, but many areas of research that benefit humanity were destroyed, including research leading to cures for cancer, treatments for autism, and much more. I share a poem by Hanna Yerushalmi titled "Kaddish for Science." Michael Whitman is the senior rabbi of ADATH Congregation in Hampstead, Quebec, and an adjunct professor at McGill University Faculty of Law. ADATH is a modern orthodox synagogue community in suburban Montreal, providing Judaism for the next generation. We take great pleasure in welcoming everyone with a warm smile, while sharing inspiration through prayer, study, and friendship. Rabbi Whitman shares his thoughts and inspirations through online lectures and shiurim, which are available on: YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC5FLcsC6xz5TmkirT1qObkA Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/adathmichael/ Podcast - Mining the Riches of the Parsha: Apple Podcasts: https://podcasts.apple.com/ca/podcast/mining-the-riches-of-the-parsha/id1479615142?fbclid=IwAR1c6YygRR6pvAKFvEmMGCcs0Y6hpmK8tXzPinbum8drqw2zLIo7c9SR-jc Spotify: https://open.spotify.com/show/3hWYhCG5GR8zygw4ZNsSmO Please contact Rabbi Whitman (rabbi@adath.ca) with any questions or feedback, or to receive a daily email, "Study with Rabbi Whitman Today," with current and past insights for that day, video, and audio, all in one short email sent directly to your inbox.

Join Elevated GP: www.theelevatedgp.com Net32.com  Follow @dental_digest_podcast Instagram Follow @dr.melissa_seibert on Instagram As the founder and director of Spear Education, Dr. Spear continues to be recognized as one of the premier educators in esthetic and restorative dentistry in the world today. Dr. Spear earned his dental degree from the University of Washington in 1979, and an MSD in periodontal prosthodontics in 1982, also from the University of Washington. Dr. Spear has been recognized by numerous associations for his contributions to dentistry. In 1993, he was awarded the Christensen Award for Excellence in Restorative Education from the Chicago Dental Society. In 1995, the American Academy of Cosmetic Dentistry presented him with a special award for having advanced the Art and Science of cosmetic dentistry in the United States. In 1996, he received the Saul Schluger Memorial Award for Excellence in Diagnosis and Treatment Planning from the Seattle Study Club. In 2003 he and colleague Vincent G. Kokich were awarded the first ever Presidents Award for excellence in education from the American Academy of Esthetic Dentistry. He also earned the 2004 Distinguished Alumnus Award from Pacific Lutheran University his undergraduate Alma Mater. And in 2013 was named Distinguished Alumnus for the University of Washington School of Dentistry. In 2018 he received the first ever Charles Pincus - Ronald Goldstein Lifetime Achievement Award in Esthetic Dentistry from the American Academy of Esthetic Dentistry. He belongs to multiple dental organizations including the American Academy of Esthetic Dentistry, American Academy of Restorative Dentistry, and the American College of Prosthodontics.

James Sparks is a criminologist; he holds a Bachelor of Arts from Murray State University and a Master of Science in Criminal Justice from UAB. His academic focus and teaching responsibilities at UAB encompass specialized topics such as serial killers, serial killers in international contexts, and the juvenile justice system.Although primarily serving as an instructor, Sparks applies a criminological lens to the study of violent crime and the intersection of psychology and criminal justice. His courses typically explore offender behavior patterns, developmental and systemic aspects of criminality (particularly in youth), and international comparisons of serial homicide. Through engaging students in these challenging subjects, Sparks contributes to the broader mission of preparing future criminal justice professionals and researchers.https://linktr.ee/UnforbiddentruthBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/unforbidden-truth--4724561/support.

In a recent installment of Remarkable People, Yoni Applebaum joins host Guy Kawasaki to reveal the ways in which America's declining mobility is transforming our social fabric and political landscape. Drawing from his unique background as both historian and journalist, Applebaum examines the intersection of housing policy, community dynamics, and democratic resilience, offering fresh perspectives on how to reinvigorate the American dream.Listen to Remarkable People here: **https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/guy-kawasakis-remarkable-people/id1483081827**Visit the Rapid Response website here: https://www.rapidresponseshow.com/See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

A UT Health San Antonio researcher confirms that how magnesium gets into immune system cells can determine whether they fight oral cancer or support tumor growth. The discovery offers hope for new ways to prevent and treat the disease.

“To navigate proof, we must reach into a thicket of errors and biases. We must confront monsters and embrace uncertainty, balancing — and rebalancing —our beliefs. We must seek out every useful fragment of data, gather every relevant tool, searching wider and climbing further. Finding the good foundations among the bad. Dodging dogma and falsehoods. Questioning. Measuring. Triangulating. Convincing. Then perhaps, just perhaps, we'll reach the truth in time.”—Adam KucharskiMy conversation with Professor Kucharski on what constitutes certainty and proof in science (and other domains), with emphasis on many of the learnings from Covid. Given the politicization of science and A.I.'s deepfakes and power for blurring of truth, it's hard to think of a topic more important right now.Audio file (Ground Truths can also be downloaded on Apple Podcasts and Spotify)Eric Topol (00:06):Hello, it's Eric Topol from Ground Truths and I am really delighted to welcome Adam Kucharski, who is the author of a new book, Proof: The Art and Science of Certainty. He's a distinguished mathematician, by the way, the first mathematician we've had on Ground Truths and a person who I had the real privilege of getting to know a bit through the Covid pandemic. So welcome, Adam.Adam Kucharski (00:28):Thanks for having me.Eric Topol (00:30):Yeah, I mean, I think just to let everybody know, you're a Professor at London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine and also noteworthy you won the Adams Prize, which is one of the most impressive recognitions in the field of mathematics. This is the book, it's a winner, Proof and there's so much to talk about. So Adam, maybe what I'd start off is the quote in the book that captivates in the beginning, “life is full of situations that can reveal remarkably large gaps in our understanding of what is true and why it's true. This is a book about those gaps.” So what was the motivation when you undertook this very big endeavor?Adam Kucharski (01:17):I think a lot of it comes to the work I do at my day job where we have to deal with a lot of evidence under pressure, particularly if you work in outbreaks or emerging health concerns. And often it really pushes the limits, our methodology and how we converge on what's true subject to potential revision in the future. I think particularly having a background in math's, I think you kind of grow up with this idea that you can get to these concrete, almost immovable truths and then even just looking through the history, realizing that often isn't the case, that there's these kind of very human dynamics that play out around them. And it's something I think that everyone in science can reflect on that sometimes what convinces us doesn't convince other people, and particularly when you have that kind of urgency of time pressure, working out how to navigate that.Eric Topol (02:05):Yeah. Well, I mean I think these times of course have really gotten us to appreciate, particularly during Covid, the importance of understanding uncertainty. And I think one of the ways that we can dispel what people assume they know is the famous Monty Hall, which you get into a bit in the book. So I think everybody here is familiar with that show, Let's Make a Deal and maybe you can just take us through what happens with one of the doors are unveiled and how that changes the mathematics.Adam Kucharski (02:50):Yeah, sure. So I think it is a problem that's been around for a while and it's based on this game show. So you've got three doors that are closed. Behind two of the doors there is a goat and behind one of the doors is a luxury car. So obviously, you want to win the car. The host asks you to pick a door, so you point to one, maybe door number two, then the host who knows what's behind the doors opens another door to reveal a goat and then ask you, do you want to change your mind? Do you want to switch doors? And a lot of the, I think intuition people have, and certainly when I first came across this problem many years ago is well, you've got two doors left, right? You've picked one, there's another one, it's 50-50. And even some quite well-respected mathematicians.Adam Kucharski (03:27):People like Paul Erdős who was really published more papers than almost anyone else, that was their initial gut reaction. But if you work through all of the combinations, if you pick this door and then the host does this, and you switch or not switch and work through all of those options. You actually double your chances if you switch versus sticking with the door. So something that's counterintuitive, but I think one of the things that really struck me and even over the years trying to explain it is convincing myself of the answer, which was when I first came across it as a teenager, I did quite quickly is very different to convincing someone else. And even actually Paul Erdős, one of his colleagues showed him what I call proof by exhaustion. So go through every combination and that didn't really convince him. So then he started to simulate and said, well, let's do a computer simulation of the game a hundred thousand times. And again, switching was this optimal strategy, but Erdős wasn't really convinced because I accept that this is the case, but I'm not really satisfied with it. And I think that encapsulates for a lot of people, their experience of proof and evidence. It's a fact and you have to take it as given, but there's actually quite a big bridge often to really understanding why it's true and feeling convinced by it.Eric Topol (04:41):Yeah, I think it's a fabulous example because I think everyone would naturally assume it's 50-50 and it isn't. And I think that gets us to the topic at hand. What I love, there's many things I love about this book. One is that you don't just get into science and medicine, but you cut across all the domains, law, mathematics, AI. So it's a very comprehensive sweep of everything about proof and truth, and it couldn't come at a better time as we'll get into. Maybe just starting off with math, the term I love mathematical monsters. Can you tell us a little bit more about that?Adam Kucharski (05:25):Yeah, this was a fascinating situation that emerged in the late 19th century where a lot of math's, certainly in Europe had been derived from geometry because a lot of the ancient Greek influence on how we shaped things and then Newton and his work on rates of change and calculus, it was really the natural world that provided a lot of inspiration, these kind of tangible objects, tangible movements. And as mathematicians started to build out the theory around rates of change and how we tackle these kinds of situations, they sometimes took that intuition a bit too seriously. And there was some theorems that they said were intuitively obvious, some of these French mathematicians. And so, one for example is this idea of you how things change smoothly over time and how you do those calculations. But what happened was some mathematicians came along and showed that when you have things that can be infinitely small, that intuition didn't necessarily hold in the same way.Adam Kucharski (06:26):And they came up with these examples that broke a lot of these theorems and a lot of the establishments at the time called these things monsters. They called them these aberrations against common sense and this idea that if Newton had known about them, he never would've done all of his discovery because they're just nuisances and we just need to get rid of them. And there's this real tension at the core of mathematics in the late 1800s where some people just wanted to disregard this and say, look, it works for most of the time, that's good enough. And then others really weren't happy with this quite vague logic. They wanted to put it on much sturdier ground. And what was remarkable actually is if you trace this then into the 20th century, a lot of these monsters and these particularly in some cases functions which could almost move constantly, this constant motion rather than our intuitive concept of movement as something that's smooth, if you drop an apple, it accelerates at a very smooth rate, would become foundational in our understanding of things like probability, Einstein's work on atomic theory. A lot of these concepts where geometry breaks down would be really important in relativity. So actually, these things that we thought were monsters actually were all around us all the time, and science couldn't advance without them. So I think it's just this remarkable example of this tension within a field that supposedly concrete and the things that were going to be shunned actually turn out to be quite important.Eric Topol (07:53):It's great how you convey how nature isn't so neat and tidy and things like Brownian motion, understanding that, I mean, just so many things that I think fit into that general category. In the legal, we won't get into too much because that's not so much the audience of Ground Truths, but the classic things about innocent and until proven guilty and proof beyond reasonable doubt, I mean these are obviously really important parts of that overall sense of proof and truth. We're going to get into one thing I'm fascinated about related to that subsequently and then in science. So before we get into the different types of proof, obviously the pandemic is still fresh in our minds and we're an endemic with Covid now, and there are so many things we got wrong along the way of uncertainty and didn't convey that science isn't always evolving search for what is the truth. There's plenty no shortage of uncertainty at any moment. So can you recap some of the, you did so much work during the pandemic and obviously some of it's in the book. What were some of the major things that you took out of proof and truth from the pandemic?Adam Kucharski (09:14):I think it was almost this story of two hearts because on the one hand, science was the thing that got us where we are today. The reason that so much normality could resume and so much risk was reduced was development of vaccines and the understanding of treatments and the understanding of variants as they came to their characteristics. So it was kind of this amazing opportunity to see this happen faster than it ever happened in history. And I think ever in science, it certainly shifted a lot of my thinking about what's possible and even how we should think about these kinds of problems. But also on the other hand, I think where people might have been more familiar with seeing science progress a bit more slowly and reach consensus around some of these health issues, having that emerge very rapidly can present challenges even we found with some of the work we did on Alpha and then the Delta variants, and it was the early quantification of these.Adam Kucharski (10:08):So really the big question is, is this thing more transmissible? Because at the time countries were thinking about control measures, thinking about relaxing things, and you've got this just enormous social economic health decision-making based around essentially is it a lot more spreadable or is it not? And you only had these fragments of evidence. So I think for me, that was really an illustration of the sharp end. And I think what we ended up doing with some of those was rather than arguing over a precise number, something like Delta, instead we kind of looked at, well, what's the range that matters? So in the sense of arguing over whether it's 40% or 50% or 30% more transmissible is perhaps less important than being, it's substantially more transmissible and it's going to start going up. Is it going to go up extremely fast or just very fast?Adam Kucharski (10:59):That's still a very useful conclusion. I think what often created some of the more challenges, I think the things that on reflection people looking back pick up on are where there was probably overstated certainty. We saw that around some of the airborne spread, for example, stated as a fact by in some cases some organizations, I think in some situations as well, governments had a constraint and presented it as scientific. So the UK, for example, would say testing isn't useful. And what was happening at the time was there wasn't enough tests. So it was more a case of they can't test at that volume. But I think blowing between what the science was saying and what the decision-making, and I think also one thing we found in the UK was we made a lot of the epidemiological evidence available. I think that was really, I think something that was important.Adam Kucharski (11:51):I found it a lot easier to communicate if talking to the media to be able to say, look, this is the paper that's out, this is what it means, this is the evidence. I always found it quite uncomfortable having to communicate things where you knew there were reports behind the scenes, but you couldn't actually articulate. But I think what that did is it created this impression that particularly epidemiology was driving the decision-making a lot more than it perhaps was in reality because so much of that was being made public and a lot more of the evidence around education or economics was being done behind the scenes. I think that created this kind of asymmetry in public perception about how that was feeding in. And so, I think there was always that, and it happens, it is really hard as well as a scientist when you've got journalists asking you how to run the country to work out those steps of am I describing the evidence behind what we're seeing? Am I describing the evidence about different interventions or am I proposing to some extent my value system on what we do? And I think all of that in very intense times can be very easy to get blurred together in public communication. I think we saw a few examples of that where things were being the follow the science on policy type angle where actually once you get into what you're prioritizing within a society, quite rightly, you've got other things beyond just the epidemiology driving that.Eric Topol (13:09):Yeah, I mean that term that you just use follow the science is such an important term because it tells us about the dynamic aspect. It isn't just a snapshot, it's constantly being revised. But during the pandemic we had things like the six-foot rule that was never supported by data, but yet still today, if I walk around my hospital and there's still the footprints of the six-foot rule and not paying attention to the fact that this was airborne and took years before some of these things were accepted. The flatten the curve stuff with lockdowns, which I never was supportive of that, but perhaps at the worst point, the idea that hospitals would get overrun was an issue, but it got carried away with school shutdowns for prolonged periods and in some parts of the world, especially very stringent lockdowns. But anyway, we learned a lot.Eric Topol (14:10):But perhaps one of the greatest lessons is that people's expectations about science is that it's absolute and somehow you have this truth that's not there. I mean, it's getting revised. It's kind of on the job training, it's on this case on the pandemic revision. But very interesting. And that gets us to, I think the next topic, which I think is a fundamental part of the book distributed throughout the book, which is the different types of proof in biomedicine and of course across all these domains. And so, you take us through things like randomized trials, p-values, 95 percent confidence intervals, counterfactuals, causation and correlation, peer review, the works, which is great because a lot of people have misconceptions of these things. So for example, randomized trials, which is the temple of the randomized trials, they're not as great as a lot of people think, yes, they can help us establish cause and effect, but they're skewed because of the people who come into the trial. So they may not at all be a representative sample. What are your thoughts about over deference to randomized trials?Adam Kucharski (15:31):Yeah, I think that the story of how we rank evidence in medicines a fascinating one. I mean even just how long it took for people to think about these elements of randomization. Fundamentally, what we're trying to do when we have evidence here in medicine or science is prevent ourselves from confusing randomness for a signal. I mean, that's fundamentally, we don't want to mistake something, we think it's going on and it's not. And the challenge, particularly with any intervention is you only get to see one version of reality. You can't give someone a drug, follow them, rewind history, not give them the drug and then follow them again. So one of the things that essentially randomization allows us to do is, if you have two groups, one that's been randomized, one that hasn't on average, the difference in outcomes between those groups is going to be down to the treatment effect.Adam Kucharski (16:20):So it doesn't necessarily mean in reality that'd be the case, but on average that's the expectation that you'd have. And it's kind of interesting actually that the first modern randomized control trial (RCT) in medicine in 1947, this is for TB and streptomycin. The randomization element actually, it wasn't so much statistical as behavioral, that if you have people coming to hospital, you could to some extent just say, we'll just alternate. We're not going to randomize. We're just going to first patient we'll say is a control, second patient a treatment. But what they found in a lot of previous studies was doctors have bias. Maybe that patient looks a little bit ill or that one maybe is on borderline for eligibility. And often you got these quite striking imbalances when you allowed it for human judgment. So it was really about shielding against those behavioral elements. But I think there's a few situations, it's a really powerful tool for a lot of these questions, but as you mentioned, one is this issue of you have the population you study on and then perhaps in reality how that translates elsewhere.Adam Kucharski (17:17):And we see, I mean things like flu vaccines are a good example, which are very dependent on immunity and evolution and what goes on in different populations. Sometimes you've had a result on a vaccine in one place and then the effectiveness doesn't translate in the same way to somewhere else. I think the other really important thing to bear in mind is, as I said, it's the averaging that you're getting an average effect between two different groups. And I think we see certainly a lot of development around things like personalized medicine where actually you're much more interested in the outcome for the individual. And so, what a trial can give you evidence is on average across a group, this is the effect that I can expect this intervention to have. But we've now seen more of the emergence things like N=1 studies where you can actually over the same individual, particularly for chronic conditions, look at those kind of interventions.Adam Kucharski (18:05):And also there's just these extreme examples where you're ethically not going to run a trial, there's never been a trial of whether it's a good idea to have intensive care units in hospitals or there's a lot of these kind of historical treatments which are just so overwhelmingly effective that we're not going to run trial. So almost this hierarchy over time, you can see it getting shifted because actually you do have these situations where other forms of evidence can get you either closer to what you need or just more feasibly an answer where it's just not ethical or practical to do an RCT.Eric Topol (18:37):And that brings us to the natural experiments I just wrote about recently, the one with shingles, which there's two big natural experiments to suggest that shingles vaccine might reduce the risk of Alzheimer's, an added benefit beyond the shingles that was not anticipated. Your thoughts about natural experiments, because here you're getting a much different type of population assessment, again, not at the individual level, but not necessarily restricted by some potentially skewed enrollment criteria.Adam Kucharski (19:14):I think this is as emerged as a really valuable tool. It's kind of interesting, in the book you're talking to economists like Josh Angrist, that a lot of these ideas emerge in epidemiology, but I think were really then taken up by economists, particularly as they wanted to add more credibility to a lot of these policy questions. And ultimately, it comes down to this issue that for a lot of problems, we can't necessarily intervene and randomize, but there might be a situation that's done it to some extent for us, so the classic example is the Vietnam draft where it was kind of random birthdays with drawn out of lottery. And so, there's been a lot of studies subsequently about the effect of serving in the military on different subsequent lifetime outcomes because broadly those people have been randomized. It was for a different reason. But you've got that element of randomization driving that.Adam Kucharski (20:02):And so again, with some of the recent shingles data and other studies, you might have a situation for example, where there's been an intervention that's somewhat arbitrary in terms of time. It's a cutoff on a birth date, for example. And under certain assumptions you could think, well, actually there's no real reason for the person on this day and this day to be fundamentally different. I mean, perhaps there might be effects of cohorts if it's school years or this sort of thing. But generally, this isn't the same as having people who are very, very different ages and very different characteristics. It's just nature, or in this case, just a policy intervention for a different reason has given you that randomization, which allows you or pseudo randomization, which allows you to then look at something about the effect of an intervention that you wouldn't as reliably if you were just digging into the data of yes, no who's received a vaccine.Eric Topol (20:52):Yeah, no, I think it's really valuable. And now I think increasingly given priority, if you can find these natural experiments and they're not always so abundant to use to extrapolate from, but when they are, they're phenomenal. The causation correlation is so big. The issue there, I mean Judea Pearl's, the Book of Why, and you give so many great examples throughout the book in Proof. I wonder if you could comment that on that a bit more because this is where associations are confused somehow or other with a direct effect. And we unfortunately make these jumps all too frequently. Perhaps it's the most common problem that's occurring in the way we interpret medical research data.Adam Kucharski (21:52):Yeah, I think it's an issue that I think a lot of people get drilled into in their training just because a correlation between things doesn't mean that that thing causes this thing. But it really struck me as I talked to people, researching the book, in practice in research, there's actually a bit more to it in how it's played out. So first of all, if there's a correlation between things, it doesn't tell you much generally that's useful for intervention. If two things are correlated, it doesn't mean that changing that thing's going to have an effect on that thing. There might be something that's influencing both of them. If you have more ice cream sales, it will lead to more heat stroke cases. It doesn't mean that changing ice cream sales is going to have that effect, but it does allow you to make predictions potentially because if you can identify consistent patterns, you can say, okay, if this thing going up, I'm going to make a prediction that this thing's going up.Adam Kucharski (22:37):So one thing I found quite striking, actually talking to research in different fields is how many fields choose to focus on prediction because it kind of avoids having to deal with this cause and effect problem. And even in fields like psychology, it was kind of interesting that there's a lot of focus on predicting things like relationship outcomes, but actually for people, you don't want a prediction about your relationship. You want to know, well, how can I do something about it? You don't just want someone to sell you your relationship's going to go downhill. So there's almost part of the challenge is people just got stuck on prediction because it's an easier field of work, whereas actually some of those problems will involve intervention. I think the other thing that really stood out for me is in epidemiology and a lot of other fields, rightly, people are very cautious to not get that mixed up.Adam Kucharski (23:24):They don't want to mix up correlations or associations with causation, but you've kind of got this weird situation where a lot of papers go out of their way to not use causal language and say it's an association, it's just an association. It's just an association. You can't say anything about causality. And then the end of the paper, they'll say, well, we should think about introducing more of this thing or restricting this thing. So really the whole paper and its purpose is framed around a causal intervention, but it's extremely careful throughout the paper to not frame it as a causal claim. So I think we almost by skirting that too much, we actually avoid the problems that people sometimes care about. And I think a lot of the nice work that's been going on in causal inference is trying to get people to confront this more head on rather than say, okay, you can just stay in this prediction world and that's fine. And then just later maybe make a policy suggestion off the back of it.Eric Topol (24:20):Yeah, I think this is cause and effect is a very alluring concept to support proof as you so nicely go through in the book. But of course, one of the things that we use to help us is the biological mechanism. So here you have, let's say for example, you're trying to get a new drug approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), and the request is, well, we want two trials, randomized trials, independent. We want to have p-values that are significant, and we want to know the biological mechanism ideally with the dose response of the drug. But there are many drugs as you review that have no biological mechanism established. And even when the tobacco problems were mounting, the actual mechanism of how tobacco use caused cancer wasn't known. So how important is the biological mechanism, especially now that we're well into the AI world where explainability is demanded. And so, we don't know the mechanism, but we also don't know the mechanism and lots of things in medicine too, like anesthetics and even things as simple as aspirin, how it works and many others. So how do we deal with this quest for the biological mechanism?Adam Kucharski (25:42):I think that's a really good point. It shows almost a lot of the transition I think we're going through currently. I think particularly for things like smoking cancer where it's very hard to run a trial. You can't make people randomly take up smoking. Having those additional pieces of evidence, whether it's an analogy with a similar carcinogen, whether it's a biological mechanism, can help almost give you more supports for that argument that there's a cause and effect going on. But I think what I found quite striking, and I realized actually that it's something that had kind of bothered me a bit and I'd be interested to hear whether it bothers you, but with the emergence of AI, it's almost a bit of the loss of scientific satisfaction. I think you grow up with learning about how the world works and why this is doing what it's doing.Adam Kucharski (26:26):And I talked for example of some of the people involved with AlphaFold and some of the subsequent work in installing those predictions about structures. And they'd almost made peace with it, which I found interesting because I think they started off being a bit uncomfortable with like, yeah, you've got these remarkable AI models making these predictions, but we don't understand still biologically what's happening here. But I think they're just settled in saying, well, biology is really complex on some of these problems, and if we can have a tool that can give us this extremely valuable information, maybe that's okay. And it was just interesting that they'd really kind of gone through that kind process, which I think a lot of people are still grappling with and that almost that discomfort of using AI and what's going to convince you that that's a useful reliable prediction whether it's something like predicting protein folding or getting in a self-driving car. What's the evidence you need to convince you that's reliable?Eric Topol (27:26):Yeah, no, I'm so glad you brought that up because when Demis Hassabis and John Jumper won the Nobel Prize, the point I made was maybe there should be an asterisk with AI because they don't know how it works. I mean, they had all the rich data from the protein data bank, and they got the transformer model to do it for 200 million protein structure prediction, but they still to this day don't fully understand how the model really was working. So it reinforces what you're just saying. And of course, it cuts across so many types of AI. It's just that we tend to hold different standards in medicine not realizing that there's lots of lack of explainability for routine medical treatments today. Now one of the things that I found fascinating in your book, because there's different levels of proof, different types of proof, but solid logical systems.Eric Topol (28:26):And on page 60 of the book, especially pertinent to the US right now, there is a bit about Kurt Gödel and what he did there was he basically, there was a question about dictatorship in the US could it ever occur? And Gödel says, “oh, yes, I can prove it.” And he's using the constitution itself to prove it, which I found fascinating because of course we're seeing that emerge right now. Can you give us a little bit more about this, because this is fascinating about the Fifth Amendment, and I mean I never thought that the Constitution would allow for a dictatorship to emerge.Adam Kucharski (29:23):And this was a fascinating story, Kurt Gödel who is one of the greatest logical minds of the 20th century and did a lot of work, particularly in the early 20th century around system of rules, particularly things like mathematics and whether they can ever be really fully satisfying. So particularly in mathematics, he showed that there were this problem that is very hard to have a set of rules for something like arithmetic that was both complete and covered every situation, but also had no contradictions. And I think a lot of countries, if you go back, things like Napoleonic code and these attempts to almost write down every possible legal situation that could be imaginable, always just ascended into either they needed amendments or they had contradictions. I think Gödel's work really summed it up, and there's a story, this is in the late forties when he had his citizenship interview and Einstein and Oskar Morgenstern went along as witnesses for him.Adam Kucharski (30:17):And it's always told as kind of a lighthearted story as this logical mind, this academic just saying something silly in front of the judge. And actually, to my own admission, I've in the past given talks and mentioned it in this slightly kind of lighthearted way, but for the book I got talking to a few people who'd taken it more seriously. I realized actually he's this extremely logically focused mind at the time, and maybe there should have been something more to it. And people who have kind of dug more into possibilities was saying, well, what could he have spotted that bothered him? And a lot of his work that he did about consistency in mass was around particularly self-referential statements. So if I say this sentence is false, it's self-referential and if it is false, then it's true, but if it's true, then it's false and you get this kind of weird self-referential contradictions.Adam Kucharski (31:13):And so, one of the theories about Gödel was that in the Constitution, it wasn't that there was a kind of rule for someone can become a dictator, but rather people can use the mechanisms within the Constitution to make it easier to make further amendments. And he kind of downward cycle of amendment that he had seen happening in Europe and the run up to the war, and again, because this is never fully documented exactly what he thought, but it's one of the theories that it wouldn't just be outright that it would just be this cycle process of weakening and weakening and weakening and making it easier to add. And actually, when I wrote that, it was all the earlier bits of the book that I drafted, I did sort of debate whether including it I thought, is this actually just a bit in the weeds of American history? And here we are. Yeah, it's remarkable.Eric Topol (32:00):Yeah, yeah. No, I mean I found, it struck me when I was reading this because here back in 1947, there was somebody predicting that this could happen based on some, if you want to call it loopholes if you will, or the ability to change things, even though you would've thought otherwise that there wasn't any possible capability for that to happen. Now, one of the things I thought was a bit contradictory is two parts here. One is from Angus Deaton, he wrote, “Gold standard thinking is magical thinking.” And then the other is what you basically are concluding in many respects. “To navigate proof, we must reach into a thicket of errors and biases. We must confront monsters and embrace uncertainty, balancing — and rebalancing —our beliefs. We must seek out every useful fragment of data, gather every relevant tool, searching wider and climbing further. Finding the good foundations among the bad. Dodging dogma and falsehoods. Questioning. Measuring. Triangulating. Convincing. Then perhaps, just perhaps, we'll reach the truth in time.” So here you have on the one hand your search for the truth, proof, which I think that little paragraph says it all. In many respects, it sums up somewhat to the work that you review here and on the other you have this Nobel laureate saying, you don't have to go to extremes here. The enemy of good is perfect, perhaps. I mean, how do you reconcile this sense that you shouldn't go so far? Don't search for absolute perfection of proof.Adam Kucharski (33:58):Yeah, I think that encapsulates a lot of what the book is about, is that search for certainty and how far do you have to go. I think one of the things, there's a lot of interesting discussion, some fascinating papers around at what point do you use these studies? What are their flaws? But I think one of the things that does stand out is across fields, across science, medicine, even if you going to cover law, AI, having these kind of cookie cutter, this is the definitive way of doing it. And if you just follow this simple rule, if you do your p-value, you'll get there and you'll be fine. And I think that's where a lot of the danger is. And I think that's what we've seen over time. Certain science people chasing certain targets and all the behaviors that come around that or in certain situations disregarding valuable evidence because you've got this kind of gold standard and nothing else will do.Adam Kucharski (34:56):And I think particularly in a crisis, it's very dangerous to have that because you might have a low level of evidence that demands a certain action and you almost bias yourself towards inaction if you have these kind of very simple thresholds. So I think for me, across all of these stories and across the whole book, I mean William Gosset who did a lot of pioneering work on statistical experiments at Guinness in the early 20th century, he had this nice question he sort of framed is, how much do we lose? And if we're thinking about the problems, there's always more studies we can do, there's always more confidence we can have, but whether it's a patient we want to treat or crisis we need to deal with, we need to work out actually getting that level of proof that's really appropriate for where we are currently.Eric Topol (35:49):I think exceptionally important that there's this kind of spectrum or continuum in following science and search for truth and that distinction, I think really nails it. Now, one of the things that's unique in the book is you don't just go through all the different types of how you would get to proof, but you also talk about how the evidence is acted on. And for example, you quote, “they spent a lot of time misinforming themselves.” This is the whole idea of taking data and torturing it or using it, dredging it however way you want to support either conspiracy theories or alternative facts. Basically, manipulating sometimes even emasculating what evidence and data we have. And one of the sentences, or I guess this is from Sir Francis Bacon, “truth is a daughter of time”, but the added part is not authority. So here we have our president here that repeats things that are wrong, fabricated or wrong, and he keeps repeating to the point that people believe it's true. But on the other hand, you could say truth is a daughter of time because you like to not accept any truth immediately. You like to see it get replicated and further supported, backed up. So in that one sentence, truth is a daughter of time not authority, there's the whole ball of wax here. Can you take us through that? Because I just think that people don't understand that truth being tested over time, but also manipulated by its repetition. This is a part of the big problem that we live in right now.Adam Kucharski (37:51):And I think it's something that writing the book and actually just reflecting on it subsequently has made me think about a lot in just how people approach these kinds of problems. I think that there's an idea that conspiracy theorists are just lazy and have maybe just fallen for a random thing, but talking to people, you really think about these things a lot more in the field. And actually, the more I've ended up engaging with people who believe things that are just outright unevidenced around vaccines, around health issues, they often have this mountain of papers and data to hand and a lot of it, often they will be peer reviewed papers. It won't necessarily be supporting the point that they think it's supports.Adam Kucharski (38:35):But it's not something that you can just say everything you're saying is false, that there's actually often a lot of things that have been put together and it's just that leap to that conclusion. I think you also see a lot of scientific language borrowed. So I gave a talker early this year and it got posted on YouTube. It had conspiracy theories it, and there was a lot of conspiracy theory supporters who piled in the comments and one of the points they made is skepticism is good. It's the kind of law society, take no one's word for it, you need this. We are the ones that are kind of doing science and people who just assume that science is settled are in the wrong. And again, you also mentioned that repetition. There's this phenomenon, it's the illusory truth problem that if you repeatedly tell someone someone's something's false, it'll increase their belief in it even if it's something quite outrageous.Adam Kucharski (39:27):And that mimics that scientific repetition because people kind of say, okay, well if I've heard it again and again, it's almost like if you tweak these as mini experiments, I'm just accumulating evidence that this thing is true. So it made me think a lot about how you've got essentially a lot of mimicry of the scientific method, amount of data and how you present it and this kind of skepticism being good, but I think a lot of it comes down to as well as just looking at theological flaws, but also ability to be wrong in not actually seeking out things that confirm. I think all of us, it's something that I've certainly tried to do a lot working on emergencies, and one of the scientific advisory groups that I worked on almost it became a catchphrase whenever someone presented something, they finished by saying, tell me why I'm wrong.Adam Kucharski (40:14):And if you've got a variant that's more transmissible, I don't want to be right about that really. And it is something that is quite hard to do and I found it is particularly for something that's quite high pressure, trying to get a policymaker or someone to write even just non-publicly by themselves, write down what you think's going to happen or write down what would convince you that you are wrong about something. I think particularly on contentious issues where someone's got perhaps a lot of public persona wrapped up in something that's really hard to do, but I think it's those kind of elements that distinguish between getting sucked into a conspiracy theory and really seeking out evidence that supports it and trying to just get your theory stronger and stronger and actually seeking out things that might overturn your belief about the world. And it's often those things that we don't want overturned. I think those are the views that we all have politically or in other ways, and that's often where the problems lie.Eric Topol (41:11):Yeah, I think this is perhaps one of, if not the most essential part here is that to try to deal with the different views. We have biases as you emphasized throughout, but if you can use these different types of proof to have a sound discussion, conversation, refutation whereby you don't summarily dismiss another view which may be skewed and maybe spurious or just absolutely wrong, maybe fabricated whatever, but did you can engage and say, here's why these are my proof points, or this is why there's some extent of certainty you can have regarding this view of the data. I think this is so fundamental because unfortunately as we saw during the pandemic, the strident minority, which were the anti-science, anti-vaxxers, they were summarily dismissed as being kooks and adopting conspiracy theories without the right engagement and the right debates. And I think this might've helped along the way, no less the fact that a lot of scientists didn't really want to engage in the first place and adopt this methodical proof that you've advocated in the book so many different ways to support a hypothesis or an assertion. Now, we've covered a lot here, Adam. Have I missed some central parts of the book and the effort because it's really quite extraordinary. I know it's your third book, but it's certainly a standout and it certainly it's a standout not just for your books, but books on this topic.Adam Kucharski (43:13):Thanks. And it's much appreciated. It was not an easy book to write. I think at times, I kind of wondered if I should have taken on the topic and I think a core thing, your last point speaks to that. I think a core thing is that gap often between what convinces us and what convinces someone else. I think it's often very tempting as a scientist to say the evidence is clear or the science has proved this. But even on something like the vaccines, you do get the loud minority who perhaps think they're putting microchips in people and outlandish views, but you actually get a lot more people who might just have some skepticism of pharmaceutical companies or they might have, my wife was pregnant actually at the time during Covid and we waited up because there wasn't much data on pregnancy and the vaccine. And I think it's just finding what is convincing. Is it having more studies from other countries? Is it understanding more about the biology? Is it understanding how you evaluate some of those safety signals? And I think that's just really important to not just think what convinces us and it's going to be obvious to other people, but actually think where are they coming from? Because ultimately having proof isn't that good unless it leads to the action that can make lives better.Eric Topol (44:24):Yeah. Well, look, you've inculcated my mind with this book, Adam, called Proof. Anytime I think of the word proof, I'm going to be thinking about you. So thank you. Thanks for taking the time to have a conversation about your book, your work, and I know we're going to count on you for the astute mathematics and analysis of outbreaks in the future, which we will see unfortunately. We are seeing now, in fact already in this country with measles and whatnot. So thank you and we'll continue to follow your great work.**************************************Thanks for listening, watching or reading this Ground Truths podcast/post.If you found this interesting please share it!That makes the work involved in putting these together especially worthwhile.I'm also appreciative for your subscribing to Ground Truths. All content —its newsletters, analyses, and podcasts—is free, open-access. I'm fortunate to get help from my producer Jessica Nguyen and Sinjun Balabanoff for audio/video tech support to pull these podcasts together for Scripps Research.Paid subscriptions are voluntary and all proceeds from them go to support Scripps Research. They do allow for posting comments and questions, which I do my best to respond to. Please don't hesitate to post comments and give me feedback. Many thanks to those who have contributed—they have greatly helped fund our summer internship programs for the past two years.A bit of an update on SUPER AGERSMy book has been selected as a Next Big Idea Club winner for Season 26 by Adam Grant, Malcolm Gladwell, Susan Cain, and Daniel Pink. This club has spotlighted the most groundbreaking nonfiction books for over a decade. As a winning title, my book will be shipped to thousands of thoughtful readers like you, featured alongside a reading guide, a "Book Bite," Next Big Idea Podcast episode as well as a live virtual Q&A with me in the club's vibrant online community. If you're interested in joining the club, here's a promo code SEASON26 for 20% off at the website. SUPER AGERS reached #3 for all books on Amazon this week. This was in part related to the segment on the book on the TODAY SHOW which you can see here. Also at Amazon there is a remarkable sale on the hardcover book for $10.l0 at the moment for up to 4 copies. Not sure how long it will last or what prompted it.The journalist Paul von Zielbauer has a Substack “Aging With Strength” and did an extensive interview with me on the biology of aging and how we can prevent the major age-related diseases. Here's the link. Get full access to Ground Truths at erictopol.substack.com/subscribe

Former professional poker player Annie Duke wrote a book about Steve's favorite subject: quitting. They talk about why quitting is so hard, how to do it sooner, and why we feel shame when we do something that's good for us. SOURCES:Annie Duke, author and former professional poker player. RESOURCES:Quit: The Power of Knowing When to Walk Away, by Annie Duke (2022)."Heads or Tails: The Impact of a Coin Toss on Major Life Decisions and Subsequent Happiness," by Steven Levitt (NBER Working Papers, 2016).Superforecasting: The Art and Science of Prediction, by Philip E. Tetlock and Dan Gardner (2015)."Knee-Deep in the Big Muddy: A Study of Escalating Commitment to a Chosen Course of Action," by Barry M. Staw (Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 1976).Alliance for Decision Education. EXTRAS:"How to Make Your Own Luck," by Freakonomics Radio (2020)."How Do You Know When It's Time to Quit?" by No Stupid Questions (2020)."The Upside of Quitting," by Freakonomics Radio (2011).

Phil Bourjaily, Ducks Unlimited magazine shotgunning columnist, joins Chris Jennings to talk about ways to improve your wingshooting during the off season. Bourjaily explains that repetition is the key, but there are several ways to focus your training on shots typically seen in the duck blind. Pick up a few helpful off-season shooting tips as the pair discuss techniques and best practices. Listen now: www.ducks.org/DUPodcastSend feedback: DUPodcast@ducks.org

Dr. Yasmin Hurd is the Director of the Addiction Institute within the Mount Sinai Behavioral Health System as well as the Ward Coleman Chair of Translational Neuroscience and Professor of Psychiatry and Neuroscience at the Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai in New York. Dr. Hurd is an internationally renowned neuroscientist whose translational research examines the neurobiology of drug abuse and related psychiatric disorders. Her research exploring the neurobiological effects of cannabis and heroin has significantly shaped the field. Using multidisciplinary research approaches, her research has provided unique insights into the impact of developmental cannabis exposure and epigenetic mechanisms underlying the drug's protracted effects into adulthood and even across generations. Dr. Hurd's basic science research is complemented by clinical laboratory investigations evaluating the therapeutic potential of novel science-based strategies for the treatment of opioid addiction and related psychiatric disorders including pioneering work with cannabidiol. Based on these high impact accomplishments and her advocacy of drug addiction education and health, Dr. Hurd was inducted into both the National Academy of Medicine and the National Academy of Science, complementing other honors she has received in the field. Today on the show we discuss: how high potency THC changes the brain, why today's weed is much stronger than it used to be, the shocking medical risks of using marijuana (besides damaging your mental health), the surprising truth about what weed withdrawal looks like, why people deny their addiction to cannabis, what life can look like after quitting weed and much more.  ⚠ WELLNESS DISCLAIMER ⚠ Please be advised; the topics related to health and mental health in my content are for informational, discussion, and entertainment purposes only. The content is not intended to be a substitute for professional advice, diagnosis, or treatment. Always seek the advice of your health or mental health professional or other qualified health provider with any questions you may have regarding your current condition. Never disregard professional advice or delay in seeking it because of something you have heard from your favorite creator, on social media, or shared within content you've consumed. If you are in crisis or you think you may have an emergency, call your doctor or 911 immediately. If you do not have a health professional who is able to assist you, use these resources to find help: Emergency Medical Services—911 If the situation is potentially life-threatening, get immediate emergency assistance by calling 911, available 24 hours a day. National Suicide Prevention Lifeline, 1-800-273-TALK (8255) or https://suicidepreventionlifeline.org.  SAMHSA addiction and mental health treatment Referral Helpline, 1-877-SAMHSA7 (1-877-726-4727) and https://www.samhsa.gov Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

What is in the This Week in Science Podcast? This Week:  Vera's First Look, Dragons, Fertility. Anthrobots, Vascular Organoids, Orcas, Octopi, Car T, Type 1 Cure, Ears, Glow Brains, Morning Chorus, and Much More Science! Become a Patron! Check out the full unedited episode of our podcast on YouTube or Twitch. Remember that you can […] The post 25 June, 2025 – Episode 1020 – The Future of Science Starts Now appeared first on This Week in Science - The Kickass Science Podcast.

Two-time Emmy and Three-time NAACP Image Award-winning television Executive Producer Rushion McDonald interviewed Janice Omadeke. Founder of The Mentor Method and author of Mentorship Unlocked: The Science and Art of Setting Yourself Up for Success. Here's a breakdown of the key highlights and takeaways:

In his weekly clinical update, Dr. Griffin with Vincent Racaniello are alarmed at how RFK is breaking his promise of not altering vaccine policies, and nonexistent data and studies are used by members of the ACIP to make changes to immunization practices in the absence of a CDC director, justification for not honoring the US commitment to GAVI and global public policies including support of routine childhood immunizations, placing millions of children at risk for the return of vaccine preventable diseases including polio outbreaks in Pappa New Guinea and increased circulation of wildtype type 1 poliovirus, before Dr. Griffin reviews recent statistics on RSV, influenza and SARS-CoV-2 infections, the Wasterwater Scan dashboard, approval of Merck's anti-RSV mRNA monoclonal antibody, whether or not the NB.1.8.1 should be included in the fall 2025 vaccines, immunization recommendations for COVID-19 vaccines, where to find PEMGARDA, changes in COVID mRNA vaccine labeling and reframing of the science around the vaccine, provides information for Columbia University Irving Medical Center's long COVID treatment center, where to go for answers to your long COVID questions, and contacting your federal government representative to stop the assault on science and biomedical research Subscribe (free): Apple Podcasts, RSS, email Become a patron of TWiV! Links for this episode Jake Scott (Stanford University) Vaccine Randomized control trials (Bradspellberg.com) Vaccine RCT spreadsheet aims to show the data, dispel myths about vaccines  (CIDRAP) Vaccines-rcts (Bradspellberg.com) CDC's upcoming vaccine advisory meeting set up to sow distrust in vaccines (CIDRAP) Next ACIP meeting (CDC: ACIP) June meeting: MEETING OF THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON IMMUNIZATION PRACTICES (ACIP) (CDC: ACIP agenda) Robert F Berman, PhD (UC Davis Health: Department of Neurological Surgery) Transparency = nonexistent data: CDC advisers appears to cite nonexistent study to support claims about risk of vaccine preservative (CNN) A C.D.C. Committee Just Voted Against Flu Shots With This Preservative. Is It Safe? (NY Times) CDC vaccine advisory committee to review long-approved immunizations (STAT News) Newly appointed CDC vaccine advisory committee holds first meeting, stirs more controversy (CIDRAP) FDA approves clesrovimab to protect infants during first RSV season (Contemporary Pediatrics) ACIP updates: Committee recommends clesrovimab for RSV, reaffirms routine influenza vaccination (Contemporary Pediatrics) Susan Monarez (Wikipedia) Robert F Kennedy Jr (Wikipedia) Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (Wikipedia) Who is in charge at the CDC (CDC: About CDC) Do children REALLY need to be vaccinated? (Wall Street Journal) U.S. Adults' Views on Routine Childhood Vaccination (Harvard Opinion Research Program) RFK Jr. declares US withdrawal from GAVI (YouTube) Kennedy Withdraws U.S. Funding Pledge to International Vaccine Agency (NY Times) Millions of children at risk as global vaccine rates fall (Guardian) Global, regional, and national trends in routine childhood vaccination coverage from 1980 to 2023 with forecasts to 2030 (LANCET) Polio this week: 47 WPV1 positive environmental samples this week! (GPEI) H5 bird flu: current situation (CDC: Avian Influenza) Cambodia logs fifth death from H5N1 avian flu as USDA weighs poultry vaccination (CIDRAP) Cambodia reports 6th H5N1 bird flu case this year(BNO News) USDA develops potential plan to vaccinate poultry for bird flu (Reuters) Wastewater for measles (WasterWater Scan) Measles cases and outbreaks (CDC Rubeola) Weekly measles and rubella monitoring (Government of Canada) Measles vaccine recommendations from NYP (jpg) Measles (WHO) Get the FACTS about measles (NY State Department of Health) Measles (CDC Measles (Rubeola)) Measles vaccine (CDC Measles (Rubeola)) Presumptive evidence of measles immunity (CDC) Contraindications and precautions to measles vaccination (CDC) Measles (CDC Measles (Rubeola)) Measles (CDC: Measles Rubeola) Adverse events associated with childhood vaccines: evidence bearing on causality (NLM) Measles Vaccination: Know the Facts(ISDA: Infectious Diseases Society of America) Deaths following vaccination: what does the evidence show (Vaccine) Influenza: Waste water scan for 11 pathogens (WastewaterSCan) US respiratory virus activity (CDC Respiratory Illnesses) Respiratory virus activity levels (CDC Respiratory Illnesses) Weekly surveillance report: clift notes (CDC FluView) FDA-CDC-DOD: 2025-2046 influenza vaccine composition (FDA) RSV: Waste water scan for 11 pathogens (WastewaterSCan) US respiratory virus activity (CDC Respiratory Illnesses) RSV-Network (CDC Respiratory Syncytial virus Infection) Novel Drug Approvals for 2025 (FDA) Waste water scan for 11 pathogens (WastewaterSCan) COVID-19 deaths (CDC) COVID-19 national and regional trends (CDC) COVID-19 variant tracker (CDC) SARS-CoV-2 genomes galore (Nextstrain) Antigenic and Virological Characteristics of SARS-CoV-2 Variant BA.3.2, XFG, and NB.1.8.1 (biRxiV) Episode 184: Fool's Gold: Reframing the Science…..reframing? (Apple Podcasts: Osterholm Update) Children with Post COVID-19 Multisystem Inflammatory Syndrome Display Unique Pathophysiological Metabolic Phenotypes (Journal of Proteome Research) FDA COVID mRNA vaccine labeling update (FDA) Where to get pemgarda (Pemgarda) EUA for the pre-exposure prophylaxis of COVID-19 (INVIYD) Infusion center (Prime Fusions) CDC Quarantine guidelines (CDC) NIH COVID-19 treatment guidelines (NIH) Drug interaction checker (University of Liverpool) Infectious Disease Society guidelines for treatment and management (ID Society) Molnupiravir safety and efficacy (JMV) Convalescent plasma recommendation for immunocompromised (ID Society) What to do when sick with a respiratory virus (CDC) Managing healthcare staffing shortages (CDC) Steroids,dexamethasone at the right time (OFID) Anticoagulation guidelines (hematology.org) Daniel Griffin's evidence based medical practices for long COVID (OFID) Long COVID hotline (Columbia : Columbia University Irving Medical Center) The answers: Long COVID Stellate Ganglion Block for the Treatment of COVID-19−Induced Parosmia (JAMA Otolaryngology-Head& Neck Surgery) Reaching out to US house representative Letters read on TWiV 1230 Dr. Griffin's COVID treatment summary (pdf) Timestamps by Jolene Ramsey. Thanks! Intro music is by Ronald Jenkees Send your questions for Dr. Griffin to daniel@microbe.tv Content in this podcast should not be construed as medical advice.

Your intrepid hosts, Ben Creighton and Kenny Windorski, have meticulously ranked Batman: The Animated Series, The New Batman Adventures, Superman: The Animated Series, Matlock, Batman Beyond, Murder She Wrote, and Justice League with unimpeachable SCIENCE! After a science-free year with Static Shock, now we're back to SCIENCE with Justice League Unlimited!Join us on Discord at ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠bit.ly/LandOfTheBlind⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Get your own Justice League Cold Open Bingo card and play along: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://bingobaker.com/#64c7bfe36e604708⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠The List: 1.) A Better World2.) Starcrossed3.) Fearful Symmetry4.) Secret Origins5.) Murder She Wrote - The Death of Sherlock Holmes6.) Savage Time7.) Kid Stuff8.) A Knight of Shadows9.) In Blackest Night10.) The Enemy Below11.) Hereafter12.) Wild Cards13.) For the Man Who Has Everything14.) Initiation15.) Comfort and Joy16.) Only a Dream17.) The Greatest Story Never Told18.) Eclipsed19.) Tabula Rasa20.) Twilight21.) The Brave and the Bold22.) Paradise Lost23.) Ultimatum24.) Legends25.) Injustice For All26.) War World27.) The Return28.) This Little Piggy29.) Secret Society30.) Maid of Honor31.) Hawk & Dove32.) Fury33.) Hearts and Minds34.) The Terror Beyond35.) Metamorphosis36.) Dark Heart

* A Whole Lot Moore: Peter W. Moore, PhD is a Christian master metallurgist listed as "inventor" in patents held by Hughes Aircraft and U.S. Steel. Pete began speaking to Churches on Science and Evolution in 1970. His more recent work has been to help fund organizations that do scientific creation research and those who present that evidence to the public.    * Aether or: ...relative nonsense. Hear a brief history, and then, not only criticisms of, but an alternate theory to Einstein's rather ridiculous postulates regarding time and space. Hear how Einstein not only dethroned Newtonian physics, but how his relativistic thinking has infected the minds of otherwise relatively smart creationists!    * Simhony/EPOLA: Menahem Simhony is the father of a scientifically satisfactory description of what space might be made of. And EPOLA means "Electron/Positron Lattice." You'll have to listen to all 4 parts of the interview to form your opinion on whether or not it makes more sense to you than Einstein's "purely mathematical" description of a relativistic universe.   * Deriving $10,000.00: ...and quite possibly a Nobel prize! RSR and Dr. Moore are offering a prize of $10,000.00 to the first person to submit an acceptable technical derivation of the Gravitational Constant “G” based on the Natural Physics and Structure of the Simhony/EPOLA Model of the Space Vacuum. (Pre-register this prize right here).

Cristina Gomez breaks down statements in a recent news piece by Luis Elizondo, Jeremy Corbell, and George Knapp, related to UFO revelations and the battle for UAP disclosure within and outside the Government, and other related news updates.Welcome to my channel, your premier source for the latest UFO and UAP news, in-depth reports, and expert analysis. We provide up-to-the-minute coverage of government disclosures, whistleblower testimonies, and unexplained sightings from around the world. My channel is dedicated to uncovering the truth behind alleged extraterrestrial phenomena and exploring the ongoing battle for UFO disclosure. Join me as I delve into the mysteries of UFOs and deliver comprehensive insights into ufology. Subscribe now to stay informed and join our community of truth-seekers!0:00 - NewsNation UFO Revelations Intro1:56 - ARROW Admits Fabricating UFO Stories3:21 - Knapp's Three Key Questions5:09 - UFO Collides with Military Jet6:10 - FBI Outperforms Pentagon Program7:25 - Underwater UFOs Move at Sonic Speed8:26 - Carter's Secret UFO Conversation9:52 - Congressional UFO Disclosure Push10:31 - Multi-Layered Deception ExposedBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/strange-and-unexplained--5235662/support.

* A Whole Lot Moore: Peter W. Moore, PhD is a Christian master metallurgist listed as "inventor" in patents held by Hughes Aircraft and U.S. Steel. Pete began speaking to Churches on Science and Evolution in 1970. His more recent work has been to help fund organizations that do scientific creation research and those who present that evidence to the public.    * Aether or: ...relative nonsense. Hear a brief history, and then, not only criticisms of, but an alternate theory to Einstein's rather ridiculous postulates regarding time and space. Hear how Einstein not only dethroned Newtonian physics, but how his relativistic thinking has infected the minds of otherwise relatively smart creationists!    * Simhony/EPOLA: Menahem Simhony is the father of a scientifically satisfactory description of what space might be made of. And EPOLA means "Electron/Positron Lattice." You'll have to listen to all 4 parts of the interview to form your opinion on whether or not it makes more sense to you than Einstein's "purely mathematical" description of a relativistic universe.   * Deriving $10,000.00: ...and quite possibly a Nobel prize! RSR and Dr. Moore are offering a prize of $10,000.00 to the first person to submit an acceptable technical derivation of the Gravitational Constant “G” based on the Natural Physics and Structure of the Simhony/EPOLA Model of the Space Vacuum. (Pre-register this prize right here).  

This week, Chris and Matt return for an emergency deep dive on Operation Midnight Hammer, the largest US strike on Iran since 1979. They break down what the bombing raid and actually achieved, why initial White House claims of “obliterating” Iran's nuclear program don't hold up to scrutiny, and what the intelligence community's more cautious battle damage assessments reveal. They also unpack the legal debate around preemptive strikes, Israel's unfinished campaign against Iran, and the risk of a new status quo in which these strikes become routine. Plus, Denis Villeneuve takes on Bond, and Chris dares to revisit the great “blonde Bond” panic of 2005. Subscribe and share to stay ahead in the world of intelligence, geopolitics, and current affairs. Please share this episode using these links Audio: https://pod.fo/e/2f0e51 YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RIM_ga7TiU8 Articles discussed in today's episode "Shifting Views and Misdirection: How Trump Decided to Strike Iran" by Mark Mazzetti, Jonathan Swan, Maggie Haberman, Eric Schmitt & Helene Cooper | The New York Times: https://www.nytimes.com/2025/06/22/us/politics/trump-iran-decision-strikes.html "Early US intel assessment suggests strikes on Iran did not destroy nuclear sites, sources say" by Natasha Bertrand, Katie Bo Lillis & Zachary Cohen | CNN: https://www.cnn.com/2025/06/24/politics/intel-assessment-us-strikes-iran-nuclear-sites "Strike Set Back Iran's Nuclear Program by Only a Few Months, U.S. Report Says" by Julian E. Barnes, Helene Cooper, Eric Schmitt, Ronen Bergman, Maggie Haberman & Jonathan Swan | The New York Times: https://www.nytimes.com/2025/06/24/us/politics/iran-nuclear-sites.html "Israeli officials see 'significant' damage to Iran's nuclear facilities" by Barak Ravid & Zachary Basu | Axios: https://www.axios.com/2025/06/25/iran-nuclear-program-israel-damage-intelligence "In New Assessment, C.I.A. Chief Says U.S. Strikes ‘Severely Damaged' Iranian Program" by Julian E. Barnes, Mark Mazzetti & Maggie Haberman | The New York Times: https://www.nytimes.com/2025/06/25/us/politics/trump-iran-nuclear.html "Centrifuges at Fordo ‘No Longer Operational,' U.N. Nuclear Watchdog Head Says" by Aurelien Breeden | The New York Times: https://www.nytimes.com/2025/06/26/world/middleeast/centrifuges-fordo-damage-iran.html “Post-Attack Assessment of the First 12 Days of Israeli and U.S. Strikes on Iranian Nuclear Facilities” by David Albright & Spencer Faragasso | Institute for Science & International Security: https://isis-online.org/isis-reports/post-attack-assessment-of-the-first-12-days-of-israeli-strikes-on-iranian-nuclear-facilities "Questions on the Fordo Strike (Wonky)" by Cheryl Rofer | Lawyers, Guns, Money: https://www.lawyersgunsmoneyblog.com/2025/06/questions-on-the-fordo-strike-wonky "Everything We Just Learned About The GBU-57 Massive Ordnance Penetrator Strikes On Iran" by Joseph Trevithick | The War Zone: https://www.twz.com/air/gbu-57-massive-ordnance-penetrator-strikes-on-iran-everything-we-just-learned "Largest Patriot Missile Salvo In U.S. Military History Launched Defending Al Udeid Air Base Against Iranian Attack" by Howard Altman | The War Zone: https://www.twz.com/land/largest-patriot-salvo-in-u-s-military-history-launched-defending-al-udeid-air-base-against-iranian-missiles Support Secrets and Spies Become a “Friend of the Podcast” on Patreon for £3/$4: https://www.patreon.com/SecretsAndSpies Buy merchandise from our Redbubble shop: https://www.redbubble.com/shop/ap/60934996 Subscribe to our YouTube page: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCDVB23lrHr3KFeXq4VU36dg For more information about the podcast, check out our website: https://secretsandspiespodcast.com Connect with us on social media Bluesky: https://bsky.app/profile/secretsandspies.bsky.social Instagram: https://instagram.com/secretsandspies Facebook: https://facebook.com/secretsandspies Spoutible: https://spoutible.com/SecretsAndSpies Follow Chris and Matt on Bluesky: https://bsky.app/profile/chriscarrfilm.bsky.social https://bsky.app/profile/mattfulton.net Secrets and Spies is produced by F & P LTD. Music by Andrew R. Bird Photos by USAF Secrets and Spies sits at the intersection of intelligence, covert action, real-world espionage, and broader geopolitics in a way that is digestible but serious. Hosted by filmmaker Chris Carr and writer Matt Fulton, each episode examines the very topics that real intelligence officers and analysts consider on a daily basis through the lens of global events and geopolitics, featuring expert insights from former spies, authors, and journalists.

It happens in Washington D.C. all the time but also in state legislatures, political decisions are often made down the party lines with members voting with the official policy or opinion of one's political party. What happens when those policies work for cities but not for the rural districts of a state? That challenge could not be showcased better than in Washington State, which ranks second in the nation for agricultural production but also has cities like Seattle and Spokane to care for. FOX's Tonya J. Powers speaks with Washington State Senator Drew MacEwen (R) who says there is a balancing act in meeting the needs and interests of rural areas in a state and its cities, and he also shares plenty of reasons to visit his beautiful state. Click Here⁠⁠⁠⁠ To Follow 'The FOX News Rundown: Evening Edition' Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Are we addicted… to revenge? Neil deGrasse Tyson, Chuck Nice, and Gary O'Reilly break down the neuroscience behind revenge-seeking, what motivates violence, and how science can help stop it with James Kimmel Jr., lawyer, psychiatry lecturer at Yale School of Medicine, and author of “The Science of Revenge.” NOTE: StarTalk+ Patrons can listen to this entire episode commercial-free here: https://startalkmedia.com/show/the-science-of-revenge-with-james-kimmel-jr/Thanks to our Patrons Daniel D., Wendi Su, Jim, Patrick Johnson, Lyleblakeo, Anabel del Val, Alex P, Harry Peters jr, Scott Syme, Katie Littman, Jarrett Rice, James, Mindy Graulich, Bart, John Dragicevich, Michelle Gerez, Renee A Chen, Sarthak Misra, Drew and Bobbi Monks, Nina Kattwinkel, Emir Tenic, Tyler Kunkel, Matt Baldwin, jscribble, Tore Aslaksen, Melina Morgan, kenneth cooke, Dale Ireen Goldstein, Christopher Arnold, Etienne moolman, Daniel S. Hall, Quillan, Jeff Whitacre, Jeremy Schmidt, Brian Reed, Frank, Micheal Trager, Irene, Robert Tillinghast, HeWhoQueries, Samantha, Laura knight lucas, Amagerikaner, Webb Peterson, Jeramiah Keele, Joe Quintanilla, kent simon, Tim Albertson, Fallon Cohen, John Terranova, Phinphan77, yocheved Devehcoy, Lasha Kanchaveli, and Nalini Martin for supporting us this week. Subscribe to SiriusXM Podcasts+ to listen to new episodes of StarTalk Radio ad-free and a whole week early.Start a free trial now on Apple Podcasts or by visiting siriusxm.com/podcastsplus.

In this episode of Quah (Q & A), Sal, Adam & Justin answer four Pump Head questions drawn from last Sunday's Quah post on the @mindpumpmedia Instagram page.  Mind Pump Fit Tip: 6 controversial muscle-building & fat-burning tips. (1:24) HMB for muscle-building. (20:37) Free weights vs machines. (26:55) Fun table topic starters for deep conversations. (28:52) The Shilajit reviews are in. (48:22) Bacteria vs. virus. (51:28) #Quah question #1 – People are always talking about having trouble connecting with their glutes, but I have a bigger problem connecting with my pecs. Any recommendations? (55:06) #Quah question #2 – When getting home late, is it better to go to bed asap and get good sleep or eat a late-night meal and hit protein? (58:20) #Quah question #3 – I've injured myself a few times outside of the gym, especially my lower back, and it's limiting the exercises I can do. What's the best way to safely build those muscles back to where they should be, and to keep progressing in other areas while I do? (1:00:21) #Quah question #4 – Should I use squat shoes to improve my range of motion in squats? (1:02:34) Related Links/Products Mentioned Visit Legion Athletics for the exclusive offer for Mind Pump listeners! ** Code MINDPUMP for 20% off your first order (new customers) and double rewards points for existing customers. ** Visit Organifi for the exclusive offer for Mind Pump listeners! **Promo code MINDPUMP at checkout for 20% off** June Special: Shredded Summer Bundle or Bikini Bundle 50% off! ** Code JUNE50 at checkout ** Mind Pump #2405: The 5 Intermittent Fasting Mistakes Causing Weight Gainv Effects of different stretching exercises on hamstring flexibility and performance in long term HMB benefits, dosage, and side effects - Examine Oral Supplementation with Beta-hydroxy-beta-methylbutyrate, Arginine, and Glutamine Improves Lean Body Mass in Healthy Older Adults TableTopics Dinner Party Question Card Game - 135 Entertaining Conversation Starter Cards for Dinner Table with Adult Friends, Getting to Know You Game. Justin's Road to 315 Push Press The 5 Love Languages: The Secret to Love that Lasts Mind Pump #1912: The Science of Successful Marriages & Relationships With Drs. John and Julie Gottman Visit Brain.fm for an exclusive offer for Mind Pump listeners. ** Get 30 days of free access to science-backed music. ** Mind Pump #2540: Ranking the Top 5 Ways to Build Your Chest How to Build A STRONG Back | Mind Pump 1972 - YouTube Adam Schafer's DEEP Squat Mobility Secrets | Behind The Scenes at Mind Pump Mind Pump Podcast – YouTube Mind Pump Free Resources People Mentioned Drew Canole (@drewcanole) Instagram  

Since January, the National Institutes of Health (NIH) has made sweeping cuts to science. It's hard to keep track of how many research grants were canceled, but they add up to hundreds of millions—possibly billions—of dollars of research funding lost. Some scientists, like Dr. Katie Edwards, are taking the fight to the courts. Edwards studies interpersonal violence at the University of Michigan, and she speaks with Host Flora Lichtman about why she's suing the NIH.Guest: Dr. Katie Edwards is the director of the Interpersonal Violence Research Laboratory and a professor of social work at the University of Michigan. She studies violence against marginalized communities.Transcripts for each episode are available within 1-3 days at sciencefriday.com. Subscribe to this podcast. Plus, to stay updated on all things science, sign up for Science Friday's newsletters.

Ever wondered why some spices burn your throat while others tickle your nose? Or why some of us live for spicy foods while others sweat at the mere thought of a habanero? How do pickles stay crunchy if they're sitting in brine for weeks on end? And why do we have such different food preferences from our friends? We're answering your food questions with chef and author Kenji López-Alt, author of the kids book Every Night is Pizza Night and co-host of The Recipe.Download our learning guides:  PDF | Google Slide

Tim Friede has allowed himself to be bitten by venomous snakes more then 200 times. As a result, his blood has helped scientists concoct a new antibody cocktail that could save thousands of lives. Jeff and Anthony discuss how to classify Tim's contributions to science.Link to the story: https://www.npr.org/sections/goats-and-soda/2025/05/02/nx-s1-5381017/snake-bite-venom-antivenom-tim-friede-universalSupport the show and get bonus episodes, videos, Discord community access and more! http://patreon.com/wehaveconcernsJeff on Blue Sky: https://bsky.app/profile/jeffcannata.bsky.socialAnthony on Blue Sky: https://bsky.app/profile/acarboni.bsky.socialIf you've seen a story you think belongs on the show, share it on our Discord

This bonus episode was originally posted on Patreon on September 30, 2022 titled "Silly Little Bonus Pod."Original Patreon description: The Tangents team is back in know your team mode. Listen along to more great icebreakers and send us your answers in the discord!SciShow Tangents is on YouTube! Go to www.youtube.com/scishowtangents!And go to https://complexly.store/collections/scishow-tangents to buy some great Tangents merch!While you're at it, check out the Tangents crew on socials:Ceri: @ceriley.bsky.social@rhinoceri on InstagramSam: @im-sam-schultz.bsky.social@im_sam_schultz on InstagramHank: @hankgreen on X

In this episode, I'm joined by James Kimmel Jr. JD, a lecturer in psychiatry at the Yale School of Medicine and author of The Science of Revenge, to explore what the latest neuroscience tells us about revenge, grievance, and retaliation. We discuss how the brain's reward system becomes activated in response to perceived harm—often fueling cycles of conflict that begin in childhood. Together, we examine how understanding these mechanisms can help us teach our children to reframe grievances, regulate emotional responses, and move toward forgiveness, both in everyday sibling conflicts and larger social dynamics.I WROTE MY FIRST BOOK! Order your copy of The Five Principles of Parenting: Your Essential Guide to Raising Good Humans Here: https://bit.ly/3rMLMsLSubscribe to my free newsletter for parenting tips delivered straight to your inbox: draliza.substack.com Follow me on Instagram for more:@raisinggoodhumanspodcast Sponsors:Rylee & Cru: Visit ryleeandcru.com/raisinggoodhumans and use code HUMANS for 20% off your first orderBobbie: Bobbie is offering an additional 10% off on your purchase with the code:humans. Visit www.hibobbie.com to find the Bobbie formula that fits your journey.Venmo: Visit Venmo.me/debit to learn more and sign up todayWayfair: Head to Wayfair.com right now to shop a huge outdoor selectionWater Wipes: Visit WaterWipes.com to learn more about how Water Wipes effectively cleans with minimal ingredients that leave nothing behindBetterHelp: Our listeners get 10% off their first month at BetterHelp.com/HUMANSPhiladelphia Cream Cheese: Visit creamcheese.comPlease note that this episode may contain paid endorsements and advertisements for products and services. Individuals on the show may have a direct or indirect financial interest in products or services referred to in this episode.Produced by Dear Media.See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Alicia Brown from the Commercial Space Federation and Brittany Webster from the American Geophysical Union join the show to discuss NASA’s fiscal year 2026 budget proposal, which aims to slash the agency’s funding by nearly 25%, cut science by 47%, and reduce staffing to levels not seen since 1960. Discover more at: https://www.planetary.org/planetary-radio/fy2026-nasa-budget-discussionSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Story at-a-glance Long daytime naps and inconsistent nap durations were linked to significantly higher risks of early death, regardless of nighttime sleep quality or baseline health status People who regularly napped in the early afternoon or whose naps varied widely in length from day to day faced the greatest health risks, including cardiovascular and metabolic complications Research shows that naps longer than 30 minutes are associated with increased risks of death, cardiovascular disease, diabetes, and cancer, while short naps under 30 minutes offer cognitive benefits Among older women, daily napping raised the risk of all-cause mortality by 44%, and sleeping 10 or more hours per day raised death risk by 58%, even when other factors like illness and depression were accounted for Consistent short naps are far less risky than irregular or long naps; if your daytime sleep varies a lot or exceeds 30 minutes, it could be a warning sign of underlying inflammation, energy imbalance or circadian rhythm disruption

Although many seabirds utter groans and croaks, the Pigeon Guillemot produces a lovely series of trills and whistles. As part of their courtship, they fly side by side in large circles and loops, a perfectly synchronized flying act. These guillemots do not breed until they are between three and five years old. The male chooses a site in a crevice or cave, among boulders, under driftwood, on a wharf, or even in a pipe.More info and transcript at BirdNote.org.Want more BirdNote? Subscribe to our weekly newsletter. Sign up for BirdNote+ to get ad-free listening and other perks. BirdNote is a nonprofit. Your tax-deductible gift makes these shows possible. 

New music out today, Vince Neil thinks AI girls are real on X, and Jellyrool on role play. SCIENCE! New app can put you in outfits before you buy and a new drone the size of a mosquito.

Today's episode is from #782 that originally aired on Aug. 19, 2024. Drew Wahlgren is the VP and director of capital markets for MAG Capital Partners. MAG Capital specializes in sale lease backs, net lease investments, and various development projects throughout the US. Drew has been investing in real estate since 2011, and joined MAG Capital Partners in 2019 after 8 successful years as a risk analyst and program manager at Liberty Mutual Insurance. Prior to that experience at a large corporation, Drew had started his entrepreneurial experience at the age of 20, owning and operating a food and beverage distribution company for 6 years. Drew holds a Bachelor of Science in Finance from California State University at Hayward & resides in the Fort Worth, TX with his wife and three children. Connect with Drew: MAGCP.com | Drew@magcp.com Highlights: 2:25 - Drews BG / His Real Estate Start 11:40 - Drew's Business Model as an Investor 20:00 - Cap Rates 36:15 - Where The Market is Now   Recommended Resources: Accredited Investors, you're invited to Join the Cashflow Investor Club to learn how you can partner with Kevin Bupp on current and upcoming opportunities to create passive cash flow and build wealth. Join the Club! If you're a high net worth investor with capital to deploy in the next 12 months and you want to build passive income and wealth with a trusted partner, go to InvestWithKB.com for opportunities to invest in real estate projects alongside Kevin and his team.  Looking for the ultimate guide to passive investing? Grab a copy of my latest book, The Cash Flow Investor at KevinBupp.com.  Tap into a wealth of free information on Commercial Real Estate Investing by listening to past podcast episodes at KevinBupp.com/Podcast.

Watch Call me Back on YouTube: youtube.com/@CallMeBackPodcastCheck out Ark Media's other podcasts: For Heaven's Sake: lnk.to/rfGlrA‘What's Your Number?': lnk.to/rbGlvMFor sponsorship inquiries, please contact: callmeback@arkmedia.orgTo contact us and sign up for updates visit: arkmedia.org/Ark Media on Instagram: instagram.com/arkmediaorgDan on X: x.com/dansenorDan on Instagram: instagram.com/dansenorTo order Dan Senor & Saul Singer's book, The Genius of Israel: https://tinyurl.com/bdeyjsdnToday's Episode (Part I)On Saturday June 21st, the U.S. dropped 14, 30,000 pound bunker-buster bombs on Iran's three key nuclear sites: Natanz, Esfahan and the infamous Fordo, where 12 of the 14 bombs were dropped.Since the bombing of these three nuclear sites, which President Donald Trump said were “completely and totally obliterated,” there has been some speculation in the press  as to how much damage was actually done.While the world scrambles to figure out what was destroyed, what was damaged, and what was left intact, we are asking what was Iran's actual nuclear program and how was it built?To help answer those questions, we asked physicist and weapons expert David Albright, who is the President and Founder of the Institute for Science and International Security. David has written numerous books and assessments on nuclear weapons programs and has testified on multiple occasions on nuclear issues before the U.S. Congress. Check out David's work here: https://www.amazon.com/stores/author/B001HPEB5C/allbooks?ingress=0&visitId=1b1c48b5-d51b-4ce5-b43e-dc94a51aadec–CREDITS:ILAN BENATAR - Producer & EditorMARTIN HUERGO - Sound EditorMARIANGELES BURGOS - Additional EditingMAYA RACKOFF - Operations DirectorGABE SILVERSTEIN - ResearchYUVAL SEMO - Music Composer

Watch Call me Back on YouTube: youtube.com/@CallMeBackPodcastCheck out Ark Media's other podcasts: For Heaven's Sake: lnk.to/rfGlrA‘What's Your Number?': lnk.to/rbGlvMFor sponsorship inquiries, please contact: callmeback@arkmedia.orgTo contact us, sign up for updates, and access transcripts, visit: arkmedia.org/Ark Media on Instagram: instagram.com/arkmediaorgDan on X: x.com/dansenorDan on Instagram: instagram.com/dansenorTo order Dan Senor & Saul Singer's book, The Genius of Israel: https://tinyurl.com/bdeyjsdnToday's Episode (Part II):In the first part of our conversation, we talked about how Iran built its nuclear program and gave a history and scientific tutorial on how it was / could be done. In the second part, we talk about what is believed to be remaining after the Israeli and U.S. attacks. We welcome back to the show, Lahav Harkov who has been covering this topic in detail for Jewish Insider. David Albright, a physicist and world renowned expert and author on nuclear weapons, and the President and Founder of the Institute for Science and International Security, also joins us. Check out David's work here: https://www.amazon.com/stores/author/B001HPEB5C/allbooks?ingress=0&visitId=1b1c48b5-d51b-4ce5-b43e-dc94a51aadecCheck out Lahav's work at Jewish Insider here: https://jewishinsider.com/authors/lahav-harkov/–CREDITS:ILAN BENATAR - Producer & EditorMARTIN HUERGO - Sound EditorMARIANGELES BURGOS - Additional EditingMAYA RACKOFF - Operations DirectorGABE SILVERSTEIN - ResearchYUVAL SEMO - Music Composer

To close out Pride Month this week, we're sharing a special best of episode featuring stories about coming out in science!  Part 1: Science educator Charlie Cook experiments with coming out to students. Charlie Cook is a non-binary white settler on ancestral, unceded Musqueam, Squamish, and Tsleil-Waututh territory. They are a museum science interpreter with a BFA in Original Works from Cornish College of the Arts. Part 2: Marine biologist Shayle Matsuda adapts to his new identity as a transgender man while on assignment in the Philippines. Dr. Shayle Matsuda is a Research Biologist at the John G. Shedd Aquarium in Chicago, where he leads the Aquatic Microbial Ecology: Coral Reefs and Urban Freshwater Ecosystems research program. Shayle Matsuda's story originally aired on our podcast in November 2014. See details here. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Famed author, professor, and psychologist Scott Barry Kaufman and I discuss his journey from special needs to student to cognitive scientist—and beyond!https://www.youtube.com/c/ThePsychologyPodcast https://x.com/sbkaufman https://scottbarrykaufman.com Support this channel:https://www.paypal.me/benjaminboycehttps://cash.app/$benjaminaboycehttps://www.buymeacoffee.com/benjaminaboyce

The first images from the brand new Vera C. Rubin Observatory have finally been unveiled, and they show us the cosmos like never before. The camera captures so much detail that its first complete image contains about 10 million galaxies. Host Flora Lichtman talks with Dr. Federica Bianco about our dazzling new view of the night sky, how the camera works, and what cosmic mysteries it may reveal.See images from the telescope on our website.Guest: Dr. Federica Bianco is an astrophysicist at the University of Delaware and the deputy project scientist for the Vera C. Rubin Observatory.Transcripts for each episode are available within 1-3 days at sciencefriday.com.  Subscribe to this podcast. Plus, to stay updated on all things science, sign up for Science Friday's newsletters.

Details of Nephew Jalen Hurts second wedding (still no pics); Audra McDonald stuns at the Tonys; The Grammys change the rules; Adriana Smith, used as a human incubator, has finally been allowed to die; Andrew Cuomo is out; Realities and legalities of Portia's divorce settlement; R. Kelly ODs in prison; Diddy's employees were texting about a(n) (alleged) criminal conspiracy;  Barack Obama is minding his Black business;  PLUS: Former Cook County State's Attorney Kim Foxx returns to explain these “dropped” charges against Diddy. Thanks to our sponsor: This year, skip breaking a sweat AND breaking the bank. Get this new customer offer and your 3-month Unlimited wireless plan for just 15 bucks a month at mintmobile.com/ratchet. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices