Podcasts about stanford

Prepare for game-changing AI insights! Join Noelle Russell, CEO of the AI Leadership Institute and author of Scaling Responsible AI: From Enthusiasm to Execution. Noelle, an AI pioneer, shares her journey from the early Alexa team with Jeff Bezos, where her unique perspective shaped successful mindfulness apps. We'll explore her "I Love AI" community, which has taught over 3.4 million people. Unpack responsible, profitable AI, from the "baby tiger" analogy for AI development and organizational execution, to critical discussions around data bias and the cognitive cost of AI over-reliance.Key Moments: Journey into AI: From Jeff Bezos to Alexa (03:13): Noelle describes how she "stumbled into AI" after receiving an email from Jeff Bezos inviting her to join a new team at Amazon, later revealed to be the early Alexa team. She highlights that while she lacked inherent AI skills, her "purpose and passion" fueled her journey."I Love AI" Community & Learning (11:02): After leaving Amazon and experiencing a personal transition, Noelle created the "I Love AI" community. This free, neurodiverse space offers a safe environment for people, especially those laid off or transitioning careers, to learn AI without feeling alone, fundamentally changing their life trajectories.The "Baby Tiger" Analogy (17:21): Noelle introduces her "baby tiger" analogy for early AI model development. She explains that in the "peak of enthusiasm" (baby tiger mode), people get excited about novel AI models, but often fail to ask critical questions about scale, data needs, long-term care, or what happens if the model isn't wanted anymore.Model Selection & Explainability (32:01): Noelle stresses the importance of a clear rubric for model selection and evaluation, especially given rapid changes. She points to Stanford's HELM project (Holistic Evaluation of Language Models) as an open-source leaderboard that evaluates models on "toxicity" beyond just accuracy.Avoiding Data Bias (40:18): Noelle warns against prioritizing model selection before understanding the problem and analyzing the data landscape, as this often leads to biased outcomes and the "hammer-and-nail" problem.Cognitive Cost of AI Over-Reliance (44:43): Referencing recent industry research, Noelle warns about the potential "atrophy" of human creativity due to over-reliance on AI. Key Quotes:"Show don't tell... It's more about understanding what your review board does and how they're thinking and what their backgrounds are... And then being very thoughtful about your approach."  - Noelle Russell"When we use AI as an aid rather than as writing the whole thing or writing the title, when we use it as an aid, like, can you make this title better for me? Then our brain actually is growing. The creative synapses are firing away." Noelle Russell"Most organizations, most leaders... they're picking their model before they've even figured out what the problem will be... it's kind of like, I have a really cool hammer, everything's a nail, right?"  - Noelle RussellMentions:"I Love AI" CommunityScaling Responsible AI: From Enthusiasm to Execution - Noelle Russell"Your Brain on ChatGPT" - MIT Media LabPower to Truth: AI Narratives, Public Trust, and the New Tech Empire - StanfordMeta-learning, Social Cognition and Consciousness in Brains and MachinesHELM - A Reproductive and Transparent Framework for Evaluating Foundation ModelsGuest Bio: Noelle Russell is a multi-award-winning speaker, author, and AI Executive who specializes in transforming businesses through strategic AI adoption. She is a revenue growth + cost optimization expert, 4x Microsoft Responsible AI MVP, and named the #1 Agentic AI Leader in 2025. She has led teams at NPR, Microsoft, IBM, AWS and Amazon Alexa, and is a consistent champion for Data and AI literacy and is the founder of the "I ❤️ AI" Community teaching responsible AI for everyone.She is the founder of the AI Leadership Institute and empowers business owners to grow and scale with AI. In the last year, she has been named an awardee of the AI and Cyber Leadership Award from DCALive,  the #1 Thought Leader in Agentic AI, and a Top 10 Global Thought Leader in Generative AI by Thinkers360. Hear more from Cindi Howson here. Sponsored by ThoughtSpot.

It's also a 3-day event, and we won't see Bill Belichick until Day 3 from Charlotte… Today, commissioner Jim Phillips speaks, and we'll also hear from Miami, SMU, Stanford, Cal and Virginia Show Sponsored by SANDHILLS GLOBALOur Sponsors:* Check out Hims: https://hims.com/EARLYBREAKAdvertising Inquiries: https://redcircle.com/brandsPrivacy & Opt-Out: https://redcircle.com/privacy

Trailblazer in biomimicry, Dr. Capella Kerst, joins us to share her inspiring journey from Stanford mechanical engineering PhD student to founder of geCKo Materials, a company revolutionizing industries with its nature-inspired Dry Adhesive technology. Learn how Dr. Kerst's fascination with gecko feet led to a breakthrough that is not only impacting fields like space exploration and dentistry but is also redefining the future of industrial materials. Her story is a testament to innovation born from simplicity, starting from her mom's garage and quickly capturing the intrigue and support of investors. Dr. Capella Kerst is an entrepreneur and engineer leading sustainable innovation as the founder of geCKo Materials. Inspired by nature's genius, she developed the groundbreaking geCKo Materials Dry Adhesive (gMDA) technology, which is revolutionizing industries from space exploration to manufacturing. Driven by a passion for biomimicry and social impact, she is committed to building a greener future and mentoring the next generation of changemakers in STEM. In this episode, you'll hear about: Dr. Capella Kerst's journey from Stanford PhD student to founder of geCKo Materials Breakthrough in Dry Adhesive technology inspired by gecko feet, revolutionizing industries like space exploration and dentistry Overcoming startup challenges as a solo founder, securing investments, and collaborating with major industry players like TSMC, Samsung, and Intel geCKo Materials' commitment to ethical entrepreneurship as a Public Benefit Corporation focused on societal and environmental welfare Pioneering space debris cleanup efforts in collaboration with NASA, including participation in REACH and Astrobee projects geCKo Materials' innovative approach to manufacturing and sustainability, aiming to be the next industrial Velcro Follow and Review: We'd love for you to follow us if you haven't yet. Click that purple '+' in the top right corner of your Apple Podcasts app. We'd love it even more if you could drop a review or 5-star rating over on Apple Podcasts. Simply select “Ratings and Reviews” and “Write a Review” then a quick line with your favorite part of the episode. It only takes a second and it helps spread the word about the podcast. Supporting Resources: Linkedin - https://www.linkedin.com/in/capellak/ https://www.linkedin.com/company/geckomaterials www.geckomaterials.com  info@geckomaterials.com https://www.alcorn.law/podcast/sap225/  https://www.alcorn.law/podcast/sap185/ Alcorn Immigration Law: Subscribe to the monthly Alcorn newsletter Sophie Alcorn Podcast: Episode 16: E-2 Visa for Founders and Employees Episode 19: Australian Visas Including E-3 Episode 20: TN Visas and Status for Canadian and Mexican Citizens Immigration Options for Talent, Investors, and Founders Immigration Law for Tech Startups eBook

Last week's public disclosure that a gene therapy from Sarepta had caused a third death led FDA to ask the company to stop distributing its DMD gene therapy Elevidys, a move the biotech has resisted. The deaths, and disputes between FDA and Sarepta, raise questions about the future of AAV gene therapies, as well as the future of FDA's platform technology designation. On the latest BioCentury This Week podcast, BioCentury's analysts unpack the events surrounding Sarepta's gene therapies and discuss how FDA, industry and patient groups should come together to learn the lessons from the tragic, avoidable deaths.BioCentury's analysts also assess Monday's appointment of Stanford professor and biotech executive George Tidmarsh to lead FDA's Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, and check in on the latest trends in venture financings. This episode of BioCentury This Week is sponsored by IQVIA Biotech.View full story: https://www.biocentury.com/article/656537#biotech #biopharma #pharma #lifescience #GeneTherapy #AAVTherapy #Sarepta #Elevidys00:01 - Sponsor Message: IQVIA Biotech02:03 - Gene Therapy17:59 - Leading CDER27:00 - Venture ReportTo submit a question to BioCentury's editors, email the BioCentury This Week team at podcasts@biocentury.com.Reach us by sending a text

In this wide-ranging Hoover History Lab discussion, Kleinheinz Senior Fellow Stephen Kotkin joins Research Fellow Dan Wang to explore the craft of history and its relevance to the present.  From his office in Hoover Tower, Kotkin reflects on his efforts to answer the big questions of history, guided by a methodology rooted in rigorous archival research, deliberate engagement with contradictory evidence, and a strategic approach to empathy in order to grasp the contexts and motivations that shape human choices at critical historical junctures. In constructing what he calls an “analytical narrative approach” with audiences, he explains how historians can apply their training and skills to show historical patterns, as well as illuminate drivers of change, relationships between structures and agency, and the workings of power: how it is accumulated, exercised, and leaves its mark on societies.  Wang and Kotkin talk about the enormous demand for historical understanding across society and sectors. In responding to that demand, Kotkin underscores the historian's responsibility to reach both scholarly and public audiences, the dangers of using “junk history” to inform policymaking, and the need for emerging scholars to engage thoughtfully with Artificial Intelligence.  The conversation closes with Kotkin's reflections about what historical perspective can show us about achieving sustained global peace and prosperity; details about his work and vision at the Hoover History Lab aimed at cultivating rising generations of scholars and meeting widespread public  demand for policy-relevant history; and his recommendations for five books that the audience should consider reading. ABOUT THE HOOVER HISTORY LAB The Hoover History Lab is not a traditional academic department but instead functions as a hub for research, teaching, and convening—in person and online, in the classroom and in print. The Lab studies and uses history to inform public policy, develops next-generation scholars, and reinforces the work of Hoover's world-class historians to inform scholarship and the teaching of history at Stanford and beyond. The Lab's work is driven by its principal investigators, who spearhead research and research-based policy projects. The Lab also encompasses a strong cohort of “staff scientist-equivalents”:  research fellows ranging from the most senior, world-renowned scholars to a full slate of exciting next-generation talents who bring fresh, multifaceted insights to our research. Rounding out our team, some of our postdoctoral scholars serve as research and teaching fellows, and we also leverage the talents of exceptional Stanford undergraduates as our student fellows, who participate in leading-edge research, just as in a scientific laboratory. This full-range approach to personnel, spanning all ages and levels of experience, ensures that the mission of the lab carries forward into the future and across to other institutions with a positive, powerful impact.

Ellin LolisHelping high achievers own their story, land their MBA, and lead with purpose.Ellin Lolis is the founder of Ellin Lolis Consulting, one of the most successful MBA admissions firms in the world, with a 98.9% success rate helping applicants get into top programs like Harvard, Stanford, Wharton, and beyond.But Ellin's work goes far beyond test scores and résumés. She's a master of storytelling, helping ambitious professionals find the clarity, confidence, and voice to not only land their dream MBA but also to build bold, purpose-driven careers after.A passionate writer turned entrepreneur, Ellin has built a seven-figure business by doing things differently: leading with honesty, prioritizing depth over polish, and redefining what leadership looks like, especially for women.Her insights have been featured in Fortune, Entrepreneur, and several business podcasts. Whether you're navigating your next career move, building a brand, or just craving a more honest conversation about ambition, Ellin brings sharp strategy and refreshing realness to the mic.Want to be a guest on Book 101 Review? Send Daniel Lucas a message on PodMatch, here: https://www.podmatch.com/hostdetailpreview/17372807971394464fea5bae3 Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

About 22% of adults age 65 and older reported volunteering in 2021, according to data from the U.S. Census Bureau, Current Population Survey, Volunteering and Civic Life Supplement. Around 22% of people in their 70s and 80s volunteer on a weekly basis, which is higher than the rate among older adults in their 50s.  This week on the Swimming Upstream Radio Show, we'll meet two people repelling for a cause and one who says public speaking is a path into lending a hand to people Repelling for a Cause Meet Jon Hubble, age 84, and Diane Malone, both members of a senior residential community,  They're choosing to raise money for an important project by repelling (that's dropping down with a rope).  Anyway, they'll be coming down the front of a four story building. They'll be back next month to tell us how it went.  Bil Lewis, Toastmasters Bil Lewis is a Computer Scientist and has worked in research and taught most of his life, most recently doing Genetics Research at MIT. He has taught at Stanford and Tufts Universities and worked for FMC, Sun Microsystems, and Nokia Data. Bil is a Past District Governor for Toastmasters (Eastern Massachusetts and Rhode Island), an Eagle Scout, a Returned Peace Corps Volunteer, and a Patriotic Citizen of the United States. Bil joined Toastmasters when his mother dragged him by the ear to a meeting after he graduated college. Bil discovered that being able to speak well in public was a very useful skill, which he was weak in. He has improved.  Using his speaking skills, Bil ran his own company for a decade, teaching and consulting in Computer Science. In 2015, Bil took on the persona of James Madison and began performing for schools, libraries, and conferences. As a District Governor, Bil got to practice his leadership skills. He had 50 direct reports and 3,000 members, with a budget of $50,000. He ran two major conferences and organized 100 contests and trainings. He learned a lot. All because of Toastmasters. Links: Bil Lewis on LinkedIn - https://www.linkedin.com/in/bil-lewis-4986314/ Toastmasters International - https://www.toastmasters.org Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

A new Craftwork conversation with Matthew Clark Davison and Alice LaPlante, co-authors of The Lab: Experiments in Writing Across Genre, available from W. W. Norton & Col. Davison is the author of Doubting Thomas and founder of The Lab, a generative writing workshop. He is emeritus faculty in Creative Writing at San Francisco State University, and lives in Oakland, California with his husband. LaPlante is the author of the craft book The Making of a Story and the New York Times best-selling novel Turn of Mind. She has taught creative writing at Stanford and San Francisco State University and lives in Mallorca, Spain, with her family. *** ⁠⁠Otherppl with Brad Listi⁠⁠ is a weekly literary podcast featuring in-depth interviews with today's leading writers. Available where podcasts are available: ⁠⁠Apple Podcasts⁠⁠, ⁠⁠Spotify⁠⁠, ⁠⁠YouTube⁠⁠, etc. Subscribe to ⁠⁠Brad Listi's email newsletter⁠⁠. ⁠⁠Support the show on Patreon⁠⁠ ⁠⁠Merch⁠⁠ ⁠⁠Instagram⁠⁠  ⁠⁠TikTok⁠⁠ ⁠⁠Bluesky⁠⁠ Email the show: letters [at] otherppl [dot] com The podcast is a ⁠⁠proud affiliate partner of Bookshop⁠⁠, working to support local, independent bookstores. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Dr Michael Eisenberg is a professor of Urology at Stanford, a urologic surgeon, and a leading expert in male fertility and reproductive medicine. It's no secret that global population decline is accelerating, but what's driving it? Male fertility might be a major piece of the puzzle. So why are so many men struggling with infertility and low testosterone, and what can be done to reverse it? Expect to learn why global sperm counts have declined by over 50% in the last 40 years, what the biggest determining factors that influence a man's sperm quality is, what men should do if they want to improve their sperm quality, what the relationship between age and fertility is for men and when fertility starts to drop off, if there is a relationship between sperm quality and there a relationship between alcohol, marijuana, smoking & vaping, what men can do to improve their testosterone, and much more… Sponsors: See me on tour in America: ⁠https://chriswilliamson.live⁠ See discounts for all the products I use and recommend: https://chriswillx.com/deals Get the brand new Whoop 5.0 at https://join.whoop.com/modernwisdom Sign up for a one-dollar-per-month trial period from Shopify at https://shopify.com/modernwisdom Get a Free Sample Pack of LMNT's most popular Flavours with your first purchase at https://drinklmnt.com/modernwisdom Extra Stuff: Get my free reading list of 100 books to read before you die: https://chriswillx.com/books Try my productivity energy drink Neutonic: https://neutonic.com/modernwisdom Episodes You Might Enjoy: #577 - David Goggins - This Is How To Master Your Life: https://tinyurl.com/43hv6y59 #712 - Dr Jordan Peterson - How To Destroy Your Negative Beliefs: https://tinyurl.com/2rtz7avf #700 - Dr Andrew Huberman - The Secret Tools To Hack Your Brain: https://tinyurl.com/3ccn5vkp - Get In Touch: Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/chriswillx Twitter: https://www.twitter.com/chriswillx YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/modernwisdompodcast Email: https://chriswillx.com/contact - Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Michael Smerconish speaks with Stanford political scientist Dr. James Fishkin about his groundbreaking book "Can Deliberation Cure the Ills of Democracy?" They explore how bringing diverse Americans together for civil, informed discussion—through experiments like America in One Room—can reduce polarization and lead to surprising consensus. A hopeful look at democratic reform in a divided age. Original air date 15 July 2025. The book was published on 3 July 2025.

Recorded live at the PSE-CEPR Policy Forum 2025.  Now that many of us work part or all our week at home, does that mean we want to move to a different area, or a larger house? And what is the effect on housing for those who cannot work from home? Morgane Richard of Stanford has researched how Londoners sought out new homes post-Covid to match their flexible work arrangements. She tells Tim Phillips what her models tell us about the long-run impact of their new working lives on house prices and rents for everyone living in, and on the edge of, the city.

The Education Minister is promising a school property agency (taking over management from the Ministry of Education) will pay for itself. Erica Stanford says using offsite manufacturing and repeatable designs from now, is reducing class build costs. She's announced plans for 137 new schoolrooms in Auckland. Stanford told Ryan Bridge cost efficiencies will pay for the new property agency. Stanford's also today announced plans to build 137 classrooms across 24 Auckland schools. LISTEN ABOVESee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

NLW explores a groundbreaking Stanford study of 15,000+ workers across 100+ occupations that reveals what employees actually want from AI. While 69% welcome AI automation, it's only for specific tasks—just 2% support full automation. Nearly half want AI to reduce repetitive work, but 41% of startups are building in the “red zone,” where workers reject AI tools. The study maps four zones of AI adoption: Green Light (high feasibility + worker demand), Red Light (feasible but unwanted), R&D Opportunity (wanted but not yet feasible), and Low Priority (neither feasible nor desired). Most importantly, 45% fear AI inaccuracy more than job loss, showing workers seek partnership—not replacement.Brought to you by:KPMG – Go to ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://kpmg.com/ai⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ to learn more about how KPMG can help you drive value with our AI solutions.Blitzy.com - Go to ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://blitzy.com/⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ to build enterprise software in days, not months AGNTCY - The AGNTCY is an open-source collective dedicated to building the Internet of Agents, enabling AI agents to communicate and collaborate seamlessly across frameworks. Join a community of engineers focused on high-quality multi-agent software and support the initiative at ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠agntcy.org ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠  ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Vanta - Simplify compliance - ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://vanta.com/nlw⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Plumb - The automation platform for AI experts and consultants ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://useplumb.com/⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠The Agent Readiness Audit from Superintelligent - Go to ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://besuper.ai/ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠to request your company's agent readiness score.The AI Daily Brief helps you understand the most important news and discussions in AI. Subscribe to the podcast version of The AI Daily Brief wherever you listen: https://pod.link/1680633614Subscribe to the newsletter: https://aidailybrief.beehiiv.com/Join our Discord: https://bit.ly/aibreakdownInterested in sponsoring the show? nlw@breakdown.network

July 16, 2025. Week 29. What is a natural history study (NHS)?  And why do we care? We care because we haven't done this before, heal those born with disease. Natural history studies, which examine the progression of a disease over time, can be either retrospective or prospective. Retrospective studies analyze existing data, like medical records, while prospective studies collect new data over time. Both types are valuable for understanding a disease's course and informing research and treatment strategies. ⁠NHS are critical for clinical trial design.  Size and Quality matter.  Validated scales are better than PROs regardless of what the current rhetoric is. What's going on now? USA - https://curesyngap1.org/resources/studies/syngap1-ProMMiS/ - 135+ over three sites, some with FOUR visits, and counting - Adding GCP - Collaborating with world class institutions and excellent clinicians at Stanford, Children's Colorado and, of course, CHOP. USA - https://Citizen.Health/partners/srf has almost 300 patients! Retrospective Health Data. USA - https://rare-x.org/syngap1/ is where we collect PROs. Australia - Dr. Sheffer is running a study, talk to her or Dani. Latin America - SYNGAP1 Argentina with others joining. Europe - https://www.patre.info/syngap1/  Key takeaways for Industry SYNGAP1 is well positioned to work with… Vlasskamp and Wiltrout are published, Citizen Health is growing & ProMMiS is truly exceptional – and growing, and Rare-X is collecting eight key PROs.   Additionally, there are significant international efforts in Australia, Latin America & Europe. Census: https://curesyngap1.org/blog/syngap1-census-2025-update-55-in-q2-2025-total-1636/  If you are in industry and thinking about starting another NHS for your asset, please don't.  Please instead partner with existing PAGs and NHS studies in your key geographies to move faster, have bigger N and not waste precious patients time, we need to accelerate drug development not slow it down by diluting patients and clinicians between too many studies. Baseline papers on SYNGAP1: 1998 - Huganir - SynGAP: a synaptic RasGAP that associates with the PSD-95/SAP90 protein family - https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/9581761/ 2009 - Michaud - Mutations in SYNGAP1 in autosomal nonsyndromic mental retardation - https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/19196676/ 2013 - Carvill - Targeted resequencing in epileptic encephalopathies identifies de novo mutations in CHD2 and SYNGAP1 - https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/23708187/ 2019 - Vlasskamp - SYNGAP1 encephalopathy: A distinctive generalized developmental and epileptic encephalopathy - https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30541864/ 2023 - Rong - Adult Phenotype of SYNGAP1-DEE - https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/38045990/ 2024 - Wiltrout - Comprehensive phenotypes of patients with SYNGAP1-related disorder reveals high rates of epilepsy and autism - https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/38470175/ Pubmed is at 28 (so less than one a week…) https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/?term=syngap1&filter=years.2025-2025&timeline=expanded&sort=date&sort_order=asc   CURE SYNGAP1 CONNECT https://curesyngap1.org/curesyngap1connect/   SHARE BLOOD TO THE SRF BIOBANK AT CB! Read here for more information: https://curesyngap1.org/blog/fueling-research-syngap1-combinedbrain-biorepository-roadshow/    VOLUNTEER  Join us: https://curesyngap1.org/volunteer-with-srf/    SOCIAL MATTERS - 4,238 LinkedIn.  https://www.linkedin.com/company/curesyngap1/  - 1,400 followers with 575 Videos on YouTube.  https://www.youtube.com/@CureSYNGAP1    - 11,302 Twitter https://twitter.com/cureSYNGAP1  - 46k Insta https://www.instagram.com/curesyngap1/    NEWLY DIAGNOSED? New families have resources here! https://syngap.fund/Resources      Podcasts, give all of these a five star review! https://cureSYNGAP1.org/SRFApple   https://podcasts.apple.com/us/channel/syngap1-podcasts-by-srf/id6464522917    Episode 175 of #Syngap10  #RareDisease #PatientAdvocacy #SYNGAP1 #SynGAP #ProMMiS

What if you could design the future — instead of reacting to it? In today's episode of Leveraging Thought Leadership, Peter Winick sits down with futurist and design strategist Lisa Kay Solomon to explore how leaders can use design thinking to actively shape what's next. Lisa is a Designer-in-Residence at Stanford's d.school, an educator, a bestselling author, and a respected voice on the Thinkers50 Radar list. She helps leaders and organizations make better long-term decisions in a short-term world. Her superpower? Turning vague uncertainty into actionable insight — by teaching leaders how to think like futurists. Lisa shares how she guides boards, conference planners, and executive teams through complex challenges. She doesn't just create better experiences — she builds capabilities that last. Whether it's designing strategic conversations or preparing teams to operate in ambiguity, Lisa brings a toolkit of creative, repeatable practices to move from stuck to strategic. If you've ever found yourself saying, “Yeah, but that would never happen here,” Lisa has a chapter — and a strategy — just for you. This conversation is packed with high-impact takeaways for those who want to lead with intention and design a future worth inhabiting. Three Key Takeaways: • Designing the Future Is a Teachable Skill Lisa argues that futures thinking isn't a mysterious talent—it's a learnable capability. Most leaders have been trained to focus on short-term goals. Lisa teaches them how to widen their lens, shift perspective, and think long-term using strategic design practices. • Great Ideas Need More Than Strategy—They Need Capability Organizations often bring Lisa in to spark innovation—whether at board meetings or large conferences. But the real value she delivers goes beyond a single event. She helps teams build the capabilities to sustain innovation, adapt to change, and continue asking the right questions long after she's gone. • Overcoming the “Yeah, Buts” That Block Progress Lisa names the top three “yeah, buts” that sabotage future thinking: short-term pressure, lack of resources, and not knowing how. Her approach disarms these mental blockers by reframing possibility as practical—and showing leaders how to move from reactive to proactive in shaping what's next. If you found Lisa Kay Solomon's insights on designing the future and building long-term leadership capabilities compelling, you won't want to miss our episode with Joseph Press: Thought Leadership for Future Thinking. Both Lisa and Joseph explore how leaders can move beyond short-term fixes to shape more intentional, future-ready organizations. While Lisa focuses on strategic conversations and capability building through design, Joseph dives into how thought leadership and digital transformation intersect to foster future thinking. Together, these episodes offer a powerful one-two punch for anyone looking to lead with clarity, creativity, and courage in uncertain times. Listen to both and equip yourself with the mindset and tools to not just predict the future—but actively shape it.

Tyler is joined by Isaac Schade of LockedOnHeels to discuss early national title favorites, UNC's roster 180, the Tar Heels' crucial x-factor and more.Later, a full history lesson on the entirety of Stanford basketball's existence.Follow the show on Twitter: @UpTheCoastsPod @tcrons21Follow Isaac: @isaacschade @LockedOnHeels @LockedOnCBB

The climate crisis is not a tragedy. It's a crime. The July 4 signing of HR1, is the latest if not the greatest climate crime considering the current state of the earth's energy imbalance or the ever-increasing amount of atmospheric GHG emissions that trap infrared radiation (heat) causing planetary warming. It's estimated the OBBBA will over just the next five years add an extra seven billion tons of GHG emissions into the atmosphere - equal to more than one-years' worth of total annual US carbon emissions. While it had been projected the US would reduce GHG emissions this decade by upwards of 43%, or get close us to a 50-52% reduction to align with the 2015 Paris Accord, the OBBBA will now reduce carbon emissions this decade by just 17%. The legislation rescinds virtually all IRA renewable energy tax credits while further subsidizing fossil fuels. Prof. Jacobson's considerable contribution to understanding and addressing climate breakdown can be found at: https://web.stanford.edu/group/efmh/jacobson/. Information regarding his most recent book, “No Miracles Needed” (U. of Cambridge Press, 2023), is at: https://web.stanford.edu/group/efmh/jacobson/WWSNoMN/NoMiracles.html. Prof. Jacobson's LinkeIn page is at: https://www.linkedin.com/in/mark-jacobson-1b58b38/. This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.thehealthcarepolicypodcast.com

¿Sabías que, en 1907, un médico midió 21 g al “peso del alma” justo en el instante de la muerte? ⚖️ Hoy no vamos a pesar almas, pero sí vamos a cartografiar la depresión: un vacío que, cuanto más hueco se vuelve, más pesa en nuestro día a día. En este episodio viajamos desde la leyenda de esos 21 gramos hasta la ciencia puntera de 2024, cuando la Universidad de Stanford identificó 6 biotipos cerebrales distintos de depresión y demostró que no todos los cerebros se deprimen igual. A lo largo de una hora de conversación combinamos historia, neurociencia y testimonios reales para iluminar: Qué es y qué NO es la depresión (spoiler: no es simple tristeza ni “falta de ganas”). Los factores biológicos, sociales y contextuales que la desencadenan y mantienen. El hallazgo de los marcadores cerebrales: desde la sobrecarga de la red por defecto (rumiación sin freno) hasta la “parálisis por análisis” de la corteza prefrontal. El biotipo “Insome” y cómo el insomnio desajusta tu reloj interno. El biotipo de la “Ola emocional”, donde la amígdala arde y cada estímulo se siente a 100 000 V. Estrategias prácticas: rTMS, ACT, DBT, cronoterapia, mindfulness… y cómo elegir la adecuada para TU biotipo. Te contaremos por qué Finlandia puede encabezar el ranking de países más felices y, aun así, luchar contra una tasa de suicidio elevada , y qué nos enseña eso sobre la diferencia entre “vida satisfactoria” y “bienestar emocional”. Al terminar el episodio: Sabrás describir tu propia experiencia con palabras precisas (¡o al menos sentirás que ya no estás solo!). Tendrás un mapa con las rutas terapéuticas mejor adaptadas a cada tipo de depresión. Contarás con una playlist de prácticas sencillas para activar tu ánimo incluso cuando la niebla sea densa. Recursos y comunidad (¡haz clic y acompáñanos!) Nuestro nuevo libro Nuestra escuela de ansiedad Visita nuestra web Facebook Instagram ▶️ YouTube AMADAG TV Palabras clave depresión,biotipos,Stanford,neurociencia,salud mental,21 gramos,Duncan MacDougall,DSM5,anhedonia,rutinas de sueño,rumiación,amígdala,corteza prefrontal,red por defecto,insomnio,terapia cognitiva,técnicas de mindfulness,ACT,TMS,antidepresivos,análisis neuroimagen,marcadores biológicos,La teoría de la mente,podcast psicología,AMADAG Hashtags #Depresión,#SaludMental,#Neurociencia,#LaTeoríaDeLaMente,#PodcastPsicología,#AMADAG 5 títulos atractivos para tu plataforma de podcasts 4 hábitos que te ayudarán a que la depresión pierda peso (¡y no son “pensar en positivo”!) ✨ Deja de luchar contra la tristeza así… y descubre por qué no funciona ⚠️ Esta forma de mirar tu cerebro cambiará para siempre el tratamiento de la depresión 5 cosas que nunca te contaron sobre la depresión… y que tu bienestar necesita saber ¿Y si tu tristeza fuera de otro “tipo”? Descubre el biotipo que está frenando tu ánimo ️ Pon los auriculares, pulsa play y acompáñanos en la investigación más humana de todas: la del alma que busca recuperar su luz.

What if AI is more than a tool? What if it's a toddler learning from us? In this mind-expanding episode of The Greatness Machine, futurist Elatia Abate joins Darius to explore the ethical and emotional dimensions of artificial intelligence. From the power of diverse voices shaping AI to how kindness in prompts can actually improve results, Elatia shares a bold vision of co-creating the future with technology. She also reflects on her personal journey—how pretending to be anything less than her full self held her back, and how authenticity unlocked her greatness. In this episode, Darius and Elatia will discuss: (00:00) Introduction and Personal Background (03:05) Cultural Heritage and Identity (05:57) Career Journey and Transition to Futurism (09:04) The Impact of Technology on Work (11:55) Education and Influences (15:14) The Role of Humanity in Leadership (18:08) Exploring the Future of Work (20:59) Navigating the Age of AI (25:32) The Rise of AI and Its Impact on Employment (30:37) Navigating the Future of Work (34:55) The Velocity of Change and Workforce Displacement (38:40) Societal Implications of AI and Automation (41:57) Reimagining Value Creation in the Age of AI (48:04) Consciousness and AI: A New Frontier (53:57) The Importance of Diverse Voices in AI Development Elatia Abate is a globally recognized entrepreneur and futurist on a mission to revolutionize leadership in the Age of AI. Named a Forbes leading female futurist, she serves as Futurist in Residence at Paylocity and is the creator of Future-Led Leadership™️, a framework used by organizations such as Verizon, Deloitte, and GMAC. A sought-after keynote speaker and TEDx presenter, Elatia has shared insights on the future of work, leadership, and resilience with audiences from Citi to SHRM. Formerly an HR executive at Anheuser-Busch InBev and Dow Jones, she is also the author of Build a Career You Love and a featured expert in work with Tony Robbins and Trevor Noah. Elatia teaches at Stanford, the University of Chicago Booth School of Business, and LinkedIn Learning. Sponsored by: Constant Contact: Try Constant Contact free for 30 days at constantcontact.com. IDEO U: Enroll today and get 15% off sitewide at ideou.com/greatness.  Indeed: Get a $75 sponsored job credit to boost your job's visibility at Indeed.com/darius. Shopify: Sign up for a $1/month trial period at shopify.com/darius.  Connect with Elatia: Website: https://elatiaabate.com/ LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/elatiaabate  Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/elatiaabate/  Connect with Darius: Website: https://therealdarius.com/ Linkedin: https://www.linkedin.com/in/dariusmirshahzadeh/ Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/imthedarius/ YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@Thegreatnessmachine  Book: The Core Value Equation https://www.amazon.com/Core-Value-Equation-Framework-Limitless/dp/1544506708 Write a review for The Greatness Machine using this link: https://ratethispodcast.com/spreadinggreatness.  Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Think burnout is a badge of honor? Think again. In this eye-opening episode, high-performance coach Lisa Goldenthal breaks down the real reason high-achievers burn out—and it's not because they're working too hard.

The future of creativity is shifting—fast. And for the first time, humans aren't the only ones leading the way. New studies from Stanford and MIT reveal how AI is already transforming creative work. In this video, we break down the top 3 takeaways every creative needs to know to stay ahead. ============================= Table of Contents: ============================= 0:00 - Intro 1:00 - Takeaway #1: The AI Revolution Is Backwards 13:06 - Takeaway #2: Trust Is The Biggest Roadblock 20:27 - Takeaway #3: Creative Bankruptcy IMPORTANT LINKS - Future of Work with AI Agents: https://bit.ly/4lzlPnc - Your Brain On Chatgpt: https://bit.ly/4nyRHKn - Threads, Podcast Video Studio, & AI Policy For Churches: https://youtu.be/hngpsILIL8I THE 167 NEWSLETTER

Welcome to The Times of Israel's Daily Briefing, your 20-minute audio update on what's happening in Israel, the Middle East and the Jewish world. New York reporter Luke Tress joins host Jessica Steinberg for today's episode. Tress discusses several universities dealing with issues of antisemitism and anti-Zionism, including Tuesday's hearing in Congress as Republican officials questioned the CUNY chancellor and presidents of Berkeley and Georgetown about foreign funding, support for terrorism on campus and harassment of Jewish students on campus, keeping up the Trump administration pressure. He also discusses a report on Israel studies programs in universities, as a Jerusalem think tank looked at the climate on campuses, including anti-Zionism activism on campus alongside rich discussion and a broad array of viewpoints in the classroom. Tress talks about mayoral candidate Zohran Mamdani and his threats to arrest Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu if he ever visited New York, as well as the current feud between New York City Mayor Eric Adams and Comptroller Brad Lander about a possible BDS conflict over New York's divestment from Israel bonds. He also mentions the 100-year-old Adirondacks synagogue that has persisted despite the dearth of Jews in the area and the history of Jewish immigrants in rural America. Check out The Times of Israel's ongoing liveblog for more updates. For further reading: US university heads grilled in Congress about anti-Israel terror support on campus Shai Davidai, an outspoken Israeli professor at Columbia, leaves the university Israeli postdoc sues Stanford for discrimination; university denies it Israel studies programs on US campuses are at a crisis point, report warns NYC hopeful Mamdani’s vow to arrest Netanyahu likely oversteps what US mayors can do NYC mayor feuds with comptroller over Israel bonds investments NY’s rural 120-year-old ‘Peddlers’ Synagogue’ charts new path — without a congregation Subscribe to The Times of Israel Daily Briefing on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, YouTube, or wherever you get your podcasts. This episode was produced by the Pod-Waves. IMAGE: FILE- Pro-Palestinian, anti-Israel protesters demonstrate on the campus of DePaul University, April 30, 2024, in Chicago. (AP Photo/Charles Rex Arbogast, file)See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Condoleezza Rice is a former U.S. Secretary of State and current director of Stanford's Hoover Institution. Rice joins Big Technology to discuss whether the United States can hold its technological edge as China races ahead in AI, batteries, and advanced manufacturing. Tune in to hear her candid take on the U.S.–China tech arms race, the ripple effects of chip export controls, and why she believes democracies are safer stewards of frontier technologies. We also cover the squeeze on university research funding, immigration-driven talent pipelines, and tuition-fueled class divides. Hit play for a data-rich, no-fluff conversation on the special sauce for the U.S. tech industry and the risks it faces in our current political environment. Learn more about the Hoover Technology Policy Accelerator here: https://www.hoover.org/research-teams/technology-policy-accelerator --- Enjoying Big Technology Podcast? Please rate us five stars ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐ in your podcast app of choice. Want a discount for Big Technology on Substack + Discord? Here's 25% off for the first year: https://www.bigtechnology.com/subscribe?coupon=0843016b Questions? Feedback? Write to: bigtechnologypodcast@gmail.com

Learn more about Michael Wenderoth, Executive Coach: www.changwenderoth.comEd Batista spent fifteen years as Lecturer and Leadership Coach at Stanford Business School, working in and teaching the highly popular course there, Interpersonal Dynamics – also known as “Touchy Feely.” In this episode of 97% Effective, host Michael Wenderoth talks with Ed about the influence that course had on Ed's coaching – and how course “T-groups” are a powerful laboratory to explore influence. They discuss why needers need to build emotional regulation and how many people confuse force and power – and confuse empathy with needing to be nice. By the end of this episode, you'll have a deeper understanding of core concepts in touchy feely – and why that doesn't imply you need to adopt a “touchy feely” leadership style.SHOW NOTES:How the Stanford course Interpersonal Dynamics (aka “Touchy Feely”) has influenced EdA short history on Interpersonal dynamics (Kurt Lewin and “T-groups”)A source of power is developing close and connected relationships with peopleMagical black box, artificial setting, or great laboratory for exploring interpersonal communication, influence and power? Michael and Ed debate T-groupsThe benefit of structured reflectionEd is not advocating a “touch feely” leadership style – but he does stress the importance of emotional regulationAre you willing to understand and explore your feelings?Confusing force and powerConfusing empathy with being nice (or with not holding people accountable)The need to understand what another person is feelingMichael and Ed discuss empathy vs perspective taking – is the difference a nuance, and does that matter?EdBot (the large language model built on Ed's blog) and Swiss watchesHow should coaches take advantage of AI tools, what differentiates human coaches?A man and his dog.. the common connection: Buster (Great Pyrenees mix) is to Ed what and Manchas (Spanish Mastin mix) is to Michael… BIO AND LINKS:Ed Batista has been an executive coach since 2006, working with senior leaders who are facing a challenge or would like to be more effective or fulfilled in their roles. He also spent 15 years as a Lecturer and Leadership Coach at the Stanford Graduate School of Business. Most of Ed's clients are technology company CEOs, but he works with leaders in fields from investing to healthcare. Issues he addresses with clients include managing relationships with key employees, improving leadership team dynamics, transitioning from technical expert to leader, evolving company culture, and better self-care. Ed's work as a coach began after a 15-year career in management, during which he took two years off to earn an MBA at Stanford and helped launch three new organizations. He writes about coaching and related issues at www.edbatista.com. Ed is married to Amy Wright, and they lived in San Francisco from 1990 to 2020, when they relocated to a farm 40 miles north of the city. In addition to his MBA, Ed earned a BA in History, magna cum laude, from Brown University.Previous episode with Ed and Michael EP120: Power Struggles Among Nice People: https://redcircle.com/shows/86fcd90d-083e-4af2-9bc8-6d52fb981ae1Ed's website and blog: https://www.edbatista.com/about.htmlKurt Lewin and T-groups: https://www.edbatista.com/2018/06/a-brief-history-of-t-groups.htmlProf Jeffrey Pfeffer at Stanford: https://jeffreypfeffer.comForce isn't Power: https://www.edbatista.com/2021/03/force-isnt-power.htmlTry out EdBot: https://www.edbatista.com/2025/04/ask-me-anything-anytime-the-ed-bot-20.html8000 Coaching Sessions Reflection: https://www.edbatista.com/2024/05/8000-coaching-sessions.html9000 Hours (Evolution of a Practice): https://www.edbatista.com/2025/03/9000-coaching-sessions-the-evolution-of-a-practice.html97% Effective, Now on video, here: https://www.youtube.com/@97PercentEffectiveMichael's Award-Winning book, Get Promoted: What Your Really Missing at Work That's Holding You Back https://tinyurl.com/453txk74Advertising Inquiries: https://redcircle.com/brandsPrivacy & Opt-Out: https://redcircle.com/privacy

Tom Mullaney is professor of history and of East Asian languages at Stanford, and he has one of the most awesomely nerdy areas of interest and research that I've seen in a long time: Chinese typewriters and early Chinese computers (not necessarily electronic)

Mike Johnston is the mayor of Denver. I like Mike though we probably only agree about half the time. I've been looking forward to this conversation and hope you find it informative. Tom Mullaney is professor of history and of East Asian languages at Stanford, and he has one of the most awesomely nerdy areas of interest and research that I've seen in a long time: Chinese typewriters and early Chinese computers (not necessarily electronic)And... hot dogs.

I've said it before, and I'll say it again: Erica Stanford is this Government's MVP. Once again, she is taking an inexplicably stupid thing in schools, ditching it, and going back to common sense. This is something close to my heart at the moment because I have to make a decision in the next six months or so about which school we send our son to. But I've basically already made the decision, and it will be the one school in the area that has single classes instead of open plan, modern learning spaces. It's the school his best friend from kindy is now going to. It's also the school another parent I know has just sent their child to. All of us are doing it for the same reason: we want to avoid open plan learning spaces. We know, like most parents know, that if you stick a hundred kids in a big room and tell them to pay attention to the teacher in front of them, they can't. They get distracted by the loud noises coming from the other kids over there. Why the Ministry of Education forced this in schools will probably baffle me for the rest of my life, because there is no logic to it. No one who has kids, or spends time with kids, can really believe kids can concentrate and learn with 100 voices chirping all the time. Which idiot came up with this? I'd love to know. I tell you what, the legacy of this Government could well be that it finally turns around our up-to-now decades long decline in education stats. That, along with the ban on phones in schools, and the hour a day of reading writing and maths, and the expectation that kids must pass existing standards, actually gives our kids a chance to learn as well as kids in any other developed country, like we used to. And if that is what happens, given how crucial education is to a country's success, Erica Stanford will remain as I see her: The MVP of this Government, if not of the decade. Or, of this generation. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

¿Sentís que intentas ahorrar, pero siempre hay algo que te lo impide?¿Te pasó alguna vez que cobras… y a los pocos días no sabes en qué se te fue el dinero?No estás solo. En México, Argentina y Colombia solo 30% de las personas alcanza el nivel mínimo de alfabetización financiera. Tenemos que manejar dinero todos los días y es clave para lograr nuestras metas, pero nadie nos enseña cómo hacerlo bien. ¡Y hay otro problema más! Tu mente está programada para gastar mal. Y si no lo entendés, vas a seguir tomando malas decisiones financieras... sin darte cuenta.En este episodio de Futuro en Construcción te muestro cómo funciona realmente tu cerebro cuando se trata de dinero:

Let's dive deep into the ACC's contenders and rebuilding projects in part two of our three-part conference preview. From Clemson's championship steam to Stanford's complete rebuild, we break down the teams at the top and bottom of the conference hierarchy. In this college football podcast episode, we debate whether Clemson is the clear conference favorite and discuss whether Cade Klubnik can take the next step. We examine Miami's Carson Beck experiment and defensive coordinator change, make the case for Pitt as a sleeper contender, and discuss SMU's inevitable step back after their magical 2024 run. Plus, we dive into Louisville's massive roster turnover, Georgia Tech's potential as a dangerous spoiler, and why both programs represent fascinating wild cards. We also look at Jake Dickert's fresh approach at Wake Forest and Stanford's complete overhaul with interim coach Frank Reich. Can Wake Forest find an offensive identity with Robbie Ashford? Will Stanford be competitive despite massive roster turnover? And which of these teams has the best chance to pull off an upset? This is your deep dive into the most compelling storylines at the top and bottom of the ACC heading into 2025. Timestamps:3:23 - Clemson Preview15:21 - Miami Preview26:51 - Pitt Preview35:30 - SMU Preview41:44 - Louisville Preview49:36 - Georgia Tech Preview57:21 - Wake Forest Preview1:03:56 - Stanford Preview Support the show and get perks like ad-free episodes, early releases, bonus content, Discord access and much more: https://www.verballers.com _____ A fan of our college football podcast? Leave us a rating and review, and don't forget to subscribe or follow so you don't miss any of our podcast episodes: Apple Podcasts: https://play.solidverbal.com/apple-podcasts Spotify: https://play.solidverbal.com/spotify Amazon Music: https://play.solidverbal.com/amazon-music Overcast: https://play.solidverbal.com/overcast Pocket Casts: https://play.solidverbal.com/pocketcasts Podcast Addict: https://play.solidverbal.com/podcast-addict CastBox: https://play.solidverbal.com/castbox Our college football show is also available on YouTube. Subscribe to the channel at: https://www.youtube.com/@solidverbal Learn more about the show on our website: https://www.solidverbal.com/about Want to get in touch? Give us a holler on Twitter: @solidverbal, @tyhildenbrandt, @danrubenstein, on Instagram, or on Facebook. You can also find our college football podcast out on TikTok and Threads. Stay up to date with our free weekly college football newsletter: https://quickslants.solidverbal.com/subscribe. College football has been our passion since we started The Solid Verbal College Football Podcast back in 2008. We don't just love college football, we live it!Support the show!: https://www.patreon.com/solidverbalSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Dr. Mark Jacobson is a professor of Civil and Environmental Engineering and Director of the Atmosphere Energy Program at Stanford University, where he's been one of the most vocal advocates for powering the world entirely with wind, water, and solar energy. No nuclear, no carbon capture, no fossil fuels of any kind. His research team has created 100% renewable energy roadmaps for all 50 U.S. states and 149 countries, helping shape policies like New York's clean energy mandate. In this episode, Dr. Jacobson shares his perspective on where we are in the renewables adoption curve and explains why he believes that technologies like nuclear power, carbon capture, and biofuels aren't just unnecessary, they're harmful distractions from the clean energy transition he sees as both achievable and urgent.This conversation may be polarizing. While many will agree with Mark's take on renewables and the grid, his firm rejection of other low-carbon tech challenges mainstream climate thinking. We believe these fault lines are worth exploring, even, or especially, when they make people uncomfortable.Episode recorded on June 30, 2025 (Published on July 15, 2025)In this episode, we cover: ⁠[02:32]⁠ Why proposed tax changes threaten renewables⁠[05:45]⁠ Fossil fuel subsidies vs. renewables support⁠[06:29]⁠ China's rapid clean energy deployment⁠[10:44]⁠ Rooftop solar offsets California's rising demand⁠[12:20]⁠ Home and utility batteries reshaping grid usage⁠[14:40]⁠ Texas grid inefficiencies and renewables progress⁠[18:21]⁠ Combining wind, solar and batteries[19:26]⁠ Land use myths about wind and solar[22:49] Dr. Mark Jacobson's background and research⁠[27:23]⁠ How to phase out existing fossil infrastructure⁠[31:36]⁠ Dr. Jacobson's rejection of carbon capture[36:52] His thoughts on nuclear[42:11] Dr. Jacobson's thoughts on geothermal[46:19] How he sees the next decade unfolding Enjoyed this episode? Please leave us a review! Share feedback or suggest future topics and guests at info@mcj.vc.Connect with MCJ:Cody Simms on LinkedInVisit mcj.vcSubscribe to the MCJ Newsletter*Editing and post-production work for this episode was provided by The Podcast Consultant

Are you struggling to form new habits that actually stick?If you've ever found yourself failing to break old habits, it's likely because you're using the wrong habit formation strategies. Thankfully, today's guest is going to unlock the key to transformational behavior change so you and your team can successfully adopt new ways of working.Today's guest is Jason Hreha. Jason is a behavioral scientist and entrepreneur who, after studying at Stanford and working in BJ Fogg's Behavior Design Lab, developed the Behavioral Strategy framework for business challenges. As CEO of Persona, he combines behavioral science assessments with rigorous vetting to connect companies with exceptional talent. Previously, as Global Head at Walmart, he established the first Fortune 100 behavioral science team. Jason is also the author of Real Change, a book redefining habit formation and personal growth. In this episode, Jason shares a breakthrough approach to behavior change that will reshape the way you think about habits.We explore the distinction between habits and transformative practices and why most people fail by choosing habits that are too complex or misaligned with their personality.Jason also explains the importance of behavior matching and how it can help both individuals and teams adopt the right practices for lasting impact. Plus, in the extended episode available to Podcast+ members, Jason shares practical, human-centered strategies to break bad habits for yourself and your team.Join the conversation now!Get FREE mini-episode guides with the big idea from the week's episode delivered to your inbox when you subscribe to my weekly email.Conversation Topics(00:00) Introduction(01:55) Habits vs. transformative practices(05:46) The problem with habit-forming strategies(08:15) Why behavior matching is more effective(10:47) Respecting individual strengths and weaknesses(17:31) How managers can introduce new team practices effectively(21:01) Exploring new behaviors as a way of growth(24:44) A great manager Jason has worked for(27:18) Keep up with Jason(28:09) [Extended Episode Only] How to break a bad habit for yourself or a team member (35:49) [Extended Episode Only] Embracing personality traits for effective behavior changeAdditional Resources:- Get the extended episode by joining The Modern Manager Podcast+ Community for just $15 per month- Read the full transcript here- Follow me on Instagram here - Visit my website for more here- Upskill your team here- Subscribe to my YouTube Channel here Keep up with Jason Hreha - Follow Jason on LinkedIn, Twitter/X, and Instagram- Follow Persona for more updates on LinkedIn, Twitter/X, and Facebook- Subscribe to The Behavioral Scientist on YouTube here- Visit Persona Talent and The Behavioral Scientist for more informationFREE: First Half of Real Change: Moving Beyond Habits to Achieve Lasting TransformationJason is providing members of Podcast+ with the first half of his book Real Change: Moving Beyond Habits to Achieve Lasting Transformation, for free! This book debunks the myths of habit hacking and guides you towards meaningful, lasting transformation through the innovative Transformative Practice Path. Whether you're a seasoned professional or just starting out, this book will empower you to create the meaningful life you've always desired.To get this bonus and many other member benefits, become a member of The Modern Manager Podcast+ Community.---------------------The Modern Manager is a leadership podcast for rockstar managers who want to create a working environment where people thrive, and great work gets done.Follow The Modern Manager on your favorite podcast platform so you won't miss an episode!

Is everyone really low in vitamin D? Or have we been sold a narrative that doesn't hold up under scrutiny? In this mind-blowing episode, Tara sits down with Regina and Kristin, the investigative duo behind the Normal Curves podcast, to explore the truth behind the so-called "vitamin D deficiency epidemic." Spoiler: it may have been manufactured by outdated, flawed science—and driven by people with major conflicts of interest. This is a must-listen for anyone taking vitamin D or worried about their levels. If you've been told your D is “low,” this episode might change everything. In this episode we cover: How the original vitamin D reference ranges were set (and how they were quietly reversed in 2024) Why testing vitamin D routinely may be doing more harm than good The role of conflicts of interest in shaping clinical guidelines What the latest randomized controlled trials (RCTs) actually show about supplementing vitamin D for disease prevention Why observational data can mislead us, and how low D might be the consequence—not the cause—of illness How much sun you actually need to make enough vitamin D (hint: it's a lot less than you think) Why the “low D” narrative stuck around even after the science was overturned If you're thinking about taking D, already taking D, or have been told your vitamin D is "low" (it likely isn't) then this one is for you.   WATCH THIS EPISODE ON YOUTUBE -https://www.youtube.com/@TaraThorne   Regina Nuzzo is a Gallaudet professor, award-winning science journalist, and co-host of the Normal Curves podcast. She brings statistics to life for students and audiences worldwide, often using sex-science examples to keep things lively. Her writing has appeared in Nature, The New York Times, Scientific American, and the Los Angeles Times, where she wrote a column on the science of sex and relationships. Alongside co-host Kristin Sainani, she penned a long-running statistics column for Physical Medicine & Rehabilitation and now teaches a Stanford summer course on statistics for clinical informatics. Regina's work earned the American Statistical Association's Excellence in Statistical Reporting Award.   Kristin Cobb Sainani is a Stanford professor, science journalist, and co-host of the Normal Curves podcast. She brings statistics and scientific writing to students and audiences around the world. She also works as a statistician on sports medicine projects. Kristin has written widely about health, science, and statistics for both academic and popular audiences. She was a health columnist for Allure magazine for ten years and, alongside co-host Regina Nuzzo, penned a long-running statistics column for the journal Physical Medicine & Rehabilitation. In 2018, she received Stanford's Biosciences Award for Excellence in Graduate Teaching. Known for her statistical sleuthing and ability to cut through academic jargon, Kristin champions clear language and rigorous methods in science.   Mentioned in this episode: Normal Curves Podcast https://www.normalcurves.com/vitamin-d-part-1-is-the-deficiency-epidemic-real/   https://www.normalcurves.com/vitamin-d-part-2-good-for-more-than-just-your-bones/   Normal Curves Website: https://www.normalcurves.com/     EQUIP PRIME PROTEIN – Click HERE to grab yours and use my code: TARA to get 15% off. When you sign up for a subscription via my link, you'll save 30% on the first month & 15% on any subsequent months! Purchase Herbatonin here to get 15% automatically applied to your cart: https://symphonynaturalhealth.com/Tara PIQUE TEA – These are some of Tara's favourite teas! They're crystal form, which makes them super unique and easy to transport in your purse, (they come in single use satchels!) and higher in polyphenols. They're made from high quality ingredients with triple toxin screening, (super important when it comes to your tea). Click HERE to visit the shop. HRT Made Simple™ - Learn how to confidently speak to your doctor about the benefits of hormone replacement therapy so you can set yourself up for symptom-free, unmedicated years to come without feeling confused, dismissed, or leaving the medical office minus your HRT script. Hair Loss Solutions Made Simple™ – This course will teach you the best natural, highly effective, and safe solutions for your hair loss so you can stop it, reverse it, and regrow healthy hair without turning to medications. The Perimenopause Solution™ – My signature 6-month comprehensive hormonal health program for women in midlife who want to get solid answers to their hormonal health issues once and for all so they can kick the weight gain, moodiness, gut problems, skin issues, period problems, fatigue, overwhelm, insomnia, hair/eyebrow loss, and other symptoms in order to get back to the woman they once were. [FREE] The Ultimate Midlife Perimenopause Handbook - Grab my free guide and RECLAIM your confidence, your mood, your waistline and energy without turning to medications or restrictive diets (or spending a fortune on testing you don't need!).   [BOOK A 30-MINUTE SESSION WITH TARA HERE]

In this episode of Stories from Real Life, host Melvin E. Edwards interviews Cristian Cibils Bernardes, a digital historian and founder of Autograph. Cristian shares his unique journey from Paraguay to Stanford University, highlighting the cultural contrasts he experienced. He discusses the entrepreneurial spirit instilled in him by his parents and the lessons learned from their business endeavors. Cristian reflects on his teaching experience at Stanford and how it shaped his perspective on education. The conversation delves into the creation of Autograph, a platform aimed at preserving personal stories and connecting families through AI technology. Cristian emphasizes the importance of storytelling and the impact it can have on future generations. The episode concludes with insights on success, the future of storytelling, and the value of modeling behavior for personal growth.Want to be a guest on Stories from Real Life? Send Melvin Edwards a message on PodMatch, here: https://www.podmatch.com/hostdetailpreview/storiesfromreallife. www.podcastreallife.comhttps://autograph-ai.comGet 1 month free for the Autograph subscription.TakeawaysCristian's journey from Paraguay to Stanford was shaped by his unique upbringing.Cultural differences between Paraguay and California influenced Cristian's perspective on success.Lessons in resilience and problem-solving were learned from his entrepreneurial parents.Teaching at Stanford provided Christian with valuable experiences in education and communication.The idea for Autograph emerged from a desire to connect stories and preserve family legacies.Cristian's vision for Autograph includes using AI to create a digital version of individuals.The name 'Walter' symbolizes the importance of storytelling and preserving history.Autograph aims to democratize the recording of personal histories and experiences.The future of storytelling may involve advanced AI technologies and interactive experiences.Modeling behavior is a key strategy for personal and professional success. Get full access to Melvin E. Edwards at storiesfromreallife.substack.com/subscribe

Interview Summary So, you two, along with a number of other people in the field, wrote a chapter for a recently published book called The Handbook of Children and Screens. We discussed that book in an earlier podcast with its editors, Dmitri Christakis and Kris Perry, the executive director of the Children and Screens organization. And I'd like to emphasize to our listeners that the book can be downloaded at no cost. I'd like to read a quote if I may, from the chapter that the two of you wrote. 'Screen time continues to evolve with the advent of continuous and immersive video reels, voice activated assistance, social media influencers, augmented and virtual reality targeted advertising. Immersive worlds where children can virtually shop for food and beverages, cook or work in a fast-food outlet from a smartphone, a tablet, a computer, or an internet connected tv and more.' So as much as I follow the field, I still read that and I say, holy you know what. I mean that's just an absolutely alarming set of things that are coming at our children. And it really sounds like a tidal wave of digital sophistication that one could have never imagined even a short time ago. Amanda, let's start with you. Can you tell us a little bit more about these methods and how quickly they evolve and how much exposure children have? I think you're right, Kelly, that the world is changing fast. I've been looking at screen media for about 20 years now as a researcher. And in the earlier years, and Tom can attest to this as well, it was all about TV viewing. And you could ask parents how much time does your child spend watching TV? And they could say, well, they watch a couple shows every night and maybe a movie or two on the weekend, and they could come up with a pretty good estimate, 1, 2, 3 hours a day. Now, when we ask parents how much time their children spend with media, they have to stop and think, 'well, they're watching YouTube clips throughout the day. They're on their smartphone, their tablet, they're on social media, texting and playing all these different games.' It really becomes challenging to even get a grasp of the quantity of screen time let alone what kids are doing when they're using those screens. I will say for this book chapter, we found a really great review that summarized over 130 studies and found that kids are spending about three and a half or four hours a day using screens. Yet some of these studies are showing as high as seven or eight hours. I think it's probably under-reported because parents have a hard time really grasping how much time kids spend on screens. I've got a one-year-old and a five-year-old, and I've got some nieces and nephews and I'm constantly looking over their shoulder trying to figure out what games are they playing and where are they going online and what are they doing. Because this is changing really rapidly and we're trying to keep up with it and trying to make sure that screen time is a safe and perhaps healthy place to be. And that's really where a lot of our research is focused. I can only imagine how challenging it must be to work through that landscape. And because the technology advances way more quickly than the policies and legal landscape to control it, it really is pretty much whatever anybody wants to do, they do it and very little can be done about it. It's a really interesting picture, I know. We'll come back later and talk about what might be done about it. Tom, if you will help us understand the impact of all this. What are the effects on the diets of children and adolescents? I'm thinking particularly when Amanda was mentioning how many hours a day children are on it that three to four hours could be an underestimate of how much time they're spending. What did kids used to do with that time? I mean, if I think about when you and I were growing up, we did a lot of different things with that time. But what's it look like now? Well, that's one of the important questions that we don't really know a lot about because even experimental studies that I can talk about that look at reducing screen time have not been very good at being able to measure what else is going on or what substitutes for it. And so, a lot of the day we don't really know exactly what it's displacing and what happens when you reduce screen time. What replaces it? The assumption is that it's something that's more active than screen time. But, you know, it could be reading or homework or other sedentary behaviors that are more productive. But we really don't know. However, we do know that really the general consensus across all these studies that look at the relationship between screen time and nutrition is that the more time children spend using screens in general, the more calories they consume, the lower the nutritional quality of their diets and the greater their risk for obesity. A lot of these studies, as Amanda mentioned, were dominated by studies of television viewing, or looking at television viewing as a form of screen use. And there's much less and much more mixed results linking nutrition and obesity with other screens such as video games, computers, tablets, and smartphones. That doesn't mean those relationships don't exist. Only that the data are too limited at this point. And there's several reasons for that. One is that there just haven't been enough studies that single out one type of screen time versus another. Another is what Amanda brought up around the self-report issue, is that most of these studies depend on asking children or the parents how much time they spend using screens. And we know that children and adults have a very hard time accurately reporting how much time they're using screens. And, in fact when we measure this objectively, we find that they both underestimate and overestimate at times. It's not all in one direction, although our assumption is that they underestimate most of the time, we find it goes in both directions. That means that in addition to sort of not having that answer about exactly what the amount of screen time is, really makes it much tougher to be able to detect relationships because it adds a lot of error into our studies. Now there have been studies, as I mentioned, that have tried to avoid these limitations by doing randomized controlled trials. Including some that we conducted, in which we randomized children, families or schools in some cases to programs that help them reduce their screen time and then measure changes that occur in nutrition, physical activity, and measures of obesity compared to kids who are randomized to not receive those programs. And the randomized trials are really useful because they allow us to make a conclusion about cause-and-effect relationships. Some of these programs also targeted video games and computers as well as television. In fact, many of them do, although almost all of them were done before tablets and smartphones became very common in children. We still don't have a lot of information on those, although things are starting to come out. Most of these studies demonstrated that these interventions to reduce screen use can result in improved nutrition and less weight gain. And the differences seen between the treatment and control groups were sometimes even larger than those commonly observed from programs to improve nutrition and increased physical activity directly. Really, it's the strongest evidence we have of cause-and-effect relationships between screen use and poor nutrition and risk for obesity. Of course, we need a lot more of these studies, particularly more randomized controlled studies. And especially those including smartphones because that's where a lot of kids, especially starting in the preteen age and above, are starting to spend their time. But from what we know about the amount of apparent addictiveness that we see in the sophisticated marketing methods that are being used in today's media, I would predict that the relationships are even larger today than what we're seeing in all these other studies that we reviewed. It's really pretty stunning when one adds up all that science and it looks pretty conclusive that there's some bad things happening, and if you reduce screen time, some good things happen. So, Amanda, if you know the numbers off the top of your head, how many exposures are kids getting to advertisements for unhealthy foods? If I think about my own childhood, you know, we saw ads for sugar cereals during Saturday morning cartoon televisions. And there might have been a smattering if kids watch things that weren't necessarily just directed at kids like baseball games and stuff like that. But, and I'm just making this number up, my exposure to those ads for unhealthy foods might have been 20 a week, 30 a week, something like that. What does it look like now? That is a good question. Kelly. I'm not sure if anyone can give you a totally accurate answer, but I'll try. If you look at YouTube ads that are targeting children, a study found that over half of those ads were promoting foods and beverages, and the majority of those were considered unhealthy, low nutritional value, high calorie. It's hard to answer that question. What we used to do is we'd take, look at all the Saturday morning cartoons, and we'd actually record them and document them and count the number of food ads versus non-food ads. And it was just a much simpler time in a way, in terms of screen exposure. And we found in that case, throughout the '90s and early 2000s, a lot of food ads, a lot of instances of these food ads. And then you can look at food placement too, right? It's not an actual commercial, but these companies are paying to get their food products in the TV show or in the program. And it's just become much more complicated. I think it's hard to capture unless you have a study where you're putting a camera on a child, which some people are doing, to try to really capture everything they see throughout their day. It's really hard to answer, but I think it's very prolific and common and becoming more sophisticated. Okay, thanks. That is very helpful context. Whatever the number is, it's way more than it used to be. Definitely. And it also sounds as if and it's almost all for unhealthy foods, but it sounds like it's changed in other ways. I mean, at some point as I was growing up, I started to realize that these things are advertising and somebody's trying to sell me something. But that's a lot harder to discern now, isn't it with influencers and stuff built in the product placements and all that kind of stuff. So, to the extent we had any safeguards or guardrails in the beginning, it sounds like those are going to be much harder to have these days. That's right. It really takes until a child is 6, 7, 8 years old for them to even identify that this is a commercial. That this is a company that's trying to sell me something, trying to persuade. And then even older children are having to really understand those companies are trying to make money off the products that they sell, right? A lot of kids, they just look at things as face value. They don't discriminate against the commercial versus the non-commercial. And then like you're suggesting with social influencers, that they're getting paid to promote specific products. Or athletes. But to the child that is a character or a person that they've learned to love and trust and don't realize, and as adults, I think we forget sometimes too. That's very true. Amanda, let me ask about one thing that you and Tom had in your chapter. You had a diagram that I thought was very informative and it showed the mechanisms through which social media affects the diet and physical activity of children. Can you describe what you think some of the main pathways of influence might be? That figure was pretty fun to put together because we had a wonderful wealth of knowledge and expertise as authors on this chapter. And people provided different insight from the scientific evidence. I will say the main path we were trying to figure out how does this exposure to screen really explain changes in what children are eating, their risk for obesity, the inactivity and sedentary behavior they're engaging in? In terms of food, really what is I believe the strongest relationship is the exposure to food advertisement and the eating while engaging in screen time. You're getting direct consumption while you're watching screens, but also the taste preferences, the brand loyalty that's being built over time by constantly seeing these different food products consistently emerge as one of the strongest relationships. But we identified some other interesting potential mechanisms too. While kids are watching screens or engaging in screens, there's some evidence to indicate that they're not able to read their body as well. Their feelings of hunger, their feelings of satiety or fullness. That they're getting distracted for long periods of time. Also, this idea of instant gratification, just like the reward process of instant gratification with using the screen. They're so interactive. You can go online and get what you want and reach what you want. And the same thing is happening with food. It becomes habitual as well. Children get off of school and they go home, and they grab a snack, and they watch tv or they watch their YouTube clips or play their games. And it becomes an eating occasion that may not have otherwise existed. But they're just associating screen time with eating. There's some evidence even on screen time impacting inhibition and controlling impulse and memory. And that's more emerging, but it's interesting to just consider how this prolonged screen time where you're not interacting with someone in person, your eyes are focused on the screen, might actually be having other cognitive impacts that we may not even be aware of yet. If we ask the question why Is screen time having a bad impact on children and their diets? It's almost let us count the ways. There are a lot of possible things going on there. And speaking of that, there's one question in particular I'd like to ask you, Tom. Certainly marketing might affect what kids prefer. Like it might make them want to have a cereal or a beverage A or snack food B or whatever it happens to be. But could it also affect hunger? How much kids want to eat? I mean, you think, well, hunger is biological, and the body sends out signals that it's time to eat. How does that all figure in? The research suggests it can. Advertising in particular but even non-advertising references or images of food can trigger hunger and eating whether or not you felt hungry before you saw them. And I'm guessing almost everyone's experienced that themselves, where they see an image of food, and all of a sudden, they're craving it. It can be as simple as Pavlov's dogs, you know, salivating in response to cues about food. In addition, I think one of the mechanisms that Amanda brought up is this idea that when you're distracted with a screen, it actually overruns or overwhelms your normal feelings of fullness or satiety during eating. When distracted, people are less aware of how much they're eating. And when you're eating while using a screen, people tend to eat until they've finished the plate or the bag or the box, you know? And until that's empty, till they get to the bottom, instead of stopping when they start to get full. Well, there's sort of a double biological whammy going on there, isn't there? It is affecting your likelihood of eating in the first place, and how hungry you feel. But then it also is affecting when you stop and your satiety happening. And you put those two together there's a lot going on, isn't there? Exactly. And it's really one of the reasons why a lot of our programs to reduce weight gain and improve nutrition really put a lot of emphasis on not eating in front of screens. Because our studies have shown it accounts for a large proportion of the calories consumed during the day. Oh, that's so interesting. Amanda, you mentioned influencers. Tell us a little bit more about how this works in the food space. These social influencers are everywhere, particularly Instagram, TikTok, et cetera. Kids are seeing these all the time and as I mentioned earlier, you often build this trusting relationship with the influencer. And that becomes who you look to for fads and trends and what you should and shouldn't do. A lot of times these influencers are eating food or cooking or at restaurants, even the ones that are reaching kids. As you analyze that, oftentimes it's the poor nutrition, high calorie foods. And they're often being paid for the ads too, which as we discussed earlier, kids don't always realize. There's also a lot of misinformation about diet and dieting, which is of concern. Misinformation that could be harmful for kids as they're growing and trying to grow in a healthy way and eat healthy foods. But kids who may look to overly restrict their foods, for example, rather than eating in a healthier manner. So that's definitely a problem. And then also, oftentimes these social influencers really have these unattainable beauty standards. Maybe they're using a filter or maybe they are models or whatnot. They're projecting these ideal body images that are very difficult and sometimes inappropriate for children to try to attain. Now, we've seen this in other forms, right? We've seen this in magazines going back. We've seen this on websites. But now as soon as a kid turns on their smartphone or their tablet and they're online, it's in front of them all the time. And, and they're interacting, they're liking it, they're commenting and posting. I think the social influencers have just really become quite pervasive in children's lives. Somebody who's an influencer might be recording something that then goes out to lots and lots of people. They're eating some food or there's some food sitting in the background or something like that. And they're getting paid for it, but not saying they're getting paid for it. Probably very few people realize that money is changing hands in all of that, I'm suspecting, is that right? Yes, I do believe they're supposed to do hashtag ad and there are different indicators, but I'm not sure the accountability behind that. And I'm also not sure that kids are looking for that and really understand what that means or really care what that means. Okay. Because they're looking to sense what's popular. But there's an opportunity to perhaps further regulate, or at least to educate parents and kids in that regard that I think would be helpful. Tom, while we're on this issue of conflicts of interest, there was recent press coverage, and then there were reports by reporters at the Washington Post and The Examination showing that the food industry was paying dieticians to be influencers who then posted things favorable to industry without disclosing their funding. How big of a problem do you think this is sort of overall with professionals being paid and not disclosing the payments or being paid even if they disclose things. What kind of a negative impact that's having? Yes, I find it very concerning as you would guess, knowing me. And I believe one of the investigations found that about half of influencers who were being paid to promote foods, drinks, or supplements, didn't disclose that they were paid. It was quite a large magnitude. It goes throughout all types of health professionals who are supposed to be sources of quality information and professional organizations themselves which take advertising or take sponsorships and then don't necessarily disclose it. And you know in this day when we're already seeing drops in the public's trust in science and in research, I think this type of information, or this type of deception just makes it a lot worse. As you know, Kelly, there's quite a bit of research that suggests that being paid by a company actually changes the way you talk about their products and even conduct research in a way that's more favorable to those products. Whether you think it does or not, whether you're trying to be biased or not. Tom, just to insert one thing in my experience. If you ask people in the field, does taking money from industry affect the way scientists do their work and they'll almost always say yes. But if you say, does it influence your work, they'll almost always say no. There's this unbelievable blind spot. And one might conclude from what you were telling us is that disclosure is going to be the remedy to this. Like for the half of people who didn't disclose it, it would be okay if they took the money as long as they disclosed it. But you're saying that's obviously not the case. That there's still all kinds of bias going on and people who are hearing some disclosure don't necessarily discount what they're hearing because of it. And it's still a pretty bad kettle of fish, even if disclosure occurs. It's especially pernicious when it doesn't, but it seems even when disclosure happens, it's not much of a remedy to anything. But you may not agree. No, I definitely agree with that. And that's only, you know, part of it too because there's the other side of the audience that Amanda brought up as well. And in particular what kids, but also adults, how they react to disclosures. And, while it's been possible to teach people to recognize potential bias, you know, when there's a disclosure. And to make people aware, which is a good thing, we want disclosure, I guess, so people are aware to be more vigilant in terms of thinking about what biases may be in the messages. There's not much evidence that teaching people that or making them aware of that changes their behavior. They still believe the advertising. Right. They still act in the same way. It's still just as persuasive to them. One more little editorial insertion. The thing that has always puzzled me about disclosure is that it implies that there's something bad going on or else, why would you have to disclose it? And the solution seems not to disclose it, but not to do the bad thing. And it's like, I could come up and kick you in the leg, but it's okay if I disclose that I kick you in the leg. I mean, it just makes no sense to me. But let me move on to something different. Amanda, I'd like to ask you this. I assume the food industry gets a lot more impact and reach per dollar they spend from when the only option was to run ads on national television and now, they're doing things at much less expense, I think, that can have, you know, orders of magnitude more impact and things. But is my perception correct? And how do you think through that? I think of it like the Tupperware model, right? You're building these trusted local or national celebrities, spokespeople for kids. Oftentimes these young adults or teenagers who are doing funny things and they're engaging, and so you're building this trust like you did with the Tupperware. Where you go and train people to go out to people's homes and their neighbors and their friends and their church and sell the product. It's really similar just in an online space. I think you're right; the cost is likely much less. And yet the reach and even the way these influencers are paid is all about the interaction, the likes, the comments, that sort of thing. The reposts. It's become quite sophisticated, and clearly, it's effective because companies are doing this. And one other thing to mention we haven't talked about yet is the food companies themselves have hired young people who use humor as a way to create a following for the different brands or products. It's not a person now, it's either the branded character or the actual company itself. And I think that has great influence of building some loyalty to the brand early in life. So that child is growing up and not only persuading their parents to purchase these products, but as they have more disposable income, they're going to continue purchasing the product. I wonder if Edward Tupper or I don't know if I remember his first name right, but I wonder if you could have ever imagined the how his plastic invention would permeate more of society than he ever thought? Tom, what about the argument that it's up to parents to decide and to monitor what their children are exposed to and the government needs to back off. Oh, it would be so nice if they were that easy, wouldn't it? If we could depend on parents. And I think every parent would love to be able to do that. But we're talking about individual parents and their kids who are being asked to stand up against billions, literally billions and billions of dollars spent every year to get them to stay on their screens as long as possible. To pay attention to their marketing, as Amanda was talking about the techniques they use. And to really want their products even more. If you could think of a parent with endless knowledge and time and resources, even they are really unable to stand up to such powerful forces working against them. Unfortunately, and this is not unique to the issues of screens in children's health, but really many of the issues around health, that in the absence of government regulation and really lack of any oversight, this really difficult job is dumped on parents. You know, not their choice, but it's sort of in their lap. We still try and help them to be better at this. While we're waiting for our elected representatives to stand up to lobbyists and do their jobs, we still in a lot of our interventions we develop, we still try and help parents as well as schools, afterschool programs, teachers, health professionals, develop the skills to really help families resist this pool of media and marketing. But that shouldn't be the way it is. You know, most parents are really already doing the best they can. But it's drastically unfair. It's really an unfair playing field. That all makes good sense. We've been talking thus far about the negative impacts of media, but Amanda, you've done some work on putting this technology to good use. Tell us about that if you will. I do enjoy trying to flip the script because technology is meant to help us, not harm us. It's meant to make our lives more efficient, to provide entertainment. Now with video chatting, to provide some social connection. A lot of my work over the past 20 years has been looking at what's commercially available, what kids are using, and then seeing let's test these products or these programs and can we flip them around to promote healthier eating? To promote physical activity? Can we integrate them for kids who are in a weight management program? Can we integrate the technology to really help them be successful? It doesn't always work, and we certainly aren't looking to increase screen time, but we also need to recognize that achieving zero hours of screen time is really unattainable pretty much universally. Let's try to evaluate the screen time that is being used and see if we can make it healthier. A few examples of that include when the Nintendo Wii came out about 18 years ago now. I was part of a group that was one of the first to test that video game console system because up until that point, most of the games you sat down to play, you held a remote in your hand. There were Dance Dance Revolution games and arcade halls so you could do a little bit of movement with games. But pretty much they were sedentary. Nintendo Wii came out and really changed a lot because now you had to get up off the couch, move your body, move your arms and legs to control the game. And we found it cut across all demographics. Men, women, boys, girls, different age groups. There was content available for a lot of different groups. These types of games became really popular. And I did some of the earlier studies to show that at least in a structured program that kids can engage in what we call moderate levels of physical activity. They're actually moving their bodies when they play these games. And over time, I and others have integrated these games into programs as a way to be an in with kids who may not be involved in sports, may not go outside to play, but they're willing to put on a video game and move in their living room at home. Building from that, we've developed and tested various apps. Some of these apps directly reach the parents, for example, teaching the parents. These are strategies to get your child to eat healthier. Prepare healthier meals, grocery shop, be more physically active as a family. We've looked at different wearables, wristwatches that can help kids and parents. Maybe they'll compete against each other to try to get the most steps of a day and that sort of thing. And then some of my recent work is now integrating chatbots and artificial intelligence as ways to provide some tailored feedback and support to kids and families who are looking to be more physically active, eat healthier. And then one study I'm really excited about uses mixed reality. This is virtual reality where you're putting on a headset. And for that study we are integrating children's homework that they would otherwise do on their Chromebook. And we're removing the keyboard and computer mouse so that they now have to use their body to click and point and drag and move the screen. And these are just a few examples. I do not think this is the magical solution. I think as Tom alluded to, there are different levels of government regulation, educating parents, working with schools. There's working with the food industry. There's a lot that we need to do to make this a healthier media space for kids. But I think this is something we should be open to, is figuring out if people are going to spend a lot of time using screens, what can we do to try to make those screens healthier? You make me smile when I'm hearing that because all these things sound really exciting and like there's plenty of potential. And you're right, I mean, if they're going to be on there anyway, maybe there can be some positive way to harness that time. And those all sound really important and really good. And let's hope that they spread enough to really touch lots and lots of children and their families. Tom, you and I keep caught up. We see each other at professional meetings or we just have periodic phone calls where we tell each other what we're up to. And you've been telling me over the past couple years about this really amazing project you're heading up tracking screen usage. Could you tell us a little bit about that? I'd love to. Really it addresses the problem that came up before, which is really how we measure what people are doing and seeing on their screens. Basically all the studies of media effects for the past a hundred plus years that the field has been studying media, has been dependent on people telling us what they do and what they saw. When in fact, we know that's not particularly accurate. So now we have technology that allows us to track exactly what people are doing and seeing on their screens. We call this screenomics, like genomics, except instead of studying how genes affect us, it's studying how screens affect us and how the screens we experience in our lives really are a reflection of our lives. The way we are doing this is we put software on your phone or your laptop, and it can be on other screens as well, and it runs in the background and takes a screenshot every five seconds. And it covers everything on the screen because it's just taking a picture of the screen. All the words, all the images. Then we use AI to help us decipher [00:34:00] what was on those screens. And so far, we've collected over 350 million screenshots from several hundred adults and teenagers who've participated in our studies for periods of six months to a year. Some of our most interesting findings, I think, is how much idiosyncrasy there is in people's screen use. And this has a huge impact on how we do research on the effects of screens, I believe. Because no two people really have the same screenomes, which is what we call the sequence of screenshots that people experience. And even for the same person, no two hours or days or weeks are the same. We're looking at both how different people differ in their screen use, and how that's related to their mental health, for example. But also how changes over time in a single person's screenome is related to their mental health, for example. Comparing your screen use this afternoon to your screen use this morning or yesterday, or last week or last month. And how that changes your health or is at least associated with changes in your health at this point. Eventually, we hope to move this into very precise interventions that would be able to monitor what your screen experience is and give you an appropriate either change in your screen or help you change your behavior appropriate to what you're feeling. One of our current studies is to learn really the details of what, when, how, why, and where foods and beverages appear in adolescent screenomes. And how these factors relate to foods and beverages they consume and their health. In fact, we're currently recruiting 13- to 17-year-olds all over the US who can participate in this study for six months of screenome collection and weekly surveys we do with them. Including detailed surveys of what they're eating. But this sort of goes back to an issue that came up before that you had asked us about how much is advertising? I can tell you that at least some of our preliminary data, looking at a small number of kids, suggests that food, it varies greatly across kids and what they're experiencing, especially on their phones. And, we found, for example, one young girl who 37% of all her screens had food on them. About a third, or more than a third of her entire screenome, had food in it. And it wasn't just through advertising and it wasn't just through social media or influencers. It was everywhere. It was pictures she was taking of food. It was influencers she was following who had food. It was games she was playing that were around food. There are games, they're all about running a restaurant or making food and serving and kitchen work. And then there were also videos that people watched that are actually fairly popular among where you watch other people eat. Apparently it's a phenomenon that came out of Korea first. And it's grown to be quite popular here over the last several years in which people just put on their camera and show themselves eating. I mean, nothing special, nothing staged, just people eating. There's all kinds of food exists everywhere throughout the screenome, not just in one place or another, and not just in advertising. Tom, a study with a hundred data points can be a lot. You've got 350 million, so I wish you the best of luck in sorting all that out. And boy, whatever you find is going to be really informative and important. Thanks for telling us about this. I'd like to end with kind of a basic question to each of you, and that is, is there any reason for hope. Amanda, let's, let's start with you. Do you see any reason to be optimistic about all this? We must be optimistic. No matter how we're facing. We have no choice. I think there's greater awareness. I think parents, policy makers, civic leaders are really recognizing this pervasive effective screen use on mental health, eating, obesity risk, even just the ability to have social interactions and talk to people face to face. And I think that's a good sign. I've seen even in my own state legislature in Louisiana, bills going through about appropriately restricting screens from schools and offering guidance to pediatricians on counseling related to screen use. The American Academy of Pediatrics changed their guidelines a number of years ago. Instead of just saying, no screens for the really little ones, and then limit to fewer than two hours a day for the older ones. They recognized and tried to be more practical and pragmatic with family. Sit down as a family, create some rules, create some boundaries. Make sure you're being healthy with your screen use. Put the screens away during mealtime. Get the screens out of the bedroom. And I think going towards those more practical strategies that families can actually do and sustain is really positive. I'd like to remain optimistic and let's just keep our eyes wide open and talk to the kids too. And ask the kids what they're doing and get them part of this because it's so hard to stay up to date on the technology. Thanks. I appreciate that positive note. Tom, what do you think? Yeah, I agree with Amanda. I can be positive about several things. First of all, I think last year, there were two bills, one to protect child privacy and the other to regulate technology aimed at children. COPPA 2.0 (Children's Online Private Protection Act) and KOSA (Kid's Online Safety Act). And they passed the Senate overwhelmingly. I mean, almost unanimously, or as close as you can get in our current senate. Unfortunately, they were never acted upon by the house, but in the absence of federal legislature regulation, we've had, as Amanda mentioned, a lot of states and also communities where they have actually started to pass bills or regulate social media. Things like prohibiting use under a certain age. For example, social media warning labels is another one. Limiting smartphone use in schools has become popular. However, a lot of these are being challenged in the courts by tech and media industries. And sadly, you know, that's a strategy they've borrowed, as you know well, Kelly, from tobacco and food industry. There also have been attempts that I think we need to fight against. For the federal legislature or the federal government, congress, to pass legislation to preempt state and local efforts, that would not allow states and local communities to make their own laws in this area. I think that's an important thing. But it's positive in that we're hearing advocacy against that, and people are getting involved. I'm also glad to hear people talking about efforts to promote alternative business models for media. I believe that technology itself is not inherently good or bad, as Amanda mentioned, but the advertising business models that are linked to this powerful technology has inevitably led to a lot of these problems we're seeing. Not just in nutrition and health, but many problems. Finally, I see a lot more parent advocacy to protect children and teens, especially around tech in schools and around the potential harms of social media. And more recently around AI even. As more people start to understand what the implications of AI are. I get the feeling these efforts are really starting to make a difference. Organizations, like Fair Play, for example, are doing a lot of organizing and advocacy with parents. And, we're starting to see advocacy in organizing among teens themselves. I think that's all really super positive that the public awareness is there, and people are starting to act. And hopefully, we'll start to see some more action to help children and families. Bios Developmental psychologist Dr. Amanda Staiano is an associate professor and Director of the Pediatric Obesity & Health Behavior Laboratory at Pennington Biomedical Research Center at Louisiana State University. She also holds an adjunct appointment in LSU's Department of Psychology. Dr. Staiano earned her PhD in developmental psychology and Master of Public Policy at Georgetown University, followed by a Master of Science in clinical research at Tulane University. Her primary interest is developing and testing family-based healthy lifestyle interventions that utilize innovative technology to decrease pediatric obesity and its comorbidities. Her research has involved over 2500 children and adolescents, including randomized controlled trials and prospective cohorts, to examine the influence of physical activity and sedentary behavior on body composition and cardiometabolic risk factors. Thomas N. Robinson, MD, MPH is the Irving Schulman, MD Endowed Professor in Child Health, Professor of Pediatrics and of Medicine, in the Division of General Pediatrics and the Stanford Prevention Research Center at Stanford University School of Medicine, and Director of the Center for Healthy Weight at Stanford University and Lucile Packard Children's Hospital at Stanford. Dr. Robinson focuses on "solution-oriented" research, developing and evaluating health promotion and disease prevention interventions for children, adolescents and their families to directly inform medical and public health practice and policy. His research is largely experimental in design, conducting school-, family- and community-based randomized controlled trials to test the efficacy and/or effectiveness of theory-driven behavioral, social and environmental interventions to prevent and reduce obesity, improve nutrition, increase physical activity and decrease inactivity, reduce smoking, reduce children's television and media use, and demonstrate causal relationships between hypothesized risk factors and health outcomes. Robinson's research is grounded in social cognitive models of human behavior, uses rigorous methods, and is performed in generalizable settings with diverse populations, making the results of his research more relevant for clinical and public health practice and policy.

Ali “AMAC” McGuire, is a platinum mix engineer turned speaker and mental health advocate who knows that story firsthand. After working with Joji, Murdabeatz, Kelly Rowland, Shordie Shordie, Post Malone, and more, Ali realized that outward success doesn't always mean inner peace. Now 13.5 years sober, she shares her Inner Compass framework to help others - especially creatives and young adults -  build lives rooted in purpose, not pressure. Her framework has been shared across stages from Stanford, Rowan University, University of San Diego and beyond. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Marketplace's Meghan McCarty Carino speaks with Rebecca Lester, a professor of accounting at Stanford, about a tax provision within the One Big Beautiful Bill Act that could further tech R&D and innovation.

Marketplace's Meghan McCarty Carino speaks with Rebecca Lester, a professor of accounting at Stanford, about a tax provision within the One Big Beautiful Bill Act that could further tech R&D and innovation.

About this episode:  Artificial intelligence is changing everything about how we work, live, and study—and, now, AI therapy chatbots are poised to transform mental health care. In this episode: Stanford researcher Nick Haber details recent data that suggests that therapeutic AI has a long way to go in addressing biases and recognizing safety-critical situations in order to provide adequate care. Guest: Nick Haber, PhD, is an assistant professor at the Stanford Graduate School of Education, and by courtesy, Computer Science, where he researches AI implementation for learning and therapeutic tools. Host: Stephanie Desmon, MA, is a former journalist, author, and the director of public relations and communications for the Johns Hopkins Center for Communication Programs, the largest center at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health. Show links and related content: Expressing stigma and inappropriate responses prevents LLMs from safely replacing mental health providers—FAccT '25: The 2025 ACM Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency Kids Are in Crisis. Could Chatbot Therapy Help?—New York Times Exploring the Dangers of AI in Mental Health Care—Stanford Institute for Human-Centered AI Transcript information: Looking for episode transcripts? Open our podcast on the Apple Podcasts app (desktop or mobile) or the Spotify mobile app to access an auto-generated transcript of any episode. Closed captioning is also available for every episode on our YouTube channel. Contact us: Have a question about something you heard? Looking for a transcript? Want to suggest a topic or guest? Contact us via email or visit our website. Follow us: @‌PublicHealthPod on Bluesky @‌JohnsHopkinsSPH on Instagram @‌JohnsHopkinsSPH on Facebook @‌PublicHealthOnCall on YouTube Here's our RSS feed Note: These podcasts are a conversation between the participants, and do not represent the position of Johns Hopkins University.

Caroline Diarte-Edwards and Maria Wich-Vila on the changes for MBA applicants

If for one moment you found yourself straying from reality and thought Stanford would sit idly by while the world of college football rapidly evolved, then re-think that idea. The Cardinal opted for the, let's kick some rear-end approach to igniting their football program by bringing in former NFL QB Andrew Luck as GM who then brought in his former head coach in Indianapolis, Frank Reich to be "interim". That remains to be seen, the interim part that is. Ben Parker, the Publisher of Cardinal Sports Report, an On3/Rivals site joins Will and Jim on ACC Nation to preview the Cardinal. Up front he gives us his thoughts on if Stanford will win or lose games on their schedule. Then, Parker and Will look at the movement and depth on offense and defense. What's changed? A lot. Luck was very active in the Transfer Portal in part because many players departed but also because there is a new vision of what this team will look like in the coming years. Stanford Reich, a former Maryland QB and Buffalo Bills QB has a great deal of experience finding ways to come back from seemingly insurmountable odds. His experience as OC with Philadelphia during their Super Bowl run and as head coach of both Indianapolis and Carolina will no doubt help develop a pro-style approach to offense at Stanford. If he has the right QB Reich can make good use of what appears to be a deep Wide Receiver room and that same depth can be found among Running Backs as well. Stanford still has plenty of work to do with both lines and some weak spots on defense. If Reich pulls a rabbit out of the hat this season the term, "interim" may well be just that. One game to look forward to will be his meeting in Chapel Hill with Bill Belichick's Tar Heels later in the season. Be sure to subscribe to ACC Nation Podcast, listen to us on ACC Nation Radio or watch the previews on YouTube.

Drs. Hope Rugo, Sheri Brenner, and Mikolaj Slawkowski-Rode discuss the struggle that health care professionals experience when terminally ill patients are suffering and approaches to help clinicians understand and respond to suffering in a more patient-centered and therapeutic way. TRANSCRIPT Dr. Hope Rugo: Hello, and welcome to By the Book, a monthly podcast series from ASCO that features engaging conversations between editors and authors of the ASCO Educational Book.  I'm your host, Dr. Hope Rugo. I'm director of the Women's Cancers Program and division chief of breast medical oncology at the City of Hope Cancer Center, and I'm also the editor-in-chief of the Educational Book. On today's episode, we'll be exploring the complexities of grief and oncology and the struggle we experience as healthcare professionals when terminally ill patients are suffering. Our guests will discuss approaches to help clinicians understand and respond to suffering in a more patient-centered and therapeutic way, as outlined in their recently published article titled, “Oncology and Suffering: Strategies on Coping With Grief for Healthcare Professionals.” I'm delighted today to welcome Dr. Keri Brenner, a clinical associate professor of medicine, palliative care attending, and psychiatrist at Stanford University, and Dr. Mikołaj Sławkowski-Rode, a senior research fellow in philosophy in the Humanities Research Institute at the University of Buckingham, where he also serves as director of graduate research in p hilosophy. He is also a research fellow in philosophy at Blackfriars Hall at the University of Oxford and associate professor at the University of Warsaw.  Our full disclosures are available in the transcript of this episode. Dr. Brenner and Dr. Sławkowski-Rode, thanks for being on the podcast today. Dr. Keri Brenner: Great to be here, Dr. Rugo. Thank you so much for that kind introduction. Dr. Mikołaj Sławkowski-Rode: Thank you very much, Dr. Rugo. It's a pleasure and an honor. Dr. Hope Rugo: So I'm going to start with some questions for both of you. I'll start with Dr. Brenner. You've spoken and written about the concept of suffering when there is no cure. For oncologists, what does it mean to attune to suffering, not just disease? And how might this impact the way they show up in difficult conversations with patients? Dr. Keri Brenner: Suffering is something that's so omnipresent in the work of clinical oncology, and I like to begin by just thinking about what is suffering, because it's a word that we use so commonly, and yet, it's important to know what we're talking about. I think about the definition of Eric Cassell, who was a beloved mentor of mine for decades, and he defined suffering as the state of severe distress that's associated with events that threaten the intactness of a person. And my colleague here at Stanford, Tyler Tate, has been working on a definition of suffering that encompasses the experience of a gap between how things are versus how things ought to be. Both of these definitions really touch upon suffering in a person-centered way that's relational about one's identity, meaning, autonomy, and connectedness with others. So these definitions alone remind us that suffering calls for a person-centered response, not the patient as a pathology, but the panoramic view of who the patient is as a person and their lived reality of illness. And in this light, the therapeutic alliance becomes one of our most active ingredients in care. The therapeutic alliance is that collaborative, trusting bond as persons that we have between clinician and patient, and it's actually one of the most powerful predictors of meaningful outcomes in our care, especially in oncologic care.  You know, I'll never forget my first day of internship at Massachusetts General Hospital. A faculty lecturer shared this really sage insight with us that left this indelible mark. She shared, “As physicians and healers, your very self is the primary instrument of healing. Our being is the median of the medicine.” So, our very selves as embodied, relationally grounded people, that's the median of the medicine and the first most enduring medicine that we offer. That has really borne fruit in the evidence that we see around the therapeutic alliance. And we see this in oncologic care, that in advanced cancer, a strong alliance with one's oncologist truly improves a patient's quality of life, treatment adherence, emotional well-being, and even surpasses structured interventions like psychotherapeutic interventions. Dr. Hope Rugo: That's just incredibly helpful information and actually terminology as well, and I think the concept of suffering differs so much. Suffering comes in many shapes and forms, and I think you really have highlighted that. But many oncologists struggle with knowing what to do when patients are suffering but can't be fixed, and I think a lot of times that has to do with oncologists when patients have pain or shortness of breath or issues like that. There are obviously many ways people suffer. But I think what's really challenging is how clinicians understand suffering and what the best approaches to respond to suffering are in the best patient-centered and therapeutic way. Dr. Keri Brenner: I get that question a lot from my trainees in palliative care, not knowing what to do. And my first response is, this is about how to be, not about knowing what to do, but how to be. In our medical training, we're trained often how to think and treat, but rarely how to be, how to accompany others. And I often have this image that I tell my trainees of, instead of this hierarchical approach of a fix-it mentality of all we're going to do, when it comes to elements of unavoidable loss, mortality, unavoidable sufferings, I imagine something more like accompaniment, a patient walking through some dark caverns, and I am accompanying them, trying to walk beside them, shining a light as a guide throughout that darkness. So it's a spirit of being and walking with. And it's so tempting in medicine to either avoid the suffering altogether or potentially overidentify with it, where the suffering just becomes so all-consuming like it's our own. And we're taught to instead strike a balance of authentic accompaniment through it. I often teach this key concept in my palli-psych work with my team about formulation. Formulation is a working hypothesis. It's taking a step back and asking, “Why? Why is this patient behaving in this manner? What might the patient's core inner struggle be?” Because asking that “why” and understanding the nuanced dimensions of a patient's core inner struggle will really help guide our therapeutic interactions and guide the way that we accompany them and where we choose to shine that light as we're walking with them. And oftentimes people think, “Well Keri, that sounds so sappy or oversentimental,” and it's not. You know, I'm just thinking about a case that I had a couple months ago, and it was a 28-year-old man with gastric cancer, metastatic disease, and that 28-year-old man, he was actually a college Division I athlete, and his dad was an acclaimed Division I coach. And our typical open-ended palliative care questions, that approach, infuriated them. They needed to know that I was showing up confident, competent, and that I was ready, on my A-game, with a real plan for them to follow through. And so my formulation about them was they needed somebody to show up with that confidence and competence, like the Division I athletes that they were, to really meet them and accompany them where they were on how they were going to walk through that experience of illness. Dr. Hope Rugo: These kinds of insights are so helpful to think about how we manage something that we face every day in oncology care. And I think that there are many ways to manage this.  Maybe I'll ask Dr. Sławkowski-Rode one question just that I think sequences nicely with what you're talking about.  A lot of our patients are trying to think about sort of the bigger picture and how that might help clinicians understand and support patients. So, the whole concept of spirituality, you know, how can we really use that as oncology clinicians to better understand and support patients with advanced illness, and how can that help patients themselves? And we'll talk about that in two different ways, but we'll just start with this broader question. Dr. Mikołaj Sławkowski-Rode: I think spirituality, and here, I usually refer to spirituality in terms of religious belief. Most people in the world are religious believers, and it is very intuitive and natural that religious beliefs would be a resource that people who help patients with a terminal diagnosis and healthcare professionals who work with those patients appeal to when they try to help them deal with the trauma and the stress of these situations.  Now, I think that the interesting thing there is that very often the benefit of appealing to a religious belief is misunderstood in terms of what it delivers. And there are many, many studies on how religious belief can be used to support therapy and to support patients in getting through the experience of suffering and defeating cancer or facing a terminal diagnosis. There's a wealth of literature on this. But most of the literature focuses on this idea that by appealing to religious belief, we help patients and healthcare practitioners who are working with them get over the fact and that there's a terminal diagnosis determining the course of someone's life and get on with our lives and engaging with whatever other pursuits we might have, with our job if we're healthcare practitioners, and with the other things that we might be passionate about in our lives. And the idea here is that this is what religion allows us to do because we sort of defer the need to worry about what's going to happen to us until the afterlife or some perspective beyond the horizon of our life here.  However, my view is – I have worked beyond philosophy also with theologians from many traditions, and my view here is that religion is something that does allow us to get on with our life but not because we're able to move on or move past the concerns that are being threatened by illness or death, but by forming stronger bonds with these things that we value in our life in a way and to have a sense of hope that these will be things that we will be able to keep an attachment to despite the threat to our life. So, in a sense, I think very many approaches in the field have the benefit of religion upside down, as it were, when it comes to helping patients and healthcare professionals who are engaged with their illness and treating it. Dr. Hope Rugo: You know, it's really interesting the points that you make, and I think really important, but, you know, sometimes the oncologists are really struggling with their own emotional reactions, how they are reacting to patients, and dealing with sort of taking on the burden, which, Dr. Brenner, you were mentioning earlier. How can oncologists be aware of their own emotional reactions? You know, they're struggling with this patient who they're very attached to who's dying or whatever the situation is, but you want to avoid burnout as an oncologist but also understand the patient's inner world and support them. Dr. Keri Brenner: I believe that these affective, emotional states, they're contagious. As we accompany patients through these tragic losses, it's very normal and expected that we ourselves will experience that full range of the human experience as we accompany the patients. And so the more that we can recognize that this is a normative dimension of our work, to have a nonjudgmental stance about the whole panoramic set of emotions that we'll experience as we accompany patients with curiosity and openness about that, the more sustainable the work will become. And I often think about the concept of countertransference given to us by Sigmund Freud over 100 years ago. Countertransference is the clinician's response to the patient, the thoughts, feelings, associations that come up within us, shaped by our own history, our own life events, those unconscious processes that come to the foreground as we are accompanying patients with illness. And that is a natural part of the human experience. Historically, countertransference was viewed as something negative, and now it's actually seen as a key that can unlock and enlighten the formulation about what might be going on within the patient themselves even. You know, I was with a patient a couple weeks ago, and I found myself feeling pretty helpless and hopeless in the encounter as I was trying to care for them. And I recognized that countertransference within myself that I was feeling demoralized. It was a prompt for me to take a step back, get on the balcony, and be curious about that because I normally don't feel helpless and hopeless caring for my patients. Well, ultimately, I discovered through processing it with my interdisciplinary team that the patient likely had demoralization as a clinical syndrome, and so it's natural many of us were feeling helpless and hopeless also accompanying them with their care. And it allowed us to have a greater interdisciplinary approach and a more therapeutic response and deeper empathy for the patient's plight. And we can really be curious about our countertransferences. You know, a few months ago, I was feeling bored and distracted in a family meeting, which is quite atypical for me when I'm sharing serious illness news. And it was actually a key that allowed me to recognize that the patient was trying to distract all of us talking about inconsequential facts and details rather than the gravitas of her illness.  Being curious about these affective states really allows us to have greater sustainability within our own practice because it normalizes that human spectrum of emotions and also allows us to reduce unconscious bias and have greater inclusivity with our practice because what Freud also said is that what we can't recognize and say within our own selves, if we don't have that self-reflective capacity, it will come out in what we do. So really recognizing and having the self-awareness and naming some of these emotions with trusted colleagues or even within our own selves allows us to ensure that it doesn't come out in aberrant behaviors like avoiding the patient, staving off that patient till the end of the day, or overtreating, offering more chemotherapy or not having the goals of care, doing everything possible when we know that that might result in medically ineffective care. Dr. Hope Rugo: Yeah, I love the comments that you made, sort of weaving in Freud, but also, I think the importance of talking to colleagues and to sharing some of these issues because I do think that oncologists suffer from the fact that no one else in your life wants to hear about dying people. They don't really want to hear about the tragic cases either. So, I think that using your community, your oncology community and greater community within medicine, is an important part of being able to sort of process. Dr. Keri Brenner: Yes, and Dr. Rugo, this came up in our ASCO [Education] Session. I'd love to double click into some of those ways that we can do this that aren't too time consuming in our everyday practice. You know, within palliative care, we have interdisciplinary rounds where we process complex cases. Some of us do case supervision with a trusted mentor or colleague where we bring complex cases to them. My team and I offer process rounds virtually where we go through countertransference, formulation, and therapeutic responses on some tough cases.  You know, on a personal note, just last week when I left a family meeting feeling really depleted and stuck, I called one of my trusted colleagues and just for 3 minutes constructively, sort of cathartically vented what was coming up within me after that family meeting, which allowed me to have more of an enlightened stance on what to do next and how to be therapeutically helpful for the case. One of my colleagues calls this "friend-tors." They coined the phrase, and they actually wrote a paper about it. Who within your peer group of trusted colleagues can you utilize and phone in real time or have process opportunities with to get a pulse check on where what's coming up within us as we're doing this work? Dr. Hope Rugo: Yeah, and it's an interesting question about how one does that and, you know, maintaining that as you move institutions or change places or become more senior, it's really important.  One of the, I think, the challenges sometimes is that we come from different places from our patients, and that can be an issue, I think when our patients are very religious and the provider is not, or the reverse, patients who don't have religious beliefs and you're trying to sort of focus on the spirituality, but it doesn't really ring true. So, Dr. Sławkowski-Rode, what resources can patients and practitioners draw on when they're facing death and loss in the absence of, or just different religious beliefs that don't fit into the standard model? Dr. Mikołaj Sławkowski-Rode: You're absolutely right that this can be an extremely problematic situation to be in when there is that disconnect of religious belief or more generally spiritual engagement with the situation that we're in. But I just wanted to tie into what Dr. Brenner was saying just before. I couldn't agree more, and I think that a lot of healthcare practitioners, oncologists in particular who I've had the pleasure to talk to at ASCO and at other events as well, are very often quite skeptical about emotional engagement in their profession. They feel as though this is something to be managed, as it were, and something that gets in the way. And they can often be very critical of methods that help them understand the emotions and extend them towards patients because they feel that this will be an obstacle to doing their job and potentially an obstacle also to helping patients to their full ability if they focus on their own emotions or the burden that emotionally, spiritually, and in other ways the illness is for the patient. They feel that they should be focusing on the cancer rather than on the patient's emotions. And I think that a useful comparison, although, you know, perhaps slightly drastic, is that of combat experience of soldiers. They also need to be up and running and can't be too emotionally invested in the situation that they're in. But there's a crucial difference, which is that soldiers are usually engaged in very short bursts of activity with the time to go back and rethink, and they often have a lot of support for this in between. Whereas doctors are in a profession where their exposure to the emotions of patients and their own emotions, the emotions of families of patients is constant. And I think that there's a great danger in thinking that this is something to be avoided and something to compartmentalize in order to avoid burnout. I think, in a way, burnout is more sure to happen if your emotions and your attachment to your patients goes ignored for too long. So that's just following up on Keri's absolutely excellent points. As far as the disconnect is concerned, that's, in fact, an area in which I'm particularly interested in. That's where my research comes in. I'm interested in the kinds of connections that we have with other people, especially in terms of maintaining bonds when there is no spiritual belief, no spiritual backdrop to support this connection. In most religious traditions, we have the framework of the religious belief that tells us that the person who we've lost or the values that have become undermined in our life are something that hasn't been destroyed permanently but something that we can still believe we have a deep connection to despite its absence from our life. And how do you rebuild that sense of the existence of the things that you have perceivably lost without the appeal to some sort of transcendent realm which is defined by a given religion? And that is a hard question. That's a question, I think, that can be answered partly by psychology but also partly by philosophy in terms of looking at who we are as human beings and our nature as people who are essentially, or as entities that are essentially connected to one another. That connection, I believe, is more direct than the mediation of religion might at first suggest. I think that we essentially share the world not only physically, it's not just the case that we're all here, but more importantly, the world that we live in is not just the physical world but the world of meanings and values that helps us orient ourselves in society and amongst one another as friends and foes. And it is that shared sense of the world that we can appeal to when we're thinking about retaining the value or retaining the connection with the people who we have lost or the people who are helping through, go through an experience of facing death. And just to finish, there's a very interesting question, I think, something that we possibly don't have time to explore, about the degree of connection that we have with other people. So, what I've just been saying is something that rings more true or is more intuitive when we think about the connections that we have to our closest ones. We share a similar outlook onto the world, and our preferences and our moods and our emotions and our values are shaped by life with the other person. And so, appealing to these values can give us a sense of a continued presence. But what in those relationships where the connection isn't that close? For example, given the topic of this podcast, the connection that a patient has with their doctor and vice versa. In what sense can we talk about a shared world of experience? Well, I think, obviously, we should admit degrees to the kind of relationship that can sustain our connection with another person. But at the same time, I don't think there's a clear cutoff point. And I think part of emotional engagement in medical practice is finding yourself somewhere on that spectrum rather than thinking you're completely off of it. That's what I would say. Dr. Hope Rugo: That's very helpful and I think a very helpful way of thinking about how to manage this challenging situation for all of us.  One of the things that really, I think, is a big question for all of us throughout our careers, is when to address the dying process and how to do that. Dr. Brenner, you know, I still struggle with this – what to do when patients refuse to discuss end-of-life but they're very close to end of life? They don't want to talk about it. It's very stressful for all of us, even where you're going to be, how you're going to manage this. They're just absolutely opposed to that discussion. How should we approach those kinds of discussions? How do we manage that? How do you address the code discussion, which is so important? You know, these patients are not able to stay at home at end-of-life in general, so you really do need to have a code discussion before you're admitting them. It actually ends up being kind of a challenge and a mess all around. You know, I would love your advice about how to manage those situations. Dr. Keri Brenner: I think that's one of the most piercing and relevant inquiries we have within our clinical work and challenges. I often think of denial not as an all-or-nothing concept but rather as parts of self. There's a part of everyone's being where the unconscious believes it's immortal and will live on forever, and yet we all know intellectually that we all have mortality and finitude and transience, and that time will end. We often think of this work as more iterative and gradual and exposure based. There's potency to words. Saying, “You are dying within days,” is a lot higher potency of a phrase to share than, “This is serious illness. This illness is incurable. Time might be shorter than we hoped.” And so the earlier and more upstream we begin to have these conversations, even in small, subtle ways, it starts to begin to expose the patient to the concept so they can go from the head to the heart, not only knowing their prognosis intellectually but also affectively, to integrate it into who they are as a person because all patients are trying to live well while also we're gradually exposing them to this awareness of mortality within their own lived experience of illness. And that, ideally, happens gradually over time. Now, there are moments where the medical frame is very limited, and we might have short days, and we have to uptitrate those words and really accompany them more radically through those high-affective moments. And that's when we have to take a lot of more nuanced approaches, but I would say the more earlier and upstream the better. And then the second piece to that question as well is coping with our own mortality. The more we can be comfortable with our own transience and finitude and limitations, the more we will be able to accompany others through that. And even within my own life, I've had to integrate losses in a way where before I go in to talk to one of my own palliative care patients, one mantra I often say to myself is, “I'm just a few steps behind you. I don't know if it's going to be 30 days or 30 years, but I'm just a few steps behind you on this finite, transient road of life that is the human experience.” And that creates a stance of accompaniment that patients really can experience as they're traversing these tragedies. Dr. Hope Rugo: That's great. And I think those are really important points and actually some pearls, which I think we can take into the clinic. I think being really concrete when really the expected life expectancy is a few days to a couple of weeks can be very, very helpful. And making sure the patients hear you, but also continuing to let them know that, as oncologists, we're here for them. We're not abandoning them. I think that's a big worry for many, certainly of my patients, is that somehow when they would go to hospice or be a ‘no code', that we're not going to support them anymore or treat them anymore. That is a really important process of that as well. And of course, engaging the team makes a big difference because the whole oncology team can help to manage situations that are particularly challenging like that. And just as we close, I wanted to ask one last question of you, Dr. Brenner, that suffering, grief, and burnout, you've really made the point that these are not problems to fix but dimensions that we want to attend to and acknowledge as part of our lives, the dying process is part of all of our lives. It's just dealing with this in the unexpected and the, I think, unpredictability of life, you know, that people take on a lot of guilt and all sorts of things about, all sorts of emotions. And the question is now, people have listened to this podcast, what can they take back to their oncology teams to build a culture that supports clinicians and their team at large to engage with these realities in a meaningful and sustainable way? I really feel like if we could build the whole team approach where we're supporting each other and supporting the patients together, that that will help this process immeasurably. Dr. Keri Brenner: Yes, and I'm thinking about Dr. Sławkowski-Rode's observation about the combat analogy, and it made me recognize this distinction between suppression and repression. Repression is this unconscious process, and this is what we're taught to do in medical training all the time, to just involuntarily shove that tragedy under the rug, just forget about it and see the next patient and move on. And we know that if we keep unconsciously shoving things under the rug, that it will lead to burnout and lack of sustainability for our clinical teams. Suppression is a more conscious process. That deliberate effort to say, “This was a tragedy that I bore witness to. I know I need to put that in a box on the shelf for now because I have 10 other patients I have to see.” And yet, do I work in a culture where I can take that off the shelf during particular moments and process it with my interdisciplinary team, phone a friend, talk to a trusted colleague, have some trusted case supervision around it, or process rounds around it, talk to my social worker? And I think the more that we model this type of self-reflective capacity as attendings, folks who have been in the field for decades, the more we create that ethos and culture that is sustainable because clinician self-reflection is never a weakness, rather it's a silent strength. Clinician self-reflection is this portal for wisdom, connectedness, sustainability, and ultimately transformative growth within ourselves. Dr. Hope Rugo: That's such a great point, and I think this whole discussion has been so helpful for me and I hope for our audience that we really can take these points and bring them to our practice. I think, “Wow, this is such a great conversation. I'd like to have the team as a whole listen to this as ways to sort of strategize talking about the process, our patients, and being supportive as a team, understanding how we manage spirituality when it connects and when it doesn't.” All of these points, they're bringing in how we process these issues and the whole idea of suppressing versus sort of deciding that it never happened at all is, I think, very important because that's just a tool for managing our daily lives, our busy clinics, and everything we manage. Dr. Keri Brenner: And Dr. Rugo, it's reminding me at Stanford, you know, we have this weekly practice that's just a ritual where every Friday morning for 30 minutes, our social worker leads a process rounds with us as a team, where we talk about how the work that we're doing clinically is affecting us in our lives in ways that have joy and greater meaning and connectedness and other ways that might be depleting. And that kind of authentic vulnerability with one another allows us to show up more authentically for our patients. So those rituals, that small 30 minutes once a week, goes a long way. And it reminds me that sometimes slowing things down with those rituals can really get us to more meaningful, transformative places ultimately. Dr. Hope Rugo: It's a great idea, and I think, you know, making time for that in everybody's busy days where they just don't have any time anymore is important. And you don't have to do it weekly, you could even do something monthly. I think there's a lot of options, and that's a great suggestion. I want to thank you both for taking your time out for this enriching and incredibly helpful conversation. Our listeners will find a link to the Ed Book article we discussed today, which is excellent, in the transcript of this episode. I want to thank you again, Dr. Brenner and Dr. Sławkowski-Rode, for your time and for your excellent thoughts and advice and direction. Dr. Mikołaj Sławkowski-Rode: Thank you very much, Dr. Rugo. Dr. Keri Brenner: Thank you. Dr. Hope Rugo: And thanks to our listeners for joining us today. Please join us again next month on By the Book for more insightful views on topics you'll be hearing at the education sessions from ASCO meetings and our deep dives on new approaches that are shaping modern oncology. Disclaimer: The purpose of this podcast is to educate and to inform. This is not a substitute for professional medical care and is not intended for use in the diagnosis or treatment of individual conditions. Guests on this podcast express their own opinions, experience, and conclusions. Guest statements on the podcast do not express the opinions of ASCO. The mention of any product, service, organization, activity, or therapy should not be construed as an ASCO endorsement. Follow today's speakers:      Dr. Hope Rugo @hope.rugo Dr. Keri Brenner @keri_brenner Dr. Mikolaj Slawkowski-Rode @MikolajRode Follow ASCO on social media:      @ASCO on X (formerly Twitter)      ASCO on Bluesky     ASCO on Facebook      ASCO on LinkedIn      Disclosures:     Dr. Hope Rugo: Honoraria: Mylan/Viatris, Chugai Pharma Consulting/Advisory Role: Napo Pharmaceuticals, Sanofi, Bristol Myer Research Funding (Inst.): OBI Pharma, Pfizer, Novartis, Lilly, Merck, Daiichi Sankyo, AstraZeneca, Gilead Sciences, Hoffman La-Roche AG/Genentech, In., Stemline Therapeutics, Ambryx Dr. Keri Brenner: No relationships to disclose Dr. Mikolaj Slawkowski-Rode: No relationships to disclose    

In this episode of the Conscious Fertility Podcast, Dr. Lorne Brown welcomes Dr. Lora Shahine, a reproductive endocrinologist, author, and advocate for integrated fertility care. They explore recurrent pregnancy loss, male fertility, age-related factors, mind-body medicine, sperm quality, IVF strategy, and nutrition. With compassion and clarity, Dr. Shahine offers practical, evidence-informed insights while advocating for a holistic and individualized approach to fertility and wellness. She reminds us that real healing comes from knowledge, support, and letting go of blame.Key Takeaways:Recurrent miscarriage is often linked to embryo genetics—and sperm plays a larger role than many realize.Not all IVF protocols are created equal: age, egg quality, and uterine receptivity must be individualized.Mind-body tools, stress regulation, and emotional support are essential to whole-person fertility care.Nutrition matters—but shame-based, restrictive advice does more harm than good.Key supplements like CoQ10, vitamin D, and a good prenatal can support egg and sperm health.Dr. Lora Shahine's Bio:Dr. Lora Shahine is a reproductive endocrinologist, author, speaker, and educator dedicated to breaking the stigma around infertility and miscarriage. She's a partner at Pacific NW Fertility, teaches at the University of Washington, and shares evidence-based fertility insights with a global audience through her books, social media, and podcast. With a background in OBGYN and fellowship training at Stanford, she blends cutting-edge science with compassionate care to support patients in building their families.Where to find Dr. Lora Shahine:Website: https://drlorashahine.com/Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/drlorashahine/Tik Tok: https://www.tiktok.com/@drlorashahineYoutube: https://www.youtube.com/drlorashahineBooks: https://drlorashahine.com/books How to connect to Lorne Brown online and in person (Vancouver, BC)Acubalance.ca book virtual or in person conscious work sessions with Dr. Lorne Brown Lornebrown.comConscious hacks and tools to optimize your fertility by Dr. Lorne Brown:https://acubalance.ca/conscious-work/Download a free copy of the Acubalance Fertility Diet & Recipes and a copy of the ebook 5 Ways to Maximize Your Chances of Getting Pregnant from Acubalance.caConnect with Lorne and the podcast on Instagram:@acubalancewellnesscentre

Brought to you by the Founders Unfiltered podcast by A Junior VC - Unscripted conversations with Indian founders about their story and the process of building a company. Hosted by Aviral and Mazin.Join us as we talk to Gaurav Hinduja, the co-founder of axio, about their story.Gaurav studied Commerce at Christ University and went on to pursue his MBA from Stanford. He later served as COO of Gokaldas Exports and, in 2013, co-founded axio, previously known as Capital Float.

“Obedience” in marriage is a loaded word—what does it really mean? Are women expected to submit like servants? Is Christian marriage inherently unequal? Or is there something deeper, more beautiful, and profoundly mutual at play?Today I'm joined by Mary Stanford, who has spent her career unpacking this very paradox. How can a woman “submit” as described in Ephesians 5 and still be a full, free, and equal partner in marriage?Mary dives into the God-given differences between men and women—how our bodies and dispositions reflect distinct, complementary gifts—and how this complementarity can lead to deep unity and even fruitfulness, both literally and spiritually.This topic isn't without controversy. The line between holy submission and enabling harmful dynamics is razor thin. Join the conversation in the comments and help us wrestle with one of the most misunderstood teachings in Scripture.Obedience Paradox book: https://www.amazon.com/Obedience-Paradox-Finding-Freedom-Marriage/dp/1681926954Mary's faculty website: https://www.christendom.edu/academics/undergraduate-faculty/mary-stanford/NEW: Join our exclusive Rose Report community! https://lilaroseshow.supercast.com - We'll have BTS footage, ad-free episodes, monthly AMA, and early access to our upcoming guests.A big thanks to our partner, EWTN, the world's leading Catholic network! Discover news, entertainment and more at https://www.ewtn.com/ Check out our Sponsors:-We Heart Nutrition: https://www.weheartnutrition.com/ Get high quality vitamin supplements for 20% off using the code LILA. -Good Ranchers: https://go.goodranchers.com/lila Purchase your American Meat Delivered subscription today and get a free add-on of beef, chicken, or salmon! Use code LILA for $40 off! -EveryLife: https://www.everylife.com Buy diapers from an amazing pro-life diaper company and use code LILA and get 10% off!00:00:00 - Intro00:06:39 - Few people have parents as model relationships00:10:40 - Good Ranchers00:11:52 - Key successes in Mary's parent's marriage00:19:04 - What did fighting and resolution look like?00:23:11 - EveryLife00:24:11 - What is the Obedience Paradox?00:32:26 - Man as an instrument00:36:22 - We Heart Nutrition00:37:20 - What does submission mean?00:51:01 - The temptation for women00:54:30 - What are women's fallen traits?01:08:38 - Do's/Don'ts of Biblical Submission01:27:13 - Final thoughts

Katherine Boyle is a General Partner at Andreessen Horowitz and cofounder of its American Dynamism practice, investing in sectors such as defense, aerospace, manufacturing, and infrastructure. She serves on the boards of Apex Space and Hadrian Automation, and is a board observer for Saronic Technologies and Castelion. Previously, she was a partner at General Catalyst, where she co-led the seed practice and backed companies like Anduril Industries and Vannevar Labs. She was also a reporter at The Washington Post. Katherine holds a BA from Georgetown, an MBA from Stanford, and a Master's from the National University of Ireland, Galway. She sits on the boards of The Free Press and the Mercatus Center. Shawn Ryan Show Sponsors: https://americanfinancing.net/srs NMLS 182334, nmlsconsumeraccess.org https://tryarmra.com/srs https://betterhelp.com/srs This episode is sponsored. Give online therapy a try at betterhelp.com/srs and get on your way to being your best self. https://meetfabric.com/shawn https://shawnlikesgold.com https://hillsdale.edu/srs https://masachips.com/srs – USE CODE SRS https://paladinpower.com/srs – USE CODE SRS https://patriotmobile.com/srs https://rocketmoney.com/srs https://ROKA.com – USE CODE SRS https://trueclassic.com/srs https://USCCA.com/srs https://blackbuffalo.com Katherine Boyle Links: Website - https://a16z.com/author/katherine-boyle X - https://x.com/KTmBoyle Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Today's guests are Cameron Josse and Joel Reinhardt. Cameron Josse is an Assistant Strength & Conditioning Coach with the Detroit Lions. He's previously led training at DeFranco's and worked in college football at UNC Charlotte and Indiana, training athletes across the NFL, NHL, UFC, and WWE. Joel Reinhardt is the Director of Football Performance at Lafayette College. He's coached at San José State, Stanford, UMass, and Nicholls State. Both Cameron and Joel are field leaders in applied performance, data-driven programming, and athletic movement for physical preparation in American Football. Details in athletic preparation change from the level of high school to college to professional. On today's episode, Cameron and Joel speak on the nature of contact and collision preparation in their athlete populations, with a specific emphasis on the use of the ground and rolling patterns. They discuss the specific game demands of football, especially on the college and pro level, and how to prepare athletes for 25,000+ weekly yards of total on-field movement. They break down their approaches to speed, direction change, and capacity building work, with these ideas in mind. This was a show with lots of wisdom on helping players fully meet the needs of their sport. Today's episode is brought to you by Hammer Strength and LILA Exogen wearable resistance. Use the code "justfly25" for 25% off any Lila Exogen wearable resistance training, including the popular Exogen Calf Sleeves. For this offer, head to Lilateam.com View more podcast episodes at the podcast homepage. (https://www.just-fly-sports.com/podcast-home/) Timestamps 1:57 – In-Season Program Differences: NFL vs. College Strength Cycles 4:48 – Navigating Player Relationships with Private Trainers 15:57 – Adapting Contact Prep and Agility for Different Levels 32:38 – Tempo Running as a Foundation for Training Camp Readiness 37:44 – Total Yardage and Conditioning Strategy in Football Preparation 50:16 – Designing Multi-Directional Conditioning Sessions That Mimic Football 58:28 – Integrating Multi-Directional Movements in Conditioning for Athleticism 1:03:46 – Reframing Speed Development Within Annual Training Cycles 1:10:04 – Shifting Focus: From Pure Speed to Building Complete Players Actionable Takeaways In-Season Program Differences: NFL vs. College Strength Cycles [1:57] College and NFL environments demand different strategies due to season length, player access, and structure. Joel discusses managing heavy summer phases before camp, while Cam explains the shift in autonomy and scheduling when transitioning to the NFL. What to try: In college, leverage summer access to build in more football-specific work before camp. In pro settings: Expect less year-round control—build players' autonomy and keep lines open during away periods. Plan for longer in-season stress in the NFL (17+ games); taper early and build recovery into weekly rhythms Navigating Player Relationships with Private Trainers [4:48] Cameron emphasizes collaboration with private-sector coaches when players train off-site. Rather than resisting outside input, he advocates for using it to better individualize in-team programming. What to try: Reach out to private coaches working with your athletes—especially vets with long-standing relationships. Use those conversations to shape training direction, not override it. Drop the ego—focus on what helps the athlete feel and perform best Adapting Contact Prep and Agility for Different Levels [15:57] Literal contact prep (e.g., wrestling, rugby-style drills) is mostly off-limits in team settings. Cam shifts toward decel work, ground-based drills, and rolling patterns to mimic collisions without violating rules. What to try: Use crawling, rolls, and tumbling as proxies for contact—especially during early prep phases. Emphasize deceleration and COD mechanics for lower body contact loading.

What happens when AI decides who gets promoted and who gets fired? Blake and David dive into the shocking reality that 60% of managers now use AI for HR decisions, with over 20% letting algorithms make final calls without human oversight. They explore a Stanford study revealing that tax preparers are the #1 profession seeking automation, but only for basic calendar scheduling. Plus, discover why young Americans now rank health over wealth as their top measure of success, and how this generational shift is reshaping talent recruitment in accounting.SponsorsCloud Accountant Staffing - http://accountingpodcast.promo/casKeeper - http://accountingpodcast.promo/keeperChapters(01:27) - Tax Prom: The Must-Attend Event (04:15) - AI in HR: Promotions and Firings (08:48) - AI in the Workplace: Automation and Worker Preferences (13:32) - AI Adoption and Security Concerns (18:21) - AI Training and Education in Firms (24:01) - Armanino's New AI-Powered Data Warehouse (33:07) - The Annoying Know-It-All Employee (33:18) - The Perfect AI Assistant (35:48) - Young People's Values on Success (38:55) - Global Perspectives on Success (41:23) - The Talent Shortage in Accounting (43:10) - Unlimited PTO and Burnout (46:53) - Tariffs Update (50:42) - The Big Beautiful Bill (01:03:52) - IRS Staffing Cuts and Refund Delays (01:08:26) - Conclusion and CPE Information  Show Notes  Half of Managers Use AI To Determine Who Gets Promoted and Firedhttps://www.resumebuilder.com/half-of-managers-use-ai-to-determine-who-gets-promoted-and-fired/Future of Work with AI Agentshttps://futureofwork.saltlab.stanford.edu/Future of Work with AI Agents: Auditing Automation and Augmentation Potential across the U.S. Workforce https://arxiv.org/abs/2506.06576 What workers really want from artificial intelligence https://hai.stanford.edu/news/what-workers-really-want-from-artificial-intelligence Big 4 Firm Discovers That Bragging About AI Efficiencies Leads Clients to Expect a Discounthttps://www.goingconcern.com/big-4-firm-discovers-that-bragging-about-ai-efficiencies-leads-clients-to-expect-a-discount/ Monday Morning Accounting News Brief: PwC Clients Ask For an AI Discount; Big 4 Firms Losing Hundreds of Partners https://www.goingconcern.com/monday-morning-accounting-news-brief-pwc-clients-ask-for-an-ai-discount-big-4-firms-losing-hundreds-of-partners-6-30-25/ Armanino planning data warehouse service, used AI for development https://www.accountingtoday.com/news/armanino-planning-data-warehouse-service-used-ai-to-help-development Bolt's millennial founder has just ‘killed' its unlimited PTO perk because it was actually causing burnout https://fortune.com/2025/07/02/bolt-millennial-founder-ceo-ryan-breslow-killed-unlimited-pto-burnout-mandatory-four-weeks-paid-vacation-fintech-startup/ Agentic Misalignment: AI Agents in Corporate Environmentshttps://www.anthropic.com/research/agentic-misalignment Relationships, health and financial stability are the defining priorities for Gen Z, according to new EY survey https://www.ey.com/en_gl/newsroom/2025/05/relationships-health-and-financial-stability-are-the-defining-priorities-for-gen-z-according-to-new-ey-survey 2025 Technology Perceptions Survey https://www.intapp.com/2025-tech-perceptions-survey/ Trust, attitudes and use of artificial intelligence https://kpmg.com/us/en/articles/2025/trust-attitudes-and-use-of-artificial-intelligence.html Tax Foundation Tax Prom 2025 https://taxprom.comNeed CPE?Get CPE for listening to podcasts with Earmark: https://earmarkcpe.comSubscribe to the Earmark Podcast: https://podcast.earmarkcpe.comGet in TouchThanks for listening and the great reviews! We appreciate you! Follow and tweet @BlakeTOliver and @DavidLeary. Find us on Facebook and Instagram. If you like what you hear, please do us a favor and write a review on Apple Podcasts or Podchaser. Call us and leave a voicemail; maybe we'll play it on the show. DIAL (202) 695-1040.SponsorshipsAre you interested in sponsoring The Accounting Podcast? For details, read the prospectus.Need Accounting Conference Info? Check out our new website - accountingconferences.comLimited edition shirts, stickers, and other necessitiesTeePublic Store: http://cloudacctpod.link/merchSubscribeApple Podcasts: http://cloudacctpod.link/ApplePodcastsYouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@TheAccountingPodcastSpotify: http://cloudacctpod.link/SpotifyPodchaser: http://cloudacctpod.link/podchaserStitcher: http://cloudacctpod.link/StitcherOvercast: http://cloudacctpod.link/OvercastClassifiedsREFRAME 2025 - http://accountingpodcast.promo/reframe2025Want to get the word out about your newsletter, webinar, party, Facebo...

I encourage all of my patients to find what I refer to as a “cabana boy.” I like the idea of someone fanning them with a big palm leaf, and taking care of their every need while they relax and take it easy during fertility treatment.  Since it can be hard to find a good cabana boy these days, I am always on the lookout for ways to make things easier for my patients. Still, eating right is super important during fertility treatment, AND meal prep and planning can be one more thing to add to your “plate” during an already busy time. When I found out about Methodology, I knew I had to have CEO Julie Nguyen on The Egg Whisperer Show. I know you'll be inspired by Julie's story of how she started Methodology as a way to eat better, and eat healthier, while still having quick and easy options for a busy life. In this episode you will learn about how gut health impacts your overall health, easy ways to eat a cleaner diet, and how some of those ailments (eczema, asthma, and sometimes sleep issues) you have might be the result of what you're eating.. Our current culture provides so many opportunities to pick up fast and processed foods, and while that seems like a faster option, it's not always your best option. I hope you'll join Julie and I as we talk about ways to fix this, especially during a time when you are looking for ways to eat healthier and have easy food prep options. Julie Nguyen is the Founder & CEO of Methodology, a company that makes high-quality, fully cooked meals for busy professionals. Julie holds a BA in Economics from Stanford, and started Methodology after discovering that her own diet was negatively impacting her health and causing eczema, asthma, and poor sleep. Six years, Two nutritionists, 3 personal trainers, and an enormous excel sheet later, Julie had unlocked the keys to tracking her own eating habits and that was the start of Methodology. Get the full show notes for this episode on Dr. Aimee's site. You can find Methodology here, https://www.gomethodology.com/ Would you like to learn about IVF?Click here to join Dr. Aimee for The IVF Class Dr. Aimee will explain Egg Freezing and IVF and there will be time to ask her your questions live on Zoom. Subscribe to my YouTube channel for more fertility tips! Join Egg Whisperer School Checkout the podcast Subscribe to the newsletter to get updates Dr. Aimee Eyvazzadeh is one of America's most well known fertility doctors. Her success rate at baby-making is what gives future parents hope when all hope is lost. She pioneered the TUSHY Method and BALLS Method to decrease your time to pregnancy. Learn more about the TUSHY Method and find a wealth of fertility resources at www.draimee.org.

Six practical steps to harness the full power of your mind. Our guest today is James R. Doty, a neurosurgeon who has just written a whole book about the science of manifestation – although, as you'll hear him admit, there's very little ‘magic' involved in his process.  James R. Doty, M.D. is a Stanford neurosurgeon, neuroscientist, compassion researcher, inventor, entrepreneur, author and philanthropist. He's the founder and director of the Center for Compassion and Altruism Research and Education (CCARE) at Stanford University.  In this episode we talk about: Doty's six steps to manifest His very interesting backstory The art and science of intention setting and the role of our neural pathways. How caring can ignite our parasympathetic nervous system, which in turn can help us manifest better Practical tips for embedding an intention into our subconscious The keys to understanding what we want vs. what we need And how to ‘alert the bloodhound' to harness the full power of your mind We originally aired this episode in July 2024. Related Episodes: #388. The Science of Training Your Attention | Dr. Amishi Jha The Art and Science of Compassion: Thupten Jinpa #425. Compassion Is the Ultimate Tool for the Truly Ambitious | Paul Gilbert Join Dan's online community here Follow Dan on social: Instagram, TikTok Subscribe to our YouTube Channel To advertise on the show, contact sales@advertisecast.com or visit https://advertising.libsyn.com/10HappierwithDanHarris