Podcasts about tavris

In this episode of the You Are Not Broken podcast, Dr. Kelly Casperson interviews Dr. Carol Tavris, a renowned social psychologist and feminist. They discuss the evolving definition of feminism, the impact of cognitive dissonance on women's health, and the collaboration between Dr. Tavris and Dr. Avrum Blooming on hormone therapy. The conversation highlights the importance of staying curious, the role of fear in controlling women, and the challenges women face in navigating medical information. Dr. Tavris emphasizes the need for women to advocate for their health and to question outdated medical warnings. In this conversation, Dr. Kelly Casperson and Carol Tavris discuss the complexities surrounding hormone therapy, particularly estrogen, and the societal and medical biases that influence women's health. They explore the implications of labeling estrogen as hazardous, the challenges of mobilizing women for advocacy, and the cognitive biases that affect perceptions of hormone therapy. The discussion emphasizes the need for informed activism, understanding causation versus correlation, and the evolution of medical beliefs over time. Dr. Tavris offers insights on how to engage effectively with both the medical community and the public to foster change in women's health policies. Takeaways Feminism is about equality and justice for all genders. Cognitive dissonance can hinder our ability to accept new information. Women have historically been misrepresented in medical research. Collaboration between psychology and medicine can improve women's health. Fear is a powerful tool used to control women's choices. Women must navigate a complex landscape of medical information. The medical community often overlooks women's health needs. Outdated medical warnings can create unnecessary fear. Women should advocate for their health and question misinformation. Understanding cognitive dissonance can help in making informed decisions. Estrogen patches are being labeled as hazardous without proper justification. Women need to mobilize and organize for advocacy efforts. Apathy among women in advocacy is a significant barrier to change. Cognitive biases can distort perceptions of hormone therapy. Correlation does not imply causation, especially in health matters. Personal anecdotes can shape beliefs about medical treatments. The evolution of medical beliefs often requires a critical mass of evidence. Activism should focus on engaging those who are open to change. Mistakes in medicine are common, and learning from them is essential. Holding beliefs lightly allows for adaptation to new evidence. Dr. Tavris' Books: Estrogen Matters Mistakes Were Made (but not by me) Thanks to our sponsor Midi Women's Health. Designed by midlife experts, delivered by experienced clinicians, covered by insurance. Midi is the first virtual care clinic made exclusively for women 40+. Evidence-based treatments. Personalized midlife care. https://www.joinmidi.com To learn more about Via vaginal moisturizer from Solv Wellness, visit via4her.com for 30% off your first purchase of any product, automatically applied at checkout. For an additional $5 off, use coupon code DRKELLY5. Order my book "You Are Not Broken: Stop "Should-ing" All Over You Sex Life" Listen to my Tedx Talk: Why we need adult sex ed Take my Adult Sex Ed Master Class: Join my membership to get these episodes ASAP, a private facebook group to discuss and my private accountability group for your health, hormones and life support! www.kellycaspersonmd.com/membership Interested in my sexual health and hormone clinic? Starts January 2025. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Welcome to the Social-Engineer Podcast: The Doctor Is In Series – where we will discuss understandings and developments in the field of psychology.   In today's episode, Chris and Abbie are discussing Psychological Myths. They will talk about some of the most pervasive myths in our society and how you can separate fact from fiction. [July 1, 2024]   00:00 - Intro 00:17 - Dr. Abbie Maroño Intro 00:41 - Intro Links -          Social-Engineer.com - http://www.social-engineer.com/ -          Managed Voice Phishing - https://www.social-engineer.com/services/vishing-service/ -          Managed Email Phishing - https://www.social-engineer.com/services/se-phishing-service/ -          Adversarial Simulations - https://www.social-engineer.com/services/social-engineering-penetration-test/ -          Social-Engineer channel on SLACK - https://social-engineering-hq.slack.com/ssb -          CLUTCH - http://www.pro-rock.com/ -          innocentlivesfoundation.org - http://www.innocentlivesfoundation.org/                                             03:54 - The Topic of the Day: Psychological Myths 05:05 - Consider the Source 06:45 - Too Good To Be True? 09:43 - Myth 1: Reading Minds 11:45 - Myth 2: 10% 14:36 - Myth 3: Left vs Right Brained 18:11 - Myth 4: Venting Anger for Calmness 23:02 - Myth 5: Hypnosis Unlimited 31:05 - Myth 6: Perfect Memory 37:12 - Question Everything 39:02 - Next Month: Self-Sabotage 39:47 - Wrap Up & Outro                                                                         -          Work in Progress - Dr. Abbie Maroño -          www.social-engineer.com -          www.innocentlivesfoundation.org   Find us online: -          Twitter: @DrAbbieofficial -          LinkedIn: linkedin.com/in/dr-abbie-maroño-phd -          Instagram: @DoctorAbbieofficial -          Twitter: @humanhacker -          LinkedIn: linkedin.com/in/christopherhadnagy     References: Beyerstein, B. L. (1999). Whence cometh the myth that we only use 10% of our brains? In S. Della Sala (Ed.), Mind Myths: Exploring Popular Assumptions About the Mind and Brain (pp. 3-24). John Wiley & Sons. Bushman, B. J. (2002). Does venting anger feed or extinguish the flame? Catharsis, rumination, distraction, anger, and aggressive responding. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 28(6), 724-731. This study found that venting anger actually increases aggressive behavior and does not diminish anger. Derbyshire, S. W., Whalley, M. G., & Oakley, D. A. (2009). Fibromyalgia pain and its modulation by hypnotic and non-hypnotic suggestion: An fMRI analysis. European Journal of Pain, 13(5), 542-550. Horton, J. E., Crawford, H. J., Harrington, G., & Downs, J. H. (2004). Increased anterior corpus callosum size associated positively with hypnotizability and the ability to control pain. Brain: A Journal of Neurology, 127(Pt 8), 1741-1747. Jensen, M. P., Adachi, T., & Hakimian, S. (2015). Brain Oscillations, Hypnosis, and Hypnotizability. American Journal of Clinical Hypnosis, 57(3), 230-253. Kirsch, I. (1997). Suggestibility or Hypnosis: What Do Our Scales Really Measure? The International Journal of Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis, 45(3), 212-225. Lilienfeld, S. O., Lynn, S. J., Ruscio, J., & Beyerstein, B. L. (2010). 50 Great Myths of Popular Psychology: Shattering Widespread Misconceptions about Human Behavior. Wiley-Blackwell. Loftus, E. F., & Palmer, J. C. (1974). Reconstruction of automobile destruction: An example of the interaction between language and memory. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 13(5), 585-589. doi:10.1016/S0022-5371(74)80011-3 Loftus, E. F., & Pickrell, J. E. (1995). The formation of false memories. Psychiatric Annals, 25(12), 720-725. doi:10.3928/0048-5713-19951201-07 Lohr, J. M., Olatunji, B. O., Baumeister, R. F., & Bushman, B. J. (2007). The psychology of anger venting and empirically supported alternatives that do no harm. Scientific Review of Mental Health Practice, 5(1), 53-64. This review challenges the catharsis hypothesis, providing evidence that venting may be harmful and not helpful. McGeown, W. J., Mazzoni, G., Venneri, A., & Kirsch, I. (2009). Hypnotic induction decreases anterior default mode activity. Consciousness and Cognition, 18(4), 848-855. Nielsen, J. A., Zielinski, B. A., Ferguson, M. A., Lainhart, J. E., & Anderson, J. S. (2013). An evaluation of the left-brain vs. right-brain hypothesis with resting state functional connectivity magnetic resonance imaging. PLOS ONE, 8(8), e71275. Oakley, D. A., & Halligan, P. W. (2017). Hypnotic suggestion and cognitive neuroscience. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 21(6), 406-416. Raij, T. T., Numminen, J., Narvanen, S., Hiltunen, J., & Hari, R. (2005). Brain correlates of subjective reality of physically and psychologically induced pain. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 102(6), 2147-2151. Schacter, D. L. (1996). Searching for memory: The brain, the mind, and the past. New York, NY: Basic Books. Schacter, D. L. (2001). The seven sins of memory: How the mind forgets and remembers. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin. Tavris, C. (1989). Anger: The misunderstood emotion. New York: Simon and Schuster. Tavris' work discusses the misconceptions surrounding anger, including the myth of cathartic expression.

In this episode Garth interviews Carol Tavris, an independent scholar from Los Angeles, CA. Carol recounts her eclectic career, highlighting her transition from academia to writing. She discusses the importance of accurately communicating psychological science to the public, emphasizing empirical evidence while criticizing the tendency of some popular writers to prioritize sensational ideas. She reflects on various topics, including her work on the psychology of anger, her skepticism toward unfounded scientific claims, and the dynamics of cognitive dissonance. The dialogue also covers Tavris's contributions to textbooks, particularly her efforts to incorporate critical thinking and a balanced view of gender and cultural issues in introductory psychology courses. Carol generously shares insights on maintaining scientific integrity amid societal pressures and changing academic landscapes. [Note. Portions of these show notes were generated by Descript AI.]

Chapter 1 What's Mistakes Were Made (But Not by Me) Book by Carol Tavris"Mistakes Were Made (But Not by Me): Why We Justify Foolish Beliefs, Bad Decisions, and Hurtful Acts" is a non-fiction book written by Carol Tavris and Elliot Aronson. The book explores the concept of cognitive dissonance and its role in human behavior. It delves into why people often refuse to admit their mistakes and instead engage in rationalizations and attribution of blame to others. Using various examples from different domains like politics, law, and personal relationships, the authors analyze the psychological mechanisms behind these behaviors and provide insights into how individuals can overcome self-justification. The book seeks to explain why people often maintain their erroneous beliefs and actions rather than correcting themselves, and the impact it has on personal growth and relationships.Chapter 2 Is Mistakes Were Made (But Not by Me) Book A Good BookIt is difficult to determine if a book is "good" as it is subjective and depends on individual preferences. "Mistakes Were Made (But Not by Me)" by Carol Tavris and Elliot Aronson is highly regarded in the field of psychology and has received positive reviews from readers. The book explores the concept of cognitive dissonance and explores how people often justify their wrongdoings or mistakes. It provides valuable insights into human behavior and the errors of judgment we all make. If you are interested in psychology, cognitive biases, and understanding the complexities of human thinking, this book could be a worthwhile read for you.Chapter 3 Mistakes Were Made (But Not by Me) Book by Carol Tavris Summary"Mistakes Were Made (But Not by Me)" is a book written by Carol Tavris and Elliot Aronson. It explores the concept of cognitive dissonance and its impact on human behavior. The book highlights how people often struggle to admit their mistakes and take responsibility for them, instead resorting to self-justification and blaming others. Tavris and Aronson argue that cognitive dissonance, the psychological discomfort that arises when our actions contradict our beliefs or values, plays a crucial role in this process.The authors provide various case studies and examples from different fields to illustrate the harmful consequences of this self-justification mechanism. They discuss instances where individuals, organizations, and even entire nations have made catastrophic errors and failed to recognize or rectify them.The book delves into topics such as false memories, confirmation bias, and the criminal justice system to shed light on how cognitive dissonance affects our perceptions and decision-making. It argues that acknowledging mistakes, rather than avoiding or denying them, is vital for personal growth, healthy relationships, and societal progress.Additionally, "Mistakes Were Made (But Not by Me)" explores strategies to mitigate the impact of cognitive dissonance. The authors suggest fostering a culture of critical thinking, encouraging self-reflection, and promoting empathy as ways to challenge our biases and prejudices.Overall, the book seeks to provide readers with a better understanding of why people often refuse to admit their mistakes. It examines the psychological processes behind self-justification and suggests ways to overcome these cognitive biases to foster a more honest and accountable society. Chapter 4 Mistakes Were Made (But Not by Me) Book AuthorCarol Tavris is a renowned social psychologist and author. She co-authored the book "Mistakes Were Made (But Not by...

We're diving head first into a necessary and energetic discussion about a topic that has stirred the medical world: hormone replacement therapy (HRT).  HRT is both a medical and feminist issue and we're creating a call to action for all women to educate ourselves in order to advocate for ourselves.As with many of the experts we've connected with in our menopause community, Avrum Bluming and Carol Tavris didn't set out to be activists.  These leaders were compelled by the shift in culture around treating women with symptoms of perimenopause as a result of the groundbreaking research done by the Women's Health Initiative (WHI).  Overnight the perception of HRT transformed dramatically, and stopped being prescribed. Bluming and Tavris are joining us to address the exaggerated claims made by the Women's Health Initiative and shed light on the overlooked benefits of HRT, all while ensuring that the specter of breast cancer risk remains low.  AVRUM BLUMING, MDAvrum Bluming received his MD from the Columbia College of Physicians and Surgeons. He spent four years as a senior investigator for the National Cancer Institute and for two of those years was director of the Lymphoma Treatment Center in Kampala, Uganda. He organized the first study of lumpectomy for the treatment of breast cancer in Southern California in 1978, and for more than two decades he has been studying the benefits and risks of hormone replacement therapy administered to women with a history of breast cancer. Dr. Bluming has served as a clinical professor of medicine at USC and has been an invited speaker at the Royal College of Physicians in London and the Pasteur Institute in Paris. He was elected to mastership in the American College of Physicians, an honor accorded to only five hundred of the over one hundred thousand board-certified internists in this country.CAROL TAVRIS, PhD  Carol Tavris received her PhD in social psychology from the University of Michigan. Her books include Mistakes Were Made (But Not by Me), with Elliot Aronson; Anger: The Misunderstood Emotion, and The Mismeasure of Woman. She has written articles, op-eds, and book reviews on topics in psychological science for a wide array of publications — including the Los Angeles Times, the New York Times Book Review, the Wall Street Journal, and the TLS — and a column for Skeptic magazine. She is a fellow of the Association for Psychological Science and has received numerous awards for her efforts to promote gender equality, science, and skepticism. 

Geçtiğimiz hafta, Kasım ayının son Çarşamba günü Kitap Kulübümüzün 23üncü buluşmasında Carol Tavris & Elliot Aronson'dan Hatalar Psikolojisi'ni konuştuk. Bu bölümde her zaman olduğu gibi katılımcılarımızın kitaba ilişkin görüşlerine yer veriyorum. Tavris ve Aronson sosyal psikoloji alanında çalışan bilim insanları. Kitabın orijinal adı “Mistakes were made” (but not by me) Bu politikacıların sorumluluk almadan yaptıkları itiraflara gönderme yapıyor. Yani bazı hatalar yapıldı ama yani ben yapmadım, benim kabahatim, ihmalim yok. Bunu Nixon, Reagan, Clinton, Kissenger, Bush gibi politikacılardan örnekler vererek anlatıyor. Kitabın tamamı aslında bilişsel uyumsuzluk adı verilen Amerikalı sosyal psikolog Leon Festinger'in teorisi hakkında. Ki Aronson da onun öğrencisi. Bilişsel uyumsuzluk, bireyin inanç, davranış, söylem, değer ve fikirleri arasında bir çelişkiyle karşı karşıya kaldığı durumlarda ortaya çıkıyor. Kitapta çok çarpıcı bir tespit var. Tutarsız davranan bazı insanların bizi kandırmaya çalıştığı yanılgısına düşebiliyoruz, aslında onlar kendilerini kandırıyorlar. Kitabın arka yazılarından biri bunu güzel özetliyor. “Sevgililerin, avukatların, doktorların, politikacıların; herkesin kendi kendini nasıl kandırdığına dair etkileyici bir çalışma… Sunduğu bilimsel kanıtlar, gerçekçi ve sağduyulu cazibesi nedeniyle, Hatalar Psikolojisi oldukça inandırıcı. Bu kitabı okuyarak, liderlerimizin, sevdiklerimizin ve -dürüst davranırsak- kendimizin davranışlarını anlayabiliriz; insanın doğasının bazı şaşırtıcı gizemleri daha açık görünmeye başlayabilir. Kitabın sonunda hatalı adımlarımızı kabul etmekten kaçınmamızı sağlayan yöntemler, çok daha aşina hale geliyor. Biz -ve bizi yönetenlerle bize yol gösterenler- yalnızca “Ben bir hata yaptım, özür dilerim” demenin gücünü ve değerini bir anlasak, bizim ve herkesin hayatının ne kadar olumlu bir yönde etkileneceğinin farkına varırız.” Evet dilerseniz şimdi sohbetimize kulak verelim. Söz alan arkadaşlar sırasıya (02:42) Aycan Acar Şahin, (05:12) Yavuz Abut, (06:43) Halime Özben Hacı, (09:21) Yavuz Abut, (10:15) Aycan Acar Şahin, (11:07) Yasemin Parlak Demir, (12:51) Selim Uysal, (14:18) Alim Küçükpehlivan, (16:42) Betül Emre, (17:50) Yasemin Parlak Demir, (19:21) Yavuz Abut

In this candid and personal discussion about vaginal health, I share the following golden nuggets. NEWS FLASH #1: There ARE answers to reclaiming your sex life after a breast cancer diagnosis. You just need help in knowing how to go get them. NEWSFLASH #2: BODY BEFORE BRAIN. You've GOT to fix your body before your brain can get back in the game. NEWSFLASH #3: THIS ISN'T ABOUT LUBE. You may be experiencing issues that lubes can't fix. Get to the bottom of it with a diagnosis instead of trying to fix it with a bandaid. NEWSFLASH #4: There are typically no quick solutions for our vaginal issues. Be patient and kind to yourself. NEWSFLASH #5 – There is a growing body of work that indicates that vaginal estrogen is not harmful to women who have had breast cancer. It's always a personal choice. Your Two-Step Action Plan STEP 1 — Set up an appt with your gynecologist. Don't forget to download the Healthcare Provider Worksheet on http://sexafterbreastcancer.com/, and use it as a tool for your appointments. STEP 2 — Go to http://sexafterbreastcancer.com/. Join our community. Get into the discussion. Meet our Contributing Experts. Read the articles and videos we've provided for you on our website and inside the groups. Listen to our podcast which has brand new content every week. Resources Discussed Book - Estrogen Matters: Why Taking Hormones in Menopause Can Improve Women's Well-Being and Lengthen Their Lives -- Without Raising the Risk of Breast Cancer: Bluming, Avrum, Tavris, Carol: 9780316481205: AmazonSmile: Books. Podcast - Is Estrogen the Enemy of Women Who Have Had Breast Cancer? A Conversation with Dr. Melody Rodarte, DO Article/Video - Is Estrogen the Enemy of Women Who Have Had Breast Cancer? A Conversation with Dr. Melody Rodarte, DO Shared with love by Jan James, Hope After Breast Cancer Find out more about our private Facebook support groups (Booby Buddies, Hope After Breast Cancer, Sex After Breast Cancer, Booby Buddies en español) here. Joining our Newsletter List will give you a monthly recap of our best content, as well as information about available training and support. Subscribe to our Hope After Breast Cancer Podcast on your favorite podcast platform! Please help me provide more content to our community by buying me a cup of coffee (or two) at Buy Me A Coffee. And please pray for my efforts to have significance in the lives of the women we serve! Thank you! Disclaimer: While professional experts and the Company address health issues and the information provided on this Website and its components relates to medical and/or health issues, the information provided is not a substitute for medical or health advice from a professional who is aware of the facts and circumstances of your individual situation.

I am delighted to have two respected researchers, Dr. Avrum Bluming and Dr. Carol Tavris, joining me today! They are the co-authors of the book, Estrogen Matters.  Avrum Bluming received his MD from the Columbia College of Physicians and Surgeons. He spent four years as a senior investigator for the National Cancer Institute. For two of those years, he was director of the Lymphoma Treatment Center in Kampala, Uganda. For more than three decades, he has been studying the benefits and risks of hormone replacement therapy administered to women with a history of breast cancer. Carol Tavris received her Ph.D. in social psychology from the University of Michigan. Her books include Mistakes Were Made (But Not by Me), with Elliot Aronson; Anger: The Misunderstood Emotion, and The Mismeasure of Woman. Estrogen Matters provides a lot of scientific information that refutes much of the fear-mongering around hormone replacement therapy. It is helpful for women who have gone through cancer therapy and those who have not had to deal with cancer, in terms of the conversations they could consider having with their healthcare professionals. Dr. Bluming and Dr. Tavris are both incredible individuals, and it was an honor to interact with them! In this episode, we dive into statistical manipulation and the influence of the Women's Health Initiative. We talk about the study limitations and the role of data mining. We discuss the benefits of hormone replacement therapy and its impact on cancer risk, coronary artery disease, bone and brain health, and more. We also look at synthetic versus bioidentical hormones, routes of administration, and what we need to think about in our own hormonal health journeys.  I hope you enjoy my conversion with Drs. Bluming and Tavris today! Stay tuned for more! IN THIS EPISODE YOU WILL LEARN: Dr. Bluming talks about the Women's Health Initiative and explains why we went off-course after it came out in 2002.  The symptoms of menopause are not trivial. They are physically and mentally harmful to the body.  We need to understand the social and political trends against hormone replacement therapy. We need to understand that estrogen for women in menopause plummets to one percent of what it was before menopause. Dr. Bluming discusses the various issues with the article about hormone replacement therapy. If a woman starts taking hormones within ten years of her last menstrual period, she will have a reduced risk of heart disease and strokes and also improved longevity.  The women who fear taking hormone replacement therapy are afraid of breast cancer.  Estrogen reduces the risk of heart disease by up to fifty percent. Drs. Tavris and Bluming talk about bone health.  The impact of hormone replacement on brain health. How the investigators of the Women's Health Initiative manipulated their findings on dementia. How data mining gets used to sub-stratify data that has already been studied. The truth about bio-identical hormones. There is a lot of misinformation around the route of administration for estrogen. Connect with Cynthia Thurlow Follow on Twitter, Instagram & LinkedIn Check out Cynthia's website   Connect with Dr. Avrum Blooming and Dr. Carol Tavris On Facebook On Twitter

We hebben allemaal wel eens last van botsende gedachten. Blijven roken terwijl je weet dat het slecht is voor je gezondheid, jezelf omschrijven als ‘begaan met het milieu' en toch het vliegtuig pakken, of claimen van dieren te houden en vlees eten. Dit soort botsende gedachten leiden tot een ongemakkelijk gevoel. Hoe komt dat? Wat is de functie daarvan? En op welke manieren kunnen we met botsende gedachten omgaan? Aan de hand van recent psychologisch onderzoek bespreken Rolf en Anita antwoorden op deze vragen. Meer over cognitieve dissonantie vind je in hoofdstuk 17 van het boek Drang naar Samenhang: De Psychologie van het Begrijpen. Bronnen:Aronson, E., & Tavris, C. (2020). The role of cognitive dissonance in the pandemic. The Atlantic.Gradidge, S., Zawisza, M., Harvey, A.J., & McDermott, D.T. (2021). A structured literature review of the meat paradox. Social Psychological Bulletin, 16(3), Article e5953, https://doi.org/10.32872/spb.5953Mazor, M., Demertzi, A., Fahrenfort, J. J., Faivre, N., Francken, J., Lamy, D., … Lubianker, N. (2021, November 12). The scientific study of consciousness cannot, and should not, be morally neutral. https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/8nb2cProefdiervrij onderzoek aan Universiteit Utrecht Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Ross and Carrie follow up their rage room experience with a discussion on anger featuring social psychologist Dr. Carol Tavris, author of Anger: The Misunderstood Emotion. Is anger meant to be released, best to keep bottled up, or is the truth far more subtle and situation-dependent than what can fit on a bumper sticker? Dr. Tavris shares the research, along with relevant examples.For pics and videos, follow us on Facebook!

Cui Bono, the Latin phrase meaning “who benefits,” says the motive for an act or crime lies with the person who has something to gain.Only twenty percent of our senior women and even fewer men take hormones. Outside Europe and the US, usage is rare. How is this possible? The “bio-identical” or “human” forms of these drugs are not promoted because they can rarely be patented to make the big money. But they work better and are safer than other medications such as statins, antidepressants, many cancer treatments, and the proprietary imitation hormones made by big Pharma. These industry cash cows are supported and protected, while in contrast, natural hormones are defamed and restricted. Chasing profits has ruined science. To explain, here is how the Women's Health Initiative study (WHI) was hijacked by its own authors and sabotaged patient care. This huge National Institutes of Health trial (published in 2002) examined 160,000 women aged 59 to 79. It found an increase in breast cancer for patients taking both Premarin, the horse urine estrogen, and Provera, the patented synthetic progesterone. But those who took only Premarin had a decrease in breast cancer. This proved Provera was responsible, and other trials confirmed it. The WHI should have ended this medication's use for long-term applications, but it did not.The WHI took 11 years, and by that time it was complete, the two drugs it examined were obsolete. But the study statisticians claimed they uncovered critical dangers, and the authors sensationalized and embellished their threadbare findings. Medical academics buffed their reputations by declaring that they, too, could see the emperor's clothes. The media joined the parade—baloney sells advertising—and the public soon believed that all female hormones were killers. This “man bites dog” story still terrifies everyone. Once a bell is rung, it cannot be unrung. In the public and medical eye, hormones were branded with cancer, dementia, and other problems. One reviewer wrote that the study authors were “overselling hysteria.” John Goldman, MD, wrote in Medscape, “[The study] has undermined the credibility of the research and the medical community as a whole.” Abraham Morgentaler, MD, and others (Harvard) explained how the panic was generated:The (WHI)… reported increased risk of adverse events of only 19 events per 10,000 person-years of exposure for the estrogen–progesterone arm [Premarin-Provera] compared with placebo. This means that if one woman in every generation of a family used estrogen–progesterone for 10 years, it would take 50 generations, or about 1,000 years, to see one extra adverse event in that family. The result may have been statistically significant, but they were clinically meaningless.Avrum Bluming and Carol Tavris described the study's statistical trickery and atrocious sensationalism in Estrogen Matters (2018), a superb book about the science and politics. One of the WHI's principal investigators, Rossouw, had an agenda to “change the thinking about hormones.” Six years before the WHI was published, he wrote it was time to put “the brakes on that bandwagon,” referring to the growing support for estrogen replacement. And so the WHI authors ignored their colleagues' advice and rushed to publication before completing the study. This spawned thousands of meritless lawsuits. Bluming and Tavris cited follow-up trials showing that estrogen decreases the chance of breast canceSupport the show (https://paypal.me/dryohoauthor?locale.x=en_US)

This is the audio version of a blog post I wrote in May 2021.Everyone eventually reaches a point in life where the need to question assumptions arises; this may manifest in different ways at different points in life.  Whenever I pass the apartment nearby my girlfriend's house where the teenager loudly plays the electric guitar, I like to joke, “You don't understand me, mom!”  My girlfriend says the teenager and the mother actually seem to get along quite well.A lot of people might look around in their twenties and say, “Why are all these people doing this?” Or, they might pose this question's twin sibling, “Why am I not?”  Cultures, beliefs, assumptions evolve over decades, centuries, millennia.  The end result for beings who can think and feel is, ultimately, the perpetuation of the human race, the reward of evolution.  So, if you feel like something is “missing” or if you aren't happy, maybe it's time to take a step back and evaluate, because evolution doesn't necessarily reward us with happiness.Karen Horney was a psychoanalyst.  I, decidedly, am not, nor am I a psychologist or a therapist; I'm just a person trying to figure things out.  I excitedly read Karen Horney's 1950 book Neurosis and Human Growth after finding it as a footnote in another book by a social psychologist named Carol Tavris (I would recommend both her books Anger: The Misunderstood Emotion and Mistakes Were Made (But Not By Me)).  I really liked Neurosis and Human Growth, though I am told by Dr. Tavris, whom I emailed about it, that psychoanalysis has fallen out of vogue and is quite dated.  But, I still find a number of things Ms. Horney has to say to be extremely compelling.She talks about our expectations of life, of others, and of ourselves, dubbing this, “The Tyranny of the Should.”  This is how things “should” be, as we esteem them, as individuals, societies, and cultures; I “should” be doing this, you “should” be doing that, you “should” be treating me a certain way.  She illustrates what she calls a “neurotic claim” (Dr. Tavris also informed me psychology students today would no longer use the word “neurosis”) with an example about a train not being available when she wants to take it, and the resulting frustration that can result.  The train “should” be available at 2:30PM, when I want to take it; how stupid that it is not available then!  Certainly some injustices in our day-to-day life are more grave than others, but when you learn to see how you think about little things such as the dawdling pedestrian crossing the road or the driver who is having a hard time parallel parking, you can start to calm down a bit and go through life giving other parties a bit more benefit of the doubt.People often assume they are omniscient, as any connoisseur of Fox News or CNN might notice.  We think we have all available facts, that if you just do X, Y, and Z, life will fall into place, and a magical happiness and utopia will result.  And in a lot of ways, if you do the things you “should” do, you might be setting yourself up for success.  But, evolution didn't reward human happiness; it rewarded the conditions that led to seven billion humans on Earth, a number that has increased over 10-fold in the last 500 years.  If you've ever been to the natural history museum, humans are really old;like hundreds of thousands of years old.  So, you don't have to be a math whiz to gather that modernity and civilization are, relatively speaking, kind of a new thing.In light of this, if you are feeling unsatisfied, unfulfilled, unhappy, maybe that, actually, makes quite a bit of sense.  Modernity isn't quite as soul-crushing as history was, so we have a lot more time to think, take it easy, and ponder what exactly is going on.  If you are feeling “something is missing,” maybe a personal re-evaluation of your philosophy of life, your “shoulds,” so to speak, is in order.  My friends are all doctors, lawyers, engineers, are having children, have expensive real estate, and here I am holding a uniform from Hot Dog on a Stick and I live with my parents.  To a certain extent, a lot of “should” can put humans in a place where they can achieve happiness; it is easier to be happy when you have a little extra money in the bank.  But if you become addicted to a certain kind of lifestyle, that potential for lasting and intrinsic happiness can morph into a form of slavery, and then you're stuck making boat payments.To be sure, many people genuinely like having a boat, others maybe would be just as happy without one.  I am sure there are just as many satisfied and happy parents as there are parents who wished (or think they wished) they had never had children; and surely their answers will differ ten and twenty and forty years from now.  Different things have different meanings for different people; what do you want your life to mean for you?Jonathan Haidt and Carl Rogers both point out how inescapably social creatures humans are; if we did not care what others thought, we would be sociopaths.  But, as you get older, you can start to question some of the assumptions that are core to our historical human function.  Yes, it is impolite and rude to fart loudly on the subway, and we really ought not to shoot other people in the head for cutting us off in traffic; I think most people, on any given day, would feel these to be simple truths.  But humans are no longer on the savanna with prehistoric creatures, and a lot of the impulses and feelings we evolved with have overstayed their practical welcome.  You might start to question, as you get older, the up-keeping of appearances, and start to do the things that you want to do.  Social isolation can be lonely, but it is fair to assume we will still have friends and be allowed at the grocery store if we pull up in a Nissan Versa instead of a BMW.  Carl Rogers said, “When an activity feels as though it is valuable or worth doing, it is worth doing... I have never regretted moving in directions which ‘felt right,' even though I have often felt lonely or foolish at the time.”Learning to trust what you want from life doesn't have to mean a descent into booze-fueled nihilism coupled with a fast car and lots of drugs.  A lot of the post-WWII pop-psychologists like to talk about listening to your inner dictates, being your true self, self-realization, so on and so forth.  What they're really saying is that you need to do some things with your life that you genuinely want to do.  Rob Kurzban is a psychologist who writes about the “modular mind,” and how we evolved with different brain “modules” that achieve certain evolutionary goals; there is no “self” in there, in our brains, running the show.  This is another way of saying that all of the potential things which could be considered humanly good do not necessarily add up to all being compatible.  There is no final life solution.  Life has paradoxes.  There is nuance.  And, there are tradeoffs.What do you want from life?  What do you want from the World?  These are big questions.  Humans are sexually reproductive creatures.  If you want the pretty girl, a BMW might help.  Others will tell you that if you are relying on the fancy car to get the girl, you're getting the “wrong” kind of girl.  Do you want to start a family?  If you aren't sure, maybe you should put the idea on ice until you've better sorted out your personal life philosophy.We have some modern society-wide assumptions that go like this; you should go to college, you should have nice stuff, you should have a family, and you should get a good job.  And if you want things from the world, and from other people, a lot of these things will be mutually complementary.I did all of the things.  I was married at 23, I had a mortgage not much later, and a graduate degree in marketing.  And all I wanted to do was to sock away enough money so that we could pay off the mortgage so that I could “stop working.”  I felt this deep hatred for my work, which for me was a career in internet marketing that eventually became somewhat lucrative.  Eventually, couples therapy failed, my marriage went kaput, and I entered a fumbling figuring-myself-out in my late twenties; things people like my own parents had to figure out while being married to one another and having two young children.  And it took about ten years of fumbling and doing the same thing until I finally had saved enough money to say I could quit my job, if not forever, at least for a good long while.  I had had enough and wanted to embark on “something else.”My something else wound up entailing a lot of reading.  I started with “Winners Take All” by Anand Giridharadas.  I read a lot of non-fiction books, books about politics, something which I had an undergraduate degree in and had always been interested in.  Then I found my way from political books to pop-psychology books, since politics involves people, as well as philosophy.  I eventually wound my way to literature, having previously deemed the genre of fiction as mind-smut, and non-fiction as the way one learns things.  And in the course of all this reading, I accidentally found my own, better, personal philosophy of life, and realized some life lessons of my own.Dostoevsky, a Russian literature author, pointed out that existence is in fact slavery, and while this sounds like a bleak assessment on the surface, it is objectively true, in a sense.  We have to eat, thus, we need to get food; it so happens that now food comes from the store and not from the savanna.  I think a lot of the modern discontent which exists is a rejection of this fact, a desire to spit in its face, the dislike of reality.  Philosopher Karl Popper wrote of, “a deepfelt dissatisfaction with a world which does not, and cannot, live up to our moral ideas and to our dreams of perfection... a reaction against the strain of our civilization and its demand for personal responsibility.”  The “Closed Society” of history is gone; our roles are not predestined, we must find them for ourselves.  Humans have capacities and need to use them.  We want to work, even if it's not what we think of as “work,” as George Orwell pointed out.  A lot of political philosophy revolves about how we will re-make the World to somehow better link what we want to do with our lives versus what we must do economically in the World that has evolved.  This usually involves the bloody death of those deemed to be evil.  Suffice it to say, a paradox of “work” exists.There might be some fortunate people who find productive work which is both economically and personally rewarding.  I imagine things like physical therapist or medical doctor to be amongst these professions.  I cannot say what it is like since my profession is on the more soul-sucking/evil end of things.  But, I have come to embrace that which provides me with a roof over my head, food in the fridge, and have learned to better appreciate my fortune. Not all things which are economically productive in life are going to be rewarding, and vice versa; this is an irresolvable conflict in a society which has any form of freedom.  Ultimately, the question of whether you get to lead a happy life or not, resides with you.  People adopt philosophies of life, and if your current life philosophy is coming up short; you need to figure out a new one.  Australian “spirit master” Barry Long said, “The truth is you are responsible for your life.  If you're not responsible, it's not your life; and that's absurd.  Similarly, if you blame something else for what happens to you, you're giving up responsibility by giving it to others.  To be responsible is to be responsible for everything that happens to you, unfolding as your life.  Indeed, there are continual difficulties you have to face.  They may seem to have been caused by other agencies.  But you have to do your best to sort them out.  That's life.”I never wanted to have a family because I saw it as an elongation of my slavery, manufacturing something which needed to be supported via doing those things I already hated doing so much.  Perhaps it is a decision that I will regret in older age, though I think I have mostly moved passed living with regrets.  I quit my job to do what “I wanted to do,” and that was to think about “fixing” politics, and to try to help people, somehow.  I came to realize one of the best ways I could do something to “help people” was to lend financial assistance to young children in my own extended family who had the misfortune of being born with no fathers in the picture and are being raised by their grandmother; this very same something that I had previously found to be a very frustrating financial burden.  The idea that somehow people can be okay with bringing children into the world and then not loving or taking care of them has always been deeply troubling to me; I always viewed having children as an enormous responsibility.  So, I can do what I can to try to right this wrong, however inadequate.Leo Tolstoy's character Pierre, near the end of War and Peace, gave good color to the need for perspective in life.  As a political prisoner of the invaders from Napoleonic France in his own native Russia, he discovers the Aurelian truth that all is perspective.  Pierre suffers from blisters on his feet from marching as a prisoner of war.  Tolstoy writes, “While imprisoned in the shed Pierre had learned not with his intellect but with his whole being, by life itself, that man is created for happiness, that happiness is within him, in the satisfaction of simple human needs, and that all unhappiness arises not from privation but from superfluity. And now during these last three weeks of the march he had learned still another new, consolatory truth — that nothing in this world is terrible. He had learned that as there is no condition in which man can be happy and entirely free, so there is no condition in which he need be unhappy and lack freedom. He learned that suffering and freedom have their limits and that those limits are very near together; that the person in a bed of roses with one crumpled petal suffered as keenly as he now... and that when he had put on tight dancing shoes he had suffered just as he did now when he walked with bare feet that were covered with sores... He discovered that when he had married his wife — of his own free will as it had seemed to him — he had been no more free than now when they locked him up at night in a stable. Of all that he himself subsequently termed his sufferings, but which at the time he scarcely felt, the worst was the state of his bare, raw, and scab-covered feet. (The horseflesh was appetizing and nourishing, the saltpeter flavor of the gunpowder they used instead of salt was even pleasant; there was no great cold, it was always warm walking in the daytime, and at night there were the campfires; the lice that devoured him warmed his body.) The one thing that was at first hard to bear was his feet.”Viktor Frankl, a Holocaust survivor and author of Man's Search For Meaning, implores his reader to ask, what does life demand of you.  Not to ask, what is the meaning of life.  Because, the meaning of life cannot be known to humans.  So, we must make our own meaning.  Our greatest freedom is the choice of how to respond to life.  The determinists, those who think all is pre-ordained and nothing can be changed, would say we do not even have this freedom.  But if we do not have this freedom, why should we live?In my quest to do “something else” with my life, I strangely find myself back in a similar place, doing internet marketing part-time so that I can fulfill financial obligations to help my family.  But I do not think of it as I thought of it before.  I can think of no better use of my time to contribute, financially and spiritually, to two young children in my own family with no fathers.  I still do not like my line of work, not genuinely, but it provides me with financial freedom and time to write things such as this.People make decisions.  A lot of people choose prisons of their own making, maybe inadvertently, maybe on purpose.  The determinist says people don't make decisions, “[W]ith them one is always a ‘victim of the environment'--and nothing else!” Are our own abilities to evaluate our lives a product of our social environment?  It surely plays a role, but we must play the cards we are dealt.  If you can learn to trust yourself, your “inner dictates,” a sea of anxiety and self-mistrust can begin to wash away, in time, and you can begin to live your life more in accordance with what you think you should do.  I believe this because I feel it myself; I recognize my good psychological fortune in having been raised by two loving parents in a small rural Ivy League town.  I like to have time to ride my bicycle and read books; riding my bike brings me great joy, and provides me with a source of happiness.  Helping my family brings me a source of meaning, and one day I'd like to try to help others figure out how to better succeed at life in ways that I have.  I do not accept that the only way to contribute to humanity is to have children, that there is something wrong with me because I am in my late 30s, have no car, and live with a cat.  I am not here on Earth to somehow preserve someone else's standards for living. This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit underconsumed.substack.com

Dr. Chana Davis hosts Dr. Avrum Bluming to discuss menopausal hormone replacement therapy, with the goal of empowering women to make choices rooted in science. Bluming explains the different estrogen replacement strategies, from bioidenticals, to Premarin, to patches, including what we know, and what we don't know, about these options. He also shares insights into the notorious Women's Health Initiative (WHI) study that sparked many common, yet unfounded, fears and explains why there is such a disconnect between the science and the headlines. This episode is the second of a two part conversation. Check out part one for an overview of the risks and benefits of hormone replacement therapy. Dr. Avrum Bluming is a hematologist, medical oncologist, professor, and cancer researcher. In addition to treating women with breast cancer for four decades, Bluming was a clinical professor of medicine at University of Southern California and a senior investigator for the US National Cancer Institute. Together with Dr. Carol Tavris, Bluming literally wrote the book on post-menopausal estrogen therapies. Learn more about Bluming, Tavris and their book, Estrogen Matters, including links to the latest scientific studies at: https://estrogenmatters.com/

Are the benefits of hormone replacement therapy worth the risks? Dr. Davis chats with Dr. Avrum Bluming and Dr. Carol Tavris about the pros and cons of taking estrogen during menopause and beyond. Bluming, a breast cancer expert, and Tavris, a psychologist, are both passionate about empowering women to make an informed choice rooted in solid science. In this conversation, they reveal that many common fears around hormone therapy are not supported by the latest evidence, and stem from a misinterpreted study two decades ago. They also explain that hormone replacement therapy can offer far more than just relief from hot flashes, with potential benefits ranging from bedroom to boardroom (cognitive function) to bones and beyond. This episode is the first of a two part conversation. In the second part (coming soon), Bluming and Tavris dive deeply into why the conclusions presented by the Women's Health Initiative Study two decades ago were deeply flawed. Both episodes contain important lessons on how research findings are communicated - or mis-communicated - to clinicians and the public Dr. Avrum Bluming is a hematologist and medical oncologist who has been treating women with breast cancer for forty years. Bluming has worked as a clinical professor of medicine at USC and as a senior investigator for the US National Cancer Institute. He holds an MD from the Columbia College of Physicians and Surgeons. Dr. Carol Tavris is a social psychologist who is highly regarded for her efforts to promote science, skepticism, and gender equality. Tavris has written several influential books including Mistakes Were Made (But Not by Me), Why we justify foolish beliefs, bad decisions, and hurtful acts". She holds a PhD in social psychology from the University of Michigan. Bluming and Tavris have literally written the book on this controversial topic. Their 2018 book - Estrogen Matters - has been described as: "A compelling defense of hormone replacement therapy, exposing the faulty science behind its fall from prominence and empowering women to make informed decisions about their health." Learn more about Estrogen Matters, including testimonials from leading experts and links to the latest scientific studies at: https://estrogenmatters.com/

American social psychologist Dr Carol Tavris explains cognitive dissonance and how it works in the world of politics. Host Rafael Behr talks to Dr Carol Tavris about the mental obstacles that stop us from admitting that we may have made a mistake. Dr Tavris is a pre-eminent social psychologist specialising in the field of cognitive dissonance and co-author of “Mistakes Were Made (But Not By Me)”, a seminal book on the subject that was recently updated to include a chapter on Donald Trump's support base. Carol has written articles, op-eds, and book reviews on a wide array of topics in psychological science for the TLS, Wall Street Journal, Skeptic magazine, Los Angeles Times, and many other venues. This episode was recorded just before Christmas 2020 and touches on some of the reasons why few people have changed their minds about their support for (or opposition to) the idea of Brexit, and why the reality in 2021 is unlikely to trigger mass conversions. Links to interesting stuff mentioned in this podcast https://www.theguardian.com/tv-and-radio/2018/oct/23/sarah-silverman-apologises-after-louis-ck-masturbation-comments https://lincolnproject.us https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leon_Festinger https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doomsday_cult https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elliot_Aronson https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/522525.Mistakes_Were_Made_But_Not_by_Me_ This podcast is hosted by ZenCast.fm

Have you ever had a strong opinion (prediction) about investment markets which was subsequently proven to be incorrect? A recent example was when many people predicted borrowers would be forced to sell their properties due to the Covid lockdowns and the market would crash. This outcome now seems unlikely.It is my view that a humble mindset is the best way to avoid being blindsided by unexpected investment risk, whilst at the same time spotting all opportunities. Let me explain.Predicting the end of the world isn’t a risky endeavourRobert Glazer wrote about the concept of cognitive dissonance in his recent blog:“… the authors examined the followers of cult leaders who predicted that the world was going to end on a specific date, and told everyone to prepare. When that day passed without a fiery inferno, you may have expected these cult leaders to have lost all credibility with their followers. Instead, the exact opposite happened. The leaders simply declared their prediction was incorrect and declared a new date. Like clockwork, their followers doubled-down and began preparing for the next apocalypse. Why would they do this? According to Tavris and Aronson, it was likely too painful for the cultists to admit they had fallen for a fraudulent prophecy. It was easier to avoid interrogating their own judgment, and to instead dig a deeper hole of delusion for themselves.”This shows the danger of holding strong opinions and leaving no room for the possibility that you could be wrong, particularly when you are investing money.Perpetual property bears seem to ignore the evidenceThere are two prominent commentators that have been perpetually bearish about the Australian property market since I started ProSolution in 2002.They are Martin North from Digital Financial Analytics and economist Dr Steve Keen, who is now working in London. Of course, there are others but these two stand out in my mind.They have both been outspoken and incorrectly predicted property price crashes on a number of occasions. In fact, I recall watching Dr Keen on the TV program, Sixty Minutes in 2008 telling all Australian’s to sell their property. Apparently, he even sold his apartment. He predicted that prices would crash by 40% between 2008 and 2010. He was so certain. Of course, he was wrong.People that hold perpetually negative views, that leave no room for the possibility they could be wrong and ignore all the evidence, lack credibility.Financial advisors that hold strong beliefs are also dangerousI know some advisors that hold very strong beliefs about the methodologies they utilise. They believe their way is right and everyone else is wrong.Whilst I admire their conviction, such strongly held beliefs are dangerous. In life, things are rarely that black and white. There’s almost always some nuance.Hold strong opinions, looselyThe saying “hold strong opinions, loosely” perfectly suits investing. You should have a strong conviction in the robust investment strategy you adopt, especially since it should be supported by sound, evidenced-based methodologies. However, at the same time, you must leave room for the possibility that you could be wrong. That every investment you make may not work out how you had hoped.This humble mindset will greatly reduce the risk that you will be blindsided by unexpected risks. It will also ensure you spot investment opportunities that you may not otherwise see.Beware of confirmation biasConfirmation bias is a tendency to look for, and take notice of, information or evidence that supports our beliefs. When it comes to investing, confirmation bias is dangerous.The best way to avoid confirmation bias is to force yourself to argue for the opposite case. For example, when I wrote in May that property values wouldn’t fall materially, I forced myself to think of all the reasons why there could be a property crash. I pretended to debate myself.I do that with economists and portfolio managers that I meet too. I argue for views that are opposite to mine e.g. why the US tech sector isn’t overvalued (BTW, I think it is!). Being the devil’s advocate allows you to test your own views and to not get sucked into confirmation bias.What strongly held views do you hold? And are they limiting your investment options?Here’s some examples of beliefs held by people I have met over the years:§ Investing in shares is risky.§ All financial advisors are greedy and should not be trusted.§ Property is over-valued and cannot generate double digit returns in the future.It is my view that none of these beliefs are correct in absolute terms. For example, some share investing methodologies are high risk. But there are lower risk methodologies too.It is good to regularly test your own beliefs and look for evidence to the contrary.

Running is more than putting one foot in front of the other. Dr. Johathan Edwards has taken running form and function to the next level, learning from the great Dr. Veronique Billat. Doc. Edwards has taken the details work of Dr. Billat's work on variable speed running in the book The Science of Marathon and the Art of Variable Pace.   There is plenty of science to geek out in the book. If that is not your thing, no worries. Skip over that part and get to hands-on training to help you be a faster, and healthier runner.    Coach Stephanie and Doc Edwards deviate the conversation to hormones. If you want to work with Doc Edwards when it comes to hormones. Check out Own Your Labs by Dave Feldman.  Doc. Edwards mentioned the book Estrogen Matters - Bluming and Tavris for questions about the importance of estrogen.    Doc. Edward's Bio -  Dr. Johnathan “Doc” Edwards knows what it takes to excel at today’s highest levels of athletic competition. A nutritional advisor for professional and amateur athletes and an accomplished author and regular contributor for nationally syndicated magazines like Road Bike Action and Adventure Bike Rider, Doc Edwards focuses on sports nutrition and enabling athletes to optimize their performance. Whether you’re training for your first gran fondo cycling event, or you’re looking to compete in a National Championship race, you can utilize Doc Edwards’ expert guidance to learn how to obtain optimum wellness, weight control, and peak performance in your chosen athletic endeavor. For the past 20 years, Doc Edwards has been developing his unique wellness system for athletes and patients, one that includes education, individualized programs, dietary changes, select mineral and vitamin supplements, exercise recommendations, and much more. Doc Edwards started his academic career at the University of California, Davis, earning a B.S. in Physiology. He went on to become a medical doctor at Eastern Virginia Medical School before completing an Internal Medicine residency at the University of Nevada, Reno. Doc also spent a year in Salt Lake City, Utah, studying Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation / Sports, and then studied abroad to complete a fellowship in Lyon, France. Eventually, Doc attended school in Tampa, Florida, to complete his formal training as an anesthesiologist. After completing his studies, Doc Edwards spent five years attending the African Dakar Rally as the Red Bull KTM professional motorcycle team’s physician and physiotherapist. He then published a book, Chasing Dakar, A Rider’s Guide to Adventure Riding. Doc then moved on to work with professional cycling teams, including Fly V Australia and Champions Systems. Currently, Doc consults for the French WorldTour cycling team, Ag2r-La Mondiale, and has also served as the chief medical officer for the UCI cycling race, Four Days of Dunkirk. In addition, Doc serves as a consultant for many professional motocross riders both in the U.S. and in Europe. Doc Edwards is a devoted family man, a former professional athlete, and a current Category 1 cyclist. He has helped countless athletes in their quest for a healthy lifestyle and to achieve their goals, and he is deeply interested in helping each and every individual’s journey towards optimizing their well-being.   Own your labs - Dave Feldman https://ownyourlabs.com/   Billa Training - Veronique Billat www.BillaTraining.com   Doc Edwards Fitness www.docedwardsfitness.com   Check out Coach Stephanie Holbrook at KetoEndurance.   

This extremely timely episode of Brain Science features an interview with Dr. Carol Tavris, co-author of the newly released third edition of Mistakes Were Made (but Not by Me): Why We Justify Foolish Beliefs, Bad Decisions, and Hurtful Acts. Cognitive Dissonance was actually discovered back in 1956 and it is one of the most well-replicated phenomena in experimental psychology. It  also impacts many aspects of our lives, including politics, which is why I am grateful to have Dr. Tavris back on the podcast to help us explore this fascinating, but also disturbing topic. Links and References: Mistakes Were Made (but Not by Me): Why We Justify Foolish Beliefs, Bad Decisions, and Hurtful Acts by Carol Tavris and Elliot Aronson--- add aerio link Books and Ideas 43 with Carol Tavris Find this under episode extras in the mobile app Please visit http://brainsciencepodcast.com for additional references and episode transcripts. Please Visit Our Sponsors: TextExpander at textexpander.com/podcasts Announcements: Brain Science comes out on 4th Friday each month. Support Brain Science by buying Are You Sure? The Unconscious Origins of Certainty by Virginia "Ginger" Campbell, MD. Click here to buy an autographed copy. Learn more ways to support Brain Science at http://brainsciencepodcast.com/donations Sign up for the free Brain Science Newsletter to get show notes automatically every month. You can also text brainscience to 55444 to sign up. Check out the free Brain Science Mobile app for iOS, Android, and Windows. (It's a great way to get both new episodes and premium content.) Send email to brainsciencepodcast@gmail.com or post voice feedback at http://speakpipe.com/docartemis. Connect on Social Media: Twitter: @docartemis Facebook page: http://www.facebook.com/brainsciencepodcast Contact Dr. Campbell: Email: brainsciencepodcast@gmail.com Voicemail: http://speakpipe.com/docartemis

Kate and Trace talk the sprite companions. Topics: Writing for Friendsim. Vrisrose Day. Epilogue Jane and Nannasprite’s mutual clownery. Rambunctious Crow. Bec and Jadesprite. Self-prototyping. Vriska’s motivations for prototyping Spidermom. Gamzee making things worse. Arquius, the national treasure. Tavris (oh no). Sprites in the epilogues. Mandy Hampton, a West Wing deep cut. What we’d prototype.Support the show on Patreon and get access to exclusive the exclusive bonus [I]ntermission podcastwww.perfectlygenericpodcast.comMusic by Goomy and Kate.RSVP and get tickets for our next live shows.Follow the podcast on Twitter.Join the podcast Discord.

This week’s episode of Point of Inquiry Jim Underdown speaks with Carol Tavris, social psychologist and author of Mistakes Were Made (But Not By Me) and Avrum Bluming, hematologist, medical oncologist, and emeritus clinical professor at USC about the common myth in the medical field  surrounding the link between breast cancer and estrogen.  The talk centers around their recent book, Estrogen Matters which examines the practice of administering estrogen to women suffering from symptoms of menopause and the push back they received due to a long-held misconception that estrogen leads to an increased chance of contracting breast cancer. Tavris and Bluming's work illustrates the important need for critical thinking, especially in the area of health where people's well-being is constantly at stake and how people will often times not accept information when it is in their best interest to do so.

In 2002, the Women's Health Initiative released the results of its study, claiming use of Hormone Replacement Therapy (HRT) increased a woman's risk of breast cancer. Almost overnight, use plummeted, leaving a great many women without a good alternative for managing their menopause symptoms. In their book Estrogen Matters, Dr. Avrum Bluming and Dr. Carol Tavris take a deep and detailed look at the WHI study and its conclusions. Not only, they argue, did the WHI unnecessarily frighten women and leave them suffering with very real symptoms, they may also have prevented women from taking a life-changing, even life-prolonging treatment. In this podcast with genneve CEO Jill Angelo and genneve Director of Health ob/gyn Dr. Rebecca Dunsmoor-Su, Drs. Tavris and Bluming take us through their research and make a compelling case for the safety and effectiveness of HRT. If you're in or approaching menopause, this podcast and the book Estrogen Matters can help you better understand HRT, its true risks, and the very real benefits it can offer. Learn more and find the full transcript at genneve.com.

I am putting Episode 43 of Books and Ideas into the Brain Science Podcast feed because it should be of interest to BSP fans. This episode is an interview with Carol Tavris, PhD, co-author of . We talk about the relationship between psychology and neuroscience as well as cognitive dissonance, which is the subject of Dr. Tavris's recent book Mistakes Were Made (But Not by Me): Why We Justify Foolish Beliefs, Bad Decisions, and Hurtful Acts. For detailed show notes including references go to http://brainsciencepodcast.com. Click here for free episode transcript. Send feedback to brainsciencepodcast@gmail.com.

Episode 43 of Books and Ideas is an interview with Carol Tavris, PhD, co-author (with Eliot Aronson) of Mistakes Were Made (But Not by Me): Why We Justify Foolish Beliefs, Bad Decisions, and Hurtful Acts. For detailed show notes, including references and episode transcripts go to http://virginiacampbellmd.com.