Podcasts about tufts

On today's episode: Hegseth tells congressional leaders he is weighing release of boat strike video. Shooting at Kentucky State University leaves 1 dead, 1 hurt and a suspect in custody, officials say. Democrat wins Miami mayor’s race for the first time in nearly 30 years. Son arrested after Grammy-nominated singer Jubilant Sykes is stabbed to death at California home. Trump speaks on Americans’ economic worries and blames Democrats at Pennsylvania rally. Pope criticizes US bid to 'break part' US-Europe alliance, insists on Europe role in Ukraine peace. ICE arrests of Afghans are on the rise in the wake of National Guard attack, immigration lawyers say. Justice Department can unseal Ghislaine Maxwell sex trafficking case records, judge says. Opponents of Trump-backed redistricting in Missouri submit a petition to force a public vote. Illinois law protects immigrants from arrest near courthouses, hospitals or colleges. Turkish student who criticized Israel can resume research at Tufts after visa revoked, judge rules. Florida to execute man convicted in 1989 home invasion killing. US stocks hold in place in the countdown to the Federal Reserve’s meeting on Wednesday. New York stays hot and Orlando prevails to reach NBA Cup semis, a clash between the last two national champs in men’s college hoops, Tampa Bay puts on a show on the ice in Montreal, a pair of top free agents sign in baseball and an ex-star QB comes out of retirement. Shohei Ohtani is the AP's Male Athlete of the Year for record-tying 4th time. It's Messi. Repeat, Messi. The Inter Miami star is MLS' first back-to-back MVP winner. Social media ban for children under 16 starts in Australia. Venezuelan opposition leader María Corina Machado will miss Nobel Peace Prize ceremony. Zelenskyy refuses to cede land to Russia as he rallies European support. —The Associated Press About this program Host Terry Lipshetz is managing editor of the national newsroom for Lee Enterprises. Besides producing the daily Hot off the Wire news podcast, Terry conducts periodic interviews for this Behind the Headlines program, co-hosts the Streamed & Screened movies and television program and is the former producer of Across the Sky, a podcast dedicated to weather and climate. Theme music The News Tonight, used under license from Soundstripe. YouTube clearance: ZR2MOTROGI4XAHRX

A Tufts University student who was one of the first swept up in a wave of immigration enforcements against pro-Palestinian activists will be allowed to continue her studies. The AP's Jennifer King reports.

A Tufts University student who was one of the first swept up in a wave of immigration enforcements against pro-Palestinian activists will be allowed to continue her studies. The AP's Jennifer King reports.

Press secretary Karoline Leavitt isn't supporting her nephew's mother, a Brazilian woman detained by ICE. We talk to BU journalism's Brian McGrory about that, and why CNN has become the unwanted stepchild in the new Netflix-Warner Brothers deal. If a new state proposal takes hold it would allow sewage to be dumped into the Charles and Mystic Rivers indefinitely, backsliding on decades of progress to end the practice. We talk to Emily Norton and Patrick Herron from the Charles and Mystic River watershed associations. James Beard award-winning cookbook author Dorie Greenspan joins us to talk about her latest book: “Dorie's Anytime Cakes" and why everyone should always have a cake on the kitchen counter.We check in with GBH reporter Sarah Betancourt and Project Citizenship's Gail Breslow on ICE's latest cruelty: targeting immigrants on the cusp of citizenship at their swearing-in ceremony at Faneuil Hall. Tufts' food policy analyst Corby Kummer on the latest threats to SNAP: withholding benefits from blue states like Massachusetts over immigration data. Plus, why it might be the wrong (or right) week to quit caffeine.And we take your calls and texts on whether you believe in astrology. 

The Culture Show's Jared Bowen discusses Wicked: For Good, the latest AI-generated pop song, plus, his art-filled tour of Berlin.National security expert Juliette Kayyem discusses the war crimes allegations against Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth. And her thoughts on the attack on national guardsmen in D.C.Imari Paris Jeffries of Embrace Boston and Rev. Jay Williams of Union Combined Parish discuss their big plans for the upcoming MLK weekend and for the nation's 250th anniversary.Evan Horowitz of Tufts' Center for State Policy Analysis joins for a year-end roundup of state policy challenges: Medicaid work requirements, fiscal pressure on municipalities, and his new class at Tufts, "AI and the Future of American Politics."

Massachusetts is considering new regulations for elderly home care. We talk with Mass League of Community Health Center's Michael Curry about that, and the latest on rising health insurance costs as Affordable Care Act subsidies sunset. Tufts food policy analyst Corby Kummer breaks down the rising costs of pantry staples bananas and even… pasta. Plus, he'll tell us why Bostonians pay some of the highest prices in the country for their daily caffeine fix. Boston Medical Center's Dr. Katherine Gergen Barnett discusses her argument for stable housing and why it's vital for keeping people healthy. And, she explains what the latest CDC vaccine changes mean for people in Massachusetts. Plus, we remember English playwright and screenwriter Tom Stoppard and revisit our 2019 interview with him at Tanglewood. The Trump administration is imposing new restrictions on all refugees from Afghanistan after an Afghan national was charged in the shooting of two National Guard members in Washington DC last week. We check in with Fariba, an Afghan refugee with U.S. citizenship, about what that means for her community. And we talk with Xan Weber of the International Institute of New England about the impact on refugee communities.

This week on #TheShot of #digitalHealth Therapy, Jim Joyce and I sat down with someone who might just change how we all understand… well, everything. Because when you think “future of health tech,” your brain probably doesn't jump to noses in petri dishes. But maybe it should. We hosted Brian Lin, a Tufts researcher and a co-founder of Cellsor, who is literally growing living smell tissue to build the world's first biological smell "camera". Yes - a "camera" for scent. Think RGB for odors… except instead of 3 channels, humans have 400, dogs have 700, elephants have 2,000, and Jim has… well, that's still in peer review.

  In this episode, explore the concept of unlearning silence with Elaine Lin Herring, a faculty member at Harvard Law and a bestselling author. Elaine discusses her book 'Unlearning Silence' and shares the toll of societal and personal expectations on our lives, particularly for women and immigrants. She delves into the importance of finding one's voice, understanding personal needs, and making intentional choices for a more aligned and fulfilling life. Through personal anecdotes and professional insights, she offers practical advice for overcoming self-doubt, utilizing our unique talents, and creating a life that's truly yours.   Timestamps 01:14 The Burden of Expectations & Breaking Free from the Past 07:41 Rediscovering Your Voice, the Power of Self-Expression 14:56 The Journey to Unlearn Silence 27:37 Navigating Life's Uncertainties & Embracing Possibilities Amidst Challenges 30:06 Reevaluating Career Paths & The Importance of Market Awareness 31:55 Balancing Gratitude and Ambition, Exploring New Opportunities 40:10 Strategic Silence and Intentional Choices   About Elaine Lin Hering Elaine Lin Hering is a speaker, facilitator, and former Lecturer on Law at Harvard Law School. She works with organizations and individuals to build skills in communication, collaboration, and conflict management. She has worked on six continents and facilitated executive education at Harvard, Dartmouth, Tufts, UC Berkeley, and UCLA. She has served as the Advanced Training Director for the Harvard Mediation Program and a Managing Partner for a global leadership development firm. She has worked with coal miners at BHP Billiton, micro-finance organizers in East Africa, mental health professionals in China, and senior leadership at the US Department of Commerce. Her clients include American Express, Chevron, Google, Nike, Novartis, PayPal, Pixar, and the Red Cross. She was named a Thinkers50 global management thinker to watch and is the author of the USA Today Bestselling book Unlearning Silence: How to Speak Your Mind, Unleash Talent, and Live More Fully (Penguin). Connect with Elaine Connect with Elaine on LinkedIn Subscribe to Elaine's Newsletter    _________________________________________________________________ Connect with Me Connect with me on LinkedIn From Zero Responses to Multiple Offers: Download The 5 Essential Steps Checklist Click here to learn about coaching

In this episode, Kelly Brownell speaks with Jerold Mande, CEO of Nourish Science, adjunct professor at the Harvard School of Public Health, and former Deputy Undersecretary for Food Safety at the USDA. They discuss the alarming state of children's health in America, the challenges of combating poor nutrition, and the influence of the food industry on public policy. The conversation explores the parallels between the tobacco and food industries and proposes new strategies for ensuring children reach adulthood in good health. Mande emphasizes the need for radical changes in food policy and the role of public health in making these changes. Transcript So, you co-founded this organization along with Jerome Adams, Bill Frist and Thomas Grumbly, as we said, to ensure every child breaches age 18 at a healthy weight and in good metabolic health. That's a pretty tall order given the state of the health of youth today in America. But let's start by you telling us what inspired this mission and what does it look like to achieve this in today's food environment? I was trained in public health and also in nutrition and in my career, which has been largely in service of the public and government, I've been trying to advance those issues. And unfortunately over the arc of my career from when I started to now, particularly in nutrition and public health, it's just gotten so much worse. Indeed today Americans have the shortest lifespans by far. We're not just last among the wealthy countries, but we're a standard deviation last. But probably most alarming of all is how sick our children are. Children should not have a chronic disease. Yet in America maybe a third do. I did some work on tobacco at one point, at FDA. That was an enormous success. It was the leading cause of death. Children smoked at a higher rate, much like child chronic disease today. About a third of kids smoked. And we took that issue on, and today it's less than 2%. And so that shows that government can solve these problems. And since we did our tobacco work in the early '90s, I've changed my focus to nutrition and public health and trying to fix that. But we've still made so little progress. Give us a sense of how far from that goal we are. So, if the goal is to make every child reaching 18 at a healthy weight and in good metabolic health, what percentage of children reaching age 18 today might look like that? It's probably around a half or more, but we're not quite sure. We don't have good statistics. One of the challenges we face in nutrition is, unfortunately, the food industry or other industries lobby against funding research and data collection. And so, we're handicapped in that way. But we do know from the studies that CDC and others have done that about 20% of our children have obesity about a similar number have Type 2 diabetes or the precursors, pre-diabetes. You and I started off calling it adult-onset diabetes and they had to change that name to a Type 2 because it's becoming so common in kids. And then another disease, fatty liver disease, really unthinkable in kids. Something that the typical pediatrician would just never see. And yet in the last decade, children are the fastest growing group. I think we don't know an exact number, but today, at least a third, maybe as many as half of our children have a chronic disease. Particularly a food cause chronic disease, or the precursors that show they're on the way. I remember probably going back about 20 years, people started saying that we were seeing the first generation of American children that would lead shorter lives than our parents did. And what a terrible legacy to leave our children. Absolutely. And that's why we set that overarching goal of ensuring every child reaches age 18 in good metabolic health. And the reason we set that is in my experience in government, there's a phrase we all use - what gets measured gets done. And when I worked at FDA, when I worked at USDA, what caught my attention is that there is a mission statement. There's a goal of what we're trying to achieve. And it's ensuring access to healthy options and information, like a food label. Now the problem with that, first of all, it's failed. But the problem with that is the bureaucrats that I oversaw would go into a supermarket, see a produce section, a protein section, the food labels, which I worked on, and say we've done our job. They would check those boxes and say, we've done it. And yet we haven't. And if we ensured that every child reaches age 18 at a healthy weight and good metabolic health, if the bureaucrats say how are we doing on that? They would have to conclude we're failing, and they'd have to try something else. And that's what we need to do. We need to try radically different, new strategies because what we've been doing for decades has failed. You mentioned the food industry a moment ago. Let's talk about that in a little more detail. You made the argument that food companies have substituted profits for health in how they design their products. Explain that a little bit more, if you will. And tell us how the shift has occurred and what do you think the public health cost has been? Yes, so the way I like to think of it, and your listeners should think of it, is there's a North star for food design. And from a consumer standpoint, I think there are four points on the star: taste, cost, convenience, and health. That's what they expect and want from their food. Now the challenge is the marketplace. Because that consumer, you and I, when we go to the grocery store and get home on taste, cost, and convenience, if we want within an hour, we can know whether the food we purchased met our standard there. Or what our expectations were. Not always for health. There's just no way to know in a day, a week, a month, even in a year or more. We don't know if the food we're eating is improving and maintaining our health, right? There should be a definition of food. Food should be what we eat to thrive. That really should be the goal. I borrowed that from NASA, the space agency. When I would meet with them, they said, ' Jerry, it's important. Right? It's not enough that people just survive on the food they eat in space. They really need to thrive.' And that's what WE need to do. And that's really what food does, right? And yet we have food, not only don't we thrive, but we get sick. And the reason for that is, as I was saying, the marketplace works on taste, cost and convenience. So, companies make sure their products meet consumer expectation for those three. But the problem is on the fourth point on the star: on health. Because we can't tell in even years whether it's meeting our expectation. That sort of cries out. You're at a policy school. Those are the places where government needs to step in and act and make sure that the marketplace is providing. That feedback through government. But the industry is politically strong and has prevented that. And so that has left the fourth point of the star open for their interpretation. And my belief is that they've put in place a prop. So, they're making decisions in the design of the product. They're taste, they gotta get taste right. They gotta get cost and convenience right. But rather than worrying what does it do to your health? They just, say let's do a profit. And that's resulted in this whole category of food called ultra-processed food (UPF). I actually believe in the future, whether it's a hundred years or a thousand years. If humanity's gonna thrive we need manmade food we can thrive on. But we don't have that. And we don't invest in the science. We need to. But today, ultra-processed food is manmade food designed on taste, cost, convenience, and then how do we make the most money possible. Now, let me give you one other analogy, if I could. If we were CEOs of an automobile company, the mission is to provide vehicles where people can get safely from A to point B. It's the same as food we can thrive on. That is the mission. The problem is that when the food companies design food today, they've presented to the CEO, and everyone gets excited. They're seeing the numbers, the charts, the data that shows that this food is going to meet, taste, cost, convenience. It's going to make us all this money. But the CEO should be asking this following question: if people eat this as we intend, will they thrive? At the very least they won't get sick, right? Because the law requires they can't get sick. And if the Midmanagers were honest, they'd say here's the good news boss. We have such political power we've been able to influence the Congress and the regulatory agencies. That they're not going to do anything about it. Taste, cost, convenience, and profits will work just fine. Couldn't you make the argument that for a CEO to embrace that kind of attitude you talked about would be corporate malpractice almost? That, if they want to maximize profits then they want people to like the food as much as possible. That means engineering it in ways that make people overeat it, hijacking the reward pathways in the brain, and all that kind of thing. Why in the world would a CEO care about whether people thrive? Because it's the law. The law requires we have these safety features in cars and the companies have to design it that way. And there's more immediate feedback with the car too, in terms of if you crashed right away. Because it didn't work, you'd see that. But here's the thing. Harvey Wiley.He's the founder of the food safety programs that I led at FDA and USDA. He was a chemist from academia. Came to USDA in the late 1800s. It was a time of great change in food in America. At that point, almost all of families grew their own food on a farm. And someone had to decide who's going to grow our food. It's a family conversation that needed to take place. Increasingly, Americans were moving into the cities at that time, and a brand-new industry had sprung up to feed people in cities. It was a processed food industry. And in order to provide shelf stable foods that can offer taste, cost, convenience, this new processed food industry turned to another new industry, a chemical industry. Now, it's hard to believe this, but there was a point in time that just wasn't an industry. So these two big new industries had sprung up- processed food and chemicals. And Harvey Wiley had a hypothesis that the chemicals they were using to make these processed foods were making us sick. Indeed, food poisoning back then was one of the 10 leading causes of death. And so, Harvey Wiley went to Teddy Roosevelt. He'd been trying for years within the bureaucracy and not making progress. But when Teddy Roosevelt came in, he finally had the person who listened to him. Back then, USDA was right across from the Washington Monument to the White House. He'd walk right over there into the White House and met with Teddy Roosevelt and said, ' this food industry is making us sick. We should do something about it.' And Teddy Roosevelt agreed. And they wrote the laws. And so I think what your listeners need to understand is that when you look at the job that FDA and USDA is doing, their food safety programs were created to make sure our food doesn't make us sick. Acutely sick. Not heart disease or cancer, 30, 40 years down the road, but acutely sick. No. I think that's absolutely the point. That's what Wiley was most concerned about at the time. But that's not the law they wrote. The law doesn't say acutely ill. And I'll give you this example. Your listeners may be familiar with something called GRAS - Generally Recognized as Safe. It's a big problem today. Industry co-opted the system and no longer gets approval for their food additives. And so, you have this Generally Recognized as Safe system, and you have these chemicals and people are worried about them. In the history of GRAS. Only one chemical has FDA decided we need to get that off the market because it's unsafe. That's partially hydrogenated oils or trans-fat. Does trans-fat cause acute illness? It doesn't. It causes a chronic disease. And the evidence is clear. The agency has known that it has the responsibility for both acute and chronic illness. But you're right, the industry has taken advantage of this sort of chronic illness space to say that that really isn't what you should be doing. But having worked at those agencies, I don't think they see it that way. They just feel like here's the bottom line on it. The industry uses its political power in Congress. And it shapes the agency's budget. So, let's take FDA. FDA has a billion dollars with a 'b' for food safety. For the acute food safety, you're talking about. It has less than 25 million for the chronic disease. There are about 1400 deaths a year in America due to the acute illnesses caused by our food that FDA and USDA are trying to prevent. The chronic illnesses that we know are caused by our food cause 1600 maybe a day. More than that of the acute every day. Now the agency should be spending at least half its time, if not more, worrying about those chronic illness. Why doesn't it? Because the industry used their political power in Congress to put the billion dollars for the acute illness. That's because if you get acutely ill, that's a liability concern for them. Jerry let's talk about the political influence in just a little more detail, because you're in a unique position to tell us about this because you've seen it from the inside. One mechanism through which industry might influence the political process is lobbyists. They hire lobbyists. Lobbyists get to the Congress. People make decisions based on contributions and things like that. Are there other ways the food industry affects the political process in addition to that. For example, what about the revolving door issue people talk about where industry people come into the administrative branch of government, not legislative branch, and then return to industry. And are there other ways that the political influence of the industry has made itself felt? I think first and foremost it is the lobbyists, those who work with Congress, in effect. Particularly the funding levels, and the authority that the agencies have to do that job. I think it's overwhelmingly that. I think second, is the influence the industry has. So let me back up to that a sec. As a result of that, we spend very little on nutrition research, for example. It's 4% of the NIH budget even though we have these large institutes, cancer, heart, diabetes, everyone knows about. They're trying to come up with the cures who spend the other almost 50 billion at NIH. And so, what happens? You and I have both been at universities where there are nutrition programs and what we see is it's very hard to not accept any industry money to do the research because there isn't the federal money. Now, the key thing, it's not an accident. It's part of the plan. And so, I think that the research that we rely on to do regulation is heavily influenced by industry. And it's broad. I've served, you have, others, on the national academies and the programs. When I've been on the inside of those committees, there are always industry retired scientists on those committees. And they have undue influence. I've seen it. Their political power is so vast. The revolving door, that is a little of both ways. I think the government learns from the revolving door as well. But you're right, some people leave government and try to undo that. Now, I've chosen to work in academia when I'm not in government. But I think that does play a role, but I don't think it plays the largest role. I think the thing that people should be worried about is how much influence it has in Congress and how that affects the agency's budgets. And that way I feel that agencies are corrupted it, but it's not because they're corrupted directly by the industry. I think it's indirectly through congress. I'd like to get your opinion on something that's always relevant but is time sensitive now. And it's dietary guidelines for America. And the reason I'm saying it's time sensitive is because the current administration will be releasing dietary guidelines for America pretty soon. And there's lots of discussion about what those might look like. How can they help guide food policy and industry practices to support healthier children and families? It's one of the bigger levers the government has. The biggest is a program SNAP or food stamps. But beyond that, the dietary guidelines set the rules for government spending and food. So, I think often the way the dietary guidelines are portrayed isn't quite accurate. People think of it in terms of the once (food) Pyramid now the My Plate that's there. That's the public facing icon for the dietary guidelines. But really a very small part. The dietary guidelines are meant to help shape federal policy, not so much public perception. It's there. It's used in education in our schools - the (My) Plate, previously the (Food) Pyramid. But the main thing is it should shape what's served in government feeding programs. So principally that should be SNAP. It's not. But it does affect the WIC program- Women, Infants and Children, the school meals program, all of the military spending on food. Indeed, all spending by the government on food are set, governed by, or directed by the dietary guidelines. Now some of them are self-executing. Once the dietary guidelines change the government changes its behavior. But the biggest ones are not. They require rulemaking and in particular, today, one of the most impactful is our kids' meals in schools. So, whatever it says in these dietary guidelines, and there's reason to be alarmed in some of the press reports, it doesn't automatically change what's in school meals. The Department of Agriculture would have to write a rule and say that the dietary guidelines have changed and now we want to update. That usually takes an administration later. It's very rare one administration could both change the dietary guidelines and get through the rulemaking process. So, people can feel a little reassured by that. So, how do you feel about the way things seem to be taking shape right now? This whole MAHA movement Make America Healthy Again. What is it? To me what it is we've reached this tipping point we talked about earlier. The how sick we are, and people are saying, 'enough. Our food shouldn't make us sick at middle age. I shouldn't have to be spending so much time with my doctor. But particularly, it shouldn't be hard to raise my kids to 18 without getting sick. We really need to fix that and try to deal with that.' But I think that the MAHA movement is mostly that. But RFK and some of the people around them have increasingly claimed that it means some very specific things that are anti-science. That's been led by the policies around vaccine that are clearly anti-science. Nutrition is more and more interesting. Initially they started out in the exact right place. I think you and I could agree the things they were saying they need to focus on: kids, the need to get ultra-processed food out of our diets, were all the right things. In fact, you look at the first report that RFK and his team put out back in May this year after the President put out an Executive Order. Mostly the right things on this. They again, focus on kids, ultra-processed food was mentioned 40 times in the report as the root cause for the very first time. And this can't be undone. You had the White House saying that the root cause of our food-caused chronic disease crisis is the food industry. That's in a report that won't change. But a lot has changed since then. They came out with a second report where the word ultra-processed food showed up only once. What do you think happened? I know what happened because I've worked in that setting. The industry quietly went to the White House, the top political staff in the White House, and they said, you need to change the report when you come out with the recommendations. And so, the first report, I think, was written by MAHA, RFK Jr. and his lieutenants. The second report was written by the White House staff with the lobbyists of the food industry. That's what happened. What you end up with is their version of it. So, what does the industry want? We have a good picture from the first Trump administration. They did the last dietary guidelines and the Secretary of Agriculture, then Sonny Perdue, his mantra to his staff, people reported to me, was the industries- you know, keep the status quo. That is what the industry wants is they really don't want the dietary guidelines to change because then they have to reformulate their products. And they're used to living with what we have and they're just comfortable with that. For a big company to reformulate a product is a multi-year effort and cost billions of dollars and it's just not what they want to have to do. Particularly if it's going to change from administration to administration. And that is not a world they want to live in. From the first and second MAHA report where they wanted to go back to the status quo away from all the radical ideas. It'll be interesting to see what happens with dietary guidelines because we've seen reports that RFK Jr. and his people want to make shifts in policies. Saying that they want to go back to the Pyramid somehow. There's a cartoon on TV, South Park, I thought it was produced to be funny. But they talked about what we need to do is we need to flip the Pyramid upside down and we need to go back to the old Pyramid and make saturated fat the sort of the core of the diet. I thought it meant to be a joke but apparently that's become a belief of some people in the MAHA movement. RFK. And so, they want to add saturated fat back to our diets. They want to get rid of plant oils from our diets. There is a lot of areas of nutrition where the science isn't settled. But that's one where it is, indeed. Again, you go back only 1950s, 1960s, you look today, heart disease, heart attacks, they're down 90%. Most of that had to do with the drugs and getting rid of smoking. But a substantial contribution was made by nutrition. Lowering saturated fat in our diets and replacing it with plant oils that they're now called seed oils. If they take that step and the dietary guidelines come out next month and say that saturated fat is now good for us it is going to be just enormously disruptive. I don't think companies are going to change that much. They'll wait it out because they'll ask themselves the question, what's it going to be in two years? Because that's how long it takes them to get a product to market. Jerry, let me ask you this. You painted this picture where every once in a while, there'll be a glimmer of hope. Along comes MAHA. They're critical of the food industry and say that the diet's making us sick and therefore we should focus on different things like ultra-processed foods. In report number one, it's mentioned 40 times. Report number two comes out and it's mentioned only once for the political reasons you said. Are there any signs that lead you to be hopeful that this sort of history doesn't just keep repeating itself? Where people have good ideas, there's science that suggests you go down one road, but the food industry says, no, we're going to go down another and government obeys. Are there any signs out there that lead you to be more hopeful for the future? There are signs to be hopeful for the future. And number one, we talked earlier, is the success we had regulating tobacco. And I know you've done an outstanding job over the years drawing the parallels between what happened in tobacco and food. And there are good reasons to do that. Not the least of which is that in the 1980s, the tobacco companies bought all the big food companies and imparted on them a lot of their lessons, expertise, and playbook about how to do these things. And so that there is a tight link there. And we did succeed. We took youth smoking, which was around a 30 percent, a third, when we began work on this in the early 1990s when I was at FDA. And today it's less than 2%. It's one area with the United States leads the world in terms of what we've achieved in public health. And there's a great benefit that's going to come to that over the next generation as all of those deaths are prevented that we're not quite seeing yet. But we will. And that's regardless of what happens with vaping, which is a whole different story about nicotine. But this idea success and tobacco. The food industry has a tobacco playbook about how to addict so many people and make so much money and use their political power. We have a playbook of how to win the public health fight. So, tell us about that. What you're saying is music to my ears and I'm a big believer in exactly what you're saying. So, what is it? What does that playbook look like and what did we learn from the tobacco experience that you think could apply into the food area? There are a couple of areas. One is going to be leadership and we'll have to come back to that. Because the reason we succeeded in tobacco was the good fortune of having a David Kessler at FDA and Al Gore as Vice President. Nothing was, became more important to them than winning this fight against a big tobacco. Al Gore because his sister died at a young age of smoking. And David Kessler became convinced that this was the most important thing for public health that he could do. And keep in mind, when he came to FDA, it was the furthest thing from his mind. So, one of it is getting these kinds of leaders. Did does RFK Jr. and Marty McCarey match up to Al Gore? And we'll see. But the early signs aren't that great. But we'll see. There's still plenty of time for them to do this and get it right. The other thing is having a good strategy and policy about how to do it. And here, with tobacco, it was a complete stretch, right? There was no where did the FDA get authority over tobacco? And indeed, we eventually needed the Congress to reaffirm that authority to have the success we did. As we talked earlier, there's no question FDA was created to make sure processed food and the additives and processed food don't make us sick. So, it is the core reason the agency exists is to make sure that if there's a thing called ultra-processed food, man-made food, that is fine, but we have to thrive when we eat it. We certainly can't be made sick when we eat it. Now, David Kessler, I mentioned, he's put forward a petition, a citizens' petition to FDA. Careful work by him, he put months of effort into this, and he wrote basically a detailed roadmap for RFK and his team to use if they want to regulate ultra-processed stuff food. And I think we've gotten some, initially good feedback from the MAHA RFK people that they're interested in this petition and may take action on it. So, the basic thrust of the Kessler petition from my understanding is that we need to reconsider what's considered Generally Recognized as Safe. And that these ultra-processed foods may not be considered safe any longer because they produce all this disease down the road. And if MAHA responds positively initially to the concept, that's great. And maybe that'll have legs, and something will actually happen. But is there any reason to believe the industry won't just come in and quash this like they have other things? This idea of starting with a petition in the agency, beginning an investigation and using its authority is the blueprint we used with tobacco. There was a petition we responded, we said, gee, you raised some good points. There are other things we put forward. And so, what we hope to see here with the Kessler petition is that the FDA would put out what's called an advanced notice of a proposed rulemaking with the petition. This moves it from just being a petition to something the agency is saying, we're taking this seriously. We're putting it on the record ourselves and we want industry and others now to start weighing in. Now here's the thing, you have this category of ultra-processed food that because of the North Star I talked about before, because the industry, the marketplace has failed and gives them no incentive to make sure that we thrive, that keeps us from getting sick. They've just forgotten about that and put in place profits instead. The question is how do you get at ultra-processed food? What's the way to do it? How do you start holding the industry accountable? Now what RFK and the MAHA people started with was synthetic color additives. That wasn't what I would pick but, it wasn't a terrible choice. Because if you talk to Carlos Monteiro who coined the phrase ultra-processed food, and you ask him, what is an ultra-processed food, many people say it's this industrial creation. You can't find the ingredients in your kitchen. He agrees with all that, but he thinks the thing that really sets ultra-processed food, the harmful food, is the cosmetics that make them edible when they otherwise won't I've seen inside the plants where they make the old fashioned minimally processed food versus today's ultra-processed. In the minimally processed plants, I recognize the ingredients as food. In today's plants, you don't recognize anything. There are powders, there's sludges, there's nothing that you would really recognize as food going into it. And to make that edible, they use the cosmetics and colors as a key piece of that. But here's the problem. It doesn't matter if the color is synthetic or natural. And a fruit loop made with natural colors is just as bad for you as one made with synthetics. And indeed, it's been alarming that the agency has fast tracked these natural colors and as replacements because, cyanide is natural. We don't want to use that. And the whole approach has been off and it like how is this going to get us there? How is this focus on color additives going to get us there. And it won't. Yeah, I agree. I agree with your interpretation of that. But the thing with Kessler you got part of it right but the main thing he did is say you don't have to really define ultra-processed food, which is another industry ploy to delay action. Let's focus on the thing that's making us sick today. And that's the refined carbohydrates. The refined grains in food. That's what's most closely linked to the obesity, the diabetes we're seeing today. Now in the 1980s, the FDA granted, let's set aside sugar and white flour, for example, but they approved a whole slew of additives that the companies came forward with to see what we can add to the white flour and sugar to make it shelf stable, to meet all the taste, cost, and convenience considerations we have. And profit-making considerations we have. Back then, heart disease was the driving health problem. And so, it was easy to overlook why you didn't think that the these additives were really harmful. That then you could conclude whether Generally Recognized as Safe, which is what the agency did back then. What Kessler is saying is that what he's laid out in his petition is self-executing. It's not something that the agency grants that this is GRAS or not GRAS. They were just saying things that have historical safe use that scientists generally recognize it as safe. It's not something the agency decides. It's the universe of all of us scientists generally accept. And it's true in the '80s when we didn't face the obesity and diabetes epidemic, people didn't really focus on the refined carbohydrates. But if you look at today's food environment. And I hope you agree with this, that what is the leading driver in the food environment about what is it about ultra-processed food that's making us so sick? It's these refined grains and the way they're used in our food. And so, if the agency takes up the Kessler petition and starts acting on it, they don't have to change the designation. Maybe at some point they have to say some of these additives are no longer GRAS. But what Kessler's saying is by default, they're no longer GRAS because if you ask the scientists today, can we have this level of refined grains? And they'd say, no, that's just not Generally Recognized as Safe. So, he's pointing out that status, they no longer hold that status. And if the agency would recognize that publicly and the burden shifts where Wiley really always meant it to be, on the industry to prove that there are foods or things that we would thrive on, but that wouldn't make us sick. And so that's the key point that you go back to when you said, and you're exactly right that if you let the industry use their political power to just ignore health altogether and substitute profits, then you're right. Their sort of fiduciary responsibility is just to maximize profits and they can ignore health. If you say you can maximize profits, of course you're a capitalist business, but one of the tests you have to clear is you have to prove to us that people can thrive when they eat that. Thrive as the standard, might require some congressional amplification because it's not in the statute. But what is in the statute is the food can't make you sick. If scientists would generally recognize, would say, if you eat this diet as they intend, if you eat this snack food, there's these ready to heat meals as they intend, you're going to get diabetes and obesity. If scientists generally believe that, then you can't sell that. That's just against the law and the agency needs them to enforce the law. Bio:   Jerold Mande is CEO of Nourish Science; Adjunct Professor of Nutrition, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health; and a Non-Resident Senior Fellow, Tisch College of Civic Life, Tufts University. Professor Mande has a wealth of expertise and experience in national public health and food policy. He served in senior policymaking positions for three presidents at USDA, FDA, and OSHA helping lead landmark public health initiatives. In 2009, he was appointed by President Obama as USDA Deputy Under Secretary for Food Safety. In 2011, he moved to USDA's Food, Nutrition, and Consumer Services, where he spent six years working to improve the health outcomes of the nation's $100 billion investment in 15 nutrition programs. During President Clinton's administration, Mr. Mande was Senior Advisor to the FDA commissioner where he helped shape national policy on nutrition, food safety, and tobacco. He also served on the White House staff as a health policy advisor and was Deputy Assistant Secretary for Occupational Health at the Department of Labor. During the George H.W. Bush administration he led the graphic design of the iconic Nutrition Facts label at FDA, for which he received the Presidential Design Award. Mr. Mande began his career as a legislative assistant for Al Gore in the U.S. House and Senate, managing Gore's health and environment agenda, and helping Gore write the nation's organ donation and transplantation laws.  Mande earned a Master of Public Health from the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill and a Bachelor of Science in nutritional science from the University of Connecticut. Prior to his current academic appointments, he served on the faculty at the Tufts, Friedman School of Nutrition Science and Policy, and Yale School of Medicine.

(00:00-38:57) Oooh, I must be hittin' a growth spurt. Thursday Throwdown. Welcome back, Bob. Like a fortress. Fight Tiger (basketball). We're like five presidents just sittin' around. The Irish guy comes through, make a note. This planet's not gonna be around much longer. Doug, do you want Steve in Wildwood or Dan Janson? Let's hear from Steve first. Rene Knott got hit by a bus. No room at Algonquin. Doug, you think Wellington's hot? Bracketology in November. Half my sons. Tufts for seniors. The Polar Express and Rumpleminze Santa. Even bums get presents. Timestamps.(39:05-52:18) Showtune Thursday. Mizzou's National Championship path. Audio of Florida interim coach Billy Gonzales being asked if Lane Kiffin would be a good fit at Florida. Good non-answer. Why'd you send the money, Lix? Shoutout the listener who sent Jackson tickets for the Mizzou game. There's a shrub on the dais. Who has blonde shrubs? Infidelity by the wayside.(52:28-1:11:42) Great to be reunited with Robert Thomas. Robert's assessment of the Blues' slow start. What does the team need to do to get back to their winning ways? Monty's playlist. Missing Jake Neighbours. Getting over the Game 7 loss to the Jets last year. The Tkachuk boys starting a podcast. Big life changes off the ice.See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Die Themen: Binge Drinking sorgt für Erfolg im Leben; Gavin Newsom bei der COP30; Warum die Demokraten beim Shutdown nachgegeben haben; Forscher finden heraus, wie man sich gegen übergriffige Möwen verteidigt; Russische Medien in Sorge wegen AfD; Streit vor dem Koalitionsausschuss und eine Kuh findet bei Schafen ihr Glück Host der heutigen Folge ist Markus Feldenkirchen (DER SPIEGEL). Du möchtest mehr über unsere Werbepartner erfahren? Hier findest du alle Infos & Rabatte: https://linktr.ee/ApokalypseundFilterkaffee

Nothing wrong with that!See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Student journalist and first-time documentary filmmaker Matthew Winkler joins us to discuss his work on a film chronicling the life and career of Joya Sherrill, an unsung American jazz vocalist who wrote the lyrics to the Billy Strayhorn standard, "Take the A Train," made famous by the Duke Ellington orchestra. Matthew came across Sherrill's name during his freshman year at Tufts University, while doing research for Boston Globe journalist and noted biographer Larry Tye, who was writing a book about jazz. Matthew, a music and history major, was astonished to discover the small footprint Sherrill had left behind, despite being the first female jazz singer to visit the Soviet Union, accompanying bandleader Benny Goodman, and earning the distinction of being one of Duke Ellington's favorite singers. "Public-facing history is very important to me," Matthew told a reporter for Tufts Now, the university's alumni magazine, in an article detailing how the Tufts undergraduate grew a student research project into a feature-length documentary, with the help of his professors and mentors. "I hope this film will make people know who Joya Sherrill is and why we should care about her. On a broader level, I think a documentary like this will make people realize how easy it is for remarkable figures to fall through the cracks of history." With this conversation, it is hoped, he might also signal to aspiring storytellers how easy it is to keep their eyes and ears open for stories that might move us, inspire us, and enlighten us. Learn more about Matthew Winkler: LinkedIn Five Sisters Productions Please support the sponsors who support our show: Gotham Ghostwriters' Gathering of the Ghosts Ritani Jewelers Daniel Paisner's Balloon Dog Daniel Paisner's SHOW: The Making and Unmaking of a Network Television Pilot Heaven Help Us by John Kasich Unforgiving: Lessons from the Fall by Lindsey Jacobellis Film Movement Plus (PODCAST) | 30% discount Libro.fm (ASTOLDTO) | 2 audiobooks for the price of 1 when you start your membership Film Freaks Forever! podcast, hosted by Mark Jordan Legan and Phoef Sutton Everyday Shakespeare podcast A Mighty Blaze podcast The Writer's Bone Podcast Network Misfits Market (WRITERSBONE) | $15 off your first order  Film Movement Plus (PODCAST) | 30% discount Wizard Pins (WRITERSBONE) | 20% discount

In this episode of the Leading Voices in Food podcast, host Norbert Wilson is joined by food and nutrition policy economists Will Masters and Parke Wilde from Tufts University's Friedman School of Nutrition, Science and Policy. The discussion centers around the concept of the least cost diet, a tool used to determine the minimum cost required to maintain a nutritionally adequate diet. The conversation delves into the global computational methods and policies related to least cost diets, the challenges of making these diets culturally relevant, and the implications for food policy in both the US and internationally. You will also hear about the lived experiences of people affected by these diets and the need for more comprehensive research to better reflect reality. Interview Summary I know you both have been working in this space around least cost diets for a while. So, let's really start off by just asking a question about what brought you into this work as researchers. Why study least cost diets? Will, let's start with you. I'm a very curious person and this was a puzzle. So, you know, people want health. They want healthy food. Of course, we spend a lot on healthcare and health services, but do seek health in our food. As a child growing up, you know, companies were marketing food as a source of health. And people who had more money would spend more for premium items that were seen as healthy. And in the 2010s for the first time, we had these quantified definitions of what a healthy diet was as we went from 'nutrients' to 'food groups,' from the original dietary guidelines pyramid to the MyPlate. And then internationally, the very first quantified definitions of healthful diets that would work anywhere in the world. And I was like, oh, wow. Is it actually expensive to eat a healthy diet? And how much does it cost? How does it differ by place location? How does it differ over time, seasons, and years? And I just thought it was a fascinating question. Great, thank you for that. Parke? There's a lot of policy importance on this, but part of the fun also of this particular topic is more than almost any that we work on, it's connected to things that we have to think about in our daily lives. So, as you're preparing and purchasing food for your family and you want it to be a healthy. And you want it to still be, you know, tasty enough to satisfy the kids. And it can't take too long because it has to fit into a busy life. So, this one does feel like it's got a personal connection. Thank you both for that. One of the things I heard is there was an availability of data. There was an opportunity that seems like it didn't exist before. Can you speak a little bit about that? Especially Will because you mentioned that point. Will: Yes. So, we have had food composition data identifying for typical items. A can of beans, or even a pizza. You know, what is the expected, on average quantity of each nutrient. But only recently have we had those on a very large scale for global items. Hundreds and hundreds of thousands of distinct items. And we had nutrient requirements, but only nutrient by nutrient, and the definition of a food group where you would want not only the nutrients, but also the phytochemicals, the attributes of food from its food matrix that make a vegetable different from just in a vitamin pill. And those came about in, as I mentioned, in the 2010s. And then there's the computational tools and the price observations that get captured. They've been written down on pads of paper, literally, and brought to a headquarters to compute inflation since the 1930s. But access to those in digitized form, only really in the 2000s and only really in the 2010s were we able to have program routines that would download millions and millions of price observations, match them to food composition data, match that food composition information to a healthy diet criterion, and then compute these least cost diets. Now we've computed millions and millions of these thanks to modern computing and all of that data. Great, Will. And you've already started on this, so let's continue on this point. You were talking about some of the computational methods and data that were available globally. Can you give us a good sense of what does a lease cost diet look like from this global perspective because we're going to talk to Parke about whether it is in the US. But let's talk about it in the broad sense globally. In my case the funding opportunity to pay for the graduate students and collaborators internationally came from the Gates Foundation and the UK International Development Agency, initially for a pilot study in Ghana and Tanzania. And then we were able to get more money to scale that up to Africa and South Asia, and then globally through a project called Food Prices for Nutrition. And what we found, first of all, is that to get agreement on what a healthy diet means, we needed to go to something like the least common denominator. The most basic, basic definition from the commonalities among national governments' dietary guidelines. So, in the US, that's MyPlate, or in the UK it's the Eat Well Guide. And each country's dietary guidelines look a little different, but they have these commonalities. So, we distilled that down to six food groups. There's fruits and vegetables, separately. And then there's animal source foods altogether. And in some countries they would separate out milk, like the United States does. And then all starchy staples together. And in some countries, you would separate out whole grains like the US does. And then all edible oils. And those six food groups, in the quantities needed to provide all the nutrients you would need, plus these attributes of food groups beyond just what's in a vitamin pill, turns out to cost about $4 a day. And if you adjust for inflation and differences in the cost of living, the price of housing and so forth around the world, it's very similar. And if you think about seasonal variation in a very remote area, it might rise by 50% in a really bad situation. And if you think about a very remote location where it's difficult to get food to, it might go up to $5.50, but it stays in that range between roughly speaking $2.50 and $5.00. Meanwhile, incomes are varying from around $1.00 a day, and people who cannot possibly afford those more expensive food groups, to $200 a day in which these least expensive items are trivially small in cost compared to the issues that Parke mentioned. We can also talk about what we actually find as the items, and those vary a lot from place to place for some food groups and are very similar to each other in other food groups. So, for example, the least expensive item in an animal source food category is very often dairy in a rich country. But in a really dry, poor country it's dried fish because refrigeration and transport are very expensive. And then to see where there's commonalities in the vegetable category, boy. Onions, tomatoes, carrots are so inexpensive around the world. We've just gotten those supply chains to make the basic ingredients for a vegetable stew really low cost. But then there's all these other different vegetables that are usually more expensive. So, it's very interesting to look at which are the items that would deliver the healthfulness you need and how much they cost. It's surprisingly little from a rich country perspective, and yet still out of reach for so many in low-income countries. Will, thank you for that. And I want to turn now to looking in the US case because I think there's some important commonalities. Parke, can you describe the least cost diet, how it's used here in the US, and its implications for policy? Absolutely. And full disclosure to your audience, this is work on which we've benefited from Norbert's input and wisdom in a way that's been very valuable as a co-author and as an advisor for the quantitative part of what we were doing. For an article in the journal Food Policy, we use the same type of mathematical model that USDA uses when it sets the Thrifty Food Plan, the TFP. A hypothetical diet that's used as the benchmark for the maximum benefit in the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, which is the nation's most important anti-hunger program. And what USDA does with this model diet is it tries to find a hypothetical bundle of foods and beverages that's not too different from what people ordinarily consume. The idea is it should be a familiar diet, it should be one that's reasonably tasty, that people clearly already accept enough. But it can't be exactly that diet. It has to be different enough at least to meet a cost target and to meet a whole long list of nutrition criteria. Including getting enough of the particular nutrients, things like enough calcium or enough protein, and also, matching food group goals reasonably well. Things like having enough fruits, enough vegetables, enough dairy. When, USDA does that, it finds that it's fairly difficult. It's fairly difficult to meet all those goals at once, at a cost and a cost goal all at the same time. And so, it ends up choosing this hypothetical diet that's almost maybe more different than would feel most comfortable from people's typical average consumption. Thank you, Parke. I'm interested to understand the policy implications of this least cost diet. You suggested something about the Thrifty Food Plan and the maximum benefit levels. Can you tell us a little bit more about the policies that are relevant? Yes, so the Thrifty Food Plan update that USDA does every five years has a much bigger policy importance now than it did a few years ago. I used to tell my students that you shouldn't overstate how much policy importance this update has. It might matter a little bit less than you would think. And the reason was because every time they update the Thrifty Food Plan, they use the cost target that is the inflation adjusted or the real cost of the previous edition. It's a little bit as if nobody wanted to open up the whole can of worms about what should the SNAP benefit be in the first place. But everything changed with the update in 2021. In 2021, researchers at the US Department of Agriculture found that it was not possible at the old cost target to find a diet that met all of the nutrition criteria - at all. Even if you were willing to have a diet that was quite different from people's typical consumption. And so, they ended up increasing the cost of the Thrifty Food Plan in small increments until they found a solution to this mathematical model using data on real world prices and on the nutrition characteristics of these foods. And this led to a 21% increase in the permanent value of the maximum SNAP benefit. Many people didn't notice that increase all that much because the increase came into effect at just about the same time that a temporary boost during the COVID era to SNAP benefits was being taken away. So there had been a temporary boost to how much benefits people got as that was taken away at the end of the start of the COVID pandemic then this permanent increase came in and it kind of softened the blow from that change in benefits at that time. But it now ends up meaning that the SNAP benefit is substantially higher than it would've been without this 2021 increase. And there's a lot of policy attention on this in the current Congress and in the current administration. There's perhaps a skeptical eye on whether this increase was good policy. And so, there are proposals to essentially take away the ability to update the Thrifty Food Plan change the maximum SNAP benefit automatically, as it used to. As you know, Norbert, this is part of all sorts of things going on currently. Like we heard in the news, just last week, about plans to end collecting household food security measurement using a major national survey. And so there will be sort of possibly less information about how these programs are doing and whether a certain SNAP benefit is needed in order to protect people from food insecurity and hunger. Parke, this is really important and I'm grateful that we're able to talk about this today in that SNAP benefit levels are still determined by this mathematical program that's supposed to represent a nutritionally adequate diet that also reflects food preferences. And I don't know how many people really understand or appreciate that. I can say I didn't understand or appreciate it until working more in this project. I think it's critical for our listeners to understand just how important this particular mathematical model is, and what it says about what a nutritionally adequate diet looks like in this country. I know the US is one of the countries that uses a model diet like this to help set policy. Will, I'd like to turn to you to see what ways other nations are using this sort of model diet. How have you seen policy receive information from these model diets? It's been a remarkable thing where those initial computational papers that we were able to publish in first in 2018, '19, '20, and governments asking how could we use this in practice. Parke has laid out how it's used in the US with regard to the benefit level of SNAP. The US Thrifty Food Plan has many constraints in addition to the basic ones for the Healthy Diet Basket that I described. Because clearly that Healthy Diet Basket minimum is not something anyone in America would think is acceptable. Just to have milk and frozen vegetables and low-cost bread, that jar peanut butter and that's it. Like that would be clearly not okay. So, internationally what's happened is that first starting in 2020, and then using the current formula in 2022, the United Nations agencies together with the World Bank have done global monitoring of food and nutrition security using this method. So, the least cost items to meet the Healthy Diet Basket in each country provide this global estimate that about a third of the global population have income available for food after taking account of their non-food needs. That is insufficient to buy this healthy diet. What they're actually eating is just starchy staples, oil, some calories from low-cost sugar and that's it. And very small quantities of the fruits and vegetables. And animal source foods are the expensive ones. So, countries have the opportunity to begin calculating this themselves alongside their normal monitoring of inflation with a consumer price index. The first country to do that was Nigeria. And Nigeria began publishing this in January 2024. And it so happened that the country's national minimum wage for civil servants was up for debate at that time. And this was a newly published statistic that turned out to be enormously important for the civil society advocates and the labor unions who were trying to explain why a higher civil service minimum wage was needed. This is for the people who are serving tea or the drivers and the low wage people in these government service agencies. And able to measure how many household members could you feed a healthy diet with a day's worth of the monthly wage. So social protection in the sense of minimum wage and then used in other countries regarding something like our US SNAP program or something like our US WIC program. And trying to define how big should those benefit levels be. That's been the first use. A second use that's emerging is targeting the supply chains for the low-cost vegetables and animal source foods and asking what from experience elsewhere could be an inexpensive animal source food. What could be the most inexpensive fruits. What could be the most inexpensive vegetables? And that is the type of work that we're doing now with governments with continued funding from the Gates Foundation and the UK International Development Agency. Will, it's fascinating to hear this example from Nigeria where all of the work that you all have been doing sort of shows up in this kind of debate. And it really speaks to the power of the research that we all are trying to do as we try to inform policy. Now, as we discussed the least cost diet, there was something that I heard from both of you. Are these diets that people really want? I'm interested to understand a little bit more about that because this is a really critical space.Will, what do we know about the lived experiences of those affected by least cost diet policy implementation. How are real people affected? It's such an important and interesting question, just out of curiosity, but also for just our human understanding of what life is like for people. And then of course the policy actions that could improve. So, to be clear, we've only had these millions of least cost diets, these benchmark 'access to' at a market near you. These are open markets that might be happening twice a week or sometimes all seven days of the week in a small town, in an African country or a urban bodega type market or a supermarket across Asia, Africa. We've only begun to have these benchmarks against which to compare actual food choice, as I mentioned, since 2022. And then really only since 2024 have been able to investigate this question. We're only beginning to match up these benchmark diets to what people actually choose. But the pattern we're seeing is that in low and lower middle-income countries, people definitely spend their money to go towards that healthy diet basket goal. They don't spend all of their additional money on that. But if you improve affordability throughout the range of country incomes - from the lowest income countries in Africa, Mali, Senegal, Burkina Faso, to middle income countries in Africa, like Ghana, Indonesia, an upper middle-income country - people do spend their money to get more animal source foods, more fruits and vegetables, and to reduce the amount of the low cost starchy staples. They do increase the amount of discretionary, sugary meals. And a lot of what they're eating exits the healthy diet basket because there's too much added sodium, too much added sugar. And so, things that would've been healthy become unhealthy because of processing or in a restaurant setting. So, people do spend their money on that. But they are moving towards a healthy diet. That breaks down somewhere in the upper income and high-income countries where additional spending becomes very little correlated with the Healthy Diet Basket. What happens is people way overshoot the Healthy Diet Basket targets for animal source foods and for edible oils because I don't know if you've ever tried it, but one really delicious thing is fried meat. People love it. And even low middle income people overshoot on that. And that displaces the other elements of a healthy diet. And then there's a lot of upgrading, if you will, within the food group. So, people are spending additional money on nicer vegetables. Nicer fruits. Nicer animal source foods without increasing the total amount of them in addition to having overshot the healthy diet levels of many of those food groups. Which of course takes away from the food you would need from the fruits, the vegetables, and the pulses, nuts and seeds, that almost no one gets as much as is considered healthy, of that pulses, nuts and seeds category. Thank you. And I want to shift this to the US example. So, Parke, can you tell us a bit more about the lived experience of those affected by least cost diet policy? How are real people affected? One of the things I've enjoyed about this project that you and I got to work on, Norbert, in cooperation with other colleagues, is that it had both a quantitative and a qualitative part to it. Now, our colleague Sarah Folta led some of the qualitative interviews, sort of real interviews with people in food pantries in four states around the country. And this was published recently in the Journal of Health Education and Behavior. And we asked people about their goals and about what are the different difficulties or constraints that keep them from achieving those goals. And what came out of that was that people often talk about whether their budget constraints and whether their financial difficulties take away their autonomy to sort of be in charge of their own food choices. And this was something that Sarah emphasized as she sort of helped lead us through a process of digesting what was the key findings from these interviews with people. One of the things I liked about doing this study is that because the quantitative and the qualitative part, each had this characteristic of being about what do people want to achieve. This showed up mathematically in the constrained optimization model, but it also showed up in the conversations with people in the food pantry. And what are the constraints that keep people from achieving it. You know, the mathematical model, these are things like all the nutrition constraints and the cost constraints. And then in the real conversations, it's something that people raise in very plain language about what are all the difficulties they have. Either in satisfying their own nutrition aspirations or satisfying some of the requirements for one person or another in the family. Like if people have special diets that are needed or if they have to be gluten free or any number of things. Having the diets be culturally appropriate. And so, I feel like this is one of those classic things where different disciplines have wisdom to bring to bear on what's really very much a shared topic. What I hear from both of you is that these diets, while they are computationally interesting and they reveal some critical realities of how people eat, they can't cover everything. People want to eat certain types of foods. Certain types of foods are more culturally relevant. And that's really clear talking to you, Will, about just sort of the range of foods that end up showing up in these least cost diets and how you were having to make some adjustments there. Parke, as you talked about the work with Sarah Folta thinking through autonomy and sort of a sense of self. This kind of leads us to a question that I want to open up to both of you. What's missing when we talk about these least cost diet modeling exercises and what are the policy implications of that? What are the gaps in our understanding of these model diets and what needs to happen to make them reflect reality better? Parke? Well, you know, there's many things that people in our research community are working on. And it goes quite, quite far afield. But I'm just thinking of two related to our quantitative research using the Thrifty Food Plan type models. We've been working with Yiwen Zhao and Linlin Fan at Penn State University on how these models would work if you relaxed some of the constraints. If people's back in a financial sense weren't back up against the wall, but instead they had just a little more space. We were considering what if they had incentives that gave them a discount on fruits and vegetables, for example, through the SNAP program? Or what if they had a healthy bundle of foods provided through the emergency food system, through food banks or food pantries. What is the effect directly in terms of those foods? But also, what is the effect in terms of just relaxing their budget constraints. They get to have a little more of the foods that they find more preferred or that they had been going without. But then also, in terms of sort of your question about the more personal. You know, what is people's personal relationships with food? How does this play out on the ground? We're working with the graduate student Angelica Valdez Valderrama here at the Friedman School, thinking about what some of the cultural assumptions and of the food group constraints in some of these models are. If you sort of came from a different immigrant tradition or if you came from another community, what things would be different in, for example, decisions about what's called the Mediterranean diet or what's called the healthy US style dietary pattern. How much difference do this sort of breadth, cultural breadth of dietary patterns you could consider, how much difference does that make in terms of what's the outcome of this type of hypothetical diet? Will: And I think, you know, from the global perspective, one really interesting thing is when we do combine data sets and look across these very different cultural settings, dry land, Sahelian Africa versus countries that are coastal versus sort of forest inland countries versus all across Asia, south Asia to East Asia, all across Latin America. We do see the role of these cultural factors. And we see them playing out in very systematic ways that people come to their cultural norms for very good reasons. And then pivot and switch away to new cultural norms. You know, American fast food, for example, switching from beef primarily to chicken primarily. That sort of thing becomes very visible in a matter of years. So, in terms of things that are frontiers for us, remember this is early days. Getting many more nutritionists, people in other fields, looking at first of all, it's just what is really needed for health. Getting those health requirements improved and understood better is a key priority. Our Healthy Diet Basket comes from the work of a nutritionist named Anna Herforth, who has gone around the world studying these dietary guidelines internationally. We're about to get the Eat Lancet dietary recommendations announced, and it'll be very interesting to see how those evolve. Second thing is much better data on prices and computing these diets for more different settings at different times, different locations. Settings that are inner city United States versus very rural. And then this question of comparing to actual diets. And just trying to understand what people are seeking when they choose foods that are clearly not these benchmark least cost items. The purpose is to ask how far away and why and how are they far away? And particularly to understand to what degree are these attributes of the foods themselves: the convenience of the packaging, the preparation of the item, the taste, the flavor, the cultural significance of it. To what degree are we looking at the result of aspirations that are really shaped by marketing. Are really shaped by the fire hose of persuasion that companies are investing in every day. And very strategically and constantly iterating to the best possible spokesperson, the best possible ad campaign. Combining billboards and radio and television such that you're surrounded by this. And when you drive down the street and when you walk into the supermarket, there is no greater effort on the planet than the effort to sell us a particular brand of food. Food companies are basically marketing companies attached to a manufacturing facility, and they are spending much more than the entire combined budget of the NIH and CDC, et cetera, to persuade us to eat what we ultimately choose. And we really don't know to what degree it's the actual factors in the food itself versus the marketing campaigns and the way they've evolved. You know, if you had a choice between taking the food system and regulating it the way we regulate, say housing or vehicles. If we were to say your supermarket should be like an auto dealership, right? So, anything in the auto dealership is very heavily regulated. Everything from the paint to where the gear shift is to how the windows work. Everything is heavily regulated because the auto industry has worked with National Transportation Safety Board and every single crash investigation, et cetera, has led to the standards that we have now. We didn't get taxes on cars without airbags to make us choose cars with airbags. They're just required. And same is true for housing, right? You can't just build, you know, an extension deck behind your house any way you want. A city inspector will force you to tear it out if you haven't built it to code. So, you know, we could regulate the grocery store like we do that. It's not going to happen politically but compare that option to treating groceries the way we used to treat the legal services or pharmaceuticals. Which is you couldn't advertise them. You could sell them, and people would choose based on the actual merit of the lawyer or the pharmaceutical, right? Which would have the bigger impact. Right? If there was zero food advertising, you just walked into the grocery store and chose what you liked. Or you regulate the grocery store the same way we regulate automotive or building trades. Obviously, they both matter. There's, you know, this problem that you can't see, taste or smell the healthiness of food. You're always acting on belief and not a fact when you choose something that you're seeking health. We don't know to what extent choice is distorted away from a low-cost healthy diet by things people genuinely want and need. Such as taste, convenience, culture, and so forth. Versus things that they've been persuaded to want. And there's obviously some of both. All of these things matter. But I'm hopeful that through these least cost diets, we can identify that low-cost options are there. And you could feed your family a very healthy diet at the Thrifty Food Plan level in the United States, or even lower. It would take time, it would take attention, it would be hard. You can take some shortcuts to make that within your time budget, right? And the planning budget. And we can identify what those look like thanks to these model diets. It's a very exciting area of work, but we still have a lot to do to define carefully what are the constraints. What are the real objectives here. And how to go about helping people, acquire these foods that we now know are there within a short commuting distance. You may need to take the bus, you may need carpool. But that's what people actually do to go grocery shopping. And when they get there, we can help people to choose items that would genuinely meet their needs at lower cost. Bios Will Masters is a Professor in the Friedman School of Nutrition, with a secondary appointment in Tufts University's Department of Economics. He is coauthor of the new textbook on Food Economics: Agriculture, Nutrition and Health (Palgrave Macmillan, 2024). Before coming to Tufts in 2010 he was a faculty member in Agricultural Economics at Purdue University (1991-2010), and also at the University of Zimbabwe (1989-90), Harvard's Kennedy School of Government (2000) and Columbia University (2003-04). He is former editor-in-chief of the journal Agricultural Economics (2006-2011), and an elected Fellow of the American Society for Nutrition (FASN) as well as a Fellow of the Agricultural and Applied Economics Association (AAEA). At Tufts his courses on economics of agriculture, food and nutrition were recognized with student-nominated, University-wide teaching awards in 2019 and 2022, and he leads over a million dollars annually in externally funded research including work on the Agriculture, Nutrition and Health Academy (https://www.anh-academy.org), as well as projects supporting government efforts to calculate the cost and affordability of healthy diets worldwide and work with private enterprises on data analytics for food markets in Africa. Parke Wilde (PhD, Cornell) is a food economist and professor at the Friedman School of Nutrition Science and Policy at Tufts University. Previously, he worked for USDA's Economic Research Service. At Tufts, Parke teaches graduate-level courses in statistics, U.S. food policy, and climate change. His research addresses the economics of U.S. food and nutrition policy, including federal nutrition assistance programs. He was Director of Design for the SNAP Healthy Incentives Pilot (HIP) evaluation. He has been a member of the National Academy of Medicine's Food Forum and is on the scientific and technical advisory committee for Menus of Change, an initiative to advance the health and sustainability of the restaurant industry. He directs the USDA-funded Research Innovation and Development Grants in Economics (RIDGE) Partnership. He received the AAEA Distinguished Quality of Communication Award for his textbook, Food Policy in the United States: An Introduction (Routledge/Earthscan), whose third edition was released in April 2025. 

Send us a textDo we need to reimagine veterinary medicine?The career path of Vet Life Reimagined guest, Emily McCobb, DVM, MS, DACVAA  is all about reimagining; it's about animal welfare, openness, and compassion; about exploring new models of accessible care for pets and of education for veterinary students that creates competent, confident, and happy veterinarians. Dr. Emily is a board-certified veterinary anesthesiologist whose passion for animal welfare led her to support shelter medicine in academic settings and later inherited student-led community initiatives, opening her up to a whole new career path. Dr. Emily worked at Tufts for many years, but in August 2024, she accepted a position at UC Davis as the inaugural PetSmart Charities Endowed Chair of Accessible Veterinary Care, where she brings her expertise to foster innovation of new models of accessible veterinary care across the US. Resources:Episode on YouTubePress Release of "Endowed Chair in Accessible Veterinary Care Named at UC Davis"2024 AAHA Community Practice Care Guidelines for Small Animal PracticeSupport the showMore Vet Life Reimagined?

From July 18, 2024: On today's episode, Matt Gluck, Research Fellow at Lawfare, spoke with Michael Beckley, Associate Professor of Political Science at Tufts, and Arne Westad, the Elihu Professor of History at Yale.They discussed Beckley's and Westad's articles in Foreign Affairs on the best path forward for the U.S.-China strategic relationship—in the economic and military contexts. Beckley argues that in the short term, the U.S. should focus on winning its security competition with China, rather than significant engagement, to prevent conflict. Westad compares the current moment to the period preceding World War I. He cautions that the U.S. and China should maintain strategic communication and avoid an overly narrow focus on competition to stave off large-scale conflict.They broke down the authors' arguments and where they agree and disagree. Does U.S. engagement lower the temperature in the relationship? Will entrenched economic interests move the countries closer to conflict? How can the U.S. credibly deter China from invading Taiwan without provoking Beijing?To receive ad-free podcasts, become a Lawfare Material Supporter at www.patreon.com/lawfare. You can also support Lawfare by making a one-time donation at https://givebutter.com/lawfare-institute.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Visit the Sullivan Family Charitable Foundation Website Read The Century Foundation Report "How to Grow Bilingual Teacher Pathways: Making the Most of U.S. Linguistic and Cultural Diversity" About The Author Maggie Marcus, PhD is the Executive Director of The Sullivan Family Charitable Foundation. She has taught high school Spanish and elementary English in Puerto Rico, then worked for the United Nations as well as the CIA before returning to the classroom in Washington, D.C. as a Spanish Dual Language first and second-grade teacher. She also worked as an instructional coach for Spanish literacy in a bilingual charter school. Maggie has a Master in Law and Diplomacy from the Fletcher School at Tufts, and a Ph.D. from the Applied Linguistics and Language Education program at the University of Maryland, College Park. Her dissertation research, titled, “Bilingual in a Monolingual District: Stakeholder Perspectives on Equitable Access to Dual Language Programs” explored the similarities and differences of parents, policy-makers, and school leaders and access to dual language education (DLE) programs in a local school district.    This episode of Principal Center Radio is sponsored by IXL, the most widely used online learning and teaching platform for K-12. Discover the power of data-driven instruction in your school with IXL—it gives you everything you need to maximize learning, from a comprehensive curriculum to meaningful school-wide data. Visit IXL.com/center to lead your school towards data-driven excellence today.   

On this episode of the Stang Stories podcast, Molly O'Brien '26 interviews Mike Connolly '96, about his journey from South Boston to Milton Academy—earning a full scholarship, repeating seventh grade, bonding over sports and homeroom, and finding inspiration in an astronomy class and senior projects in photography and essays. Mike recounts his college years at Tufts, a shift from engineering into sales, the mentors who guided him, and how a personal loss led him to found Pay Forward Coaching in 2022, a nonprofit offering thousands of free career coaching sessions. He closes with practical advice for current Milton students: do more extracurriculars and keep relationships alive.

Top 5 Topics:- From Stained Glass to Smiles: The Unexpected Journey of a Dentist- The Crazy Commute: Surviving the Dentist Grind, from Boston to Long Island- Massachusetts vs. Long Island Teeth: Why Dental Health Is So Different Across America- Freedom in Dentistry: Escaping the Multi-Office Ping-Pong Commuting and Finding The Perfect Autonomy- Vitamin D, Sunlight & Smiles: Can Weather Change Your Dental Health?Quotes & Wisdom:(05:30) – “When I would go to class, all I had to worry about was just focusing on class. It made me realize later in life how valuable focus really is.”(07:45) – “It's fascinating how small differences — like water fluoridation or smoking habits — can completely change a community's dental health.”(11:12) – “You see some strange stuff on 495… semis flipped, pile-ups… crazy Long Island traffic!”(15:39) – “I wanted a place where I could control my own cases — no one calling to question every crown or treatment plan.”(16:15) – “You get fair compensation, health insurance, and the autonomy to treat patients the right way — that's worth more than anything.”(18:41) – “I've been testing vitamin D supplementation with implants, just to see if there's a measurable difference in osseointegration.”(19:13) – “The angle of the sunlight changes vitamin D production — maybe that's why health outcomes differ between places.”(20:14) – “We should all get to know each other — it's amazing what opportunities come when dentists connect.”Questions:(01:11) – “Did you ever bring up your background in stained glass windows or your dad's CNC work during dental school interviews?”“How did you like being a part of the Catholic High School System, at Chaminade? I went to St. Anthony's!”(02:25) – “How did you end up using that CNC machine for your master's research at Tufts?” (04:30) – “How do you feel when a local school like Our Lady of Mercy closes? Do you think that affects the community?”(06:53) – “How does practicing dentistry in New York compare to Massachusetts?”(10:28) – “What was your commute like working for Aspen Dental in Massachusetts?”(11:53) – “Do you think the ‘ping-pong' schedule between offices is common for DSOs?”(15:11) – “Why did you decide to move from Sachem Dental to Great Expressions?”(17:10) – “You mentioned a pharmacology CE course — any new trends or prescriptions you're interested in lately?”Now available on:- Dr. Gallagher's Podcast & YouTube Channel- Long Island Dentists Podcast #3- Dose of Dental Podcast #188- 10.2025

Join Caro in the very first Sexy Sips episode of the semester for an interview with three asexual Tufts students! With more than a few digressions, we'll chat about the complexity of being ace in a sex-centered world and explore the joy of deep, profound relationships.This episode was produced by Caroline Lever, India, and Quan. This episode was edited and transcribed by Caroline Lever.Access the fully transcribed episode. To learn more about Tufts Sex Health Reps, visit:SHR InstagramSHR Linktree To learn more about Tufts CARE Office, visit:CARE WebsiteCARE Instagram  

En una operación diplomática de gran envergadura que involucró a países e instituciones europeas, países árabes, la ONU y hasta al presidente de la FIFA, el presidente Trump consiguió que se firmara un acuerdo para terminar el conflicto entre Israel y Hamás, y una estabilización ambiciosa de Gaza que costará mucho más implementar que negociar. Mientras tanto, María Corina Machado fue premiada con el Nobel de Paz 2025, y Gustavo Petro novela su influencia en La Paz y solución del medio oriente mientras denosta del Nobel de María Corina e ignora el conflicto en Colombia. En este espisodio María Alejandra Villamizar y Juan Carlos Restrepo conversan con Federico Vélez, doctorado de la Escuela Fletcher de Derecho y Diplomacia de la Universidad de Tufts, profesor de Historia y Relaciones Internacionales de la Universidad Americana de Kuwait, y autor del libro Latin American Revolutionaries and the Arab World, quien vive en el Medio Oriente desde hace 21 años.

How can curiosity help us to come together across lines of difference?How can we insist on finding commonality despite the current political environment?In this series on healthcare and social disparities, Dr. Jill Wener, a board-certified Internal Medicine specialist, anti-racism educator, meditation expert, and tapping practitioner, interviews experts and gives her own insights into multiple fields relating to social justice and anti-racism. In this episode, Jill provides a platform for Amara Lynch to interview her colleagues from Listening 4 Justice. They talk about the implications of a news story about a teacher in Idaho who had a sign on in her classroom that said, “Everyone is Welcome Here”, which led to significant controversy and protests in that community.Addie Lentzner is a youth activist, organizer, and student. Pat Prescott is a radio veteran who has hosted programs in New York and Los Angeles, America's top 2 radio markets. Folami Prescott-Adams, Ph.D. is the CEO of HTI Catalysts. Amara Lynch has degrees from Tufts and Bethel Universities and an ICF-accredited diversity coaching certification.LINKShttps://hticatalysts.net/listening-4-justice/**Our website www.consciousantiracism.comYou can learn more about Dr. Wener and her online meditation and tapping courses at www.jillwener.com, and you can learn more about her online social justice course, Conscious Anti Racism: Tools for Self-Discovery, Accountability, and Meaningful Change at https://theresttechnique.com/courses/conscious-anti-racism.If you're a healthcare worker looking for a CME-accredited course, check out Conscious Anti-Racism: Tools for Self-Discovery, Accountability, and Meaningful Change in Healthcare at www.theresttechnique.com/courses/conscious-anti-racism-healthcareJoin her Conscious Anti-Racism facebook group: www.facebook.com/groups/307196473283408Follow her on:Instagram at jillwenerMDLinkedIn at jillwenermd

When it come to the coaches you play against, do you see friends, or just competition? Tufts University Head Volleyball Cora Thompson explains how finding ways to partner and work with your fellow coaches raises everyone's skills, and improves the sport. Cora tells Janice how pushing players AND coaches out of their comfort zones builds trust and teamwork. Above all else, Cora lays out why being authentic and true to yourself is one of the most valuable lessons young coaches need to discover.Links mentioned: For more information go to www.side-out.org. Follow the side-out organization on Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/sideoutfndn/Have suggestions for the podcast? Email Janice: leaveitbetter@side-out.org

Tufts, Gayle www.deutschlandfunkkultur.de, Politisches Feuilleton

Overcoming MBA Anxiety With The Help of an HBS Admissions Officer Part Three: Three Meditations For Your MBA Application Journey For the final episode of this very special three-part series, we are joined by SBC Consultant Pauline. Pauline holds an MBA from the Wharton School of Business, worked for years as an HBS Admissions Officer, and has presented/lectured at Stanford, Tufts and Villanova. Pauline is uniquely positioned to speak about anxiety as it relates to the MBA application process. Pauline is passionate about Business, Education and Spirituality and worked as a Level 1 Hospital Trauma Chaplain. She also holds a Divinity degree in Pastoral Counseling and a Doctorate in Educational Leadership.  In episode one of this series we talked about anxiety in the MBA context: what anxiety is, where it comes from, and discussed very specific strategies for what to do when anxiety strikes in the present moment. In our second episode we dug deeper and talked about how you can HARNESS this worry and anxiety in healthy and productive ways to IMPROVE your application.  In today's episode we talk about how meditation can help you release worry and anxiety as well as tap into deeper parts of your own lived experiences. In this episode Pauline: Talks about how meditation can be helpful to anyone during times of worry and anxiety (or anytime, really). Chandler and Pauline also share specific suggestions about how meditation can be a useful aspect of your MBA application journey. Walks our listeners through three meditations specifically centered around the MBA application process: Getting into a positive state of mind The use of mantras in meditation And a breathing excercise Shares her own advice about how her clients have used meditiations Suggests other free online meditation resources our listeners might be interested in. Chandler and the entire SBC team would like to thank Pauline for this very special three-part series; a must for anyone facing worry or anxiety as a part of their MBA journey. Additional gratitude to Tiana McCaskill for composing and recording the special music for these meditations.

On this episode of the Woodard Report podcast, Joe speaks with Jeff about the future of AI in accounting and how predictive models can transform bookkeeping accuracy. Jeff shares how his company, Digits, leverages AI not to replace accountants but to streamline workflows, reduce errors, and give professionals more time for higher-value work. They also explore the difference between generative and predictive AI, the role of accountants in reviewing outputs, and why firms must adapt quickly or risk being outpaced by competitors. About Jeff Seibert Jeff Seibert is the co-founder and CEO of Digits, where he's building the world's first AI-powered accounting platform for startups and small businesses. Jeff is also a frequent presenter on both entrepreneurial and technical topics and has lectured at Stanford, Harvard, MIT, and Tufts, as well as keynoted Scaling New Heights, Twitter Flight, AppsWorld, AnDevCon, EclipseCon, and others. Learn more about Jeff at: JeffSeibert.com Twitter LinkedIn Thank you to our show sponsor, Canopy! Unclunk your firm with Canopy, the fully integrated practice management that helps accountants build the firm they always wanted. The suite includes client and document management, workflow, time and billing, engagements and proposals, and more. Check out getcanopy.com. Learn more about the show and our sponsors at Woodard.com/podcast

This week we are recapping a thrilling and emotional win for the football team last Saturday at Tufts. Plus, we preview the Head of the Charles regatta with rowing head coach Peter Steenstra, and our Athletics Hall of Fame interview series continues with the 2015 Bates women's rowing team, the first Bates team to win an NCAA championship. All that and more... Interviews this episode: 1:19 -- Matt Coyne, Head Coach, Football. 17:04 -- Ryan Lynskey '27, Football captain. (Male Bobcat of the Week, NESCAC Offensive Player of the Week) 23:59 -- Ryan Rozich '27, Football captain. (NESCAC Special Teams Player of the Week) 34:23 -- Malina Young '28, Volleyball. (Female Bobcat of the Week) 39:29 -- Peter Steenstra, Head Coach, Rowing. (Head of the Charles Preview) 56:06 -- Jenna Armstrong '15, NCAA Champion Women's Rowing Team Captain, Hall of Fame Interview Series.

Message by Ray Tufts. Are you interested in learning more about Four Corners Church? Visit: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠http://www.fourhuntsville.com⁠⁠

The Culture Show's Jared Bowen on Bob Ross' paintings on the auction block to support public media, "Sardines" at the Huntington,  Taylor Swift's record-breaking record sales, and other arts and culture news. Harvard national security expert Juliette Kayyem on President Trump's troop orders to Portland and Chicago, the air traffic controller debacle nationwide, and more. Political philosopher Michael Sandel (author of the celebrated 1996 book "Democracy's Discontent") joins us ahead of his GBH Ralph Lowell Annual Lecture Thursday night.Tufts food policy analyst Corby Kummer is joined by retiring Washington Post food critic Tom Sietsema, who exposes his face to us for the first time.

Overcoming MBA Anxiety With The Help of an HBS Admissions Officer Part Two: How Anxiety and Worry Can Be Helpful To Your Application For this very special three-part series, we are joined by SBC Consultant Pauline. Pauline holds an MBA from the Wharton School of Business, worked for years as an HBS Admissions Officer, and has presented/lectured at Stanford, Tufts and Villanova. Pauline is uniquely positioned to speak about anxiety as it relates to the MBA application process. Pauline is passionate about Business, Education and Spirituality and worked as a Level 1 Hospital Trauma Chaplain. She also holds a Divinity degree in Pastoral Counseling and a Doctorate in Educational Leadership.  In last week's episode we talked about anxiety in the MBA context: what anxiety is, where it comes from, and discussed very specific strategies for what to do when anxiety strikes in the present moment. Today, we are going to dig deeper and talk about how you can HARNESS this worry and anxiety in healthy and productive ways to IMPROVE your application.  In this segment Chandler and Pauline:  Share specific examples of how previous clients have harnessed worry and anxiety to improve their MBA essays, Discuss how thinking through your own “worst case scenarios and greatest fears” can help you prepare for your interviews, Roleplay specific scenarios in which applicants transform what they consider to be their greatest weaknesses as an applicant into strengths Provide a template to use when discussing failures or things you are not proud of in the MBA context  This episode is a must for anyone grappling with worry, anxiety, or self-doubt along their MBA journey. 

Why Hart disagrees with Red Sox choice to stick with Narvaez in Game 2 full 734 Wed, 01 Oct 2025 18:51:28 +0000 yaFCaw0JE8aJGZGwNQfS7jcFfgJCwAAS mlb,boston red sox,sports WEEI Afternoons mlb,boston red sox,sports Why Hart disagrees with Red Sox choice to stick with Narvaez in Game 2 'WEEI Afternoons,' featuring Andy Hart, Nick 'Fitzy' Stevens, and former Patriots linebacker Ted Johnson, can be heard weekdays 2pm to 6pm on WEEI. Hart, a Tufts graduate, joined WEEI in 2019 after nearly two decades at Patriots.com. With WEEI he has served as the station's Patriots reporter, columnist, and co-host of the national ‘6 Rings & Football Things' podcast. Stevens is a Massachusetts native with a passion for Boston sports. He joined WEEI in the summer of 2019 and has hosted shows across every daypart at the station, including “The 6 Rings Postgame Show” with Hart after every Patriots game. Johnson joined WEEI after serving as an on-air host for The Sports Hub since 2018. Upon his retirement from the NFL in 2005, he began his professional media career at CBS Boston doing pre- and postgame shows for the Patriots. © 2025 Audacy, Inc. Sports False https://player.amperwa

Welcome back, friends, to Your World of Creativity—the podcast where we explore inspiration, innovation, and imagination from around the globe. I'm your host, Mark Stinson, and today we're diving into a fascinating intersection of creativity, consciousness, and cutting-edge technology.My guest is Schuyler Dragoo—an interdisciplinary artist and researcher whose work spans painting, performance, music, video, sculpture, and beyond. But what sets Schuyler apart is her deep inquiry into the intersections of technology, neurodivergence, and nonhuman perception. She's recently completed an MFA at Tufts and an MA in Psychology, bringing together art, science, and strategy in ways that are absolutely captivating.Schuyler's Website @painted.goose on Instagram 1. Art and Awareness Across Species“You explore nonhuman perception and interaction—something most artists never even think about. What first drew you to this idea of creating work that bridges the human and nonhuman experience?”Sensory translation, AI interpretations of animal behavior, or speculative interaction.Examples from her painting, sculpture, or video installations.2. Neurodivergence as a Creative Lens“You've mentioned neurodivergence in your work—not just as a subject, but also as a mode of perception and creativity. How does neurodivergence inform the way you see or create systems, art, and technology?”Non-linear thought, pattern recognition, or how psychology and art intersect in her process.3. From Concept to Code: Building Tools, Not Just Ideas“Unlike many artists, you actually build things—AI bots, automation systems, narrative engines. Can you share an example of a tool you've created that brought together creativity, strategy, and real-world performance?”Her work in performance marketing or AI-driven behavior tools.How does creative strategy function like anthropology?4. Making Systems Feel Human“You've said you approach creative work as a system—and you design systems that feel human. What does that look like in practice? And how do you make sure technology doesn't lose its emotional resonance?”Walkthrough of design thinking + behavioral insightDiscussion on ethics, empathy, and human-centered design.5. What's Next in the Ecosystem of Your Work?“With your background in psychology, tech, and performance art—what kinds of projects are on the horizon for you? Where do you see the biggest potential for impact next?”MFA and MA capstone projectsUpcoming collaborations, gallery shows, or tool launchesVision for AI and neurodiverse design spacesSchuyler, thank you for opening up your world of creativity with us today. From speculative design to neurodiverse intelligence, your work really reminds us how broad and brilliant the creative landscape can be when we embrace systems thinking and cross-domain fluency.As always, we want to thank our sponsor—White Cloud Coffee Roasters. Listeners, you can enjoy a 10% discount off your first order when you use the code CREATIVITY at checkout. Just visit WhiteCloudCoffee.com.Until next time, keep exploring your world of creativity. Be sure to subscribe, rate, and review the podcast on your favorite app. We'll see you in the next episode!

In this episode of the Scrum.org Community Podcast, Patricia Kong hosts a discussion with Elaine Lin Hering, author of  USA Today Best Selling Book "Unlearning Silence," and Ravi Verma, a Professional Scrum Trainer. They examine how workplace culture and cultural norms influence who speaks up and why intentional communication matters.Elaine explains that silence can be strategic or damaging, depending on context, and emphasizes the need for leaders to create environments where all voices are heard. Ravi shares his experiences with reactive versus reflective decision-making and the importance of transparency. They discuss practical strategies for encouraging voice and the significance of designing inclusive meeting practices.Tune in to this inspiring episode that anyone can relate to!Get more insights about Unlearning Silence in this article on the Professional Scrum Unlocked Substack!About Elaine Lin Hering:Elaine Lin Hering a facilitator, writer, and speaker. She works with organizations and individuals to build skills in communication, collaboration, and conflict management. She has worked on six continents and facilitated executive education at Harvard, Dartmouth, Tufts, UC Berkeley, and UCLA. She is the former Advanced Training Director for the Harvard Mediation Program and a Lecturer on Law at Harvard Law School. She has worked with coal miners at BHP Billiton,micro-finance organizers in East Africa, mental health professionals in China, and senior leadership at the US Department of Commerce. Her clients include American Express, Chevron, Google, Nike, Novartis, PayPal, Pixar, and the Red Cross. She is the author of the USA Today Bestselling book Unlearning Silence: How to Speak Your Mind, Unleash Talent, and Live More Fully (Penguin, 2024).About Ravi Verma:Ravi Verma is a Public Speaker, Agile Coach, Scrum.org Professional Scrum Trainer, Evidence Based Management Consultant and Blogger with a passion for helping teams recapture the magic of making I.T. As the Founder and Chief Org Whisperer at The Org Whisperers, Ravi blends ideas from the world of Technology, Entrepreneurship and Organizational Development to develop strong teams and inspiring leaders at all levels of an organization. He recently co-founded his second startup - Al Dente, a platform that helps Agile Coach's and organizations empirically improve business outcomes in tandem with Agile delivery frameworks like Scrum. 

Overcoming MBA Anxiety With The Help of an HBS Admissions Officer Part One: Understanding What Anxiety Is In The MBA Application Context For this very special three-part series, we are joined by SBC Consultant Pauline. Pauline holds an MBA from the Wharton School of Business, worked for years as an HBS Admissions Officer, and has presented/lectured at Stanford, Tufts and Villanova. Pauline is also uniquely positioned to speak about anxiety as it relates to the MBA application process. Pauline is passionate about Business, Education and Spirituality and worked as a Level 1 Hospital Trauma Chaplain. She also holds a Divinity degree in Pastoral Counseling and a Doctorate in Educational Leadership.  This episode starts with a bit of radical candor about the fact that there are LOTS of things that applicants can find themselves worrying about. This includes the test taking process, starting your application, writing (and rewriting) those essays, pressing send, preparing for interviews, managing worries while waiting for your decision, wrestling with imposter syndrome, and so many other topics. In this episode, Pauline draws from her work as an HBS Admissions Officer—as well as her masters and doctoral work—to:  Dive into the scientific underpinnings of anxiety, what it is, and where it comes from Share perspectives from various experts about physiology of anxiety Discuss the neurocognitive components, including the way anxiety affects the way you process information  And there is good news—so much good news. Chandler and Pauline also share:  a reminder that ALL applicants face anxiety at some point in their application process the benefits of "leaning in" to the discomfort anxiety sometimes brings  understanding your own "window of tolerance" as it relates to anxiety ways procrastination and anxiety are often interconnected specific tips and tricks to implement IN THE MOMENT when anxiety strikes  the difference between "self-care" and "self-preservation" on your application journey powerful things you can learn about yourself by facing anxiety head-on This podcast is a must for anyone struggling with anxiety, worry, or self-doubt on their MBA journey. 

We kicked off the program with four news stories and different guests on the stories we think you need to know about!The Return of Taste of Fenway on Wednesday September 24th! Guest: Steven Farrell - Executive Director of Fenway Community Development Corporation New Massachusetts license plate honors K9 officers and handlers. Guest: James (Jim) LaMonte – Founder of the K9 PTSD Research Center in Seekonk, the group who came up with the idea of the plates Europe bans chemical used in some gel nail polishes, classifying it as a ‘reproductive toxicant'. Tufts doctor things there should be some type of regulation in the U.S. She thinks it would be a particularly good idea for women of childbearing age to avoid gel nail polish… Guest: Dr. Farah Moustafa - MD, Dermatologist and Director of Laser and Cosmetics at Tufts Medical Center Retired Milford firefighter John Hennessy, who, after a lifetime of service with the Milford Fire Dept., now needs help finding a donor for a lifesaving kidney. Guest: John Hennessy – Retired Milford firefighter who needs a kidney  *For more info on John and how to donate*

Professor Jerold Mande is CEO of Nourish Science; Adjunct Professor of Nutrition, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health; and a Non-Resident Senior Fellow, Tisch College of Civic Life, Tufts University.Mr. Mande has a wealth of expertise and experience in national public health and food policy. He served in senior policymaking positions for three presidents at USDA, FDA, and OSHA helping lead landmark public health initiatives. In 2009, he was appointed by President Obama as USDA Deputy Under Secretary for Food Safety, In 2011, he moved to USDA's Food, Nutrition, and Consumer Services, where he spent six years working to improve the health outcomes of the nation's $100 billion investment in 15 nutrition programs. During President Clinton's administration, Mr. Mande was Senior Advisor to the FDA commissioner where he helped shape national policy on nutrition, food safety, and tobacco. He also served on the White House staff as a health policy advisor and was Deputy Assistant Secretary for Occupational Health at the Department of Labor. During the George H.W. Bush administration he led the graphic design of the iconic Nutrition Facts label at FDA, for which he received the Presidential Design Award.Mr. Mande began his career as a legislative assistant for Al Gore in the U.S. House and Senate, managing Gore's health and environment agenda, and helping Gore write the nation's organ donation and transplantation laws.Mr. Mande earned a Master's of Public Health from the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill and a Bachelor of Science in nutritional science from the University of Connecticut. Prior to his current academic appointments, he served on the faculty at the Tufts, Friedman School of Nutrition Science and Policy, and Yale School of Medicine.Links & Resources:Nourish ScienceStudy: US Diet Quality and the 86% F-grade findingDiet, Drugs and Dopamine by David KesslerThe Poison Squad by Deborah BlumThe Jungle by Upton SinclairCommissioner Kessler's citizen petition to FDA on refined carbohydratesNYT Article: what's wrong with how we test food chemicalsDiscounts Get 10% off delicious local farm-fresh food delivered to your door with my link for FarmMatch: https://farmmatch.com/jane Get 15% off high-quality Italian olive oil with code FARMTOFUTURE: https://shop.vignolifood.com/FARMTOFUTURE Get 40% the CircleDNA's Premium DNA test with code JANEZHANG: https://circledna.com/premium Connect with Jane Z. Instagram: @farm.to.future Email: jane@farmtofuture.co Website: farmtofuture.co

Joyce Coffee heads up Climate Resilience Consulting, advising cities and states and others on resilience to climate change. She explains to Ted that she learned early on in Chicago, that the impacts of climate change can be unpredictable and fierce. After 750 souls there lost their lives there in a heat wave, mostly black and brown citizens, she knew that she was going to focus on adaptation, and making people more resilient to the ravages of climate change.Joyce grew up in Colorado and then moved to the East Coat for her education at Tufts -- to focus on public health -- and then MIT where she was a student of Urban Studies and Planning. She talks about her first career step, working for an engineering firm that worked on the Three Gorges Dam project in China. The firm was helping China leap from a second world country to a first world country. Joyce's work surrounded relocating well over a million people whose land would be flooded by the dam. That prepared her for advocacy of relocating communities and towns to steer clear of the most threatening aspects of climate change.Ted and Joyce dig in on adaptation, a sorry reality. Why not cut greenhouse gases and avoid the need for adaptation? Joyce's climate action planning in Chicago made clear that even a city with a progressive mayor and populous, was falling short of its climate goals. Like it or not, citizens there -- and globally -- will have to adapt to rising CO2. Thus for nearly ten years, Joyce's firm has been providing consulting for cities and states... helping them prepare for floods, fires, droughts, windstorms, coastal inundation, and sea level rise.The conversation shifts to the brand-new guide that Climate Resilience Consulting has developed for small businesses. Sadly, one in three small businesses in climate change events have suffered financial losses. Data confirms that 26% of small businesses have resilience plans and fully 94% feel that they are prepared. But in areas ravaged by climate change events, 40% of small businesses are forced out of business. Not good. Joyce explains as small businesses employ half of all American workers and contribute 40% of our nation's gross domestic product. By helping small businesses -- with a practical guide complete with checklists and AI prompts - they can be more profitable, able to fare far better than ill-prepared others. They also "bounce back" more quickly... having moved to higher ground, or away from extreme fire risk areas. They are part of what Joyce calls the solution set... ripe with innovation and smarts in determining how to get "more crop for the drop," and formulating new kinds of exterior house paint that is more resistant to wildfires. Joyce gets great satisfaction in helping business and communities prepare for and reap the benefits of her grandmother's oft-stated view that "a stitch in time saves nine."

Today we introduce you to a model program that is making a real difference.  The Tufts University Prison Initiative of Tisch College (TUPIT) provides transformative educational experiences for incarcerated and on-campus students and faculty in an environment that encourages bold critical thinking, higher levels of civic engagement, and a greater sense of community. TUPIT aims to facilitate creative and collaborative responses to the problems of mass incarceration, fostering students' and faculty members' capacities to become active citizens of change. Joining us to tell more of the story is Dr. Hilary Binda, Founder and Executive Director of the Tufts University Prison Initiative (TUPIT). Hilary has a PhD in English Literature and teaches Literature, Gender Studies, and Carceral Studies at Tufts and in the degree program at MCI-Shirley and Souza-Baranowski Correctional Center. David Delvalle is the Education and Reentry Director for TUPIT.  A true success story, he has become a leader in prison reform, education, and restorative justice, transforming his community after his own incarceration.

Tufts University professor Eitan Hersh says colleges like the one he works at are too ideologically narrow — shutting out ideas from conservatives, religious people and others outside the academic mainstream.

Welcome to Fertility & Sterility Roundtable! Each month, we will host a discussion with the authors of "Views and Reviews" and "Fertile Battle" articles published in a recent issue of Fertility & Sterility.  This month, we are excited to talk about State Level Advocacy with Elizabeth Carr, the first baby born via IVF in the United States, and Dr. Preston Parry. Elizabeth Carr is a passionate advocate for fertility rights and access. She has presented to audiences around the globe including at the United Nations, ASRM, ESHRE, and the national infertility association, RESOLVE. She has helped companies craft benefit packages and parental leave policies. Her professional experience in the field of journalism, marketing and events, and fundraising. She enjoys marathons and is a writer when not advocating.  Dr. Preston Parry completed residency in Ob/Gyn at Tufts and went south to Louisville for his fellowship in Reproductive Endocrinology and Infertility. He was in academic REI for 8 years, including as division chief, before opening his own practice, Positive Steps Fertility, in 2017. He is a past president of the Society of Reproductive Surgeons and is currently the chair of ACOG Mississippi. He also is on the Editorial Board of Fertility and Sterility.  View Fertility and Sterility at https://www.fertstert.org/  

The Gavel Podcast is the official podcast of Sigma Nu Fraternity, Inc., and is dedicated to keeping you updated on the operations of the Legion of Honor and connecting you to stories from our brotherhood. To find out more from the Fraternity, you can always check out our website at www.sigmanu.org. Also consider following us on: Facebook | Instagram | LinkedIn | YouTube | FlickrHave feedback or a question about this episode? Want to submit an idea for a future topic you'd like to see covered? Contact the Gavel Podcast team at news@sigmanu.org. Hosts for this EpisodeChristopher Brenton - Beta Tau Chapter (North Carolina State) Alumnus and Sigma Nu Fraternity's Director of CommunicationsGuest for this EpisodeWalt Sokoll - Zeta Eta Chapter (Tufts) Alumnus, Principal in Deloitte's Human Capital Practice, Board Member for City Year in Philadelphia, and past staffer with the General Fraternity.Episode ReferencesCity Year - City Year is a national non-profit that places AmeriCorps members in public schools to provide tutoring, mentoring, and support, helping students succeed and graduate.General ResourcesThe Sigma Nu Mentor Network: Navigators - Register to be a mentor or mentee for the Fraternity's career coaching program.Prospective Member Referral - Do you know a young man who would be an ideal candidate for Sigma Nu? Please submit a membership referral.Employment and Staff Hiring Resources - If you are interested in learning more about working for the Fraternity as a consultant. Please visit the employment webpage for resources and access to the position application. The application deadlines are October 15 and March 1. Applications are accepted on a rolling basis. Contact Scott Smith at scott.smith@sigmanu.org for more information.

Luke Maher, a Tufts grad, discusses the inception and impact of Puma's Project 3, aimed at supporting sub-elite runners. He shares insights on the marketing strategy behind the project, the community engagement it fostered, and the personal stories of athletes involved. Luke reflects on his transition from coaching to a corporate role at Puma, the lessons learned from his coaching experience, and the importance of understanding athletes as individuals. Luke's coaching journey started at Amherst College where took over as Interim Head Coach then moved to Conn College to be the Head Men's XC Coach.He also emphasizes the significance of racing in the running culture and shares advice for aspiring athletes looking to join Project 3.If you're running New York in 2025, reach out to Luke to be considered.How to Support D3 Glory Days:⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Shirts⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠THE NEWSLETTER!⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠D3 Glory Days Venmo⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠.⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠We launched a Patreon!⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Subscribe and leave us a review on Apple Podcasts⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Instagram⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠,⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Twitter⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ and⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ Strava⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠.

In this episode, Andrew DeVoe, Executive Vice President and CFO of Tufts Medicine, shares how the organization reversed a $300 million loss run rate to profitability in just over a year. He outlines key cost-saving strategies, revenue cycle improvements, and his vision for transforming care delivery to strengthen Tufts' position in a competitive healthcare landscape.

What is intelligence? If we look hard, can we find it in unexpected places: not just in brains but in all kinds of structures? How should we recognize it? And what does any of this have to do with a bipedal dog born without front legs, or making small new organisms out of single cells, or how Wikipedia might be like an axolotl, or why we are so blind to the vast variety of minds that might surround us? Join Eagleman with guest Michael Levin, professor at Tufts, about how we might discover intelligence all around us in ways we don't typically intuit.

President Donald Trump says he'll decide whether or not to attack Iran within the next two weeks. On this week's On the Media, hear why the right is split on what the president should do. Plus, scrutiny on student journalists has intensified.[01:00] Host Brooke Gladstone on the recent narratives forming around the ‘No Kings' protest and President Trump's military parade. Plus, a look at the lie that the left is more politically violent than the right – a falsehood that has emerged in rightwing narratives about ICE being victimized.[14:03] Brooke speaks with Andrew Prokop, senior politics correspondent at Vox, about the bitter divide growing within the MAGA ranks – between the “America First” faction, who advocate against war with Iran and helping Ukraine, and GOP hawks who want Trump to attack. [30:44] Host Micah Loewinger sits down with Gregorio Olivares Gutierrez, a rising junior at the University of Texas Dallas and editor-in-chief of The Retrograde, to discuss his brief tenure as editor-in-chief of his school's official paper, The Mercury. They examine how The Mercury's coverage of a pro-Palestine encampment last spring ignited a chain of events that led to the university firing him and the entire staff, and the de facto shuttering of the paper. Mike Hiestand, Senior Legal Counsel at the Student Press Law Center, on the chilling effect experienced by student journalists across the country after ICE arrested Tufts grad student Rümeysa Öztürk.Statement from Barnard College: "Barnard respects and supports a robust student press. As students present in Butler Library during the disruption have been confirmed to be working as journalists, we have notified them that their interim suspensions have been lifted. As our review continues, we will issue additional notifications as appropriate." Statement from Columbia University: “The interim suspension on the Columbia student journalist was lifted within hours after it was issued once it was determined that the individual was a member of the student press who was covering the protest as a reporter, not a participant in the disruptions to academic activities that were in violation of University policies and Rules. Columbia University continues to strongly believe in the value of a vibrant and independent student press."Statement from University of Texas Dallas: “UT Dallas has always supported student journalists' editorial control and wants to create an environment where they can learn best journalistic practices and follow professional standards and guidelines. For clarification, the former editor was not removed for editorial content, but because he violated student media bylaws. Over the past few months, a group of university faculty, students, and staff has worked together to establish a new advisory committee for student media. Its goals included reviving the campus newspaper and ensuring the staff has necessary resources to operate with the editorial independence critical for student journalists.”UT Dallas Student Media Memo: “Removal of The Mercury Editor-in-Chief” by Lydia LumGregorio Olivares Gutierrez's Appeal to the UT Dallas Student Media Memo regarding his removal Further reading:“Parsing ICE's mixed-up, hard-to-believe assault claims,” by Philip Bump“‘They're Taking Shirly': An Army Sergeant Thought His Family Was Safe. Then ICE Deported His Wife,” by Sonner Kehrt“The surprising right-wing push to keep us out of war,” by Andrew ProkopQuestion Everything with Brian Reed: “Rümeysa Öztürk is Locked Up for an Op-ed: An Urgent Summit with the Student Newspaper that Published It”The Eagle: A Times Union Podcast, “The Future of Journalism”The Mercury's May 20, 2025 Edition: “Welcome to UTD” On the Media is supported by listeners like you. Support OTM by donating today (https://pledge.wnyc.org/support/otm). Follow our show on Instagram, Twitter and Facebook @onthemedia, and share your thoughts with us by emailing onthemedia@wnyc.org.

Mary welcomes Dr. David Reagan for the first time to SUFTT. David founded Lamb & Lion Ministries on April 1, 1980 and they are celebrating 45 years of building up and edifying the body of Christ, urging us all to be watchful, prayerful, and joyful in Christ.  Dr. Reagan is a native Texan, a Phi Beta Kappa graduate of the University of Texas in Austin. His graduate degrees were earned in the field of International Relations from the Fletcher School of Law & Diplomacy of Tufts and Harvard Universities. Before entering the ministry, he had an extensive career in higher education. David is a life-long Bible student, teacher, and preacher. He entered the full-time ministry in 1976 when he was called to serve as the pulpit minister for a church in Irving, Texas.  He has written over 20 books and has contributed to many others. Today we talk about the rising perilous tide all around us, starting with Israel's brilliant attack on Iran. Then we discuss whether socialism is our expected national doom, as the left ratchets up every cause they can dream of, including antisemitism -  an offense to a holy God. Lawlessness and violence threaten to spill over to any community on any day as the left uses whatever crisis suits them to foment trouble. Never mind that they themselves are lawless at heart, when the president tries to establish law and order, and it is vilified, we know just how far the violence has permeated our fragile sense of society. We also talk about the national marches planned for Saturday as it is Trump's 79th birthday and the 250th anniversary of our Army. The No Kings Movement is gaining steam from the left and could change the face of our nation yet again. What could happen next on this fragile planet is anyone's guess.   Stand Up For The Truth Videos: https://rumble.com/user/CTRNOnline & https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCgQQSvKiMcglId7oGc5c46A

In Gaza, two million people are at risk of starvation, as Israeli-controlled aid has been repeatedly interrupted and marked by violence towards aid workers and chaos at distribution sites.  Guests:   Mohammed Mhawish, journalist and writer from Gaza City. Alex de Waal, Executive Director of the World Peace Foundation at the Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy at Tufts, author of the 2017 book, Mass Starvation: The History and Future of Famine.  Want more What Next? Subscribe to Slate Plus to access ad-free listening to the whole What Next family and across all your favorite Slate podcasts. Subscribe today on Apple Podcasts by clicking “Try Free” at the top of our show page. Sign up now at slate.com/whatnextplus to get access wherever you listen. Podcast production by Ethan Oberman, Elena Schwartz, Paige Osburn, Anna Phillips, Madeline Ducharme, Isabel Angell, and Rob Gunther.  Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

In Gaza, two million people are at risk of starvation, as Israeli-controlled aid has been repeatedly interrupted and marked by violence towards aid workers and chaos at distribution sites.  Guests:   Mohammed Mhawish, journalist and writer from Gaza City. Alex de Waal, Executive Director of the World Peace Foundation at the Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy at Tufts, author of the 2017 book, Mass Starvation: The History and Future of Famine.  Want more What Next? Subscribe to Slate Plus to access ad-free listening to the whole What Next family and across all your favorite Slate podcasts. Subscribe today on Apple Podcasts by clicking “Try Free” at the top of our show page. Sign up now at slate.com/whatnextplus to get access wherever you listen. Podcast production by Ethan Oberman, Elena Schwartz, Paige Osburn, Anna Phillips, Madeline Ducharme, Isabel Angell, and Rob Gunther.  Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Stephen Miller's got some ideas. So this week, Mary and Andrew start with a focus on his recent acknowledgement that the White House is considering suspending habeas corpus altogether for migrants. They talk about what that means, and the reality that it lacks any legal sniff test, which the Supreme Court agrees with. Then, they highlight what happens when due process works, after the release of Rumeysa Ozturk, a Tufts student who was detained by ICE over an opinion piece she wrote for the student newspaper. Next up, a significant decision from Judge Susan Illston out of California, putting a temporary hold on reducing the federal workforce. Mary and Andrew note what she held, including that the administration needs to follow procedure and get congressional buy in. And lastly, they preview the Supreme Court argument Mary's ICAP team is bringing this Thursday on birthright citizenship- not on the merits per se, but on the issue of national injunctions. And a quick eye pop on Trump's decision to swap out Ed Martin as the US Attorney for DC with yet another Fox News host, Jeanine Pirro.Want to listen to this show without ads? Sign up for MSNBC Premium on Apple Podcasts.

Guests: Dave Dayen, Rep. Jasmine Crockett, Bharat Ramamurti, Drew HarwellThe president's plan to cut taxes for the rich and healthcare for the poor. Tonight: big problems for the big, beautiful bill. Then, Ford announces increased prices on vehicles made in Mexico as "the shopkeeper" has his way. Plus, a major victory for the Tufts student detained on orders from the Trump administration. And new reporting on what could be the largest bribery scandal in presidential history. Want more of Chris? Download and subscribe to his podcast, “Why Is This Happening? The Chris Hayes podcast” wherever you get your podcasts.