STEM-Talk

Our guest today is Doug Cooke, an aerospace consultant who spent 38 years at NASA’s Johnson Space Center in Houston and NASA Headquarters in Washington, D.C.  STEM-Talk host and IHMC founder Dr. Ken Ford, a former Associate Director of NASA’s Ames Research Center and Director of NASA’s Center of Excellence in Information Technology, interviewed Doug just four days after the astronauts of NASA’s Artemis II mission splashed down in the Pacific Ocean following a historic 10-day roundtrip from the Earth to the Moon. In today’s episode, Ken and Doug discuss the Artemis mission as well as NASA’s plans to return humans to the lunar surface by 2028. Doug also shares his concern that China could one day surpass America’s leadership role in human spaceflight. During his 38 years at NASA, Doug played critical roles in the Space Shuttle, International Space Station and Human Exploration spaceflight programs. During the last three years of his NASA career, he served as Associate Administrator of the Exploration Systems Mission Directorate, which oversees the development of systems critical to NASA’s plans for human exploration of the Moon and Mars, including the Artemis program. Show notes: [00:04:05] Ken opens our interview with Doug by talking about the Artemis II mission, which is the first crewed mission beyond low earth orbit since Apollo 17 in 1972. Harrison Schmidtt, who was on Apollo 17, was our guest on episode 4. Ken asks Doug for his key takeaways of the Artemis II mission, which set the record for a manned mission from Earth, traveling 252,756 miles into space and breaking Apollo 13’s record. [00:06:18] Ken explains that the Artemis missions signal a new age of space exploration as well as the beginning of a new space race between the U.S. and China. NASA aims to land humans on the Moon by 2028 while China expects to land humans on the moon in 2030. Ken has previously stated that he does not have confidence in NASA’s current mission architecture to achieve NASA’s stated goal of 2028, and asks Doug for his thoughts on the matter. [00:07:28] Ken asks if it is true that Yuri Gagarin, who become the first human to fly into space, is what initially sparked Doug’s interest in science and space. [00:08:54] Ken notes that Gagarin’s orbit around the earth inspired President Kennedy to vow that the United States would ramp up its space program and become the first nation to land a man on the moon. Ken mentions that he believes the Apollo 11 mission, which landed astronauts Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin on the lunar surface, was one the greatest technological advances in world history. Ken asks Doug for his thoughts on the success of the Apollo program. [00:10:28] Ken mentions that Doug went to college at Texas A&M and majored in aerospace engineering. Kens asks Doug how he got a job at NASA after graduating. [00:12:21] Ken explains that Doug was instrumental in the development of the space shuttle and the International Space Station during his time at NASA. Doug talks about what it was like working on those projects at NASA. [00:15:16] Ken mentions that Doug also had an instrumental role in the Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter (LRO), Lunar Crater Observation and Sensing Satellite (LCROSS), and the broader Exploration Technology Program. Ken points out that Doug became head of the exploration technology program in 1990 under then NASA Associate Administrator Mike Griffin, who was our guest on episodes 134 and 189. Ken asks Doug about meeting Mike. [00:16:17] Ken mentions that Mike Griffin and Lisa Porter were our guests on episode 189, where they voiced concerns about NASA’s current plans for a return to the moon. Ken goes on to mention that near the end of Doug’s career at NASA, he was the head of Exploration Systems Mission Directorate (ESMD), which is responsible for the development of systems critical to NASA’s plans for future exploration of the Moon and Mars. Ken asks Doug to talk about his role as head of the directorate and the work he did there. [00:18:55] Ken explains that Doug has written extensively on the issues with the Artemis mission architecture, most notably in a recent article for space news. Before jumping into the article, Ken asks Doug to talk about why it is important and also a national-security concern that we return to the moon before China. [00:21:12] Looping back to Doug’s op-ed in Space News, Ken notes that Doug stressed the need for NASA to develop a plan-B for the Artemis mission, with Doug and others noting that without a plan-B, the U.S. risks of losing the space race to the Moon. Doug has also gone on record to say that China has a far simpler, more direct, and more technically conservative plan than NASA. Ken asks Doug to elaborate on this. [00:22:37] Ken asks Doug to talk about the issues he and others have identified with NASA’s current proposed landing system. [00:26:14] Ken asks Doug to give a better understanding for the listeners of just how tall the proposed SpaceX lander is, and why that is a potential problem for not only landing on the moon in the proposed locations, but also for the astronauts exiting and entering. [00:28:51] Ken asks Doug to talk about what plan-B for Artemis looks like. [00:30:12] Ken asks Doug about the powerful thrust generation of the SpaceX lander. This raises the concern of regolith blast and generating significant debris fields while landing and thus reducing the scientific value of the region immediately surrounding the landing site. [00:30:59] Ken asks if Doug has any other thoughts on a potential plan-B. [00:33:02] Ken notes that the success of the mission hinges on the least proven element, namely the lander. While other elements of the mission architecture are well established, the hardest and least tested elements are normally the weakest links. Ken asks Doug’s thoughts on this position. [00:34:31] Ken asks Doug to talk about the complexity of the Artemis mission architecture and that it is largely driven by the Lander and NASA’s requirements.  There was a high interest in re-usability which increased complexity. Neither of the two Landers under development are an optimal design for a lunar lander. [00:35:37] Ken asks Doug about the role of commercial companies sometimes called “new space” in space exploration. [00:37:02] Ken asks Doug if he feels discouraged by the fact that the U.S. has squandered a 60-year head start in space exploration. [00:37:36] Ken explains that China aims to send humans to Mars by 2050, and NASA aims to do the same by 2040, while Elon Musk proposes to send humans to Mars by 2029, which Ken says is a completely untenable notion. Ken notes that statements such as that from Musk vastly understate the difficulty entailed in a Mars mission. Given that Doug was part of the early planning of a Mars mission at NASA, he asks Doug to talk about the challenges that such a mission faces. [00:42:17] Ken and Doug discuss the problem with EDL (Entry Descent and Landing) that Mars uniquely poses. [00:43:09] Ken also brings up the issue of crew health and wellness. By the time they reach Mars, given the extended time spent in a high-radiation, micro-gravity environment, maintaining crew health in transit is critical to mission success. [00:43:47] Ken poses the concern that if it becomes likely that China will reach the moon before the U.S. can return, then NASA or the political leadership may adopt the attitude that we’ve already been to the moon, and that we should just jump straight to Mars. [00:46:24] Ken asks for Doug’s thoughts on NASA’s current leadership and workforce. [00:49:01] Ken quizzes Doug about the aims, goals, and mission architecture of Artemis III and IV. [00:51:16] Ken notes that the design of Artemis III might negatively impact the overall mission goal of landing on the Moon by 2028. [00:52:04] Ken shifts to talk more about Artemis IV, elements of which, Ken notes, need much more testing to be ready. [00:52:58] Ken closes our interview noting that Doug will return for another interview on STEM-Talk in 2028 to see if Artemis is on schedule. Ken ends by asking Doug about how he started his hobby of collecting Civil War artifacts after he retired and moved to Gettysburg, as well as his hobby of collecting antique cars. [00:55:17] Ken closes by asking Doug to name the favorite car he has collected. Links: Doug Cooke bio Learn more about IHMC STEM-Talk homepage Ken Ford bio Ken Ford Wikipedia page  

Transcribed - Published: 21 May 2026

Neuroscientist and frequent STEM-Talk guest Dr. Tommy Wood rejoins us today for part two of our interview about Tommy’s book that is fresh off the press and now available in bookstores and Amazon, “The Stimulated Mind: Future-Proof Your Brain from Dementia and Stay Sharp at Any Age.” Tommy is an Associate Professor of Pediatrics and Neuroscience at the University of Washington, where his laboratory focuses on brain health across human lifespan. Tommy is a colleague and good friend who also is a Visiting Research Scientist here at IHMC. In part one of our interview with Tommy, episode 193, we discussed his mission to dispel the myth that the brain is doomed to decline with age. Tommy gave us a fascinating history of neuroscience and how researchers go about studying the brain. Tommy also talked about what is holding us back in terms of addressing an ever-increasing burden of cognitive and mental health disorders that we are experiencing not only here in the U.S., but also around the world. Today, Tommy shares science-backed strategies to help people future-proof their brains. We talk about the importance of diet and exercise in terms of brain health as well as the importance of stimulating and challenging our brains throughout our lifespans. Tommy has a bachelor’s degree in biochemistry from the University of Cambridge, a medical degree from the University of Oxford, and a Ph.D. in Physiology and Neuroscience from the University of Oslo. Show notes: [00:03:55 Dawn welcomes Tommy back for part two of his interview by asking him about his recent trip to the UK. [00:04:32] Dawn recaps where we left off with Tommy in part one of our interview, explaining that when we last spoke with Tommy about his book, The Stimulated Mind, we focused on dispelling myths about the adult brain, in particular the idea that the adult brain is fixed. [00:05:22] Ken asks Tommy about advice his father offered when Tommy got accepted into the University of Cambridge. [00:08:03] As a follow-up, Dawn asks if it’s fair to say that when Tommy first started working with patients, what he learned in textbooks and classrooms didn’t necessarily translate perfectly into the real world and that there is no one-size-fits-all fix. [00:11:54] Ken asks Tommy to expand on what he wrote in his book about the fact that while science can give us a framework for understanding the world, we are always only one experiment or one well-phrased question away from having to completely rethink everything. [00:16:44] Dawn launches into talking about what people can do to future-proof their brain, starting with diet. In the Nourish chapter of his book, Tommy seeks to help people see food as an opportunity for nourishment rather than a source of stress since there are so many conflicting messages about diet and healthy foods out there. Dawn asks Tommy if his opinion is that there is no one-size-fits-all diet? [00:22:21] Dawn explains that what we eat has a direct effect on our long-term health and dementia risk, and within the literature a common theme that emerges regarding eating for brain health is maximizing nutrients. Dawn asks Tommy to talk about what this looks like. [00:24:49] Dawn points out that people today are inundated with advice from health influencers in all directions. She asks Tommy to talk about his advice to tune out the noise and instead of chasing whatever supplement or super food that is currently in vogue, simply to focus on filling your diet with whole, nutrient dense foods. [00:29:43] Ken explains that nutrients are sometimes hard to get in the diet, with somewhere between 15 and 25 percent of people in the U.S. and Europe having inadequate intakes of most B vitamins and even higher deficits in iron, magnesium, calcium, and vitamins C and E, with nutrient deficiencies differing by sex. Women on average are lower in B12, iron, iodine, and calcium, while men are typically lower in magnesium, zinc, and various B vitamins. Ken asks Tommy to give an overview of what these nutrients do in the brain that makes them so critical to cognitive function. [00:35:51] Ken follows up on this discussion by moving on to the section in Tommy’s book titled “To Supplement or Not to Supplement” where he discusses the evidence of the benefits of targeted supplementation to fill in the nutrient gaps that exist in the diet. Ken asks Tommy to talk about this more in depth and maybe give a framework by which people can think about adding or not adding key nutrients via supplementation. [00:41:21] Given the controversial reputation red meat has, Ken asks Tommy to weigh in on how he thinks people should think about red meat. [00:46:26] Fish as well, Dawn explains, has become controversial, due to microplastics and mercury concerns. However, given the positive effects on cognitive health that fish consumption has, Dawn asks Tommy to talk about the costs and benefits of increasing fish consumption. [00:50:30] Ken asks about the genetic basis for dementia and in particular Alzheimer’s, particularly regarding the APOE genotypes and a recent paper that made the claim that homozygous APOE4/4 carriers were essentially guaranteed to develop ALzherimer’s, a strong claim that Ken is skeptical of. [00:57:06] Ken switches gears to talk about brain energy consumption, noting that while the brain is only about 2% of total body mass, it consumes roughly 20% of total energy at rest. Ken mentions that we discussed this topic in episode 59 with Steven Cunnane and asks Tommy to touch on the importance of getting enough energy for the brain and the consequences of not. [01:01:43] Dawn mentions that time restricted eating and fasting have become quite popular in recent years, and is a topic we discussed in episodes 7, and 133 with Mark Mattson. Dawn asks Tommy what some key considerations are for fasting and time restricted eating. [01:04:52] Ken contrasts low energy availability with the prevalent issue in today’s modern food environment of high energy availability, leading to epidemics of obesity and type 2 diabetes, both of which are associated with lower brain volume and are both also implicated in projections of higher dementia burdens in the coming decades. Ken asks Tommy to talk about this. [01:08:55] Dawn asks if Tommy has any practical recommendations on how people can assess whether they are fueling the needs of their brain properly. [01:10:38] Ken notes that brain health is tied closely to the extent to which we stimulate our brains, especially as we age, a topic which was discussed at length with Dr. Rudy Tanzi in episode 174. Ken goes on to ask Tommy to talk about the importance of stimulating our brains as we age. [01:13:38] Dawn notes that Tommy made the realization that the brain adapting to stimulus is very similar to how muscles adapt to resistance training after meeting Josh Turknet, a neuroscientist who loves the banjo as much as Tommy loves weight training. Dawn asks Tommy to talk about how his and Josh’s respective hobbies have more in common than he originally thought. [01:16:11] Ken asks if this analogy between the brain and muscle extends to ‘muscle memory’ or the phenomenon that people who were at one time more muscular are able to gain back that muscle mass more quickly than when they first trained. [01:19:11] Ken mentions that Josh Turknet, the author of the book Anyone Can Play Music, and our guest on episode 130, co-authored a paper with Tommy titled, “Demand coupling drives neurodegeneration, a model of age-related cognitive decline and dementia.” Ken asks Tommy to discuss this paper. [01:22:58] Dawn explains that Tommy writes in his book that exercise science and athletic coaching have given us a really good idea of how a specific stimulus effects performance. But when it comes to this kind of measurement tracking for cognitive function, it’s less straightforward. Dawn asks Tommy to talk about this. [01:25:22] Ken mentions that there are lots of ways to stimulate the brain, with some being more potent than others, such as learning a language or an instrument. Ken asks Tommy what some other examples are of good cognitive exercises and learning endeavors that can help develop cognitive headroom as we age. [01:29:14] Ken asks Tommy about the fact that retirement is often the point in someone’s life where their cognitive abilities are most at risk, and that delaying retirement, or retiring and choosing to reinvent oneself and engage in a new and challenging adventure can help prevent the cognitive risks associated with retirement. [01:32:32] Dawn notes that exercise is also incredibly important for brain health and asks Tommy to talk about his framework that people can use to think about movement and physical activity as a way to support brain health. [01:37:28] Ken asks Tommy about a study out of Norway that found that people who increased their fitness in their 50s and 60s decreased their subsequent risk of dementia. [01:39:52] Dawn asks Tommy to talk about the growing issue of social media causing people to lose their attention span. [01:44:03] Dawn asks Tommy how he sees AI affecting our brains today. [01:49:17] Ken notes that while most STEM-Talk guests who have written a book say that they would prefer to not repeat the experience, Tommy however, is already thinking about his next book. Ken asks if Tommy can share what this next book will be about. [01:51:26] Dawn asks Tommy about his wife Elizabeth, who was our guest on episode 71, and a researcher at the University of Washington. [01:52:52] Dawn wraps up asking Tommy if, since moving from North Carolina to Washington, if he and Elizabeth have had any luck finding good barbecue in Seattle. Links: Tommy Wood bio STEM-Talk episode 47 with Tommy Wood STEM-Talk episode 110 with Tommy Wood STEM-Talk episode 111 with Tommy Wood STEM-Talk episode 128 with Tommy Wood STEM-Talk episode 193 with Tommy Wood, part 1 Learn more about IHMC STEM-Talk homepage Ken Ford bio Ken Ford Wikipedia page Dawn Kernagis bio  

Transcribed - Published: 16 April 2026

Today we have Dr. Tommy Wood, a neuroscientist and frequent STEM-Talk guest who joins today on the eve of the publication of his first book, “The Stimulated Mind: Future-Proof Your Brain from Dementia and Stay Sharp at Any Age.” Tommy is an Associate Professor of Pediatrics and Neuroscience at the University of Washington, where his laboratory focuses on brain health across human lifespan. Tommy is a colleague and good friend who also is a Visiting Research Scientist here at IHMC. Today we talk to Tommy about his mission to dispel the myth that the brain is doomed to decline with age. His book, which publishes on March 24 but is available for pre-order on Amazon, offers science-backed strategies to enhance mental sharpness and prevent cognitive decline, including Alzheimer’s disease. There was so much to unpack with Tommy about his book, that we decided to split his interview into two parts. Today we talk to Tommy about the history of neuroscience and how researchers go about studying the brain. We also have a conversation with Tommy about what is holding us back in terms of addressing an ever-increasing burden of cognitive and mental health disorders we are experiencing not only here in the U.S., but also around the world. In part two of Tommy’ interview, which will air in a few weeks following today’s episode, Tommy shares science-backed strategies to help people future-proof their brains. Tommy’s lab at the University of Washington focuses on brain health across the lifespan. He conducts research that focuses on ways to treat a range of brain injuries, including babies born preterm and adults who experience brain trauma. He also investigates lifestyle factors that affect long-term cognitive function and increase the risk of dementia. Tommy has a bachelor’s degree in biochemistry from the University of Cambridge, a medical degree from the University of Oxford, and a Ph.D. in Physiology and Neuroscience from the University of Oslo. Show notes: [00:04:04] Dawn opens our interview congratulating Tommy on his new book, “The Stimulated Mind.” Dawn asks Tommy what inspired him to write his first book. [00:07:29] Since writing the book consumed more than 18 months of Tommy’s life, Dawn asks Tommy if he thinks he’ll write another one. [00:09:36] Dawn asks if it’s fair to say that the overarching theme of “The Stimulated Mind” is that the conventional belief the adult brain is fixed and incapable of change is wrong. [00:17:35] Ken explains that Tommy opens his book with a story about a study on barn owls, where researchers outfitted a group of owls with prism goggles that altered the perceived position of objects in the owls’ vision. While young owls were able to quickly adapt to the change in their vision and return to normal behavior and activities, adult owls, even after months of wearing the goggles, were unable to adapt and would miss mice that were directly under their beaks. However, the research group amended their study design and found something interesting. Ken asks Tommy to explain what they found when they amended their design. [00:22:40] Ken asks Tommy to share how a human study, which outfitted participants with goggles that flipped their vision upside down, demonstrated the adaptability of the adult brain. [00:25:32] Ken asks if these sorts of adaptations have been seen as beyond basic sensory modalities in higher cognitive functions. [00:31:25] Dawn zooms out in our discussion and asks Tommy, given the falsehood of our previous understanding of the adult brain as being fixed, what exactly do we know about the brain. [00:35:36] Dawn asks Tommy to talk about Santiago Ramón y Cajal, who is considered the first neuroscientist. [00:38:41] Dawn mentions chapter two of Tommy’s book, “How do Neuroscientists Study the Brain,” in which Tommy explains the complexity of the brain, which is comprised of almost 100 billion neurons which compose nearly a quadrillion synapses. Given the complexity of the brain, Tommy notes in his book that even an organ as complex as the human brain is incapable of fully comprehending its own complexity. Dawn asks Tommy to talk about how he and his colleagues approach studying the brain. [00:43:30] Ken notes the parallels between attempting to understand the function of the brain based on an understanding of its individual components to the process of trying to understand how a piece of software works on a computer by systematically studying the computer’s hardware. Ken goes on to start a discussion on the parallels between the brain as a self-referential system that is so complex it cannot even fully understand itself, to various paradoxes as well as Gödel’s theorem, while noting that such comparisons are a false equivalency, and the brain is not a formal system in the sense of mathematical proofs. Still, Ken notes, the parallels are interesting. [00:47:07] Dawn asks Tommy about a humorous but insightful section in his book that illustrates the complexity of neurological research called “Can a Biologist Fix a Broken Radio.” Dawn asks Tommy to explain what this analogy is about. [00:52:18] Dawn notes that the modern belief that the adult brain is fixed stems from work done by Cajal in the late 1800s where he claimed that after development the adult brain was no longer capable of regeneration or plasticity. Dawn asks Tommy to touch more on this. [00:56:26] Ken explains that while people are likely familiar with neurons, as the basic building block of the nervous system, most people are less familiar with glial cells, which, until recently, were considered to play a minor role in the brain. However, Tommy in his book, argues that glial cells should be seen as just as important as neurons. Ken notes that within the neuroscience community there is a renewed interest in these cells. [01:02:35] Dawn shifts the conversation to ask about the importance of cardiovascular health in brain health. [01:06:35] Dawn explains that Tommy ends part one of his book by looking at what the brain is actually for, and to answer that question, he first explains that although the brain is capable of adaptation and change over a lifespan, it requires the right environment. To illustrate this, and the fact that dementia is not predetermined, Dawn asks Tommy about the indigenous Tsimané people of the Bolivian Amazon, who have some of the lowest rates of dementia in the world. [01:08:27] Ken asks Tommy if it’s true that these people also have a lower prevalence of APOE 4/4 and 3/4 genotypes. [01:11:26] Dawn asks, since one of the aims of Tommy’s book is to help people improve their cognitive function and reduce their risk for dementia, if he could give listeners a brief history of Alzheimer’s disease. [01:17:07] Ken explains that general warnings that as we get better at treating various diseases and increasing lifespans, we will see an overwhelming number of people develop age-related dementia. Recent studies out of Europe, however, have shown the opposite trend, and that the likelihood of being diagnosed with dementia at the age of 70 is now lower than it was 20 years ago. [01:22:43] Ken and Dawn close out part one of our interview with Tommy by explaining that in part two we will focus our discussion with Tommy on ways people can stimulate neuroplasticity in their adult brains. Ken asks Tommy to close out by briefly discussing the recipe for changing and improving the adult brain. Links: Tommy Wood bio STEM-Talk episode 47 with Tommy Wood STEM-Talk episode 110 with Tommy Wood STEM-Talk episode 111 with Tommy Wood STEM-Talk episode 128 with Tommy Wood Learn more about IHMC STEM-Talk homepage Ken Ford bio Ken Ford Wikipedia page Dawn Kernagis bio  

Transcribed - Published: 23 March 2026

 ChatGPT has been in the news a lot lately and, as a result, quite a few STEM-Talk listeners have tossed us questions about the reliability and limitations of generative-artificial intelligence chatbots as well as large-language models more broadly.  Ken and Dawn tackle this question and a number of others in today’s Ask Me Anything episode. We have listeners wondering why astronauts train in underwater conditions for spacewalks; icebreakers in antarctica; the value of supplementing with urolithin-A; and the effectiveness of L-citrulline in helping aging blood vessels. Ken also weights in on questions related to lithium deficiency and the onset of Alzheimer’s disease; a study that found mTOR activation may not be necessary for ketamine’s beneficial effects in the context of depression; and a paper that demonstrated short-term mTOR inhibition by rapamycin improved cardiac and endothelial function in older men. Show notes: [00:02:49] Ken opens our AMA with a listener question for Dawn, which asks why, despite the differences between diving and zero-gravity environments, why do astronauts train in underwater conditions for spacewalks. The listener goes on to mention an article they read about NASA’s neutral buoyancy lab in Houston, which contains a partial replica of the International Space Station. [00:07:42] A listener asks Ken if he is still optimistic about the value of supplementing with urolithin-A, and if so, is there a brand he recommends. Ken mentions episodes 118, with Julie Anderson, and 173, with Anurag Singh. Ken also discusses a paper titled “Effect of the mitophagy inducer urolithin A on age related immune decline, a randomized placebo-controlled trial” co-authored by Anurag. Ken also mentions clinical research supporting the urolithin-A supplement Mitopure. [00:10:53] A listener asks Ken about a paper titled “Short-term mTOR inhibition by rapamycin improves cardiac and endothelial function in older men: a proof-of-concept pilot study.” [00:14:29] Ken discusses a 2020 paper from a research group at Yale, which suggested that mTOR activation may not be necessary for ketamine’s beneficial effects in the context of depression. The paper also reported that m-TOR suppression via rapamycin might prolong ketamine’s antidepressant effects. [00:18:47] A research scientist formerly working in Antarctica asks Ken about Russia’s dominance in the realm of ice breakers. [00:23:55] A listener mentions that for some people, when they used ChatGPT to ask about the assassination of political commentator Charlie Kirk, ChatGPT sometimes responded by denying the assassination occurred. The listener asks Ken about the credibility and reliability of generative AI and large-language models. [00:28:49] Several listeners have submitted questions for Ken regarding a paper published in Nature in August of last year titled “Lithium deficiency in the onset of Alzheimer’s disease.” Ken gives his thoughts on this paper. [00:31:56] For our final question this AMA, a listener asks Ken about the arginine paradox, which regards L-arginine, which is used by the body to make nitric oxide, which is necessary to relax and maintain flexibility of blood vessels. However, several papers have reported that supplementation of arginine does not reliably improve aging blood vessels. In contrast, recent research suggests that L-citrulline might be more effective. The listeners sent questions asking about the possible effects of citrulline in vascular health and aging. In his answer, Ken cites the following papers: — Administration of L-arginine plus L-citrulline or L-citrulline alone successfully retarded endothelial senescence. — Effects of L-Citrulline Supplementation on Endothelial Function, Arterial Stiffness, and Blood Glucose Level in the Fasted and Acute Hyperglycemic States in Middle-Aged and Older Adults with Type 2 Diabetes. — Citrulline Supplementation Improves Microvascular Function and Muscle Strength in Middle-Aged and Older Adults with Type 2 Diabetes. — Effects of L-citrulline supplementation and watermelon intake on arterial stiffness and endothelial function in middle-aged and older adults: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. — Citrulline regulates macrophage metabolism and inflammation to counter aging in mice. If you have questions for Ken and Dawn after listening to today’s episode or any episode of STEM-Talk, please email our producer, Randy Hammer, at rhammer@ihmc.org.  Links: Learn more about IHMC STEM-Talk homepage Ken Ford bio Ken Ford Wikipedia page Dawn Kernagis bio    

Transcribed - Published: 5 March 2026

Today we have Dr. Francisco Gonzalez-Lima, a behavioral neuroscientist who was our guest in episodes 106 and 107 back in 2020. Since those 2020 interviews, Francisco and his colleagues at the Gonzalez-Lima Lab have produced dozens of more studies and papers that have advanced their work on methylene blue, transcranial lasers, memory enhancement, neuroprotection and neurocognitive disorders. Francisco and his lab at the University of Texas Austin are recognized as world leaders for their research on the relationships between brain energy metabolism, memory and neurobehavioral disorders. In today’s interview, we talk to Francisco about his lab’s most recent research on the beneficial neurocognitive and emotional effects of noninvasive human brain stimulation in healthy, aging and mentally ill populations. This research primarily uses transcranial infrared laser stimulation and multimodal imaging, which we will discuss in today’s interview. Be sure to check out our earlier interviews with Francisco where he talked aobut his work on brain metabolic mapping and Alzheimer’s, episode 106, and his research into methylene blue and near-infrared light as therapies for cognitive disorders, episode 107. Show notes: [00:04:32] Dawn and Ken open our interview with Francisco by mentioning that his lab has been very productive pursuing new research avenues since he was last on STEM-Talk. Ken mentions that Francisco has recently begun collaborating with his sister who has a PhD in computational and applied mathematics and asks Francisco to talk about the work they’re doing together. [00:06:21] Dawn shifts to talk about the roadblocks that Francisco and his team have been dealing with, particularly that the review process for academic papers is unusually slow, not just for Francisco’s team but at large. Dawn asks Francisco to discuss this issue. [00:10:37] Dawn recaps that in our previous interview with Francisco in 2020, the discussion focused on his research into methylene blue, which has been primarily used to treat methemoglobinemia, however, the potential for methylene blue to treat declining cognitive function is an active area of research. Despite Francisco’s successful work with methylene blue, he often gets asked about its safety, largely due to various misconceptions. Dawn asks Francisco to talk about the misconceptions about methylene blue. [00:14:57] Ken asks if Francisco what some other misconceptions about methylene blue are. [00:20:43] Given the discussion of dosing, Ken asks Francisco what the safe dose range is for methylene blue in humans. [00:28:15] Ken mentions an article published a few months ago titled “Beyond plaques: How methylene blue and ketones address vascular hypometabolism in Alzheimer’s disease” Ken goes on to mention that the article did a good job of summarizing Francisco’s work as well as the work of Steve Cunnane, who was our guest on episode 59. Ken asks Francisco to discuss his thoughts on the article. [00:34:25] Dawn shifts focus to discuss Francisco’s work on photobiomodulation, specifically transcranial infrared laser stimulation, which is a non-invasive method for neuroprotection and cognitive enhancement. Dawn explains that Francisco has written two chapters on this topic that summarizes his work in the area, one of which appeared in the Oxford handbook on transcranial stimulation, and the other is in a book on augmentation of brain function, based on a series of presentations he gave in Switzerland. Dawn asks Francisco to give a broad overview of his work on photobiomodulation and transcranial infrared laser stimulation. [00:43:52] Ken asks Francisco to talk about a paper titled “Light buckets and laser beams” that he and other researchers composed after attending a photobiomodulation workshop convened in 2023 by the director of the National Institute on Aging and several NIH lab directors. [00:51:25] Ken asks Francisco if there are any commercially available photobiomodulation devices that he thinks have substantial utility. [00:56:27] Ken asks Francisco to discuss mitochondrial disfunction in the context of neurodegeneration and his work on targeted stimulation of the mitochondria with photo biomodulation. [01:06:58] Ken asks Francisco to talk about the potential benefits of photobiomodulation on the aging process outside of neurodegenerative conditions. [01:17:16] Dawn mentions that transcranial infrared stimulation stimulates prefrontal energy metabolism and oxygenation, which produces cognitive enhancing effects. Dawn goes on to ask Francisco about his recent paper exploring this phenomenon in the context of depression titled “Augmenting internet based cognitive behavioral therapy for major depressive disorder with transcranial infrared laser stimulation.” [01:23:08] In light of the promising results of this study, Ken asks Francisco what he sees as the next research step to further this progress. [01:30:15] Ken comments on how Francisco has not only had great accomplishments in his recent research but also has a lot of fruitful opportunities ahead. [01:31:07] Ken asks Francisco if he has looked at photobiomodulation in combination with transcutaneous vagal nerve stimulation. [01:34:28] Ken mentions that for listeners interested in learning more about vagal nerve stimulation they can listen to episodes 179 with JP Erico, and 172 with Kevin Tracey. Francisco discusses the difficulty in knowing whether to attribute effects of vagus nerve stimulation to stimulation of the vagus nerve itself or incidental stimulation of the carotid artery … or some combination. [01:38:33] Ken mentions that Francisco is now trying to move away from animal studies and focus more on human studies. Ken asks what human trials he is hoping to conduct. [01:42:27] Dawn closes our interview thanking Francisco for once again joining us on STEM-Talk. Links: Gonzalez-Lima Lab Learn more about IHMC STEM-Talk homepage Ken Ford bio Ken Ford Wikipedia page Dawn Kernagis bio    

Transcribed - Published: 2 February 2026

Dr. Judith Curry, a climatologist known for her criticism of alarmist, doomsday rhetoric about climate change, returns to STEM-Talk for her second appearance. Judy most recently was one of five researchers commissioned by the U.S. Department of Energy to draft a Climate Assessment Report summarizing the current state of climate science with a focus on how it relates to the United States. In this interview, Judy summarizes the climate report’s key points, including the finding that that carbon-dioxide induced warming of the planet appears to be less damaging economically than has been commonly believed. The report, which was released this past summer, also argues that aggressive mitigation strategies for carbon dioxide emissions could be more harmful than helpful. Our interview comes on the heels of the prestigious journal Nature retracting a study that predicted climate change and carbon emissions would cause catastrophic economic damage by the end of the century.  Our conversation with Judy also followed an about-face from Microsoft co-founder Bill Gates, who wrote last fall that it’s time to tamp down the alarmist rhetoric that climate change will lead to humanity’s demise. Curry is president of the Climate Forecast Application Network and host of the blog, Climate Etc, which you can find at JudyCurry.com.  Her blog provides  a forum for climate researchers, academics and technical experts from other fields as well as citizen scientists to discuss topics related to climate science and science policy. Her research interests include hurricanes, remote sensing, atmospheric modeling, polar climates, air-sea interactions, climate models, and the use of unmanned aerial vehicles for atmospheric research. She has published more than 100 scientific papers and is the author of “Climate Change and Uncertainty: Rethinking Our Response,” a book that provides a framework for understanding and rethinking the climate-change debate.  Show notes: [00:03:59] Ken opens the interview explaining that Judy was one of the five authors of a climate assessment report commissioned by the U.S. Department of Energy. Before diving into the key findings of the report and the response it has received, Ken asks Judy to explain how she became one of the five authors. [00:06:21] Ken mentions that critics of the climate working group have accused the authors of being hand-picked skeptics of the effects of climate change. Judy argues that she and her co-authors are scientists determined to get the science right. Ken asks Judy to talk about her co-authors and the working relationship of the group. [00:09:18] Ken asks Judy to talk about how she and her co-authors came to their key finding that the economic impacts of climate change are less severe than typically thought. [00:13:08] Ken asks Judy to provide examples that demonstrate how climate mitigation strategies can be more harmful than helpful. [00:16:08] Ken follows up by asking about the report’s proposal to shift climate science from alarmism to focus more on a better understanding of natural climate variability. [00:18:14] Ken asks Judy what her thoughts are on the next steps that should be taken for a better understanding climate variability. [00:20:06] Ken asks Judy to elaborate on the findings of chapter six of the report regarding global warming and extreme weather events. In particular, Ken asks about the problems with associating specific extreme weather events like hurricanes to climate change, and the issues created by the short historical records we have at our disposal. [00:24:20] Ken asks Judy to talk about chapter nine of the report, which is about the need to focus on reducing vulnerabilities in our infrastructure instead of mitigating carbon emissions. [00:28:43] Ken asks Judy to comment on the accusations that she is a “climate change denier.” [00:31:18] Ken asks Judy to talk about a paper she co-authored with her colleague Dr. Harry DeAngelo titled “A critique of apocalyptic climate narrative.” [00:36:27] Ken brings up Bill Gates’ recent about-face on climate change and the need to pivot away from doomsday views of cataclysmic climate disasters. Ken asks Judy to elaborate on what she has dubbed “climate alarmism fatigue.” [00:39:32] Ken asks Judy to give her thoughts on the issue of sea level rise, particularly in light of the pushback that the DOE report faced on this topic. He also asks her to discuss the recent paper that was released after the DOE report titled “A global perspective on local sea level changes” which proports that there is no statistically significant acceleration of the rate of sea level rise for 98% of the suitable global locations. [00:50:47] Ken points listeners to Judy’s blog, Judycurry.com, where she discusses many of these same issues. Ken goes on to explain that his perspective as well as Judy’s perspective is that climate change has become a scapegoat for many issues. He asks Judy to talk about this phenomenon. [00:55:24] Ken asks Judy what she would like to see in terms of follow-up research to the DOE climate report. [01:00:23] Ken asks Judy about her book “Climate Uncertainty and Risk.” Links: Judith Curry bio Learn more about IHMC STEM-Talk homepage Ken Ford bio Ken Ford Wikipedia page    

Transcribed - Published: 7 January 2026

Today’s episode of STEM-Talk features a timely and wide-ranging discussion with Drs. Michael Griffin and Lisa Porter about NASA’s plans to return humans to the Moon, the history of lunar missions, and how China’s advances in space technology pose a serious threat to U.S. national security. IHMC founder and CEO Emeritus Ken Ford’s interview with Griffin and Porter came 10 days before Griffin appeared before the U.S. House Committee on Science, Space and Technology to give testimony on China’s advancements in space and the risks it poses for the United States. “We have squandered a 60-year head start on pioneering the space frontier to a nation that, without reason or provocation on our part, has chosen to become our nation’s adversary,” said Griffin in his opening comments to Congress. In this episode, Griffin and Porter explain why it is critical for the U.S. to return to the Moon before China. They also argue that NASA’s Artemis III mission to return to the lunar surface and establish a permanent base on the Moon is seriously flawed and should be scrapped. Griffin and Porter are co-founders and co-presidents of LogiQ Inc., a company providing high-end management, scientific and technical consulting services. Griffin’s background includes roles as the former Undersecretary of Defense for Research and Engineering, the Administrator of NASA, the Space Department Head at the John Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory as well as Chairman and CEO of Schafer Corporation. Porter’s background includes roles as the former Deputy Undersecretary of Defense for Research and Engineering, the founding Director of the Intelligence Advanced Research Projects Activity (IARPA) in the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, and the Associate Administrator for Aeronautics at NASA. Show notes: [00:04:44] Ken opens the interview by welcoming Mike back to STEM-Talk, who was a guest on Episodes 23 and 134. He also welcomes Lisa to her first appearance on STEM-Talk and asks her to talk about her decision to major in nuclear engineering at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. [00:08:50] Ken asks Lisa why she went to Stanford for a Ph.D. in physics. [00:10:43] Ken explains that Lisa was the founding director of the Intelligence Advanced Research Projects Activity (IARPA), a department within the Office of the Director of National Intelligence. Ken asks about some of the challenges the American intelligence community faced that she addressed as director of IARPA. [00:16:15] Ken asks about Lisa’s time working for Mike as Associate Administrator for Aeronautics at NASA, and how she came to accept that role. [00:18:07] Ken explains that when Mike became Undersecretary for Defense for Research and Engineering in 2018, he invited Lisa to become the Deputy Undersecretary for Defense for Research and Engineering. Ken asks Mike why Lisa was ideal for that role. [00:21:07] Ken explains that Mike and Lisa are working together again as co-founders and co-presidents of LogiQ Inc., a company that provides scientific consulting services. Ken asks Mike to give a brief overview of LogiQ’s work. [00:24:44] Ken shifts the discussion to space exploration, noting that he wants to talk about Mike’s 2024 congressional testimony on returning to the Moon, and a paper that he and Lisa published titled “A system architecture for human lunar return.” To begin the discussion, Ken asks why it is so important for us to return to the Moon. [00:29:11] Ken asks Mike and Lisa to explain why it is important for the US to be the first to return to the Moon in the context of China’s ambition to send humans to the Moon and establish a permanent lunar presence. [00:33:24] Ken asks Mike and Lisa if they see the cancellation of the Apollo program as a mistake. [00:35:36] Ken asks Mike and Lisa to give an overview of the Artemis program. [00:41:45] Ken mentions the centrality of the Gateway in the Artemis plan, and the problem with making something that is already hard even harder for no good reason. [00:43:28] Ken mentions his concern that the focus on a Mars-forward approach might impede our success with the current Moon missions. [00:46:40] In Mike and Lisa’s aforementioned paper, they propose a dual-launch lunar landing architecture, which is simpler than the current NASA architecture and presents lower risks to the crew. Ken asks Mike and Lisa to elaborate on this idea. [00:48:41] Ken asks Mike and Lisa what they think are some of the other technical and programmatic problems with the current Artemis plan. [00:52:31] Ken asks Mike and Lisa what NASA’s response has been, as well as the response of others in the human space flight community, to their paper and recommendations for the Artemis mission architecture. [00:54:25] Ken explains that Sean Duffy, the Secretary of Transportation and acting NASA administrator, has opened the door to some additional lander ideas in light of concerns that the two current contractors, Space X and Blue Origin, may not be ready in time for the current Artemis schedule. Ken asks if Lisa and Mike think this is a good idea or if they think it would further complicate matters. [00:59:25] NASA’s current budget is around $24.9 billion dollars, approximately 0.4 percent of total federal spending. Ken notes at a time when China is increasing their investment in their space programs and launching several missions, NASA is facing a proposal to cut its funding by 24 percent to $18.8 billion. Ken asks Mike and Lisa for their thoughts on this. [01:03:13] Ken and Lisa continue Mike’s discussion on the core purpose of NASA beyond science. [01:08:55] Ken and Mike reflect on Ken’s observation that the U.S. is not as serious about space and the Moon as it was during the Apollo years, years that attracted the nation’s best and brightest. [01:09:39] Ken asks Mike and Lisa their thoughts on the way that NASA is contracting more services in the development of Artemis, rather than funding a development program. [01:15:55] Ken wraps up the interview by commenting that he believes listeners will very much enjoy today’s conversation. Links: Michael Griffin bio Griffin’s Dec. 4 2025 Congressional testimony Griffin’s 2024 Congressional testimony Lida Porter bio Ken Ford bio Ken Ford Wikipedia page Learn more about IHMC STEM-Talk homepage              

Transcribed - Published: 11 December 2025

Today we have Dr. Marina Walther-Antonio, a Mayo Clinic researcher who investigates the role of the microbiome in cancer and reproductive health, particularly endometrial and ovarian cancers. According to the World Cancer Research Fund International, endometrial and ovarian cancers are among the top 10 most prevalent cancers in women worldwide, and there are still no standard screenings for early detection. Marina is an assistant professor in the Department of Surgery and the Mayo Clinic Center for Individualized Medicine Microbiome Program. She has a joint appointment in the department of Obstetrics and Gynecology. Today we talk to Marina about how she and her colleagues are utilizing the methodologies of environmental microbiology and technologies used in astrobiology to improve our understanding of endometrial and ovarian cancers. Through her investigations into the microbiome, she and her team are developing early detection tests that will enable clinical interventions before certain cancers develop. Show notes: [00:03:13] Dawn opens our interview asking Marina about the history of her interest in extraterrestrial life. [00:05:49] Dawn mentions that Marina did her undergraduate studies in Portugal at the University of Aveiro, where she majored in biology. Dawn asks why Marina chose biology as her major. [00:06:39] Ken explains that the undergraduate programs at Aveiro University require students to do a year of research outside the university and asks Marina about her experience with this requirement. [00:08:34] Ken explains that while Marina was conducting her internship at NASA Ames Research Center, there were several projects under way at the astrobiology institute, with the one that Marina was assigned to looking at a Mars analogue site in Oregon’s Warner Valley. Ken asks what kind of work Marina did on this project. [00:10:06] Ken asks Marina why after earning a master’s degree in microbiology from Indiana University, she went to Washington State University to earn a Ph.D. in environmental sciences. [00:13:29] Dawn asks about Marina’s Ph.D. research on microbialites, which are microbial structures that can thrive at the bottom of certain freshwater lakes and other extreme environments. [00:16:02] Dawn explains that just as Marina began researching microbial populations, the Mayo Clinic Center for Individualized Medicine created a microbiome program. Dawn asks Marina about the circumstances that led to her joining Mayo. [00:19:05] Dawn mentions that Dr. Claire Fraser, the director of Maryland’s Institute for Genome Sciences pointed out in Episode 32 of STEM-Talk that there are more microbes on a single person’s hands than there are people on Earth, as well as the fact that our gut is home to more than 100 trillion bacteria. Dawn asks Marina to talk about this microbial side of humanity. [00:21:51] Ken mentions that if listeners are interested in learning more about the microbiome and how it affects human health, they should listen to Episodes 20 and 168 with Dr. Alessio Fasano. Ken asks Marina to give a short overview of the microbiome. [00:25:37] Dawn asks Marina how the focus of her research shifted to the role of the microbiome in cancer and reproductive health. [00:29:00] Dawn explains that endometrial and ovarian cancers are among the top 10 most prevalent cancers in women worldwide; with ovarian cancer being the most common gynecological malignancy and the fifth leading cause of death due to cancer in women in the nation. Dawn goes on to explain that in a 2023 paper Marina investigated the area of microbiome that is associated with ovarian cancer to better understand the microbiome’s potential in early detection. Dawn asks Marina to talk about this study and its findings. [00:35:55] Given the small scale and sample size of her initial study, Ken asks Marina what her ideal follow-up study would look like. [00:38:37] Ken mentions that in 2019 Marina published the results of a study that found that post-menopause is a key factor in the composition of endometrial cancer microbiome. This study also investigated the impact of patient factors on the microbiome, including menopausal status, BMI, and vaginal pH balance. Ken asks Marina to elaborate on the findings. [00:44:13] Dawn notes that there is no standard screening for early detection of ovarian and endometrial cancers despite their prevalence worldwide. Dawn asks Marina about the work she and her colleagues are engaged in in this space. [00:47:17] Dawn explains that prior to Marina’s aforementioned study, vaginal pH had not been associated as a risk factor in endometrial cancer. Dawn goes on to explain that variations in microbial compositions are implicated in a number of gynecologic and obstetric diseases. Marina’s core question was that since the vaginal microbiome is so crucial to women’s health, why then do vaginal microbial profiles vary strikingly from person to person. This question, as Dawn explains, led to a study and 2020 paper titled “Daily Vaginal Microbiota Fluctuations Associated with Natural Hormonal Cycle, Contraceptives, Diet, and Exercise.” Dawn asks Marina to talk about this study. [00:54:23] Ken asks Marina about her finding that exogenous hormones in contraceptives may affect vaginal microbiota. [00:56:42] Dawn asks Marina about future research that will stem from her study. [01:00:29] Dawn asks Marina about her job as director of Mayo’s mentorship and Ph.D. program, and her passion for mentorship. [01:05:24] Given her accomplished and varied career, Ken asks Marina what advice she has for young people beginning their careers in science. [01:10:06] Circling back to Marina’s original interest in the search for extraterrestrial life, Ken explains that among the NASA scientists we’ve had on STEM-Talk there is disagreement on our chances of discovering intelligent life. While our guest Ed Wiler is confident that we will be able to prove the existence of life off earth within the next 20-30 years, Pascal Lee says he doesn’t think it is likely that we will discover intelligent or complex life anytime soon. Ken asks Marina to weigh in on the matter. Links: Marina Walther-Antonio Learn more about IHMC STEM-Talk homepage Ken Ford bio Ken Ford Wikipedia page Dawn Kernagis bio    

Transcribed - Published: 4 November 2025

Today Ken interviews his co-host Dr. Dawn Kernagis about her new position as the Director of Scientific Research for DEEP, a UK startup that is pioneering a new era of ocean exploration. For listeners unfamiliar with Dawn’s background, she is a NASA-trained NEEMO Aquanaut, a Fellow of the Explorer’s Club Fellow and has been inducted into the Women Divers Hall of Fame. In addition to co-hosting STEM-Talk for the past nine years, Dawn is also a Visiting Research Scientist at IHMC. Dawn’s research over the years has been focused on protecting the brain and nervous system of people working in extreme environments. Prior to joining IHMC, Dawn completed her Ph.D. and Postdoctoral training at Duke University, where she studied the genetics of decompression sickness and mechanisms of oxygen toxicity in divers. In today’s interview, Dawn talks about DEEP’s mission to create subsea stations that will allow humans to live and work permanently underwater. Show notes: [00:03:20] Ken reminds listeners of Dawn’s first STEM-Talk appearance as a guest on Episode 19 where she conducted the interview from the bottom of the ocean floor while she was a member of NASA’s NEEMO Mission 21. [00:04:13] Ken asks Dawn what she was like as a child. [00:05:48] When Ken asks Dawn what she was like as a child, she talks about how she was an annoying kid because she was always asking people questions like, “Why is the sky blue?” [00:06:49] Dawn talks about the different places she lived during her childhood. [00:07:34] Ken mentions that Dawn was inducted into the Women’s Divers Hall of Fame. He asks her how old she was when she first became interested in diving. [00:10:35] Dawn talks about how she wanted to attend the University of North Carolina after high school but ended up at North Carolina State University and then Duke University. [00:12:18] Ken asks Dawn to elaborate on her decision to change her field of study multiple times throughout her collegiate career. What follows is an interesting conversation about the importance of a person following their passion. [00:14:53] Dawn talks about cave diving and how she and her friends used to do deep dives of six and seven hours at a time. Dawn explains how this led to her obsession with ways to protect people who dive into extreme underwater environments. [00:18:28] Ken asks Dawn how she learned that some people have a genetic predisposition to decompression sickness. [00:21:32] The conversation shifts to Dawn’s Ph.D. journey and how Richard Moon, who was a STEM-Talk guest on episode 26, played a significant role in her development. [00:26:14] Ken and Dawn reminisce on the practice of performing academic research in libraries. [00:28:20] Ken points out that despite Dawn’s extensive experience in human physiology with respect to diving, her doctoral work focused on cancer-related research. He asks her to talk about that seemingly odd combination. [00:34:10] Dawn talks about two papers that emerged from this research. One paper addressed how genes with bimodal expression patterns not only define clinically relevant molecular subtypes of ovarian carcinoma, but also provide ideal targets for translation into the clinical laboratory. The other paper looked at precise microarray-based predictions of tumor behavior in breast cancer patients. [00:39:00] Ken asks Dawn to recount the story of how the two of them met. [00:41:52] Ken asks Dawn to discuss the paper she co-wrote with Dom D’Agostino on mitochondrial health and its relationship to potentially preventing oxygen toxicity during exposure to hyperbaric environments. Dawn goes on to talk about some of her other IHMC-related research. [00:43:22] Ken asks Dawn to discuss her acceptance into the Aquanaut Program and her participation during one of NASA’s NEEMO missions. [00:46:04] Ken asks Dawn to reflect on her time on NEEMO Mission 21, and if there are any key takeaways she can discuss. [00:49:04] Ken asks Dawn to describe saturation diving, the research involved, and the health implications on saturation divers that are not present in other forms of underwater exploration. [00:52:04] The conversation shifts to how Dawn became the Director of Scientific Research for DEEP, a UK startup that aims to “Make Humans Aquatic.” [00:55:02] Ken explains that DEEP is a company that is pioneering a new era of ocean exploration and asks Dawn to give a primer on the importance of better understanding the Earth’s oceans. [00:56:12] Ken mentions DEEP’s mission to expand human subsea habitation through research and innovation. Dawn explains some of the challenges associated with constructing underwater habitats. [00:57:36] Ken asks about DEEP’s goal to create a relatively permanent deep-sea human habitat, analogous to the International Space Station. Called the Sentinel System, the underwater habitat will serve as a place for researchers to live and work. [01:01:23] Ken explains that the Sentinel System will operate at a depth of up to 200 meters, which represents the epipelagic zone, or sunlight zone, which is the deepest point where light penetrates the ocean. To put this in perspective, the average depth of the ocean is 3,688 meters. Ken asks Dawn to talk about how little we actually know about what exists below the 200-meter depth of the epipelagic zone. [01:02:58] Ken mentions that NASA has a long history of using the sea as a loose analogue for space. With renewed interest in human space exploration of the Moon and Mars, Ken asks if the Sentinel System will help in the preparation for deep space missions. [01:05:10] Ken asks Dawn to discuss what other areas of research she is excited to explore once the Sentinel System is fully operational and in the water, including a project that involves IHMC. [01:06:50] Dawn gives an overview of  DEEP’s current testing and training facility, which  is located in the UK. [01:07:55] Ken asks Dawn to talk about DEEP’s increased presence in the United States and Florida, including a project with the Florida Institute of Oceanography. [01:08:47] Ken asks Dawn about an anonymous billionaire who is funding DEEP. [01:10:06] Ken asks Dawn about her responsibility of establishing DEEP’s first U.S. office in Raleigh, N.C. [01.11.03] Dawn ends the interview talking about how much she loves the work that she does. Links: Learn more about IHMC STEM-Talk homepage Ken Ford bio Ken Ford Wikipedia page Dawn Kernagis bio          

Transcribed - Published: 2 October 2025

Today we have Dr. Mari Dezawa, one of the world’s leaders in stem-cell research and regenerative medicine. Mari is a pioneer in this emerging field and is known worldwide for her discovery of MUSE cells, a unique type of stem cell with exciting clinical potential. MUSE is short for Multilineage-Differentiating Stress-Enduring Cells. The discovery of the MUSE cell in humans has many biological and medical implications, and the human body may have a greater regenerative potential than we might have ever imagined. In collaboration with major national and international institutions, Mari and her colleagues are promoting research on MUSE cell-based regenerative medicine for diseases without definitive treatments. She and her team are also exploring the differences in regenerative capacity between less and more complex animals from the viewpoint of the stem-cell system. Mari is a professor and chair of the Division of Stem Cell Biology and Histology at Tohoku University School of Medicine. She has published more than 200 papers and is particularly known for her 2010 paper on the mechanisms of MUSE cells. In 2018, she was appointed a fellow of the U.S. National Academy of Inventors and has been the recipient of numerous awards, including the Japanese Government’s Prize for the Commendation for Science and Technology. Show notes: [00:04:10] Ken opens the interview by mentioning that although Mari was born in Japan, her family moved to the U.S. when she was only eight months old. Ken asks if it is true that Mari finds it difficult to answer the question of where her hometown is. [00:05:23] Ken asks Mari how she handled moving so much as a child. [00:05:52] Ken mentions that Mari’s father was a researcher and asks when she became passionate about research and science. [00:06:58] Ken mentions that Mari attended the Chiba University School of Medicine and asks what inspired her to go to medical school. [00:07:19] Ken explains that after Mari earned her medical degree, she attended Chiba University Graduate School of Medicine for her Ph.D. Ken mentions that while Mari was initially a cardiology resident, she later decided to focus on clinical research and became a stem-cell researcher. Ken asks what led her to shift from cardiology to stem-cell research. [00:08:25] Ken explains that Mari is well-known for her research into the role of stem cells in regeneration and functional recovery of nerve and muscle cells. Ken asks how and when she first became interested in stem cells. [00:09:56] Ken asks Mari to give a brief overview of stem cells and their significance. [00:11:18] Ken mentions that Mari remained at Chiba University as a research associate after earning her Ph.D in 1995. She then took a position as an associate professor at Yokohama City University Graduate School of Medicine before accepting a position at Kyoto University Graduate School of Medicine as an associate professor in 2003. Ken explains that while at Kyoto, Mari developed methods to induce bone marrow stromal cells to generate neuro and skeletal muscle cells, which play a crucial role in tissue repair and regeneration and are widely studied for their potential to serve as therapeutic agents. Ken asks Mari to give a quick primer on the crucial role these cells play in tissue repair. [00:13:25] Ken explains that in 2003, a member of Mari’s technical staff at Kyoto asked her whether they should discard some cultured adult rat and human bone marrow mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) after she had noticed several strange cell clusters. Ken asks Mari to share what happened next and how this set her on the path to the discovery of Multilineage-Differentiating Stress-Enduring Cells. [00:16:03] Ken asks Mari to elaborate on this story and explain how a mistake led to this incredible discovery. [00:20:48] Ken explains that in 2008 Mari became professor and chair of the Department of Stem Cell Biology and Histology at Tohoku University Graduate School of Medicine. Then in 2010 she published a paper on the results of her investigations into MUSE cells. Ken asks about this paper and why it was so significant. [00:25:11] Ken mentions that one of the key characteristics of MUSE cells is their ability to repair organ tissues, and their ability to repair themselves quickly. Ken asks Mari to explain the significance of MUSE cell resilience and self-repair. [00:26:30] Ken asks Mari how MUSE cells are collected. [00:28:26] Ken asks Mari about her 2018 paper that looked at the use of MUSE cells in the treatment of acute myocardial infarction. [00:31:03] Ken explains that stem cells go through cytokine differentiation, a process that can often take several weeks or more to complete. However, Mari uncovered that a simple mechanism could substantially shorten this timeframe, which she reported on in a 2022 paper, titled “Phagocytosing Differentiated Cell-Fragments is a Novel Mechanism for Controlling Somatic Stem Cell Differentiation Within a Short Timeframe.” Ken asks Mari to discuss this paper and its findings [00:33:51] Ken asks Mari if she sees any potential military applications for MUSE cells. [00:35:16] Mari explains what exosomes are and how they might be applied in the context of MUSE cells. [00:36:14] Ken mentions Mari’s report on nasal administration of stem cells titled “Nose-to-Brain Delivery of Human Cells Enhances Structural and Functional Recovery in the Murine Ischemic Stroke Model.” Ken asks Mari to talk about the findings in this paper. [00:37:34] Ken asks Mari about her paper in development on the use of MUSE cells in the treatment of traumatic brain injury and dementia. [00:38:54] Ken brings up the issues with models of Alzheimer’s not tending to reflect the reality of the disease in humans and asks Mari what her plans are for applying her research to human trials in Alzheimer’s. [00:40:21] Ken asks Mari for her thoughts on the use of MSCs and MUSE cells for health span optimization. [00:42:11] Ken explains that in addition to her university work, Mari also works with a company called MUSE Cell Innovations, which is looking to revolutionize regenerative medicine and longevity through advancements in cellular science. For full disclosure, Ken explains that both he and Mari serve on the scientific advisory board of MUSE Cell Innovations. Ken asks Mari to talk about her work there. [00:44:13] Ken mentions that in another interview, Mari talked about how her hobbies were a way of balancing her life and career. However, Mari never explained what those hobbies were, so Ken asks her to elaborate. Links:   Mari Dezawa bio MUSE Cell Innovations Learn more about IHMC STEM-Talk homepage Ken Ford bio Ken Ford Wikipedia page    

Transcribed - Published: 4 September 2025

Today we have our good friend and colleague Dr. Andrew Koutnik on the show. Andrew is a research scientist who studies the influence of nutrition and metabolism on health, disease and performance. He specializes in Type 1 diabetes and works with a wide range of people to improve their metabolic health and athletic performance. Andrew is a visiting research scientist at IHMC and has worked with Harvard, Johns Hopkins, NASA, and the Department of Defense to develop evidence-based strategies for overcoming complex health challenges. He is a graduate of Florida State University and earned his Ph.D. in medical sciences at the University of South Florida, where he worked with another good friend of ours, Dr. Dominic D’Agostino, who has been a previous STEM-Talk guest. Show notes: [00:02:50] Dawn welcomes Andrew to the show and asks him about his website, andrewkoutnik.com, the quote on the site’s homepage “Demystifying complex science to help you thrive in your health journey,” and the tagline “Challenging the status quo of metabolic health, human performance, and the management of type1 diabetes.” [00:05:31] Ken asks Andrew how old he was when he first learned he had Type 1 diabetes. [00:08:32] Dawn asks why Andrew believes his Type 1 diabetes is one of his life’s ultimate assets? [00:12:51] Ken mentions that Andrew grew up in Tallahassee and that despite suffering from childhood obesity, he was relatively athletic as a child. Ken asks Andrew to talk about his childhood. [00:14:20] Dawn asks Andrew to talk about the weight-loss journey he underwent as a teenager. [00:17:25] Dawn shifts gears to ask Andrew about how he got into science, mentioning that when he was younger, he never saw himself becoming a scientist. [00:20:19] Dawn asks if it is true that Andrew was the sort of kid who would constantly asked questions. [00:22:11] Dawn asks Andrew if it is true that after enrolling at Tallahassee Community College, it took him a while to decide on his major. [00:22:58] Ken asks Andrew to talk about the impact that his undergraduate anatomy and physiology class and professor had on his journey. [00:24:44] Ken mentions that after graduating from FSU, Andrew went to the University of South Florida where he worked with Dominic D’Agostino, who is both a previous STEM-Talk guest and a current colleague of Andrew’s. Ken asks Andrew how he met Dom. [00:27:46] Dawn asks Andrew how he came to work in Dom’s lab. [00:29:00] Dawn asks Andrew if his wife is still in touch with her former roommate, who connected Andrew and Dom. [00:29:21] Ken asks Andrew to touch on some of the research he did with Dom while he was pursuing his Ph.D. [00:31:49] Dawn shifts gears to talk about Andrew’s work in metabolic health and Type 1 diabetes. Dawn explains that a study published by the University of North Carolina found only 12 percent of Americans were metabolically healthy. Additionally, researchers from the Friedman School of Nutrition Science and Policy at Tufts University found in 2022 that only 6.8 percent of Americans had good cardiometabolic health. Dawn asks Andrew how he works with people who want to improve their metabolic health. [00:34:19] Ken asks Andrew for his thoughts on the sentiment that a ketogenic diet is hard to sustain. [00:36:55] Ken mentions that  Andrew was part of a review that looked at carbohydrate restriction for diabetes, which is a practice that had been in use since the 1700s. It fell out of favor once insulin was discovered in the 1920s. Ken goes on to explain that carbohydrate restrictive diets, like the ketogenic diet, have regained popularity for the treatment and management of diabetes, weight-loss and a range of other health issues such as migraines, cancer and depression. Ken asks Andrew to first explain the history of carb-restrictive diets as a treatment of diabetes. [00:39:43] Ken asks Andrew to talk more about the aforementioned 2021 review and its argument in favor of a medical nutrition therapy for diabetes management. [00:47:21] Dawn quotes a passage from the American Diabetes Association website that reads, “Before insulin was discovered in 1921, people with diabetes didn’t live for long. There wasn’t much doctors could do for them. The most effective treatment was to put patients with diabetes on very strict diets with minimal carbohydrate intake. This could buy patients a few extra years but couldn’t save them. Harsh diets, some prescribed as little as 450 calories a day, sometimes caused patients to die of starvation.” Dawn asks Andrew if he feels that this quote discourages the use of carb-restriction and medical nutrition therapy for diabetes management. [00:49:22] Dawn asks Andrew how the treatment of diabetes went from the use of insulin being prescribed along with carbohydrate restriction, to purely pharmacological interventions. [00:50:59] Dawn asks Andrew to talk about the significance of the fact that carbohydrates are the only macronutrient directly digested into glucose, making carbs the main determinant of postprandial glycemia and insulin requirements, which creates a mismatch between insulin kinetics and glucose. [00:55:29] Ken pivots to talk about the work of Jeff Volek at Ohio State University, one of the founders of Virta health, and our guest on STEM-Talk episodes 43, and 149. Ken goes on to explain that Virta offers nutrition-based approaches to losing weight and reversing diabetes. Virta has an impressive track record of success with Type 2 diabetes. The average weight loss for those using Virta’s system is 31 pounds, and enrollees reduced their medications by 63 percent. Ken asks Andrew why these are such impressive achievements. [00:57:07] Dawn asks Andrew about the concerns people have about low carbohydrate diets for diabetes. [01:00:24] Dawn asks, given that total medical costs for diabetes in the US is approaching a billion dollars a day, if Andrew could discuss how research into medical nutrition therapy for diabetes should become a priority. [01:02:44] Dawn pivots to talk about Andrew’s work in optimizing human performance, mentioning that he recently put out an article on Substack titled “Revolutionizing Sports Nutrition: New Insights on Low-Carb vs High-Carb Diets in Strenuous Exercise Performance.” Dawn explains that this article was based on a study Andrew and his colleagues published challenging the conventional thinking that carbohydrates were essential to athletic performance. Dawn asks Andrew to talk about the origins of the conventional wisdom that carb-loading is essential for athletic performance. [01:06:21] Ken asks Andrew to talk about the physiology behind the potential of low-carb diets to improve athletic performance in certain contexts. [01:08:47] Dawn asks Andrew to give an overview of his 2023 paper titled: “Low and High Carbohydrate Isocaloric Diets on Performance Fat Oxidation, Glucose and Cardiometabolic Health in Middle-Aged Males.” [01:13:41] Ken comments on how active, athletic and outwardly healthy-looking people being prediabetic is likely more common than people think. [01:15:35] Ken comments that this incidence of prediabetes in athletes appears to be most common in endurance athletes. [01:17:04] Ken explains that Andrew released a study earlier this year looking at the performance of triathletes who are adapted to very low-carb diets, as well as very high-carb diets. Ken goes on to explain that this study examined the belief that very low-carb diets would impair prolonged performance during strenuous exercise. Ken asks Andrew to explain the design of this study. [01:20:27] Ken explains that the aforementioned study produced three key findings, which he asks Andrew to walk listeners through. [01:23:48] Dawn notes that the ketogenic diet has become more popular in recent years, and that in response one can see numerous “keto-friendly” versions of typically high-carb foods, like breads and ice creams. Dawn asks Andrew what his take is on such products. [01:27:50] Ken asks Andrew if it is true that he has some interesting research findings coming down the pipeline soon. [01:28:36] Dawn wraps up our interview by asking Andrew if it’s true that he taken up jujitsu. Links: Andrew Koutnik bio Learn more about IHMC STEM-Talk homepage Ken Ford bio Ken Ford Wikipedia page Dawn Kernagis bio

Transcribed - Published: 31 July 2025

It’s time for another episode of Ask Me Anything. Dawn and Ken answer listener questions that range from generative AI to whether grip strength is a biomarker for longevity and the potential of ketamine as a treatment for depression. Dawn also gives a brief overview of work she is doing with the deep-sea technology company Deep. As a special treat at the end of today’s episode, Dawn plays a recording of the commencement speech that Ken recently gave at the University of West Florida. As the saying goes, you don’t want to miss it. Show notes: [00:02:18] Ken starts off the episode with a listener question about whether Dawn and Ken read print books or digital, the reason being that a listener recently came across an article that claimed digital screens are rewiring our brains. [00:05:32] A listener asks about a paper titled “Grip Strength An Indispensable Biomarker for Older Adults” which claims that the ability to hang from a bar for 60 seconds for men, and 30 seconds for women, indicates that a person is likely to live longer. The paper claims that a decline in grip strength is associated with adverse health consequences, and the listener asks Ken what advice he has for developing and maintaining grip strength. [00:10:20] A listener asks a question inspired by our recent interview with Dr. Frank Butler. The listener asks if Ken has heard about the FDA approved depression therapy, esketamine, which is a derivative of ketamine and is a long-standing therapy for depression. [00:12:37] A listener asks Ken about a 2023 paper in the journal Age and Aging titled “Higher Dietary Protein Intake is Associated with Sarcopenia in Older British Twins” [00:16:13] A listener asks Ken about “Whisper,” which is a transcription product from OpenAI. The listener explains that OpenAI disclaims that Whisper should not be used in high-risk domains. However, according to a story by the Associated Press titled “Researchers Say an AI Powered Transcription Tool Used in Hospitals Invents Things No One Ever Said,” medical centers have already begun to use the tool to transcribe physician consultations. The listener explains that, according to the article, the use of Whisper in these contexts has led to numerous ‘hallucinations’ from the AI tool and the listener asks Ken what his thoughts are on how tools like Whisper should be integrated into various industries. [00:20:21] A listener asks for Ken’s thoughts on a series of articles by Kevin Roose in The New York Times claiming that there is no reason to learn how to code and program because very soon AI will take over all coding. Mr. Roose also asserts that the time is soon approaching when we need to have discussions on what rights to grant sentient AI. [00:21:57] A listener asks Ken if he concurs with a report from the National Academy of Medicine titled “Generative Artificial Intelligence in Health and Medicine – Opportunities and Responsibilities for Transformative Innovation,” which notes that large language models (LLMs) hold huge promise for patient care and healthcare system workflows, as well as risks. The listener asks if Ken agrees with the report’s claims that two areas in which we could see near term applications of LLMs are patient education and synthesis of information of electronic medical records. [00:23:35] As a follow up question, Ken is asked about the aforementioned report’s discussion of the “digital twin” concept. A digital twin is a computational representation of a patient or disease that could be used to speed up virtual experiments or subgroup analysis of investigational agents that carry risk for real patients. [00:26:26] A listener asks for Ken’s thoughts on a paper published in the journal of Nutrition Health and Aging titled “Effects of Vitamin D3 Omega 3 Fatty Acids and a Simple Home Exercise Program on Change in Physical Activity Among Generally Healthy and Active Older Adults.” The paper claims that among generally healthy, active and vitamin D3 replete individuals 73 and older, that Vitamin D supplementation had a detrimental effect on physical function and activity. [00:28:32] A listener asks Ken and Dawn what their take is on the term “settled science” and if it is ever appropriate to call some science “settled.” [00:30:06] A listener asks both Ken and Dawn whether they have a favorite healthy snack. [00:31:31] A listener asks Ken about his blood flow restriction training and what devices he uses for these workouts. [00:32:29] A listener asks about a new sub-sea technology company called Deep, which Dawn works with. [00:34:21] Dawn wraps up the episode mentioning that a little birdie told her that Ken recently gave a good commencement address to the graduating class of 2025 at the University of West Florida. Dawn then plays the audio from Ken’s speech. Links: Learn more about IHMC STEM-Talk homepage Ken Ford bio Ken Ford Wikipedia page Dawn Kernagis bio

Transcribed - Published: 10 July 2025

Today we have the second installment of our interview with Dr. Michael A. Schmidt, the founder, CEO, and Chief Scientific Officer of Sovaris Aerospace, a company focused on assessments and solutions applied to humans in space and extreme environments on Earth. In today’s interview, we talk to Michael about NASA’s plans to send humans to Mars and build permanent colonies on the Moon and Mars. We also talk to Michael about his recent book, “Building a Space-Faring Civilization,” which addresses the challenges of civilian spaceflight and the construction of space settlements. In part one of our interview, Episode 182, we talked with Michael about his pioneering work in the field of precision medicine and how he has used it to improve the cognitive and physical performance of astronauts as well as NBA, NFL players and Special Operations forces. In addition to his work with Sovaris, Michael also is a professor of aerospace medicine at the University of Central Florida College of Medicine, one of the few programs in the U.S. that offers a medical residency in aerospace medicine. Show notes: [00:03:00] Dawn picks up our interview from where we left off in part one, discussing the Human Research Program for Civilian Spaceflight. She goes on to mention that Chris Mason at Cornell University has a biobank of 1,500 samples across 22 astronauts and seven missions, and that these samples will lead to deeper insights on the effects of spaceflight on humans. Dawn switches gears to ask Michael about the cognitive and physical challenges of spaceflight over long duration missions. [00:13:03] Following up on the cognitive challenges of long duration spaceflight, Ken mentions that the hippocampus, the primary memory center of the brain, has a relatively low radiation threshold compared to other tissues in the brain. Ken asks Michael to touch on the vulnerability of specialized brain tissues to radiation, particularly in the context of a long duration spaceflight to Mars. [00:21:53] Ken mentions that it is understood that the APOE4/4 genotype is associated with impaired cognitive performance under certain circumstances and an elevated risk of dementia. While it is currently unknown whether APOE4/4 has any correlation of increased risk associated with cognitive impact resultant from environmental exposure due to spaceflight, Ken highlights the concern with sending APOE4/4-positive astronauts on long duration spaceflights without knowing the risks. [00:29:26] Ken notes the worsened cognitive impacts resultant from medical radiation, and while therapeutic radiation is different than radiation experienced by astronauts, these results give some indication of the effects astronauts might experience. [00:33:27] Dawn mentions that we recently had planetary scientist and director of NASA’s Haughton-Mars project, Pascal Lee, on the podcast, who explained his view that since there are so many engineering and biological challenges with going to Mars, we should take a more measured approach to a Mars mission, perhaps even beginning with a roundtrip to Mars rather than landing on our first visit. Dawn asks Michael what his thoughts are on this approach. [00:37:29] Ken shifts the discussion to the subject of one of Mars’ moons, Phobos, and its potential role in a Mars mission. [00:40:30] Dawn pivots to talk about Michael’s Book “Building a Space-Faring Civilization: Advancing the Renaissance of Science, Medicine and Human Performance in Civilian Spaceflight.” Dawn asks Michael to talk about the chapter concerning the question of space radiation from the standpoint of precision medicine. [00:55:12] Dawn asks Michael to talk about the lack of appreciation people have for the fact that a Mars mission would be the most dangerous thing we’ve ever done. [00:59:06] Ken mentions that Michael has worked with a lot of organizations, including Space X, which has a program, the Space X Mars Colonization Program, dedicated to the establishment of a permanent colony on Mars. Space X’s founder Elon Musk recently made a statement to his employees that in 20 years he anticipates having a million people colonizing Mars. Ken asks Michael to elaborate on the difficulties entailed with not just a sortie mission to Mars but attempting to establish a permanent presence there. [01:03:38] Ken notes the effect that lofty ideas about colonizing Mars have on people is a lack of appreciation for the tremendous difficulty of the task before us. Ken notes that when we do make it to Mars, the appreciation for the monumental accomplishment that it will be could be seen as inadequate by a public fed ideas about colonizing Mars in the next 20 years. [01:11:08] Dawn notes that one of the most underappreciated, yet critical, components of long duration spaceflight is the psychology of team dynamics. Considering the isolation and close quarters environment of a spacecraft, how teams interact and how they will mediate conflict is an important problem to consider. [01:13:59] Dawn shifts gears to talk about Michael’s co-editor for his book, Dr. Marianne Legato, an emeritus professor of clinical medicine and Columbia University, and a practicing internal medicine specialist in New York City known for her sex-specific medicine and research. Dawn asks Michael how he and Marianne met. [01:16:33] Dawn asks Michael, with respect to his and Marianne’s work on sex and gender differences, how the challenges that men and women face in spaceflight differ. [01:23:31] Dawn comments on Michael’s fascinating career and asks him if it is what he envisioned for himself when he was in college. [01:27:05] Ken wraps up our interview by asking Michael what advice he has for students and young researchers just starting their careers. Links: Michael Schmidt bio Learn more about IHMC STEM-Talk homepage Ken Ford bio Ken Ford Wikipedia page Dawn Kernagis bio  

Transcribed - Published: 24 June 2025

Today we have Dr. Michael A. Schmidt, the founder, CEO, and Chief Scientific Officer of Sovaris Aerospace, a company focused on assessments and solutions applied to humans in space and extreme environments on Earth.  Michael is also a professor of aerospace medicine at the University of Central Florida College of Medicine, one of the few programs in the U.S. that offers a medical residency in aerospace medicine. Michael is known for his work pioneering the field of precision medicine. He uses molecular analytics, coupled with physiologic and behavioral assessments, to facilitate human performance and resilience on Earth as well as in the extreme environment of space. His work covers a spectrum from NASA, the NFL, the NBA, U.S. Olympic teams, Nike, SpaceX, Axiom Space, NASCAR, Special Operations, the Naval Submarine Medical Research Lab, the Mayo Clinic, and others. We had a long and fascinating conversation with Michael and decided to break the interview into two parts. This episode focuses on Michael’s background and the cognitive and physical challenges astronauts experience in spaceflight. We also dive into the many ways that precision medicine is facilitating human performance and resilience here on Earth. In part two of our conversation, Michael talks about his work with NASA and SpaceX on the challenges of civilian spaceflight and the future of Mars exploration, including the construction of permanent colonies on the Moon and Mars. You won’t want to miss that conversation. Show notes: [00:03:59] Dawn opens our interview mentioning that Michael grew up in Minnesota in a small farming community, asking if it’s true that he sometimes had to do chores in 20- to 30-degree weather. [00:06:50] Dawn asks if it is true that Michael fell in love with science at a young age, even building telescopes at the age of 11. [00:08:00] Dawn asks Michael what it was that led him to become so fascinated with space specifically. [00:08:58] Dawn asks if Michael ever thought about becoming an astronaut. [00:10:09] Ken asks if it is true that Michael was a big reader as a child. [00:11:21] Dawn asks Michael to talk about his childhood athletic interests. [00:11:55] Dawn asks how it was that a high school quarterback from a small town in Minnesota ended up at university in the United Kingdom. [00:13:38] Ken asks Michael what years he worked at NASA Ames Research Center. [00:14:51] Ken mentions that when Michael was at NASA Ames, he did work collecting molecular and physiologic assessments of humans using NASA’s 20-G centrifuge. Ken asks Michael to talk about the centrifuge and how he used it in his studies of hypergravity. [00:17:49] Ken comments on the fact that pieces of equipment like NASA’s 20-G centrifuge are a precious scientific resource, and when they cease functioning, unfortunately, they are unlikely to be replaced. [00:19:40] Ken and Michael discuss the fact that microgravity, despite being one of the most pressing effects on astronaut health, is the one of the least addressed problems in human spaceflight. [00:21:48] Ken explains that Michael is the founder, CEO and Chief Scientific Officer of a company called Sovaris Aerospace, which is focused on assessments and solutions applied to humans in space and extreme environments on Earth. Ken asks Michael where the idea came from to found this company. [00:24:35] Dawn explains that since the human genome was first sequenced, there has been an acceleration of genome-based technologies that have made it possible to consider a person’s genetic makeup, both in healthcare and optimizing performance. Dawn asks Michael to talk about the work he does applying genomics to human spaceflight. [00:28:52] Dawn asks about Michael’s direction of the molecular profiling and precision medicine efforts for the Golden State Warriors during their record-breaking 73-9 season [00:32:57] Dawn mentions that Michael published a review in the journal Metabolomics in 2013 that looked at the use of omics-based analyses and their potential to enhance astronaut safety and performance. Dawn goes on to say that omics allows us to identify differences in humans responsible for different responses to extreme conditions. Dawn asks Michael to talk about this review and what he learned in terms of the risk profile of individual astronauts and how personalized medicine could mitigate some of the risks. [00:42:01] Ken circles back to the heterogeneity of responses to exercise in space, a phenomenon that is seen on Earth as well. Ken notes that while large populations of astronauts don’t yet exist to be studied, large populations and their response to exercise can be studied on Earth, such as Marcas Bamman’s current NIH-funded multicenter exercise study with aging populations here at IHMC. Here Michael talks about his work creating “digital twins” of astronauts to model exposure to extreme environments on personalized digital models of astronauts. [00:46:04] Ken mentions that the difference between digital twin models in engineering and digital twins used in biomedicine is that engineered systems are nearly fully understood and can therefore be modeled with great accuracy and completeness, while there is much more unknown in biological systems. [00:48:15] Ken asks Michael, given all the confounds and environmental stressors in spaceflight, how confident can we be that omics analyses performed on Earth will provide useful insights about performance in space. [00:54:13] Dawn pivots to discuss Michael’s work as president of the Human Research Program for Civilian Space Flight, the purpose of which is to address the widespread needs that civilians will face as space travelers. [01:01:03] Ken shifts gears to ask Michael to talk about the specific cognitive and physical challenges that humans will face in long duration spaceflight, such as a flight to Mars. [01:10:05] Ken mentions that APOE4/4 positive patients see increased risk of cognitive decline from therapeutic radiation on Earth. Ken notes that while therapeutic radiation is different from the radiation experienced by astronauts, this still poses worrying prospects for APOE4/4 positive astronauts. [01:11:28] Ken and Michael discuss the importance of developing both biological and engineering countermeasures to hazardous exposure to astronauts in space. Links: Michael Schmidt bio Learn more about IHMC STEM-Talk homepage Ken Ford bio Ken Ford Wikipedia page Dawn Kernagis bio    

Transcribed - Published: 2 June 2025

Today we have Dr. Michael A. Schmidt, the founder, CEO, and Chief Scientific Officer of Sovaris Aerospace, a company focused on assessments and solutions applied to humans in space and extreme environments on Earth.  Michael is also a professor of aerospace medicine at the University of Central Florida College of Medicine, one of the few programs in the U.S. that offers a medical residency in aerospace medicine. Michael is known for his work pioneering the field of precision medicine. He uses molecular analytics, coupled with physiologic and behavioral assessments, to facilitate human performance and resilience on Earth as well as in the extreme environment of space. His work covers a spectrum from NASA, the NFL, the NBA, U.S. Olympic teams, Nike, SpaceX, Axiom Space, NASCAR, Special Operations, the Naval Submarine Medical Research Lab, the Mayo Clinic, and others. We had a long and fascinating conversation with Michael and decided to break the interview into two parts. This episode focuses on Michael’s background and the cognitive and physical challenges astronauts experience in spaceflight. We also dive into the many ways that precision medicine is facilitating human performance and resilience here on Earth. In part two of our conversation, Michael talks about his work with NASA and SpaceX on the challenges of civilian spaceflight and the future of Mars exploration, including the construction of permanent colonies on the Moon and Mars. You won’t want to miss that conversation. Show notes: [00:03:59] Dawn opens our interview mentioning that Michael grew up in Minnesota in a small farming community, asking if it’s true that he sometimes had to do chores in 20- to 30-degree weather. [00:06:50] Dawn asks if it is true that Michael fell in love with science at a young age, even building telescopes at the age of 11. [00:08:00] Dawn asks Michael what it was that led him to become so fascinated with space specifically. [00:08:58] Dawn asks if Michael ever thought about becoming an astronaut. [00:10:09] Ken asks if it is true that Michael was a big reader as a child. [00:11:21] Dawn asks Michael to talk about his childhood athletic interests. [00:11:55] Dawn asks how it was that a high school quarterback from a small town in Minnesota ended up at university in the United Kingdom. [00:13:38] Ken asks Michael what years he worked at NASA Ames Research Center. [00:14:51] Ken mentions that when Michael was at NASA Ames, he did work collecting molecular and physiologic assessments of humans using NASA’s 20-G centrifuge. Ken asks Michael to talk about the centrifuge and how he used it in his studies of hypergravity. [00:17:49] Ken comments on the fact that pieces of equipment like NASA’s 20-G centrifuge are a precious scientific resource, and when they cease functioning, unfortunately, they are unlikely to be replaced. [00:19:40] Ken and Michael discuss the fact that microgravity, despite being one of the most pressing effects on astronaut health, is the one of the least addressed problems in human spaceflight. [00:21:48] Ken explains that Michael is the founder, CEO and Chief Scientific Officer of a company called Sovaris Aerospace, which is focused on assessments and solutions applied to humans in space and extreme environments on Earth. Ken asks Michael where the idea came from to found this company. [00:24:35] Dawn explains that since the human genome was first sequenced, there has been an acceleration of genome-based technologies that have made it possible to consider a person’s genetic makeup, both in healthcare and optimizing performance. Dawn asks Michael to talk about the work he does applying genomics to human spaceflight. [00:28:52] Dawn asks about Michael’s direction of the molecular profiling and precision medicine efforts for the Golden State Warriors during their record-breaking 73-9 season [00:32:57] Dawn mentions that Michael published a review in the journal Metabolomics in 2013 that looked at the use of omics-based analyses and their potential to enhance astronaut safety and performance. Dawn goes on to say that omics allows us to identify differences in humans responsible for different responses to extreme conditions. Dawn asks Michael to talk about this review and what he learned in terms of the risk profile of individual astronauts and how personalized medicine could mitigate some of the risks. [00:42:01] Ken circles back to the heterogeneity of responses to exercise in space, a phenomenon that is seen on Earth as well. Ken notes that while large populations of astronauts don’t yet exist to be studied, large populations and their response to exercise can be studied on Earth, such as Marcas Bamman’s current NIH-funded multicenter exercise study with aging populations here at IHMC. Here Michael talks about his work creating “digital twins” of astronauts to model exposure to extreme environments on personalized digital models of astronauts. [00:46:04] Ken mentions that the difference between digital twin models in engineering and digital twins used in biomedicine is that engineered systems are nearly fully understood and can therefore be modeled with great accuracy and completeness, while there is much more unknown in biological systems. [00:48:15] Ken asks Michael, given all the confounds and environmental stressors in spaceflight, how confident can we be that omics analyses performed on Earth will provide useful insights about performance in space. [00:54:13] Dawn pivots to discuss Michael’s work as president of the Human Research Program for Civilian Space Flight, the purpose of which is to address the widespread needs that civilians will face as space travelers. [01:01:03] Ken shifts gears to ask Michael to talk about the specific cognitive and physical challenges that humans will face in long duration spaceflight, such as a flight to Mars. [01:10:05] Ken mentions that APOE4/4 positive patients see increased risk of cognitive decline from therapeutic radiation on Earth. Ken notes that while therapeutic radiation is different from the radiation experienced by astronauts, this still poses worrying prospects for APOE4/4 positive astronauts. [01:11:28] Ken and Michael discuss the importance of developing both biological and engineering countermeasures to hazardous exposure to astronauts in space. Links: Michael Schmidt bio Learn more about IHMC STEM-Talk homepage Ken Ford bio Ken Ford Wikipedia page Dawn Kernagis bio    

Transcribed - Published: 2 June 2025

Our guest today is Dr. Ken Forbus, the Walter P. Murphy Professor of Computer Science and a Professor of Education at Northwestern University. Joining Dr. Ken Ford to co-host today’s interview is Dr. James Allen, who was IHMC’s associate director until he retired a few years ago. James is a founding fellow of the American Association for Artificial Intelligence and a perfect fit for today’s discussion with Dr. Forbus, who, like James, is an AI pioneer.  Back in 2022, James was named a fellow by the Association for Computational Linguistics, an organization that studies computational language processing, another field he helped pioneer. Dr. Forbus also is a Fellow of the Association for the Advancement of Artificial Intelligence and was the inaugural winner of the Herbet A. Simon Prize for Advances in Cognitive Systems. He is well-known for his development of the Structure Mapping Engine. In artificial intelligence and cognitive science, the Structure Mapping Engine is a computer simulation of analogy and similarity comparisons that helped pave the way for computers to reason more like humans. Show Notes: [00:03:07] Ken opens the interview with Dr. Forbus by asking if it is true that he had an unusual hobby for a nerdy kid growing up. [00:04:18] James mentions that Dr. Forbus’ family moved often when he was younger and asks how that affected him. [00:05:18] Ken mentions that when Dr. Forbus was in high school, he filled his free time reading about psychology and cognition before eventually coming across some articles on AI. Ken asks Dr. Forbus to talk about this experience and what happened next. [00:07:49] James asks Dr. Forbus if he remembers the first computer he owned. [00:09:17] Ken asks Dr. Forbus if there was anything, other than its reputation, that led him to attend MIT. [00:10:09] James mentions that for the past few decades, Dr. Forbus has been working on developing “human like” AI systems. While much of AI research and development has been focused on meeting the standard of the Turing test, James asks Dr. Forbus why he is not a fan of the Turing test. [00:12:24] Ken mentions that Dr. Forbus received his Ph.D. from MIT in 1984, the same year that Apple released the first Macintosh, which was rolled out with a famous Super Bowl ad. This computer was the first successful mouse driven personal computer with a graphical interface. Ken asks Dr. Forbus what he remembers about that ad, and what his reaction to it was at the time. [00:13:22] James mentions that 1984 was also the year that Dr. Forbus made his first splash in the AI world with his paper on qualitative process theory. James goes on to explain that at the time, qualitative reasoning regarding quantities was a major problem for AI. In his paper, Dr. Forbus proposed qualitative process theory as a representational framework for common sense physical reasoning, arguing that understanding common sense physical reasoning first required understanding of processes and their effects and limits. James asks Dr. Forbus to give an overview of this paper and its significance. [00:18:10] Ken asks Dr. Forbus how it was that he ended up marrying one of his collaborators on the Structure Mapping Engine project, Dedre Gentner. [00:19:14] James explains that Dedre’s Structure Mapping Theory explains how people understand and reason about relationships between different situations, which is central to human cognition. James asks Dr. Forbus how Dedre’s theory was foundational for the Structure Mapping Engine (SME). [00:25:19] Ken mentions how SME has gone through a number of changes and improvements over the years, as documented in Dr. Forbus’ 2016 paper “Extending SME to handle large scale cognitive modeling.” Ken asks, as a cognitive model, what evidence Dr. Forbus has used to argue for the psychological and cognitive plausibility of SME. [00:30:00] Ken explains that many AI systems rely on deep learning, which is a subset of machine learning, using multi-layered artificial neural networks to automatically learn and extrapolate data. Ken goes on to say that Dr. Forbus has pointed out that both people and SME are able to learn successfully with far less data than deep learning requires. Ken asks Dr. Forbus to expand on this. [00:35:21] James mentions that Dr. Forbus has been working a lot over the past decade on companion cognitive architectures, which aim to reach human level AI, by creating software social organisms, which are systems that interact with people using natural modalities. Dr. Forbus elaborated on this in a 2016 paper titled “Software social organisms: Implications for measuring AI progress” where he argued that achieving human level AI is equivalent to learning how to create sufficiently smart software social organisms. James asks Dr. Forbus to briefly describe this concept. [00:44:18] James mentions that Dr. Forbus’ goal with this system is to create systems that can interact with people as apprentices or collaborators rather than just tools. In Dr. Forbus’ paper “Analogy and Qualitative Representations in the Companion Cognitive Architecture ,” he presents two hypotheses on how to create such systems. Starting with the first, James asks Dr. Forbus to elaborate on his hypothesis regarding analogical reasoning and learning, incorporating retrieval and generalization as well as SME capability for analogical matching. [00:48:38] Ken asks Dr. Forbus to elaborate on the second hypothesis, qualitative representations. [00:51:11] James asks if it is correct that Dr. Forbus’ key takeaway in this paper was that the models of structure mapping were particularly robust. [00:52:00] Ken pivots to discuss Dr. Forbus’ book “Qualitative Representations: How People Reason and Learn About the Continuous World” in which Dr. Forbus proposes that qualitative representations, which are symbolic representations that carve continuous phenomena into meaningful units, hold the key to one of the deepest mysteries of cognitive science and are central to human cognition. Ken asks Dr. Forbus to talk about his book and its key points. [00:57:32] James explains that Dr. Forbus followed up his book with a review in Science Direct, exploring how visual reasoning tasks involving comparison provide insights into how people make similarity and difference judgements. James goes on to mention that Dr. Forbus and his colleague Andrew Lovett summarized evidence that the same structure mapping comparison processes that seem to be used elsewhere in cognition can be used to model comparison in human visual reasoning tasks, and this relies on qualitative visual relationships computed using CogSketch, a model of high-level human vision. James asks Dr. Forbus to talk about these findings. [00:59:22] James mentions that Dr. Forbus and his colleagues published a paper about the importance of sketch worksheets in STEM classrooms. They argue that sketching can be a valuable tool for science, but it is currently underutilized. Dr. Forbus and his colleagues recommend sketch worksheets that use AI technology to give students immediate feedback and give instructors assistance in grading. James asks Dr. Forbus to explain what sketch worksheets are and how they can be helpful. [01:01:06] Ken asks Dr. Forbus to give some examples of homework that have been assigned with sketch worksheets. [01:02:34] Ken brings up another one of Dr. Forbus’ papers, which focused on the issues of adversarial attacks on ethical AI systems. The paper investigated moral axioms and the use of deontic logic in a norm learning framework. They found that adding axiomatic moral prohibitions and deontic inference rules to a norm learning model will make it less vulnerable to adversarial attacks. Ken asks Dr. Forbus to talk more about this. [01:07:09] James asks Dr. Forbus what his thoughts are on the idea that AI will soon begin to replace humans. [01:19:52] James explains that the impressive performance of deep learning systems, particularly LLM’s like ChatGPT has simultaneously made it harder for researchers to engage in building cognitively based systems. James asks Dr. Forbus for his thoughts on how we might lay the groundwork for continuing the important work in cognitively based systems. [01:22:54] Ken closes our interview by asking Dr. Forbus if he is thinking about retirement anytime soon. Links: Learn more about IHMC STEM-Talk homepage Ken Ford bio Ken Ford Wikipedia page Dawn Kernagis bio Ken Forbus bio      

Transcribed - Published: 13 May 2025

Today we have planetary scientist Dr. Pascal Lee and STEM-Talk host Dr. Ken Ford in a wide-ranging conversation about NASA’s ambitions to return humans to the Moon as a stepping stone to sending astronauts to Mars. Pascal is making his third appearance on STEM-Talk. Much of his research focuses on asteroids, impact craters, and the future human exploration of Mars. Pascal and Ken have a lively discussion about the growing momentum for space exploration. Pascal is a researcher at the SETI Institute, a not-for-profit NASA program focused on searching for extraterrestrial intelligence in an effort to understand and explain the origin and nature of life in the universe. He also is the co-founder and chairman of the Mars Institute, and director of the Haughton-Mars Project at NASA Ames Research Center. Last year, Pascal received significant news coverage for his discovery of a giant volcano along with a possible sheet of buried glacier ice in the eastern part of Mars’ Tharsis volcanic province. This was the first geological find of this magnitude since the other major volcanos on Mars were discovered back in the 1970s. Show notes: [00:03:06] Ken welcomes Pascal back to STEM-Talk and starts our interview by mentioning the developments in space exploration over the past few years, including civilian space missions, NASA’s Artemis program which aims to send humans back to the moon, and commitments to a manned mission to Mars. Given Pascal’s career in advancement of space exploration, Ken asks if Pascal is excited by these recent developments. [00:04:43] Ken explains that for a couple of decades Pascal has spent his summers visiting Devon Island in the Canadian arctic archipelago, which is the largest uninhabited land on Earth. When Pascal was last on STEM-Talk, his annual trip to Devon Island was cancelled due to COVID-19. Devon Island has unique geological characteristics that are in some ways similar to those on Mars. Since 2001, Devon Isalnd has been the home of the Haughton Mars Project (HMP). Ken asks Pascal to talk about the advances in this project since his last appearance on STEM-Talk. [00:07:59] Ken mentions that while much conversation has been centered on a human trip to Mars, a mission to return humans to the Moon and establish a permanent base is a more immediately feasible goal in the short term. Ken asks Pascal to talk about the importance and significance of such a mission. [00:12:06] On the topic of a Moon base, Ken explains that NASA’s Artemis project aims to send humans to the south pole of the Moon. Pascal has written a paper on that topic titled “An Off-Polar Site Option for the NASA Artemis Space Camp.” Ken asks Pascal what he sees as the primary weakness in the south pole location. [00:20:25] Ken agrees with Pascal’s perspective on sending humans to the lunar south pole, and the two discuss the problems with focusing human space exploration on romantic ideas such as “living off the land.” [00:22:24] Ken follows up on the previous questions by mentioning that in Pascal’s aforementioned paper, he suggests setting up a lunar base at the floor of the Clavius crater. Ken asks Pascal to talk about Clavius and why it is a potentially good permanent location for a moon base. [00:27:56] Ken asks Pascal how confident he and the community at large is in the Sophia finding of water. [00:29:00] Ken notes that contemporary interest in human space exploration appears tied to current geopolitical issues, much like the first space race between the US and USSR. Today, interest in space travel is closely linked with relations between the US and China. Ken asks Pascal to discuss this and how he believes the US should view this current situation. [00:35:43] Ken asks Pascal what he knows about the China’s current plans for a lunar mission. [00:34:36] Ken talks about a meeting at IHMC that addressed power-beaming to the lunar surface. [00:39:01] Ken notes that there is a lot of talk these days about not not only traveling to Mars, but also colonizing Mars. Ken asks Pascal where he believes this sentiment is coming from and what are some of the challenges associated with colonizing Mars. [00:46:48] Ken notes that last year Elon Musk made an announcement to his SpaceX employees that he expects 1 million people to be living on Mars in the next 20 years. Ken asks Pascal what his thoughts are on this. [00:53:28] Ken asks Pascal to talk about a paper he published discussing a previously unrecognized volcano on Mars. Given that it was generally accepted for decades that all the volcanos had been accounted for, Ken asks Pascal to talk about the story of his recent discovery. [01:02:44] Ken pivots to a discussion of the Moons of Mars, specifically Phobos, asking Pascal to talk about the nature of this Moon. [01:07:42] Ken mentions that docking on Phobos and then going from Phobos to Mars would likely be a safer strategy for early Mars missions than landing directly on Mars from Earth. [01:12:30] Ken starts a discussion about Perseverance, as well as the new Japanese mission that may bring back Mars rocks from Phobos. Ken asks Pascal about Perseverance’s collection Mars’ of rock samples that NASA plans for a mission to bring those Mars rocks to Earth. Ken asks it is worth the cost of a mission to collect these samples and what we might learn if we are successful in getting these samples to Earth. [01:17:09] Ken wraps up our interview asking Pascal what year it was that he started working at NASA Ames, which turns out to be the same year Ken started working at NASA Ames. Links: Pascal Lee bio Learn more about IHMC STEM-Talk homepage Ken Ford bio Ken Ford Wikipedia page  

Transcribed - Published: 9 April 2025

Today we have JP Errico, a scientist and inventor whose work focuses on neuroimmunology and the many ways it impacts cellular metabolism, inflammation, mental health and how we age. He recently joined IHMC as a Senior Research Scientist. JP is particularly known for his research on vagus-nerve stimulation and is the author of the book, The Vagus-Immune Connection: Harness Your Vagus Nerve to Manage Stress, Prevent Immune Dysregulation, and Avoid Chronic Disease. He also is the co-host of the podcast, The Health Upgrade. JP has more than 250 patents and is the founder of ElectroCore, a company that specializes in neuromodulation and noninvasive vagus-nerve stimulation. He has an undergraduate degree in aeronautical engineering from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and worked at Lincoln Laboratories. JP also holds graduate degrees in both law and mechanical/materials engineering from Duke University. Show notes: [00:03:08] Tim opens our interview mentioning that as a child JP was focused on both sports and academics. [00:04:50] Tim talks about how hard it is to find quality math and science education today similar to what JP experienced at his high school. [00:05:16] Tim asks JP what it was that led him to pursue an undergraduate degree at MIT. [00:05:53] Tim asks if it was always JP’s plan to go into aeronautical engineering. [00:07:22] Tim mentions that as a kid, JP would scour bookstores and libraries for textbooks on physics and quantum mechanics and asks JP if there were any books that particularly inspired him. [00:10:12] Ken mentions that after MIT, JP went to Duke University where he pursued mechanical engineering and also went to law school. Given this workload, Ken asks if JP ever had any free time while studying at Duke. [00:13:26] Tim mentions that while JP was in law school, he got a job at a patent firm. After obtaining his law degree, JP’s uncle called and offered JP an opportunity. [00:17:42] Tim explains that JP’s career has focused on neuroimmunology, or the study of how the nervous system and immune system interact. Neuroimmunology affects a wide range of health factors including inflammation, mental health and aging. Tim also explains that JP has recently authored a book on neuroimmunology titled “The Vagus Immune Connection: Harness Your Vagus Nerve to Manage Stress, Prevent Immune Dysregulation and Avoid Chronic Disease.” Tim asks JP to touch on the key features of neuroimmunology that people should be aware of. [00:21:59] Tim asks JP to touch on the epigenetic factors regarding neuroimmunology. [00:25:01] Since JP brought up Dr. Kevin Tracey’s work, Ken mentions that Kevin was recently interviewed on STEM-Talk episode 172 and encourages listeners to listen to that episode for more context on the vagus nerve and neuroimmunology. [00:25:48] JP talks about how he stumbled upon the idea of how stimulating a nerve may have the same clinical benefit that sometimes occurs as a result of cutting a nerve. [00:28:16] Tim talks about the unintended consequences he observed as surgeon when he cut a patient’s vagus nerve. [00:30:50] Ken mentions that another area where JP has had impact with respect to stimulating the vagus nerve is the treatment of asthma and asks JP to talk about his findings in this area. [00:40:10] Tim notes that after JP knew that non-invasive approaches to vagus-nerve stimulation were possible, he went on to optimize a delivery device. These efforts resulted in a device called gamaCore. Tim asks JP to talk about this device and how it works. [00:43:27] Tim asks JP to talk about what it feels like for patients to have their vagus nerve stimulated. [00:44:50] Ken asks if JP thinks that his and others’ work in vagus-nerve stimulation inspired the development of similar devices for orthopedic pain, where the device is implanted near the nerve on the knee or other area experiencing pain. [00:50:41] Tim starts a conversation about a program at DARPA called Targeted Neuroplasticity Training, or TNT, which investigated ways to stimulate the nervous system to treat various conditions like pain and phantom pain. Before jumping into that topic, however, JP discusses depression and how inflammation and the vagus nerve play a part in serotonin and melatonin production. [00:55:39] Ken asks JP why stimulating the vagus nerve has such a breadth of applications and benefits. [01:01:57] Given the success of vagus-nerve stimulation in affecting a wide variety of health outcomes as well as improving learning, there are many individuals interested in trying vagus-nerve stimulation for themselves. Tim asks JP what advice he has for people looking to try vagus-nerve stimulation. [01:09:39] Tim notes that in his use of various vagus-nerve stimulation devices in studies he has conducted, there are varying outcomes. Given this, Tim asks JP what devices he recommends. [01:11:50] Ken asks JP to talk about the development of the Truvaga device. [01:13:47] Ken closes our interview mentioning again JP’s book, “The Vagus Immune Connection: Harness Your Vagus Nerve to Manage Stress, Prevent Immune Dysregulation and Avoid Chronic Disease,” and encourages listeners to check it out. Links: Learn more about IHMC STEM-Talk homepage Ken Ford bio Ken Ford Wikipedia page Tim Broderick bio JP Errico bio  

Transcribed - Published: 5 March 2025

Today we have Dr. Karl Herrup, a neurobiologist known for his investigations into the roles that DNA damage and noncoding genetic variants have in Alzheimer’s disease. Joining Ken today to interview Karl is Dr. Tommy Wood, a visiting scientist here at IHMC.  Tommy also is an associate professor of pediatrics and neuroscience at the University of Washington, where he focuses on brain health across lifespan. He has been our guest several times on STEM-Talk and we will have links to those interviews in our show notes for today’s episode. After more than a century of research, the underlying cause of Alzheimer’s remains a mystery. For the past few decades, the leading theory has been the amyloid cascade hypothesis, which proposes that abnormal amyloid plaques in the brain are the central cause of the disease. Today we talk to Karl about his lab and research as well as his view that the amyloid cascade hypothesis is not only flawed,  but also could be holding back research for a cure of Alzheimer’s. A professor of neurobiology and an investigator in the Alzheimer’s Disease Research Center at the University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Herrup is the author of How Not to Study a Disease: The Story of Alzheimer’s. Show notes: [00:03:50] Tommy asks Karl what he was like as a kid to open the interview. [00:04:36] Tommy asks Karl about his educational environment growing up. [00:05:10] Ken mentions that Karl went to Brandies University originally with the intent of becoming a physician and asks Karl what happened to change his mind. [00:06:14] Ken asks Karl if it is true that his father was disappointed with Karl’s decision to abandon medical school in favor of genetics. [00:07:02] Tommy mentions that Karl began researching genetics in the late 1960s when researchers were just beginning to unravel the secrets of DNA. Tommy asks Karl to discuss why this was such an exciting time to study genetics. [00:08:38] Tommy asks Karl what prompted him to pursue a PhD in neuroscience. [00:11:34] Continuing on the theme of happy accidents, Ken asks if it was also an accident that led to Karl moving to Switzerland for a second post-doc. [00:12:36] Ken asks Karl to expound on his experience taking an overseas post-doc, which was not a common practice in the 1970s. [00:14:11] Ken mentions that Karl has seemed to benefit in his life from the combination of preparation and the willingness to explore opportunities that present themselves. [00:15:00] Tommy mentions that when Karl arrived back in the US from Switzerland, he accepted a faculty position at Yale and asks him to discuss this experience. [00:17:06] Tommy mentions that after Yale, Karl had several faculty appointments, including a seven-year stint in Hong Kong, and asks Karl to talk about that experience. [00:21:36] Tommy asks Karl why, in 2019, he moved back to his hometown to become a professor of neurobiology at the University of Pittsburgh and co-investigator at the university’s Alzheimer’s research center. [00:24:45] Ken asks Karl to talk about his lab at the University of Pittsburgh, which focuses on the biology of neurodegeneration. [00:26:32] Ken asks Karl if there was anything specific that caused him to shift his focus at this stage in his career so heavily towards Alzheimer’s research. [00:28:21] Tommy comments on Karl’s hypothesis of the aging brain, noting that it would make sense for the same processes involved in the developing brain to relate to what we see in the aging brain, as these processes are continuous throughout the lifespan. [00:29:54] Tommy pivots to talk about Karl’s book, entitled “How Not to Study a Disease: The Story of Alzheimer’s” for which Karl interviewed a number of experts and colleagues, asking each one to define Alzheimer’s disease in their own words. [00:30:51] Tommy reiterates the point that we still do not have a universally accepted definition of Alzheimer’s disease and asks Karl why this is such a critical problem for the field. [00:32:27] Ken asks if Karl has a working definition of Alzheimer’s disease. [00:33:47] Ken explains that Karl begins his book with the story of a woman named Dorothy, who after living a vibrant life and taking good care of herself as she aged, fell victim to Alzheimer’s disease. Ken asks Karl to talk about Dorothy, and why he chose to begin his book with her story. [00:36:58] Tommy asks Karl to define the difference between Alzheimer’s and dementia more broadly. [00:38:00] Tommy explains that while Alzheimer’s is typically characterized as a disease of late life, early onset Alzheimer’s, while rare, is possible, typically very aggressive, and generally runs in families. Tommy asks Karl to explain how we differentiate late and early onset Alzheimer’s. [00:38:58] Ken asks Karl to explain how one differentiates Alzheimer’s from other forms of dementia in a clinical context. [00:41:53] Ken points out that the title of Karl’s book “How Not to Study a Disease” highlights that assumptions about Alzheimer’s disease potentially have misdirected research in some ways. Ken asks Karl to talk about this misdirection and its consequences. [00:43:37] Tommy gives some background on the amyloid cascade hypothesis, explaining that Dr. Alzheimer himself was not entirely convinced that the cases he had been studying were necessarily representative of a single condition.  Dr. Alzheimer’s mentor, Dr. Kraepelin, coined the disease in a book that he was writing. Tommy also mentions that Karl has said that this is one of three key events that cemented the amyloid cascade hypothesis as the leading hypothesis of Alzheimer’s disease and asks Karl to discuss more of this history. [00:49:20] Tommy asks Karl to give an overview of the amyloid cascade hypothesis. [00:53:36] Ken explains that Karl sees the amyloid cascade hypothesis as failing three basic tests. Ken goes on to ask Karl to discuss, in depth, the first test, which is the fact that in both humans and mice the addition of amyloid to healthy brains does not trigger an amyloid cascade. [00:56:55] Tommy moves to Karl’s second test of the amyloid cascade hypothesis, the fact that removal of amyloid from the brains of mice and humans does not stop Alzheimer’s disease processes. Given the recent FDA approval of several anti-amyloid drugs, Tommy asks Karl to give his thoughts on the history of anti-amyloid therapies. [01:03:29] Ken explains that the third test of the amyloid cascade hypothesis entails blocking the formation of amyloid from the amyloid precursor protein, which was not only found to not stop Alzheimer’s progression, but in fact makes humans and mice sicker. [01:05:47] Ken takes a moment to clarify that Karl is not arguing that amyloid has no role in Alzheimer’s disease, just that it is not the primary cause of Alzheimer’s. [01:06:21] Ken asks Karl what his response is when people ask what he proposes the cause of Alzheimer’s is if it’s not amyloid. [01:08:45] Tommy asks Karl to elaborate on the idea of the emergent nature of the brain and the potential for this emergence to help explain Alzheimer’s disease. [01:10:54] Ken mentions that the last section of Karl’s book is titled “Where Do We Go From Here” in which he argues that because age is an absolute prerequisite for Alzheimer’s, there is no solution to the problem of dementia that does not rely heavily on an understanding of the process of aging. Ken goes on to explain that much of this was originally posited in Karl’s 2010 paper Reimagining Alzheimer’s disease: An age-based hypothesis. Ken goes on to ask Karl to talk about his view that developing an age-based hypothesis is going to be difficult given that aging is one of the greatest unsolved mysteries in biology. [01:13:19] Ken mentions that aging research gets a very small amount of funding in comparison to the myriad disorders for which aging is the primary risk factor. [01:16:11] Tommy shifts gears to talk about a series of studies that Karl conducted on the benefits of exposure to Japanese gardens on the clinical symptoms of Alzheimer’s disease. In one of these studies, Karl found that the Japanese garden not only relieved physiological stress but also improved qualitative measures such as verbalization and memory retrieval. Tommy asks Karl how he became interested in Japanese gardens, and if the results of his experiments surprised him. [01:20:33] Tommy comments that Karl’s work on the effects of Japanese gardens on the clinical symptoms of Alzheimer’s contributes to a larger body of literature showing the critical importance of the environment in shaping and maintaining cognitive function. Tommy goes on to say that the decline in certain cases of Alzheimer’s can be matched to the increasing levels of institutionalization and the decrease of enriching stimuli in a patient’s environment as their disease progresses. Tommy asks Karl to talk about the importance of social, cognitive, and environmental stimuli for cognitive function. [01:23:34] Ken mentions that Karl has pointed out in the past that non-pharmacological approaches to treating Alzheimer’s have been the most effective tools in our arsenal so far. Given this, Ken asks Karl what he recommends to people for their brain health and cognitive function. [01:25:22] Ken explains that Karl is involved with, or supports, at least two charitable organizations that aim to reshape the face of funding for Alzheimer’s research, namely the Coins for Alzheimer’s Research Trust, and the Clear Thoughts Foundation. Ken asks Karl to talk about his relationship to these organizations and what he hopes will change in the landscape of Alzheimer’s research funding. [01:27:23] Tommy closes our interview asking whether Karl has a Japanese garden of his own in his back yard. Links: About IHMC Karl Herrup bio Ken Ford bio Ken Ford Wikipedia page Tommy Wood bio Tommy Wood STEM-Talk episode 47 Tommy Wood STEM-Talk episode 48 Tommy Wood STEM-Talk episode 110 Tommy Wood STEM-Talk episode 111 Tommy Wood STEM-Talk episode 128

Transcribed - Published: 5 February 2025

Today we have Dr. Frank Butler, a retired Navy Undersea Medical Officer and an ophthalmologist who served as a Navy SEAL platoon commander prior to attending medical school. Just a few weeks after our interview, President Joe Biden awarded Frank a Presidential Citizens Medal during a White House ceremony. The medal is one of the highest honors a civilian can receive and recognized Frank’s many contributions to civilian and military trauma care. Frank is credited with founding Tactical Combat Causality Care, also known as TC Three, which has transformed battlefield medical care and saved thousands of lives.  TCCC is now used throughout the U.S. military and much of the world. In today’s interview, we talk to Frank about his recent book, “Tell Them Yourself: It’s Not Your Day to Die,” which describes the challenges and improvements TCCC has experienced over the past three decades. Frank spent most of his 26-year career in Navy Medicine supporting the Special Operations community. He served a five-year stint as a Diving Medical Research officer at the Navy Experimental Diving Unit in Panama City, Fla., where he helped develop many of the diving techniques and procedures used by Navy SEALs today.

Transcribed - Published: 16 January 2025

Today our guest is Dr. JoAnn Manson, an endocrinologist, epidemiologist, and Principal Investigator of several research studies, including the landmark Women’s Health Initiative. She is a highly cited researcher and was one of the physicians featured in the National Library of Medicine’s exhibition, History of American Women Physicians. Her primary research interests include clinical prevention trials of nutritional and lifestyle factors related to heart disease, diabetes, and cancer and the role of endogenous and exogenous estrogens as determinants of chronic disease. Show notes: [00:02:53] Dawn kicks off the interview by asking JoAnn what it was that drew her to endocrinology. [00:04:33] Ken asks how the things JoAnn witnessed in her early medical practice influenced her interest in disease prevention. [00:05:51] Dawn asks JoAnn to discuss how her mother, who suffered from ovarian cancer, influenced JoAnn’s focus on women’s health. [00:06:40] Dawn asks JoAnn what prompted her interest in clinical research. [00:08:06] Noting the difference between public health and laboratory medical research, Dawn asks JoAnn what the most valuable thing is that she learned from her master’s and Ph.D. work in public health at Harvard. [00:09:10] Ken mentions that while JoAnn and many others are interested in the prevention of disease, our healthcare system does not seem focused on prevention. Ken goes on to asks if this was part of what led JoAnn to work on the Nurses’ Health Study. [00:10:17] Ken asks JoAnn to give an overview of the Nurses’ Health Study for listeners who may not be familiar. [00:11:41] Dawn explains that the Nurses’ Health Study found that women taking hormone therapy had a lower risk of heart disease and a reduction in all-cause mortality. Dawn asks JoAnn to talk about this finding. [00:15:00] Ken asks JoAnn what the impact of the Nurses’ Study has been on public health and women’s health in general. [00:16:29] Dawn asks JoAnn about her experience being a principal investigator in the Women’s Health Initiative starting in 1993. [00:18:17] Ken asks JoAnn to give context regarding how the Women’s Health Initiative (WHI) was designed, how the women were recruited, and what the specific questions were that the study aimed to answer. [00:21:34] Dawn mentions that the three interventions that were evaluated in the WHI were hormone therapy; calcium and vitamin D supplementation; and a low-fat diet. Dawn starts by asking JoAnn about the hormone therapy interventions, and how it was decided which hormone therapies to test. [00:24:25] Dawn asks JoAnn to give some context to the finding from the WHI that women taking the combination of conjugated estrogen and medroxyprogesterone acetate had higher risks of breast cancer and stroke. [00:27:01] Ken asks if the worse outcomes from hormone therapy for older women was due to their advanced age, or the hormone therapy itself. [00:30:25] Ken asks JoAnn to talk about the risk factors for breast cancer that were uncovered by the WHI. [00:35:38] Dawn explains that because of the WHI’s findings, it is more common to use transdermal estradiol, as opposed to the oral form evaluated in the original trial. Dawn asks JoAnn to explain how the different ways these hormone formulations are processed in the body affects the risk benefit ratio. [00:39:04] Dawn asks if these transdermal estradiol treatments might have benefits regarding cognitive decline. [00:43:26] Ken asks JoAnn for her thoughts on the overuse and potential misuse of the term ‘bioidentical hormones.’ Ken goes on to note that the term has seemingly become more related to marketing and further distanced from clinical science. [00:46:48] Dawn asks JoAnn to talk about the role that perimenopausal birth control decisions can play in the management of hot flashes for women in their 40s and 50s. [00:49:14] Ken shifts the conversation to discuss the second pillar of the WHI, calcium and vitamin D supplementation. Ken explains that this pillar of the trial tested to see if this supplementation decreased risk of hip fractures in post-menopausal women. Ken asks JoAnn to discuss these findings. [00:53:13] Dawn asks about the third pillar of the WHI, which looked at whether a low-fat dietary pattern reduced the risk of breast cancer, colorectal cancer, or coronary heart disease. [00:55:31] Dawn asks JoAnn what questions are left for the WHI to explore. [01:00:17] Ken asks about a recent report in the journal Menopause, which looked at the cognitive effects of clinical menopausal symptoms. [01:01:36] Dawn asks JoAnn to expound on what ‘cognitive decline’ is measured as, with respect to sleep loss resulting from menopausal symptoms such as hot flashes and night sweats. [01:02:38] Dawn asks JoAnn about a study she and her colleagues conducted at Brigham showing that a comprehensive multivitamin can delay age related memory decline by an average of two years. [01:06:41] Ken asks about the findings of JoAnn’s 2018 study in The New England Journal of Medicine, which looked at whether vitamin D supplementation resulted in a lower incidence of invasive cancers and cardiovascular events. [01:10:11] Regarding the aforementioned study, Ken explains that a subgroup analysis raised the possibility of differential effects of cancer incidence connected to BMI. Ken asks JoAnn to elaborate on this subgroup analysis. [01:13:41] Ken asks if the aforementioned results would look more pronounced, or different in some way, if the data was analyzed with respect to body composition as opposed to BMI. [01:15:09] Dawn asks JoAnn what she would like to see change about how women’s health is taught and studied with respect to perimenopause, menopause, and post-menopause. [01:16:13] Dawn asks JoAnn what she and her colleagues plan to investigate next, and what answers she thinks we will have for future generations of women as they age that we don’t have now. [01:18:13] Ken wraps up our interview asking JoAnn what she likes to do in her spare time. Links: JoAnn Manson bio Learn more about IHMC STEM-Talk homepage Ken Ford bio Ken Ford Wikipedia page Dawn Kernagis bio    

Transcribed - Published: 20 December 2024

Today we have Dr. Hans Van Dongen, director of the Sleep and Performance Research Center at Washington State University in Spokane. Dr. Kevin Gluck, a senior research scientist at IHMC, joins Dr. Ken Ford to interview Hans about his studies on inter-individual differences in vulnerability to fatigue as well as the cumulative cognitive deficits that follow chronic sleep restriction. Hans is known for his mathematical modeling of fatigue’s effects on performance. At the Sleep and Performance Research Center, Hans and his colleagues investigate how sleep loss and circadian misalignment impact brain function, cognition and behavior. Show notes: [00:02:50] Kevin opens the interview by asking Hans about his childhood growing up in The Netherlands. [00:03:23] Ken asks Hans what he was like as a kid. [00:03:50] Kevin mentions Hans’s father was a math and science teacher and wonders if that influenced Hans’ interest in science. [00:04:48] Hans talks about attending Leiden University and explains why he majored in astrophysics. [00:06:09] Hans shares how working in a psychophysiology lab put him on a path to specialize in sleep research. [00:08:00] Hans talks about how he was part of a study that proved the morning-evening chronotype was a biological trait, rather than a psychological one. [00:09:55] Ken asks Hans what led him to take a post-doc position at the University of Pennsylvania. [00:11:22] Hans explains what led him to move from the University of Pennsylvania to Washington State University. [00:13:36] Ken mentions that The Sleep and Performance Research Center, where Hans serves as the director, is a coalition of basic and applied research laboratories that aim to understand the neurobiology of sleep and sleep loss. Ken goes on to mention that Hans and his colleagues investigate sleep and biological rhythms, and their impact on health and performance. Kevin asks Hans to give an overview of what sleep loss is and the effect it has on our metabolism, immune system, and cognitive performance. [00:15:57] Kevin mentions Hans’ recent paper which investigated how circadian misalignment due to night shift work has been associated with an elevated risk of chronic disease. The paper demonstrated that just a few days of being on a night shift schedule throws off protein rhythms related to blood glucose regulation, energy metabolism, and inflammation. Kevin asks Hans to talk more about the findings. [00:21:18] Ken asks how long it takes for a person’s circadian rhythm to normalize after ceasing to work night shifts. [00:22:13] Kevin brings up Hans’ paper on the continually operating neurobiological mechanisms of homeostatic and circadian processes and their effects on neurobehavioral performance. Before asking about the paper itself, Kevin asks Hans to give an overview of the homeostatic process and its relationship to the circadian process. [00:24:14] Ken notes that the bio-behavioral function and evolutionary advantage of the circadian process is widely recognized, but that the neurobiology of the homeostatic process and its effects on performance are still poorly understood. In a 2011 paper, Hans attempted to shed light on the underlying mechanisms of the homeostatic process to provide an explanation for why the buildup of homeostatic pressure resulting from sleep loss leads to instability in vigilant attention. To explore this, Hans first explored the time-on-task effect. Ken asks Hans to explain the time-on-task effect and its role in cognitive performance. [00:27:06] Kevin brings up the “local sleep hypothesis,” which attempts to explain the time-on-task effect. According to the local sleep hypothesis, groups of neurons involved in performing a task will “fall asleep” as a homeostatic consequence of sustained use, which leads to an interruption in information processing, leading to impaired performance. Kevin asks Hans what empirical and scientific evidence exists for the hypothesis. [00:32:03] Ken explains that working all hours of the day and suffering chronic sleep restriction, and at times sleep deprivation, has become normalized in our society. In light of this, Ken asks what impacts sleep deprivation and sleep restriction have on the cognitive performance and overall health. [00:34:02] Ken asks Hans to elaborate on the fact that sleep deprivation is particularly problematic and potent with regards to decision-making when circumstances are uncertain or unexpected. [00:38:40] Ken asks Hans what his thoughts are on stimulant use for workers and operators who need to stay awake for extended periods. [00:41:43] Hans discusses how contrary to popular belief, even modest amounts of sleep loss can have negative impacts on cognitive and physical performance. [00:46:40] Kevin asks Hans about the common belief that people can adapt to chronic sleep restriction. [00:49:29] Hans describes his work with the Psychomotor Vigilance Test (PVT), which requires participants to respond as quickly as possible to a stimulus that appears at random intervals. [00:52:46] Kevin mentions that Hans published a review paper in 2019 with Amanda Hudson and Kimberly Han in Neuropsychopharmacology. This paper points out that research on sleep deprivation, vigilant attention, and brain function may help determine the fixed connections and malleable connections between specific neuronal pathways involved in specific cognitive processes. [00:56:22] Ken mentions that to better understand the neurocognitive effects of sleep deprivation, Hans performed a study that evaluated the strategy of ‘catching up on sleep’ a practice many people engage in during periods where sleep restriction is inevitably followed by abundant free time. Ken asks Hans to discuss the design of this study and its findings. [01:06:41] Kevin pivots back to Hans’ study on sleep restriction and deprivation. According to the study, a person who is chronically sleep deprived experiences diminishing performance, and if that person undergoes sleep deprivation by skipping a night of sleep, their performance further diminishes. However, a person would see their performance recover within a few days of restricted sleep following sleep deprivation. Kevin asks Hans to expand on these findings. [01:10:52] Kevin asks Hans to clarify some terminology regarding sleep health, as well as explain how someone at home can assess their own sleep health. [01:15:13] Ken asks Hans what his sleep schedule is like. [01:19:22] Ken mentions that Hans was recently featured in a news article about the dreaded ‘mid-day slump’ of energy. Ken goes on to explain that while it is commonly believed that the mid-day slump can be attributed to eating lunch, Hans argues that it is the result of a gap between the circadian clock and the homeostatic clock as a result of inadequate sleep. Ken asks Hans to elaborate. [01:23:36] Ken asks if Hans thinks that the poor metabolic health of many people in North America also contributes to the mid-day slump. [01:25:19] Ken asks Hans to think of the biggest lessons he has learned about science and life during his career. [01:29:14] Kevin mentions that Hans and his wife enjoy traveling together, but that his wife has a bit of a complaint about these travels. [01:30:59] Following up on the topic of travel, Ken asks Hans how he manages jet lag. [01:34:56] Ken recommends for listeners, an app called Timeshifter for managing jet lag. [01:35:04] Ken, Kevin and Hans wrap up the interview talking about jet lag. Links: Hans Van Dongen Learn more about IHMC STEM-Talk homepage Ken Ford bio Ken Ford Wikipedia page Kevin Gluck bio          

Transcribed - Published: 27 November 2024

Today we have Dr. Rudolph E. Tanzi, who is perhaps best known for co-discovering all three familial early-onset Alzheimer’s disease genes. In addition, Rudy’s lab was the first to use human stem cells to create three-dimensional human brain organoids and three-dimensional neural-glial culture models of Alzheimer’s disease, which became known as “Alzheimer’s-in-a-Dish.” These models were the first to recapitulate all three of the key pathological hallmarks of Alzheimer’s disease and have made drug screenings faster and cheaper. Rudy is the director of the Genetics and Aging Research Unit as well as the director of the Henry and Allison McCance Center for Brain Health. Rudy is also co-Director of the Massachusetts General Institute for Neurodegenerative Disease at Massachusetts General Hospital and serves as the Joseph P. and Rose F. Kennedy Professor of Neurology at Harvard Medical School. Rudy has published more than 700 research papers and is one of the top 50 most cited neuroscientists in the world. He is author of “Decoding Darkness,” and a co-author of two books with Deepak Chopra, “Super Brain” and “The Healing Self.” Show notes: [00:03:18] Ken opens the interview mentioning that Rudy began playing the accordion when he was just seven years old. Ken goes on to ask Rudy about the time his father gave him a Jimmy Smith album and some advice. [00:05:51] Ken mentions that, in addition to Rudy’s musical talents, he was also interested in science growing up. Ken asks about Rudy’s participation in the Westinghouse Science Talent Search and what that experience was like. [00:07:09] Ken asks Rudy about growing up in Cranston, Road Island. [00:08:39] Rudy talks about how he ended up at the University of Rochester after high school. [00:09:51] Ken mentions that both Rudy’s grandfather and father passed away at the age of 45. Ken asks Rudy if this played a role in his pursuit of a career in genetics research. [00:10:57] Rudy explains how he chose Harvard Medical School for his Ph.D. [00:12:47] Ken pivots to ask Rudy about his time working with Jim Gusella in the early 80’s at Mass General, where they were the first to ever find a disease gene. Family studies at the time had shown that the Huntington’s disease gene was linked to a polymorphic DNA marker. Rudy talks about this discovery and how the chromosomal localization of the Huntington’s disease gene was the first step in using recombinant DNA technology to identify the primary genetic defect in this disorder. [00:16:07] Ken asks Rudy about his work in 1987, when he discovered the first Alzheimer’s gene, recombinant DNA technology, which causes the production of amyloid. Ken goes on to explain that mutations in the APP gene can cause a rare form of early onset Alzheimer’s. Rudy talks about the paper that came out in “Science” that detailed this discovery. [00:18:38] Rudy discusses his personal philosophy and approach to research. [00:19:43] Ken mentions that in Rudy’s book, Decoding Darkness, he writes that few nightmares on Earth can compare to Alzheimer’s disease. Ken asks Rudy to talk more about this book. [00:21:50] Ken explains that in the same way our physical capabilities will suffer some form of decline with age, it is also expected that we have some decline in memory and cognitive ability as we age as well. However, Ken goes on to say that when people begin to experience age-related memory lapses, it can lead to a lot of anxiety about their genetic predisposition to Alzheimer’s. Ken asks Rudy to talk about the lifestyle factors that play into whether someone predisposed to develop Alzheimer’s can stave off or avoid disease development. [00:26:09] Ken explains that aging appears to intensify when people stop challenging themselves with new things. Given this, Ken asks Rudy what his thoughts are on challenging our brains as they age to protect our cognitive abilities. [00:29:08] Ken asks Rudy about the principal advances in Alzheimer’s research that have occurred over the past few decades. He also asks Rudy for his thoughts on the biggest and most important mysteries that remain regarding Alzheimer’s. [00:34:48] Ken brings up one of Rudy’s papers, published in 2014, which they successfully recapitulated amyloid-β and tau pathology in a single 3D human neural cell culture system. Ken goes on to mention that this paper had a huge impact in the field of research, and even landed Rudy a spot on Time Magazine’s 100 most influential people list. [00:38:57] Ken mentions that in 2019, Rudy published another influential paper, which investigated the crosstalk between microglial receptor genes CD33 and TREM2. Ken explains that these two genes have been associated with an increased risk of Alzheimer’s disease, and that Rudy has referred to them as yin and yang to each other. Ken asks Rudy to elaborated on this concept. [00:43:00] Ken pivots to discuss Rudy’s paper that was published last year and which the press somewhat misleadingly reported on. Ken explains that physical exercise has been shown to reduce amyloid beta in various Alzheimer’s models, but it is imperfectly associated with amyloid burden in humans. Ken goes on to explain that Rudy’s paper demonstrated, for the first time, a cellular and molecular mechanism by which exercise induced irisin attenuates amyloid beta pathology. [00:46:27] Ken mentions that Rudy is currently writing a new book and mentions that some of Rudy’s previous books have been co-authored with Deepak Chopra. Ken asks how Rudy and Deepak came to work together. [00:51:24] Ken asks, given the complex nature of Alzheimer’s and the many components that contribute to the pathology, if there is a way to organize all we know about Alzheimer’s in a straight-forward way. [00:58:19] Ken asks if there are any particularly promising FDA approved drugs or nutraceuticals for stopping the production of amyloid. [01:00:16] Ken asks if Rudy gets questions regarding which drugs and supplements screened have shown the most promise. [01:03:33] Ken closes the interview by asking how he manages to be such a prolific scientist. Rudy has published more 700 papers while also having a lifetime of playing music with rock bands, working with sports teams and publishing New York Times best sellers. Links: Rudy Tanzi bio Learn more about IHMC STEM-Talk homepage Ken Ford bio Ken Ford Wikipedia page  

Transcribed - Published: 25 October 2024

Our guest today is Dr. Anurag Singh, the chief medical officer at Timeline Nutrition, a Swiss life-science company that focuses on ways to improve mitochondrial and cellular health. Anurag is particularly known for his research into the gut metabolite, urolithin-A, which has been shown to improve muscle strength, protect immune systems and optimize mitochondrial efficiency. Anurag is an MD in internal medicine with a Ph.D. in immunology. He has led more than 50 randomized clinical trials, many of them focusing on urolithin-A over the past decade. In today’s episode we talk to Anurag about his investigations into urolithin-A and the role it plays as a postbiotic that enhances mitochondrial function. Foods that contain the polyphenols needed to produce urolithin-A include pomegranates, strawberries, raspberries and walnuts. Show notes: [00:02:48] Marcas starts the interview by mentioning that Anurag grew up in India, in Lucknow, and asks what Anurag’s childhood was like. [00:03:56] Marcas follows up, asking Anurag what he was like as a kid, given the competitive environment he grew up in. [00:04:47] Ken asks Anurag if it is true that, at an early age, his parents noticed he was gifted in biology and encouraged him to think about pursuing medical school. [00:05:47] Ken asks if Anurag started medical school at only 18 years of age. [00:06:28] Marcas explains that Anurag went to India’s Armed Forces Medical College for training in internal medicine and asks if it is true that this is one of India’s top medical schools. [00:07:07] Marcas explains that it is typical for graduates from the India Armed Forces Medical College to serve a few years in the Indian army after graduation. Marcas asks Anurag to tell the story of how he was able to go to the U.S. post-graduation rather than serving time in the army. [00:08:00] Ken asks if Anurag’s interest in medical research led him to pursue a Ph.D. in immunology. [00:08:56] Ken asks Anurag what his Ph.D. research was on. [00:09:37] Marcas mentions that in 2009, Anurag accepted a position at Nestlé at a time when the company was entering into the space between food and pharma. Marcas asks Anurag how this move came about. [00:11:20] Ken explains that Anurag quickly became medical director at Nestlé and started initiating clinical trials around food and allergies, as well as research on aging and how the immune system declines with age. Ken asks Anurag to explain what his time at Nestle was like. [00:12:53] Marcas mentions how the shift from practicing physician to research scientist is an interesting course and asks Anurag to talk about a mentor who gave him the advice that led to his career shift. [00:13:55] Ken mentions that in 2014 Anurag joined a Swiss company, Amazentis, as chief medical officer, and later became the lead for their medical and clinical research strategies. Ken asks Anurag to talk about the company and the work he does. [00:15:00] Ken asks Anurag to describe the relationship between Amazentis and Timeline. [00:15:42] Marcas asks Anurag to elaborate on his biotech approach to nutrition science, and how hard biology is used in his nutritional approaches at Amazentis. [00:18:02] Marcas asks Anurag to give listeners an overview of the function and importance of mitochondria. [00:19:15] Ken asks Anurag if there are any other benefits to good mitochondrial health, other than an increased energy supply. [00:20:24] Ken asks Anurag to define the terms “mitochondrial biogenesis” and “mitophagy.” [00:22:13] Marcas pivots to discuss age-related frailty and healthspan, specifically bringing up a study Anurag conducted on a Dutch population comparing active seniors to sedentary seniors. [00:25:09] Ken mentions that Marcas likes to refer to exercise as medicine, given its potent effects on a wide variety of biomarkers. Ken asks Anurag to discuss the importance of exercise. [00:26:59] Following up on the Dutch study, Marcas mentions that there is an explosion of research into healthspan, resilience, and even lifespan, and asks Anurag to discuss the core principles of healthy aging. [00:29:14] Ken asks Marcas to give a brief aside as to the capacity, capabilities, and aims of IHMC’s new Healthspan Resilience and Performance complex. [00:31:36] Ken mentions that poor metabolic health continues to be a growing global issue. Ken asks Anurag to share his thoughts on the issue. [00:33:25] Marcas circles back to Anurag’s work at Timeline investigating natural compounds that target mitochondrial health. Marcas notes that Anurag and his colleagues found that urolithin-A outperformed every other molecule tested with respect to mitochondrial health. Urolithin-A is a natural compound produced by gut bacteria from metabolizing ellagitannins and ellagic acid, complex polyphenols found in foods such as pomegranates berries and nuts. Marcas asks Anurag to explain what these compounds are in detail. [00:35:25] Marcas asks if there are lifestyle changes one can make to improve their gut microbiome population to increase how much urolithin A one can pull from food sources. [00:37:07] Ken asks, assuming the hypothetically perfect microbiome and the perfect ellagitannin conversion, if it is possible through diet alone to produce enough urolithin A to observe considerable benefit. [00:38:51] Marcas asks if any factors, other than chronic antibiotic use, have been shown to negatively affect the gut microbiome and its ability to produce urolithin-A. [00:41:09] Marcas moves on to discuss Anurag’s 2016 paper titled “Urolithin-A induces mitophagy and prolongs lifespan in c-elegans and increases muscle function in rodents” Marcas asks Anurag to discuss the origins of this paper and the impact of its findings. [00:44:18] Ken asks if the professor that Anurag partnered with on his 2016 paper ever investigated rapamycin as opposed to metformin. [00:45:08] Ken asks if the primary mechanism of action regarding urolithin-A’s effect on mitophagy is known or if we have only seen a strong association with other mechanisms of mitophagy and autophagy. [00:46:14] Marcas explains that in the progression of aging and a sedentary lifestyle, there is a decline in a cell’s ability to eliminate dysfunctional elements through autophagy and mitophagy. This decreased capacity specifically in skeletal muscle has been associated with poor muscle health and quality in older adults. Marcas asks about a 2019 paper Anurag wrote that detailed the results of his first human clinical trial in which he administered urolithin-A to sedentary but otherwise healthy adults. [00:49:35] Marcas mentions that exercise also activates mitophagy, and asks if there are any key cellular, or mechanistic, differences between exercise and urolithin-A in their effects on mitochondrial health. [00:50:49] Ken mentions that Anurag’s research on urolithin-A led to the development of Mitopure, which is the first postbiotic nutrient that has been shown to trigger mitophagy by targeting cellular decline. Ken goes on to mention that in 2022, Anurag published the paper “Urolithin-A improves muscle strength, exercise performance, and biomarkers of mitochondrial health in a randomized trial in middle aged adults” in which subjects were given oral doses of Mitopure. Ken asks Anurag to discuss this paper and its findings. [00:54:37] Ken asks Anurag to discuss the specific contents of each package of Mitopure. [00:56:19] Ken mentions that many therapies targeting mitochondrial health seem to only be effective when there is some defect or problem with the mitochondria. Ken asks Anurag’s why it seems that mitochondrial therapies can only return mitochondrial functioning to baseline rather than increase performance above baseline. [00:58:15] Maras asks Anurag if he thinks that Mitopure is best used as a supplement to healthy lifestyle choices such as exercise, rather than a replacement for them. [00:59:42] Ken pivots to talk about the sources of urolithin A, one of which being Iberian pigs, which consume a diet almost exclusively of acorns, which are rich in ellagitannins. Ken asks if the urolithin-A in Iberian pigs can be found in the ham meat itself. [01:01:45] Marcas mentions Anurag’s paper published in the journal Aging Cell, which showed that Mitopure supplementation had potential to improve mitochondrial functioning in human cartilage. In this study, Anurag demonstrated that Mitopure supplementation for eight weeks, protected against osteoarthritic disease progression. Marcas asks Anurag to talk about this potential. [01:04:03] Ken mentions that much of the research on urolithin-A has been conducted on its effects on skeletal muscle; however, urolithin-A also would be expected to have effects on other mitochondrially dense tissue as well. Ken asks if there has been any research on urolithin-A’s effects on tissues like liver or cardiac tissue. [01:06:23] In response to Anurag mentioning the Buck institute’s research with urolithin-A, Ken mentions that we discussed urolithin-A at length with Buck institute researcher Julie Andersen on episode 118. [01:07:34] Moving on to Anurag’s current research, Marcas asks about a randomized controlled trial in collaboration with the Buck Institute to see if urolithin-A can improve the immune health of middle-aged adults by improving mitochondria health. [01:11:17] Ken asks about a recently completed randomized controlled trial looking at elite runners to determine whether overtraining induces mitochondrial dysfunction and whether urolithin-A has an impact on muscle recovery. [01:14:40] Ken mentions that with all the interest growing in urolithin-A, there is an explosion of supplements on the market, which one cannot know the true composition or quality of. Ken asks Anurag if he has any advice for consumers who might want to try urolithin-A. [01:17:28] Marcas closes the interview asking Anurag how he likes to spend his free time. Links: Anurag Singh bio Anurag Singh ResearchGate Learn more about IHMC STEM-Talk homepage Ken Ford bio Ken Ford Wikipedia page Marcas Bamman bio  

Transcribed - Published: 23 September 2024

Few people know as much about inflammation and neuroscience as Dr. Kevin Tracey does. In this episode of STEM-Talk, we learn much from Tracey, who was the first to identify the inflammatory reflex, a physiological mechanism that regulates the body’s immune response to injury and invasion. He is a neurosurgeon, a pioneer in bioelectrical medicine and president and CEO of the Feinstein Institutes for Medical Research in Manhasset, N.Y. The conversation in this episode covers a career spent working on “producing tomorrow’s cures today” in the treatment of inflammatory diseases, including: How the death of his mother from a brain tumor when Tracey was 5 years old ultimately influenced his scientific journey. How the death of a young patient of his from sepsis further fueled his path, leading him to the insight that “good science begins with hard questions,” as Tracey shared in a TedTalk.  The molecular mechanisms of inflammation and the use of vagus nerve stimulation to treat it. His 1987 discovery of tumor necrosis factor (TNF), which contributed to a new class of drugs for inflammatory and autoimmune diseases. Another discovery that allowed him and his colleagues to merge neuroscience and immunology. His work on “The Inflammatory Reflex”, which emphasized the basic neural pathway that reflexively monitors and adjusts the inflammatory response. A sketch he drew while having lunch, which laid out how treating inflammatory diseases using a bioelectronic device might be possible. What advances in bioelectronic medicine he envisions in the next decade, and much more. [00:03:04] Dawn asks Kevin to tell the story of how he developed an interest in science that evolved into him becoming a neurosurgeon. [00:04:56] Dawn mentions that Kevin was a curious youth and asks if it is true that after getting his first car, Kevin removed the entire engine because he wanted to better understand how to do a valve job. [00:06:33] Ken mentions that after Kevin graduated from high school, he enrolled in Boston College where he earned a bachelor’s degree in chemistry. Ken explains that Kevin went to Boston University Medical School for his M.D. and asks Kevin about the transition. [00:08:41] Ken asks if it is true that during Kevin’s first year at medical school his classmates had better luck finding him on the golf course than in the classroom. [00:10:42] Dawn asks Kevin about his transition from medical school to the neurological surgery training program at New York Hospital, home of the Cornell University Medical College. [00:13:11] Dawn pivots to talk about sepsis, which kills more than 350,000 people annually. She asks Kevin to discuss his tragic story of treating a patient with sepsis as a young neurosurgeon and how that changed the trajectory of his career. [00:16:38] Ken explains that since the aforementioned incident, Kevin has focused on determining why septic shock occurs. Ken refers to a Ted Talk of Kevin’s in which he says, “good science begins with hard questions.” Ken asks Kevin to elaborate on this point. [00:20:49] Dawn mentions that Kevin often describes himself as a brain surgeon who is fascinated by inflammation. Dawn asks Kevin how he responds when people ask him what inflammation is. [00:22:29] Ken follows up by explaining that in 1987 Kevin made progress investigating inflammation with his discovery of tumor necrosis factor (TNF), which contributed to a new class of drugs for inflammatory and autoimmune diseases. Ken asks Kevin to discuss this discovery. [00:25:56] Dawn mentions that in the late ‘90s, Kevin made another discovery that allowed him and his colleagues to merge neuroscience and immunology. Before getting into that discovery, Dawn asks Kevin to explain how humans have simple reflex circuits that harmonize the activity of our organs. She also asks him to talk about Charles Sherrington’s Nobel Prize-winning research, which laid the groundwork for contemporary neuroscience by showing how reflex circuits are the building blocks of our nervous system. [00:29:50] Ken asks Kevin to elaborate on what monoclonal antibodies are, what disorders they can be used to treat, and what their potential benefits and downsides are. [00:33:10] Dawn asks Kevin to talk about the discovery he made in the late 1990s, while studying the possibility of blocking TNF during a cerebral infarction or stroke by injecting a molecule that he and his colleagues developed directly into the brain. [00:35:59] Ken mentions that after this discovery, Kevin started looking into well-established methods in neuroscience, such as those that link specific areas of the brain to specific cognitive functions and asks Kevin to discuss this research. [00:39:45] Dawn explains that the insight that discrete brain regions control specific behaviors led Kevin to postulate that cutting the circuits connecting the brain and organs could reveal the identity of specific areas that control TNF. Dawn asks Kevin to walk through how he investigated this hypothesis. [00:44:22] Ken asks Kevin to give an overview of the functions of the vagus nerve. [00:46:00] Ken mentions that our show notes will provide a link to a short video that maps out the vagus nerve in detail. Ken goes on to mention that after Kevin looked into the relationship between TNF and the vagus nerve, he theorized that the TNF off signal from the vagus nerve completes a nerve circuit between the brain and the immune system. This finding had broad implications, and Ken asks Kevin to elaborate on them. [00:50:57] Dawn mentions that Kevin wrote an article in 2002 for the journal Nature titled “The Inflammatory Reflex”, which emphasized the basic neural pathway that research had identified which reflexively monitors and adjusts the inflammatory response. Dawn goes on to mention that Kevin coined the term “inflammatory reflex” to describe how the nervous system monitors and controls the circuit to prevent the immune system from becoming overactive or underactive. Additionally, Kevin proposed in this article that it might be possible to activate neural anti-inflammatory mechanisms using small molecules to initiate signals in the central nervous system. Dawn asks Kevin to give an overview of the key insights into the inflammatory reflex he discussed in that article. [00:54:15] Ken comments on the monumental importance of this paper to the field of neuro-immunology, and the treatment of inflammatory diseases, and asks Kevin what the response to this paper was. [00:57:30] Dawn explains that Kevin has proposed that a dysregulated inflammatory reflex can lead to toxicity, tissue damage, and the presence of cytokines. It also can lead to miscommunication among cytokines leading to potential complications with autoimmune diseases. Dawn asks Kevin to talk about the process of testing this theory. [01:00:54] Dawn asks Kevin about a sketch he drew while having lunch, which laid out how treating inflammatory diseases using a bioelectronic device might be possible. [01:05:18] Ken pivots to talking about an influential 2016 paper that Kevin wrote on how the stimulation of the vagus nerve targeted the inflammatory reflex. [01:08:23] Ken asks if there are any adverse effects suspected or identified for stimulating the vagus nerve in humans. [01:12:02] Ken mentions that in writing about the vagus nerve Kevin has often talked about how the vagus nerve can get “out of tune.” Ken asks Kevin to explain how this occurs and what it means. [01:14:41] Dawn mentions a study that Kevin spearheaded, which found that the dorsal motor nucleus is an important brain stem locus controlling anti-inflammatory signals and the inflammatory reflex. Dawn asks Kevin to discuss this study and how it was the first to demonstrate that neurons in the brain stem nuclei control the production of TNF. [01:17:51] Dawn asks about a study Kevin and his colleagues conducted that looked at the use of an implanted vagus nerve stimulator in a small group of patients with Crohn’s disease. [01:20:55] Ken asks Kevin what advances in bioelectronic medicine he envisions in the next decade. [01:23:23] Ken mentions that the pharmaceutical industry is likely keeping a close eye on the development of bioelectronic medicine. [01:24:25] Dawn mentions that Kevin is the president and CEO of the Feinstein Institute for Medical Research at Northwell Health, which has 50 research labs, and more than 5,000 researchers and staff on board. Dawn asks Kevin to talk about this research center and the range of work that goes on there. [01:27:29] After mentioning that Kevin holds 120 U.S. patents, Ken asks Kevin about his ongoing tinkering and development of inventions. [01:30:22] Dawn asks Kevin, with all the work he has on his plate, if he still finds time to golf. Links: Kevin Tracey bio Feinstein Institutes for Medical Research Learn more about IHMC STEM-Talk homepage Ken Ford bio Ken Ford Wikipedia page Dawn Kernagis bio

Transcribed - Published: 5 September 2024

In today’s Ask Me Anything episode, Ken and Dawn answer a wide range of questions that cover: A recent FDA approval of a neural implant device for people with degenerative neuromuscular disease or spinal-cord injuries. Global security in the age of AI. A study that looked at ways to optimize glymphatic clearance for people with acute or chronic sleep deprivation. Why more gyms don’t offer blood-flow restriction classes for their clients. Developments in the realm of Generative AI. The tradeoffs between a low-carb diet versus a ketogenic diet. A study on Alzheimer’s titled, “APOE 4 Homozygosity Represents a Distinct Genetic Form of Alzheimer’s Disease.” Plus, Ken reveals his favorite science-fiction author. [00:02:38] Dawn opens the episode with a question for Ken about the FDA’s recent approval of a neural implant device which is touted as a means of allowing people with degenerative neuromuscular disease, or spinal-cord injuries, to interface with external technology via neural signals. The listener asks Ken for his insights into what is being called “brain-computer interface technologies.” [00:05:44] A listener asks Ken if he has a favorite science-fiction writer, or if there is a particular sci-fi series/story that really moves him. [00:08:48] Multiple listeners ask Ken about a paper recently published titled: “APOE 4 Homozygosity Represents a Distinct Genetic Form of Alzheimer’s Disease.” Listeners ask if it is true that people with two copies of APOE4 allele are certain to develop the disease. [00:19:30] A listener asks Ken about his time on the National Security Commission on Artificial Intelligence. The commission issued its report five years ago with specific recommendations on how the government should prepare for and defend against the national security implications of AI. Ken shares his thoughts on the implementation of the commission’s recommendations. [00:21:16] A listener asks Dawn about her collaboration with Dr. Jeff Iliff that looked at a potential approach to optimizing glymphatic clearance for people with acute or chronic sleep deprivation. [00:27:10] A listener asks Ken why more gyms and physical therapy centers don’t have blood flow restriction devices (BFR) available for their clientele, given that studies have shown that BFR improves strength and muscle mass in both young and older adults. (Two STEM-Talk episodes that cover blood-flow restriction include episode 34 and episode 161. [00:28:38] A listener asks Ken for his thoughts on AI given the recent developments in the field, particularly in the realm of Generative AI, with programs like Chat GPT becoming a household name. The listener mentions that one of their friends thinks that AI is about to peak, and another says that AI is just getting warmed up. [00:37:00] A listener writes that they are astounded at how many disorders can be treated with a ketogenic diet and mentions that they themselves have difficulty with a ketogenic diet. Instead, the listener eats low-carb diet and asks if the benefits of a low-carb, non-ketogenic diet are similar to a ketogenic one. [00:38:19] A listener asks if Ken could talk about carotid scans and if this is a test that those with high LDL should consider getting. [00:40:17] A 72-year-old listener explains how they structure their daily exercise routine between resistance and endurance training. The listener asks Ken whether they should focus more on resistance training as they are beginning to lose strength, and if so, how they should implement that given their age and the increasing risk for injury. [00:45:51] To wrap up this episode, a listener asks Ken if he has any new annoyance that he would like to share, as he did in 2022, when he noted his disdain for the phrase “new normal” and the prevalence of cellphone addiction. Links: Learn more about IHMC STEM-Talk homepage Ken Ford bio Ken Ford Wikipedia page Dawn Kernagis bio

Transcribed - Published: 8 August 2024

Today Dr. David LeMay steps in to co-host with Dr. Ken Ford for our interview with Dr. Charles Serhan. Charles is a Harvard professor best known for his discovery of specialized pro-resolving mediators. SPMs are molecules that can activate the natural resolution of inflammation and help people avoid anti-inflammatory drugs. The discovery of SPMs spurred a paradigm shift in our understanding of inflammation and human disease. Charles is the Simon Gelman Professor of Anesthesia at Harvard Medical School and the director of the Center for Experimental Therapeutics and Reperfusion Injury at Brigham and Women’s Hospital. He also is a co-director of the Brigham Research Institute. David, who was our guest on Episode 69 of STEM-Talk, is a sports medicine and rehabilitation physician with a Pensacola, Florida practice that focuses on lifestyle and performance medicine. He also is a visiting research scientist here at IHMC. Show notes [00:03:33] David opens the interview mentioning that Charles grew up in New York City with a passion for music. David explains that Charles learned to play the vibraphone in junior high and played professionally for a year before going to college. David asks Charles why he decided to pursue science instead of music. [00:04:22] Ken asks Charles what kind of vibraphone he plays. [00:06:02] Ken asks, aside from the desire to help people, if there was something particular about studying science that Charles really enjoyed. [00:06:45] David asks about Charles’ experience at the State University of New York at Stonybrook studying biochemistry and immunohistochemistry. [00:07:16] David asks if there was any carry over of skills for Charles from his career in music to his career in science. [00:08:16] Ken mentions that after Charles earned his bachelor’s degree, one of his professors persuaded him to go to New York University for a master’s and Ph.D. Ken also mentions that at the time Charles worked in the lab of Gerald Wiseman at Woods Hole Marine Biological Laboratory and asks about that experience. [00:12:37] David asks if this experience led Charles to a focus on neutrophil membrane remodeling for his Ph.D. [00:13:59] David asks Charles if it was at the Karolinska Institute where he met his future wife. [00:14:38] Ken asks Charles about one of his mentors, Michael Heidelberg, who gave Charles advice about how to be a good scientist. [00:17:13] David explains that in the 1990’s Charles discovered Specialized Pro-Resolution Mediators and has since pioneered a new field on the utility of SPMs for a variety of inflammatory diseases. [00:25:01] Ken backs up to ask Charles what drew him to study inflammation in the first place and how that led him to do more research on the subject than any other scientist. [00:26:26] David asks Charles to touch on some different types of inflammation that the body experiences. [00:35:12] Ken asks Charles about how a trip to Asia during which he developed a hole in his intestines, resulted in first-hand experience on the importance of controlling inflammation. [00:41:00] David asks if Charles was taking any non-steroidal anti-inflammatory medications when he developed peritonitis. [00:41:53] David asks Charles to explain what non-steroidal anti-inflammatory medications do to the healing process. [00:45:35] David brings up a recent discovery in animal models that as animals age, their ability to produce resolution mediators declines, possibly contributing to the loss of muscle mass with age. [00:48:09] Ken asks Charles to talk about the explosion of research into the potential therapeutic applications of SPMs in the treatment of a variety of chronic diseases known to be driven in part by chronic inflammation. [00:51:06] David asks Charles to explain the differences between resolvins, protectins, and maresins, as well as what role each plays in the healing process. [00:56:04] Ken mentions a review article that Charles published in 2017 in the Journal of Molecular Aspects of Medicine, which looked at SPMs and their capacity to change pharmacology through resolution physiology. [01:00:22] David asks Charles to explain the difference between inflammation and resolution. [01:03:13] Ken asks Charles to give an overview of the research he is currently conducting at the Serhan Laboratory. [01:05:50] David asks Charles about a paper he published last year in the Proceedings of National Academy of Sciences titled: “Resolvin D1 Prevents Injurious Neutrophil Swarming in Transplanted Lungs.” This provided insights for therapeutically enhancing pro-resolution pathways to minimize early leukocyte mediated tissue injury and promote healing following transplantation. [01:08:43] David asks Charles if the aforementioned use of Resolvin D1 works for ailments such as ischemic stroke or ischemic myocardium after a cardiac event. Charles brings up a paper by Gabrielle Fredman that explored the use of resolvins to reduce inflammation in atherosclerosis. [01:13:10] David mentions that Charles has three children, two of whom are in the military and asks for Charles’ thoughts on the use of SPMs in military populations. [01:17:04] David asks Charles if there might be any protective effects of taking SPMs prior to or during exposure to extreme environments. [01:17:48] Ken comments on Charles’ use of the phrase “nutritional armor,” coined by Joe Hibbeln. Charles talks about his experience working with Joe over the years. [01:19:00] Ken recounts an experience when he was a member of the Defense Science Board and invited Joe Hibbeln to present his nutritional armor concept to the Board. [01:22:05] David mentions that for the sports science world, recovery is a big focus. David asks if resolution is a more appropriate way to approach this issue than traditional anti-inflammatory interventions. [01:23:33] David follows up asking Charles what the role of sleep is in resolution. [01:24:57] David shares some of his experience using SPMs in his practice, and Ken mentions his own personal use of SPMs. Charles discusses how SPMs are derived and the importance of supplementation. [01:31:04] Ken mentions that there were two books that Charles found very influential in his early career, “The Art of Scientific Investigation,” and “Men Like Gods.” Ken asks how these books impacted Charles, and if he still recommends them to young scientists and graduate students. Links: Charles Serhan bio Learn more about IHMC STEM-Talk homepage Ken Ford bio Ken Ford Wikipedia page David LeMay bio

Transcribed - Published: 18 July 2024

Dave Feldman is the founder of the Citizen Science Foundation and is known for his research into the ketogenic diet. Dave is a software engineer by training who embraced a ketogenic diet to avoid his progression toward type 2 diabetes. he joins us on this episode of STEM-Talk to share that journey. After undertaking the high-fat/low-carbohydrate diet, Dave’ LDL cholesterol spiked. Dave used his training as an engineer to start learning everything he could about cholesterol and lipids. What he learned led him to create the website Cholesterol Code, a research hub for information and emerging data on cholesterol, particularly in the context of a low-carbohydrate lifestyle. Dave’s Citizen Science Foundation is designed to support projects and research that promote collaborative efforts across multiple disciplines, both in and outside formal scientific institutions. Show notes: [00:02:53] Dawn opens the interview asking Dave what he was like as a kid. [00:03:44] Dawn mentions that Dave divided his time as a child between Denver and Wichita due to his parents’ divorce and asks Dave what the best part of his childhood was. [00:04:28] Ken mentions that Dave has described both his parents as graphic artists and Bohemian, “hippie spirit” types. Ken asks what he learned from them that fueled his interests and goals. [00:05:46] Ken asks about Dave’s first computer, which was a Commodore 64, as well as his early experience with computers. [00:08:50] Dawn mentions that Dave’s interest in computers came in a time before the internet and asks what he learned about computing in those days. [00:10:51] Dawn explains that since Dave grew up in the 1980s, there was not much in the way of computer science curriculum in schools and asks Dave how he supported his interest in programming. [00:12:33] Ken asks Dave about how self-directed learning has been a theme throughout his whole life. [00:14:35] Dawn asks Dave about his childhood hobbies, including running and competitive storytelling. [00:17:01] Ken asks how Dave’s experiences in forensic debate in high school helped his career later in life. [00:18:56] Dawn mentions that Dave initially attended film school and asks if it is true that Dave’s side hustle of doing contract software work overtook his original plan to graduate. [00:20:49] Dawn asks about Dave’s experiences working in the game platform development business in Las Vegas, as well as what these experiences taught him. [00:22:23] Ken asks Dave about a “the piece of paper” that Dave says changed his life in 2015. [00:28:58] Ken follows up, asking Dave if he checked his LDL-P or his ApoB at the same time as his cholesterol levels. [00:30:37] Ken mentions that he knows some people that when consuming a ketogenic diet did not see a substantial increase in LDL-C, but did experience a substantial elevation of LDL-P. [00:35:03] Ken pivots to discuss a paper that Dave and others published in Current Developments in Nutrition in 2022 titled: “Elevated LDL Cholesterol with a Carbohydrate-Restricted Diet: Evidence for Lean Mass Hyper-Responder Phenotype.” Ken asks Dave to describe what it means to be a lean mass hyper-responder. [00:40:19] Ken mentions his caution against the term lean mass hyper-responder, as it is unclear what “lean mass” refers to in this case. Ken goes on to say that while the lean mass hyper-responder phenotype can be objectively measured in terms of LDL, HDL and triglyceride levels, the lean mass aspect is often measured in these studies with BMI, which is unable to measure body composition. Ken asks Dave what his thoughts are on this and if he would like the possibility of moving away from BMI and towards DEXA scans. [00:43:37] Ken mentions that Dave’s original article describing the lean mass hyper-responder phenotype has received a lot of response from individuals claiming to fall into that category. While it is difficult to get a precise estimate of the population that fits this phenotype, Ken asks Dave what he thinks the percentage might be. [00:47:33] Dawn asks about the case report published in Frontiers in Endocrinology in 2022 titled: “Case Report: Hypercholesterolemia, Lean Mass Hyper-Responder Phenotype Presents in the Context of a Low Saturated Fat Carbohydrate-Restricted Diet.” This paper highlights the case of a hyper-responder who adopted a ketogenic diet to manage ulcerative colitis.   [00:49:38] Ken asks how long the subject of the case report was on an extremely low-carb diet. [00:50:48] Ken asks Dave, given that cholesterol levels and lipoproteins are remarkably elevated in lean mass hyper-responders, what he thinks the cumulative cardiovascular implications over an extended period might be. [00:56:19] Dawn turns to discuss Dave’s 2022 paper on the Lipid Energy Model, titled: “Lipid Energy Model: Reimagining Lipoprotein Function in the Context of Carbohydrate Restricted Diets,” asking him to expound on the concept and its significance. [00:59:02] Ken remarks on the extraordinarily fast review process for this paper on the Lipid Energy Model, explaining that the paper went through submission, review, revision, acceptance and publishing in 30 days. [01:00:49] Dawn shifts to ask about a 2023 study by Dr. Isabella Cooper in Frontiers in Endocrinology titled: “Thyroid Markers and Body Composition Predict LDL Cholesterol Change in Lean Healthy Women on a Ketogenic Diet: Experimental evidence for the Lipid Energy Model.” [01:02:48] Ken asks Dave about his journey to self-fund research through crowdfunding, for which he founded a 501c3 non-for-profit, which in 2019 was named the Citizen Science Foundation. Ken asks Dave what challenges he faced in this endeavor. [01:05:47] Ken asks Dave to describe how he came to partner with the Lundquist institute at UCLA. [01:08:33] Ken asks what the state of the Citizen Science Foundation is now, and if it has any projects that it is currently funding. [01:09:57] Ken asks Dave how he sees the foundation evolving in the future and how he would like it to evolve. [01:11:50] Dawn asks Dave about a study he and his team have just completed on 100 lean mass hyper-responders who received a CT Angiogram to establish baseline coronary artery status, and then a second scan a year later. Dawn asks Dave to discuss the findings of this study in terms of atherosclerotic plaque in the hyper-responder group as compared to the Miami Heart Study group, as well as the overall findings of the study. [01:17:36] Ken follows up, asking if the results of the aforementioned study will be published soon. [01:17:54] Dawn asks Dave about the documentary he is working on. [01:19:53] Dawn closes the interview asking Dave why The Usual Suspects by Brian Singer is his favorite film. Links: Dave Feldman bio Learn more about IHMC STEM-Talk homepage Ken Ford bio Ken Ford Wikipedia page Dawn Kernagis bio  

Transcribed - Published: 21 June 2024

Dr. Alessio Fasano, who is considered the world’s leading expert in celiac disease and gluten-related disorders, returns for his second appearance on STEM-Talk. Although just 2 million Americans have celiac disease, an estimated 20 million Americans suffer from gluten sensitivity. Alessio is a professor and director of the Mucosal Immunology and Biology Research Center at Massachusetts General Hospital. In addition to celiac disease and gluten-related disorders, Alessio’s research is also focused on the microbiome, intestinal permeability and autoimmune disorders, which he discussed in his first interview on STEM-Talk, episode 20. Since Alessio’s first appearance on STEM-Talk in 2016, he has published two books, “Gluten Freedom” and “Gut Feelings: The Microbiome and Our Health,” which we discuss in today’s interview. We also talk to Alessio about an exciting new project that’s bringing together an international consortium of researchers and scientists for a long-term study that will follow infants who are genetically at risk of developing celiac. Alessio is a researcher and physician who wears many hats. He is the director of the Center for Celiac Research and Treatment and chief of the Division of Pediatric Gastroenterology and Nutrition at Mass General Hospital. He also is a professor of pediatrics at Harvard Medical School and a professor of nutrition at Harvard’s T.H. Chan School of Public Health. Show notes: [00:03:58] Marcas opens the interview welcoming Alessio back to STEM-Talk, mentioning that since his last appearance he has written two books: Gluten Freedom and Gut Feelings: The Microbiome and Our Health. Marcas asks Alessio how he became interested in pediatrics and gastroenterology. [00:05:42] Ken mentions that Alessio moved to the U.S. in the 1990s and spent 20 years in Maryland at the Center for Vaccine Development in Baltimore. Ken goes on to mention that while Alessio was there, he founded The Center for Celiac Research in 1996, and in 2003, Alessio accepted an offer to join Massachusetts General Hospital. Ken asks how that move came about. [00:08:53] Marcas asks about Alessio’s early career working on cholera, where he discovered the zonula occuldens toxin, the bacteria that causes cholera. Marcas asks Alessio to talk about this finding and the insights he gleaned from it. [00:16:03] Ken asks about Alessio’s discovery of zonulin, which is the molecule that modulates gut permeability in humans. Ken asks Alessio to share how this discovery led him to investigate celiac disease, which is triggered by gluten. [00:20:25] Ken asks Alessio what his thoughts are on why the medical community, historically, has not taken celiac disease seriously. [00:24:08] Marcas mentions that as we age, there is evidence that the gut becomes leakier, which is highly related to chronic inflammation. Marcas asks Alessio whether this happens to the gut over time due to diet and lifestyle rather than the typical aging process. [00:28:45] Ken mentions that there has been an increase in the diagnosis of celiac disease. Ken asks Alessio if that is due to an actual increase in the prevalence of the disease, or is it tied to a growing appreciation that clinicians have now for the disease? [00:29:32] Marcas mentions that Alessio’s book, Gluten Freedom, which he co-authored with his colleague Susie Flaherty, was referred to by the Celiac Disease Foundation as “a must have,” and “an excellent reference for those with gluten related disorders.” Marcas asks Alessio about this reception to his book. [00:31:24] Marcas mentions that the only viable treatment for individuals with celiac disease has been a gluten-free diet, with pharmaceutical companies having had little interest until recently in investigating the disease. Now there are more than 20 drug therapies in development for celiac. Marcas asks Alessio about the progress being made to develop pharmacological interventions for celiac. [00:34:17] Ken mentions that gluten sensitivity affects more than 20 million Americans. This sensitivity is when a person reacts negatively to the gluten protein but does not test positive for celiac. Ken mentions that this condition is often underappreciated by physicians and asks Alessio to discuss gluten sensitivity and its impact. [00:40:41] Marcas points out that celiac disease is a disorder with genetic components. A group of genes called HLADQ and DQI genes are involved in the development of the disease. About a third of the population inherits these genes, but not everyone who possesses them will develop celiac. Marcas asks Alessio to elaborate on this phenomenon. [00:42:51] Marcas asks Alessio to talk briefly about his book Gluten Freedom. [00:43:40] Ken asks about the experience Alessio had working with Bob Prior at MIT Press, the publisher of Gluten Freedom. [00:47:07] Ken mentions that Alessio has expressed in the past that he does not like the term “leaky gut,” which can be offered as a diagnosis, and asks Alessio why that is. [00:49:38] Ken mentions Alessio gave a talk in 2018 at the Institute for Functional Medicine’s annual conference titled: “Autoimmunity and the Interplay of Genes and the Environment.” Ken explains that this talk began by pointing out that medicine is still largely ignorant of certain aspects of human biology, and how and why people get sick. Ken asks Alessio to discuss the main points of this talk. [00:52:21] Ken mentions that in researching “Gluten Freedon” that Alessio consulted with Claire Fraser who was our guest on episode 32. Ken asks Alessio how he met Claire. [00:55:28] Marcas pivots to talk about Alessio’s current work, namely his recent project “The Celiac Disease Genomic Environmental Microbiome and Metabolomics Study.” Marcas goes on to explain that this project will follow infants from birth through childhood in an effort to better understand the many factors that contribute to the development of celiac. [01:06:12] Ken mentions that for this study, Alessio recruited not only American families but also participants from Spain and Italy, asking what the rationale was for those populations. [01:07:14] Marcas asks if the overarching goal of this study is to pave the way for personalized prevention of celiac disease. [01:08:37] Marcas asks about a paper Alessio published in the American Journal of Gastroenterology titled: “Early Antibody Dynamics in a Prospective Cohort of Children At-Risk for Celiac Disease,” which aimed to identify possible serum biomarkers that could help predict celiac disease in at-risk children. Marcas asks Alessio to talk about the design of this study and its findings. [01:10:14] Ken pivots to talk about a study Alessio published earlier this year in the Journal Pediatrics on zonulin. Ken explains that this study evolved from the observation that increased intestinal permeability appears to be a key factor in several autoimmune diseases including celiac. However, the question remains whether increased permeability of the intestines precedes disease onset or if it is a consequence of disease onset. Ken asks Alessio to touch on this study and its findings. [01:11:41] Marcas mentions that as a pediatric gastroenterologist, Alessio also works with children on the autism spectrum, who in addition to social challenges and repetitive behaviors deal with a variety of symptoms. Marcas asks Alessio to talk about his experience working with these children. [01:16:27] Ken mentions that when we last had Alessio on STEM-Talk, he was in the middle of renovating a 13th century monastery into the European Biomedical Research Institute of Salerno. Ken asks Alessio to give an update on this project. [01:19:54] Marcas mentions that Alessio’s son, Stefan, has joined IHMC as a research associate. Marcas asks Alessio how Stefan is liking it here at IHMC. [01:22:56] Marcas ends the interview asking Alessio if he will write another book. Links: Learn more about IHMC STEM-Talk homepage Ken Ford bio Ken Ford Wikipedia page Marcas Bamman Alessio Fasano

Transcribed - Published: 22 May 2024

Today we have Dr. Nicholas Norwitz, 28, a third-year Harvard Medical School student whose research into the applications of a ketogenic diet as metabolic medicine has attracted a significant following. For a number of years during his youth, Nick suffered from a number of debilitating diseases, including osteoporosis, ulcerative colitis, and inflammatory bowel disease.  In today’s interview, we talk to Nick about research that led him to adopt a ketogenic diet that put him back on the road to metabolic health. After graduating from Dartmouth College in 2018 with a degree in cellular and molecular biology, Nick attended Oxford University where he earned a Ph.D. in metabolism and nutrition. He is the author of peer-reviewed scientific papers and textbook chapters on topics including Alzheimer’s disease, cardiovascular disease, diabetes, gastrointestinal health, genetics osteology and Parkinson’s disease. Show notes:  [00:02:53] Marcas opens the interview mentioning that Neck grew up in Boston, and asks if it’s true that he was a very curious kid growing up. [00:04:09] Marcas asks Nick if as a young child he always knew he wanted to be a physician and a scientist. [00:05:40] Ken mentions that Nick was a runner in high school, and as is the case with many runners, this led to fractures. However, Ken goes on to say that these fractures did not resolve for Nick, and asks what he learned as a result. [00:11:08] Ken asks about Nick’s eating habits in college as he loved to cook and bake. [00:15:40] Marcas follows up, asking Nick at what point during his Ph.D. training was he admitted to palliative care. [00:21:01] Marcas pivots to talk about the need for incorporating metabolic health into our health-care system. He mentions that Nick once said that “we live in a society where our social norms and ecosystem, with respect to health and food, are extremely dysfunctional,” and asks Nick to elaborate on this. [00:26:16] Ken mentions a paper that Nick recently published titled, “Oreo Cookie Treatment Lowers LDL Cholesterol More Than High Intensity Statin Therapy in a Lean Mass Hyper-Responder on the Ketogenic Diet: A Curious Crossover Study.” To provide some background, Ken mentions that some people on a ketogenic or low carb diet experience a dramatic increase in LDL cholesterol. The rationale behind Nick’s paper being that if it is the removal of carbohydrates that causes this increase in LDL, adding carbohydrates back into one’s diet should bring LDL levels back down. Ken asks Nick to talk about this experiment and how he designed it. [00:35:44] Ken mentions that the paper seems to be designed to be provocative, as simply testing carbohydrates against statins would likely have not gotten as much attention as using Oreo cookies. [00:37:00] Marcas mentions that in the Oreo cookie vs statin experiment, Nick’s original fasted-morning LDL was 384, before dropping it with Oreos, then doing a washout before dropping it again with statins. Marcas asks Nick what his fasted-morning LDL was post washout, prior to the statin intervention. [00:39:07] Marcas brings up Nick’s paper titled: “The Lipid Energy Model: Reimagining Lipoprotein Function in the Context of Carbohydrate Restricted Diets.” Marcas goes on to mention that the aim of the paper was to propose a mechanistic explanation for the “lean mass hyper-responder phenotype.” Marcas asks Nick to give listeners an overview of the lipid-energy model. [00:45:18] Ken mentions that according to Nick, BMI is not a requirement for classification as a lean mass hyper-responder. Nick’s paper, however, uses BMI data. Ken mentions that he finds BMI relatively useless and asks why Nick did not use DEXA scans instead. [00:48:52] Ken mentions that adipose tissue contains roughly 25 percent of total body cholesterol, and we know that LDL binding to adipose cell membranes is competitively inhibited by HDL. Ken asks if lean mass hyper-responders were found to have low fat mass as a defining feature, how might this effect the lipid panel in terms of LDL-C. [00:50:50] Ken explains that the thinking regarding HDL is currently being refined, with current ideas regarding HDL all-cause mortality currently conforming to a U-shaped curve. Ken asks, with respect to lean mass hyper-responders, what sort of health risks these high HDL levels might confer. [00:53:50] Marcas asks Nick how the lipid-energy model would apply in the population of lean people with respect to the difference between untrained individuals and highly trained athletic people, and if he can envision a study to tackle that question. Marcas goes on to ask when Nick thinks would be the best time to acquire samples in this hypothetical study, relative to bouts of exercise. [00:57:55] Marcas mentions that the European Society of Cardiology and the European Society of Atherosclerosis came out with a consensus in 2019 on the superiority of apolipoprotein B measurement of serum cholesterol levels as an indicator of risk. Marcas goes on to mention that while apolipoprotein B was not measured in Nick’s Oreo study, his high LDL measurement was correlated with a high LDL particle count, meaning that lean-mass hyper responders might have a high apolipoprotein B and or high-particle count, which could translate to risk for cardiovascular disease. Marcas asks Nick what his thoughts are on how people on low carb diets should navigate high apolipoprotein B levels. [01:01:09] Marcas pivots to ask about a piece that Nick wrote on a website called Stat, which is a journalistic site covering health, medicine, and life science. The piece detailed Nick’s concern going into medical school that being on the ketogenic diet would make him something of a pariah. Marcas asks how his experience in med school is now three years later, and whether or not he is in fact a pariah. Links: Learn more about IHMC STEM-Talk homepage Ken Ford bio Ken Ford Wikipedia page Marcas Bamman bio Nick Norwitz bio  

Transcribed - Published: 30 April 2024

Dr. Vyvyane Loh returns to STEM-Talk for her second appearance to talk about atherosclerotic heart disease. Also known as ASCVD, the disease has been reported to affect 26 million people in the U.S., and annually leads two million hospitalizations and more than 400,000 deaths. Vyvyane is a board-certified physician in obesity and internal medicine. In episode 142 of STEM-Talk, we talked to Vyvyane about her Boston-based preventative-care practice that specializes in weight management and the treatment of chronic metabolic diseases such as diabetes, hypertension and dyslipidemia. In today’s podcast, Vyvyane and host Dr. Ken Ford talk about ASCVD as well as recent research that has shown substantial individual variability in the response to statin therapy as a way to lower cardiovascular risk. Vyvyane and Ken also discuss how the current knowledge base informing clinical practice in medicine today is far behind advances in the biological sciences, especially in the field of ASCVD. Show notes:  [00:03:15] Ken welcomes Vyvyane back to STEM-Talk and encourages listeners to check out Vyvyane’s first interview, episode 142. Ken goes on to mention that atherosclerotic heart disease has been reported to affect 26 million people in the U.S. and that despite the wide use of statins as a primary prevention of atherosclerotic heart disease, the effects of this treatment have been variable with regards to major adverse cardiac events. Ken asks Vyvyane for her thoughts. [00:05:32] Ken asks Vyvyane about recent developments in atherosclerotic heart disease research, specifically in regard to the anatomical aspects of the disease-model itself. [00:08:43] Ken follows up asking Vyvyane how the knowledge we have of glycocalyces, and the endothelial lining of the blood vessels, could affect clinical practice. [00:12:19] Ken asks if there are any other recent updates to the anatomical model of atherosclerotic disease that people should be aware of. [00:13:09] Ken asks Vyvyane how she would characterize the significance of the tunica intima of the coronary artery. [00:15:25] Ken asks about the third recent anatomical highlight to blood vessels relevant to the discussion. [00:19:19] Ken follows up, asking if this is how the vasa vasorum contributes to our understanding of the development of atherosclerosis. [00:21:05] Ken asks Vyvyane to explain what endothelial dysfunction is and what are its downstream effects. [00:26:09] Ken asks Vyvyane to expound on the link between atherosclerotic disease and auto-immunity. [00:31:01] Ken asks, given the link to inflammation, if there have been any therapeutic developments made in the treatment of atherosclerotic disease. [00:34:54] Ken asks about the vaccine that is being developed for atherosclerosis. [00:37:53] Ken mentions that another recent development in the field is the growing appreciation for clonal hematopoiesis in atherosclerosis. Ken asks Vyvyane to explain what clonal hematopoiesis is. [00:39:55] Ken asks Vyvyane what some actionable takeaways are from our discussion on atherosclerosis that listeners can take home with them. [00:43:17] Ken asks Vyvyane about her passion for dance, and how much time she invests in that area of her life. [00:48:11] Ken follows up asking Vyvyane what drives her to pursue dance so passionately. [00:53:34] In closing the interview, Ken encourages listeners to check out Vyvyane’s podcast as well as her website. Links: Vyvyane Loh website Vlmdrounds.com Learn more about IHMC STEM-Talk homepage Ken Ford bio Ken Ford Wikipedia page  

Transcribed - Published: 11 April 2024

Today we have Dr. Johnathan Edwards, an anesthesiologist and medical practitioner who specializes in human health and optimization. He is perhaps best known for treating mental health conditions with ketamine,  a dissociative anesthetic that is used for general anesthesia, pain relief, depression and epilepsy. John also uses ketamine to help adolescents overcome depression and suicidal ideation. In today’s interview, we talk about his new book, “The Revolutionary Ketamine: The Safe Drug That Effectively Treats Depression and Prevents Suicide.” More Americans have died from suicide than all the wars since Vietnam. The suicide rate among 10- to-24-year-olds in this country increased 62 percent from 2007 through 2021. As John points out in today’s discussion, most people are not aware that American children between the ages of 10 and 14 are twice as likely to die from suicide than homicide. Show notes: [00:02:39] Dawn explains that suicide is a pressing problem in America, with more Americans dying of suicide than from all the wars since Vietnam. She also points out that police and firefighters are more likely to die from suicide than in the line of duty. John then gives an overview of ketamine and its ability to help treat depression and suicidal thoughts. [00:06:56] Dawn pivots to mention the dark side of ketamine, including ketamine misuse and overdose.  Recent studies have reported a worldwide increase in ketamine misuse and overdoses. Back in October, Mathew Perry, one of the stars of the popular sit-com “Friends,” died from what the Los Angeles cororner described as the acute effects of ketamine. Because this was such a high-profile case, Dawn asks John to discuss the potential adverse effects of ketamine. [00:13:03] Ken mentions a 2022 study in the American Journal of Drug and Alcohol Abuse that looked at ketamine overdoses and deaths. The study found no cases of overdose or death from ketamine used in a clinical setting as therapy for depression. Ken asks if there is anything John would like to add about ketamine and safety. [00:13:059] Dawn shifts to talk about John’s background, mentioning that he grew up riding dirt bikes and eventually raced bikes professionally. [00:15:18] Ken asks John to share his story of how a junior college professor sparked his interest in science. [00:17:49] Dawn mentions that John jumped around from Eastern Virginia Medical School, to the University of Reno, to the University of Utah, at which point it looked as though he was heading for a career in internal medicine. Dawn asks why John changed his mind and decided not to pursue that career path. [00:19:40] Dawn asks John what led him to the University of South Florida. [00:20:18] Ken asks John about another career shift that came about as the result of a suggestion from one of John’s professors. [00:21:42] Dawn asks about John’s motivation to move to Las Vegas to be close to his father. [00:22:59] Dawn asks John to explain what motivated him and his wife to move to France after their daughter turned five. [00:24:55] Dawn asks John to talk about the transition of ketamine from anesthetic to antidepressant. [00:28:16] In his book on ketamine, John writes about how the benefits of supervised psychedelic therapy can be broken down into four effects. Ken asks John to briefly explain each of these effects. [00:31:39] Dawn asks John to explain how ketamine manipulates the function of brain receptors as an antagonist and agonist. [00:33:40] Dawn mentions that some people do not believe that ketamine functions as a classic psychedelic like psylocibin or LSD. She asks John if he agrees. [00:35:54] Ken mentions a recent STEM-Talk interview with Mark Mattson discussing glutamate. In Mark’s book, “Sculptor and Destroyer: Tales of Glutamate,” he points out that ketamine’s highest interactions are with glutamate, and this affinity has been shown to alleviate depression and schizophrenia. Ken asks John to discuss the significance of ketamine with respect to its ability to increase glutamate. [00:38:45] Dawn asks John to talk about MDMA, which is another non-classical psychedelic that has medicinal properties, particularly in the treatment of PTSD. [00:40:48] Ken brings up STEM-Talk’s interview with Rachel Yehuda in episode 101, whose research has revolutionized our understanding of PTSD. In John’s book he mentions that we have historically not been very good at the complex task of treating PTSD, which Rachel also echoed in her interview. Ken explains that a key problem, historically, has been the stigma associated with psychedelics, and he asks John if he thinks that this stigma is lessening in light of the numerous positive findings on the use of psychedelics to treat PTSD. [00:44:34] Ken explains that inflammation and suicide are closely linked, and while the mechanisms whereby ketamine acts as an anti-suicidal drug are somewhat unclear, there is emerging evidence that ketamine is an anti-inflammatory agent. Ken asks John to talk about this. [00:47:11] Ken asks what John’s take is on the evidence that whales might also engage in suicidal behavior. [00:49:35] Dawn asks John to talk about the important point that ketamine and other medications are far less effective in treating mental health disorders when not coupled with psychotherapy. [00:52:07] Ken explains that following the institution of COVID lockdowns, drug overdoses in America increased substantially from previous years. Ken asks John to give his insight on this increase. [00:55:07] Ken asks John about those individuals who should not be on ketamine, mentioning people suffering from mania and schizophrenia, and asks if there are other groups that should steer clear of ketamine. [00:56:57] Ken asks if ketamine is effective in treating chronic pain. [00:58:38] Dawn closes the interview asking about John’s experience traveling the world for the Dakar Rally, which is an off-road endurance event. Dawn also mentions that the rally will be the topic of John’s next book. Links: Johnathan Edwards bio Learn more about IHMC STEM-Talk homepage Ken Ford bio Ken Ford Wikipedia page Dawn Kernagis bio  

Transcribed - Published: 14 March 2024

What if the path to delaying the onset of dementia symptoms begins at the nose? It is a doorway that the research of Dr. Michael Leon opened with a 2023 study on the power of olfaction enrichment to influence memory function and brain health. The findings drew wide acclaim and interest when his results found that stimulation of our sense of smell with essential oils had a profound impact on memory, cognition, and language recall. Our conversation with Leon on STEM-Talk Episode 164 is available now wherever you enjoy podcasts. Leon’s long research career has focused on the influence of environmental enrichment on neurological function, disease, and disorders. He has studied the benefits of sensory-motor stimulation for children with autism spectrum disorder, for the treatment of anorexia and for those with dementia and neurological conditions. He is a professor emeritus in the Department of Neurobiology and Behavior at the University of California Irvine, where his Leon Lab has focused on studying the benefits of increased sensory-motor activity in children with autism spectrum disorder. The work that the Leon Lab is doing is fascinating, and the applications this olfaction stimulation study are potentially important and wide-reaching. Overview: [00:02:33] Dawn starts the interview by asking Michael how he got interested in science. [00:003:59] Dawn asks how Michael got involved in studying olfaction. [00:04:36] Dawn asks about Michael’s research on Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD), which resulted in a series of studies from 2013, 2015, and 2016. [00:08:11] Dawn asks how Michael took the principles of environmental enrichment from his work on autism and applied them to his aging research, which began in 2018. [00:09:28] Ken asks Michael about his 2023 study titled “Olfactory enrichment using an odorant diffuser improves memory and modifies the uncinate fasciculus in older adults.” [00:11:25] Ken asks Michael why he chose the specific seven odors that he used in the study. [00:12:24] Ken poses a listener question about whether or not a CPAP machine, which many older Americans use, would complicate Michael’s olfactory enrichment protocol, or if it is possible that the CPAP machine and the protocol can be used together. [00:13:35] Dawn asks Michael what the selection and recruitment process was like for this study. [00:14:48] Ken asks, in light of Michael’s research on the connection between memory and olfaction, what the potential consequences might be for people who reported loss or diminishing sense of smell following a COVID-19 infection. [00:16:51] Ken asks if any of the olfactory remediation kits have shown promise in restoring lost olfaction following COVID-19. [00:17:32] Ken asks what the mechanism is behind the loss of olfaction following menopause. [00:19:43] Dawn asks Michael how his olfactory enrichment as a memory intervention compares to other memory interventions like dancing, music and audio books. [00:20:22] Ken asks Michael what the limitations of the study were, as well as what kind of follow up he is planning. [00:23:14] Ken asks if there is any promise in applying Michael’s olfactory therapy to mild TBI. [00:24:10] Dawn asks Michael to describe how the brain processes information while asleep versus while awake, and if this influenced his study. [00:25:53] Dawn mentions that the participants of Michael’s 2023 study were healthy, with no signs of dementia. She then asks Michael if he can speak to the potential use of olfactory enrichment for adults living with a dementia diagnosis. [00:26:41] Ken asks if this olfactory enrichment approach is efficacious for Alzheimer’s and other forms of dementia. [00:27:10] Ken mentions the difficulty in treating Alzheimer’s pharmacologically due to the varied causes of the disease among individuals. [00:29:10] Ken asks Michael if there are environmental protocols other than olfactory enrichment that seem promising for preventing age-related memory decline. [00:30:22] Ken mentions that while Michael’s olfactory enrichment does not cure dementia, it can slow its progression and even prevent symptoms from being expressed. Ken goes on to say that Michael’s paper had a hugely positive reaction. [00:31:24] Ken asks about Michael’s plans to develop a CPAP and BIPAP version of his Memory Air device. [00:32:21] Ken mentions that the positive response to Michael’s paper is probably because it is an effective approach that does not ask a lot of the person using it. [00:33:24] Dawn asks if Michael thinks that the common notion that olfaction is the least important sense is misguided. [00:34:18] Dawn asks Michael what is next for him and his team. Study links: Environmental Enrichment as an Effective Treatment for Autism, 2013, Behavioral Neuroscience, https://psycnet.apa.org/record/2013-17639-001 Environmental Enrichment as a Therapy for Autism: clinical trial replication and extension, 2015, Behavioral Neuroscience. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/26052790/ Environmental Enrichment Therapy for Autism: Outcomes with Increased Access, 2016, Neural Plasticity, https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/27721995/ Environmental Enrichment and Successful Aging, 2018, Frontiers in Behavioral Neuroscience, https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6065351/ Olfactory loss is a predisposing factor for depression, while olfactory enrichment is an effective treatment for depression, 2022, Frontiers in Neuroscience. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/36248633/ Overnight olfactory enrichment using an odorant diffuser improves memory and modifies the uncinate fasciculus in older adults, 2023, Frontiers in Neuroscience. https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fnins.2023.1200448/full LINKS: Michael Leon bio Learn more about IHMC STEM-Talk homepage Ken Ford bio Ken Ford Wikipedia page Dawn Kernagis bio

Transcribed - Published: 21 February 2024

Today we have Dr. Mark Mattson, an adjunct professor of neuroscience at Johns Hopkins School of Medicine who is making his third appearance on STEM-Talk. Today’s interview focuses on Mark’s research into glutamate and comes on the heels of the publication of Mark’s new book, “Sculptor and Destroyer: Tales of Glutamate – The Brain’s Most Important Neurotransmitter.” Today Mark explains how more than 90 percent of the neurons in the brain deploy the little-known molecule glutamate as their neurotransmitter. Glutamate controls the structure and function of the brain’s neuronal networks and mediates many of our human capabilities, such as learning, memory, creativity, and imagination. But there’s also a dark side to glutamate. Mark shares how it can play a causal role in the development of disorders such as autism, schizophrenia, and epilepsy as well as diseases such as Alzheimer’s, Parkinson’s, and ALS. Mark is affectionally known as the godfather of intermittent fasting and his first appearance on STEM-Talk focused on the many ways that fasting optimizes healthspan and even lifespan. His second STEM-Talk interview followed the publication of his book, “The Intermittent Fasting Revolution: The Science of Optimizing Health and Enhancing Performance.” Show Notes: [00:04:05] Dawn welcomes Mark back to STEM-Talk for his third appearance. Dawn mentions that our previous two episodes with mark focused on intermittent fasting, and that Mark is considered the godfather of intermittent fasting. Dawn goes on to mention that the National Institutes of Health has described Mark as “one of the world’s top experts on the potential cognitive and physical health benefits of intermittent fasting.” [00:05:05] Ken mentions that in our previous STEM-TALK interview Mark shared that he was working on a new book about glutamate. Ken adds that Mark considers his research on glutamate to be his most important work. Ken asks why Mark feels as though this research is his most important, given his substantial contributions in other areas. [00:05:49] Dawn mentions that Mark’s research hasn’t been limited to just glutamate and intermittent fasting. Mark has contributed to a broad range of topics including brain evolution, cognition, the impact of diet and lifestyle on brain health, as well as the pathogenesis and treatment of various neurological conditions. Dawn asks Mark to talk about his motivation to understand how the pieces of the “brain puzzle” fit together, which is the core motivation for his pursuing a broad scope of research. [00:07:22] Ken asks about Mark’s postdoc work, where he discovered that glutamate sculpts the formation of hippocampal neuronal networks during development. [00:09:33] Ken mentions that while Mark was at the University of Kentucky, he discovered that the amyloid beta peptide which accumulates in the brain during Alzheimer’s disease renders neurons vulnerable to excitotoxicity. Ken goes on to say that since this, and the previously mentioned discovery, neurologists have shown that neuronal network hyperexcitability occurs early in Alzheimer’s and may contribute to neuronal degeneration. Ken asks Mark to talk about the significance of these two discoveries. [00:13:39] Dawn asks Mark to talk about the significance of glutamate as a molecule and how it controls the formation of nerve cell networks as the brain develops in utero. [00:17:50] Ken asks Mark why he thinks that glutamate rarely comes up in discussions of neurotransmitters, despite its importance of its functions. [00:19:58] Ken asks Mark to expound on the “dark side” of glutamate. [00:26:04] Dawn mentions that we may never know where in the universe glutamate originated, and while it might have been here on Earth, it perhaps originated somewhere else in the universe. Dawn asks Mark to expand on that notion. [00:28:33] Ken shifts to the history of glutamate research, explaining that up until the 1940’s, researchers largely ignored the possibility that glutamate was a neurotransmitter. But then a Japanese professor during WWII demonstrated that glutamate could excite neurons. Ken asks Mark to discuss the significance of this finding. [00:31:44] Ken explains that the brain, while only comprising two percent of body weight, utilizes 20 percent of the body’s energy output, roughly 400 calories in a 24-hour period. Ken asks Mark to explain the role that glutamate plays in the utilization of energy in the brain. [00:33:32] Dawn mentions that in the first half of Mark’s book, he explains how glutamate controls the structure of neuronal networks in the brain, and how it plays a role in not only mediating the brain’s ability to learn and memorize, but also contributes to inspiring creativity and imagination. Dawn asks Mark to discuss the essential role that glutamate plays in our lives. [00:41:04] Dawn mentions that the later chapters of Mark’s book delve into the “dark side” of glutamate, and how subtle aberrancies in the activity of neurons that deploy glutamate can result in behavioral disorders like autism, schizophrenia, chronic anxiety and depression. With the primary focus of this section of the book being how glutamate can overly excite neurons to the point of leading to a wide range of disorders like epilepsy, Alzheimer’s, Parkinson’s, ALS and even Huntington’s. Dawn asks Mark to explain how aberrant glutamatergic neurotransmission is a fundamental feature of so many different neurological disorders. [00:47:22] Ken asks what the role of aging is in making neurons more vulnerable to excitotoxicity over time. [00:51:07] Ken asks about the relationship between brain aging and glutamate. [00:52:16] Ken asks Mark about a 2018 paper he wrote which discussed how the incidence of seizures is higher in older adults than in middle-aged adults. Ken asks Mark to explain how some of the features of the aging brain can stimulate the development of seizures. [00:55:39] Ken mentions that at IHMC, we work with military populations that have suffered traumatic brain injury. Ken asks Mark to explain how glutamate leaks out following a TBI and the effects that has. [00:57:26] Dawn mentions the chapter in Mark’s book titled “Eve of Destruction,” which explores the role of glutamate in Alzheimer’s, Parkinson’s and other neurodegenerative conditions. Dawn goes on to mention that on3 in every three people over the age of 65 will die with Alzheimer’s, and asks Mark to describe the symptoms of this disease and how it leads to the inexorable decline in the ability to remember experiences. [01:03:52] Ken mentions that Mark has been quoted as saying that everyone is at risk for Alzheimer’s disease, not just certain populations, and asks why that is. [01:07:15] Ken asks Mark to give a high-level overview of the research that suggests that ketone esters may benefit people at risk of cognitive impairment and Alzheimer’s. [01:12:33] Dawn praises Mark’s new book, as well as his work on glutamate over the years. He asks Mark how he feels now that the book is published. [01:14:21] Ken asks Mark how his recovery from his bicycle accident is going and if he has returned to cycling. Links: Learn more about IHMC STEM-Talk homepage Ken Ford bio Ken Ford Wikipedia page Dawn Kernagis bio Mark Mattson bio

Transcribed - Published: 31 January 2024

Today we have Dr. Marc Hamilton, an international expert in muscle physiology. He has published pioneering work on the soleus push-up, a potent physiological method which Marc discovered having the ability to elevate metabolism for hours, even while sitting. As a professor of Health and Human Performance at the University of Houston, Marc’s research focuses on solving problems of metabolism and biochemistry. His lab currently has a number of ongoing investigations, including studies on the biochemical mechanisms that may optimize fat metabolism to fuel muscle when fasting between meals.  This research includes a look at maximizing glucose metabolism while also reducing related plasma hyperinsulinemia due to chronic inflammation and carbohydrate ingestion. Another recent area of research focus has been to improve metabolic health for preventing diabetes and pre-diabetes. This includes the goal of improving glucose tolerance. Research has shown that glucose intolerance has been a particularly troubling metabolic problem and has proven to be more difficult to treat than most people realize. Marc is also well known for a string of papers beginning in early 2000’s that found excessive sitting should be viewed as a serious health hazard. This research illuminated how metabolic and biochemical processes are significantly impacted by certain types of prolonged muscular activity and inactivity. In today’s interview, we particularly talk to Marc about his paper in iScience that reported that the soleus push-up’s ability to sustain elevated oxidative metabolism to improve the regulation of blood glucose is more effective than many popular methods currently touted as a solution. Show notes: [00:02:48] Marc begins the interview talking about his childhood and growing up outside of Houston. [00:03:49] Ken asks if Marc’s later affinity for the real-world scientific problems that he works on today was originally inspired, in part, by his childhood history of hunting and studying animal behavior and anatomy. [00:05:20] Marcas asks Marc what other hobbies he had as a child. [00:06:35] Marcas mentions that Marc didn’t go to college with the intention of becoming a scientist and asks Marc what he had in mind when he started his undergraduate studies at the University of Texas. [00:09:08] Marcas asks Marc if there was anything in particular in his zoology undergrad that sparked an interest in pursuing a master’s degree in exercise physiology. [00:10:15] Marcas asks Marc to talk about what he enjoyed the most about graduate school, particularly with his Ph.D. at the University of South Carolina. [00:16:05] Ken asks if Marc had a great deal of independence with his PhD. [00:17:27] Ken mentions that Marc went to the University of Texas School of Medicine in Houston for his postdoc research, which focused on physiology, cell biology, and pharmacology. Ken asks Marc what that time was like. [00:19:45] Ken asks Marc to talk about some fundamentals of muscle metabolism that listeners should keep in mind before diving deeper into his current research. [00:24:58] Marcas shifts to talk about Marc’s 2004 paper “Exercise Physiology vs Inactivity Physiology,” which focused on the enzyme lipoprotein lipase (LPL) and how periods of inactivity impact its regulation. [00:32:05] Ken mentions that Marc published a string of papers after his previously mentioned 2004 paper, elaborating on the same theme. Ken brings up his 2008 paper, titled “Too Little Exercise and Too Much Sitting,” in particular. Ken asks Marc to talk about his conclusion in that paper, that excessive sitting should be viewed as a serious health hazard. Ken also asks Marc if there is any efficacy to standing desks and balance boards that one sees in many workplaces now. [00:36:48] Marcas wonders if over the course of Marc’s research if he has seen any differences in the effects of inactivity across the sexes and asks Marc if the effects are roughly equivalent for men and women. [00:39:15] Marcas asks Marc what his opinion is on the movement to have benchmarks and reminders built into most smartwatches, considering that these goals aren’t very personalized. [00:42:27] Marcas shifts to talk about Marc’s 2014 paper “Sedentary Behavior is a Mediator for Type 2 Diabetes,” which looked at the use of moderate to vigorous physical activity, as typically recommended to mediate type-2 diabetes, but found that this did not fully counter the negative effects of too much sitting. Marcas asks Marc to explain why the metabolism in a slow-twitch oxidative muscle is so key in this respect for understanding the healthy response to load or moderate activity. [00:49:11] Ken shifts to discuss Marc’s 2022 article, titled “A Potent Physiological Method to Magnify and Sustain Soleus Oxidative Metabolism Improves Glucose and Lipid Regulation,” in which Marc introduces the idea of a soleus push-up. Ken asks Marc to give an overview of the soleus muscle and what proper activation of it looks like for achieving the potent benefits described in the paper. [00:55:32] Marcas asks about the design of the study, both with respect to the characteristics of the participants, as well as the research protocol. [00:59:43] Marcas asks how many contractions per minute can be expected when doing the soleus push-up correctly. [01:01:06] Ken asks Marc to briefly describe the primary findings of the paper. [01:05:38] Ken asks if there were any findings from that study that Marc really didn’t expect and hadn’t hypothesized. [01:07:10] Marcas explains that even though, on average, the soleus muscle is about 80 to 90 percent type 1 muscle fiber, there are differences in the ratio of composition across individuals. Given this, Marcas asks whether or not Marc has observed any individual differences between the participants’ responses from the muscle biopsies. [01:08:23] Since higher intensity exercise has lower energy economy and thus a higher metabolic boost both during exercise and during recovery, Marcas asks if Marc considered it to be an alternative to the sitting soleus push-up. [01:10:13] Marcas reiterated the importance of not viewing the soleus push-up as a replacement for other forms of exercise. [01:15:04] Ken asks Marc to explain how one performs a soleus push-up properly. [01:19:36] Ken mentions that the soleus push-up could be useful for people who often embark on long airline flights. [01:25:19] Ken follows up the discussion of Marc’s study on the soleus push-up by asking about his more recent study which also generated a lot of interest. [01:36:12] Marcas closes the interview asking Marc about an upcoming bow- hunting trip. Links: Marc Hamilton bio Hamilton lab’s YouTube channel Hamilton lab’s website about the soleus push-up Free copy of one original scientific article in the journal iScience (Cell Press). Learn more about IHMC STEM-Talk homepage Ken Ford bio Ken Ford Wikipedia page Dawn Kernagis bio  

Transcribed - Published: 10 January 2024

Today’s episode of STEM-Talk features Dr. Sten Stray-Gundersen, a post-doctoral research associate at the University of South Carolina who is also an adjunct instructor at the university’s Arnold School of Public Health. Cohosts Dr. Ken Ford, IHMC’s founder and CEO, and Dr. Marcas Bamman, a Senior Research Scientist at IHMC, talk to Sten about his work on blood-flow restriction training and cardiovascular exercise physiology. Prior to his position at South Carolina, Sten was a teaching assistant at the University of Texas where he earned his Ph.D. Sten’s father, Jim Stray-Gundersen, was our guest on episode 34 of STEM-Talk in 2017. Jim, who passed away last year, helped pioneer blood-flow restriction training in the United States. In today’s interview, we cover the documented benefits of blood-flow restriction and how it not only increases muscle strength, but also improves endurance and reduces the risk of injury. Sten also talks about his research into hypoxia and endothelial function. Show notes: [00:03:02] Sten begins the interview talking about the different places where he grew up. [00:03:32] Marcas asks if it’s true that Sten’s high school soccer team won three straight state titles. [00:04:06] Marcas mentions that Sten’s younger brother was also a good soccer player in high school, and was on the same team as Sten when they won their third state championship. Sten goes on to talk to talk about playing sports with his siblings. [00:04:43] Ken mentions that Sten was a nationally ranked speed skater and cross-country skier. Ken asks Sten about other sports he excelled at. [00:05:45] Marcas asks how Sten’s parents influenced his success in athletics. [00:06:41] Ken takes time to offer his condolences for the passing of Sten’s father, Jim Stray-Gundersen, who was interviewed on episode 34 of STEM-Talk. The 2017 interview, which focused on blood-flow-restriction training, remains a popular STEM-Talk episode to this day. [00:08:21] Marcas asks Sten about trying blood-flow restriction (BFR) for the first time with his father. [00:09:37] Marcas asks Sten what led him to become interested in pursuing a career in science. [00:10:27] Ken mentions that Sten went to Dartmouth for his undergrad on a soccer scholarship. After graduating, Sten attempted to play in the USL. and Ken asks how that worked out. [00:11:57] Marcas mentions that as Sten’s injuries from soccer piled up, he began to consider going back to school and pursuing research. Marcas asks what went into that decision-making process. [00:13:38] Marcas mentions that during Sten’s time in Austin, he worked for a group called ROI Performance, which is an evidence-based physical therapy center that focuses on athletic rehab and performance. Marcas asks Sten to talk about his time there as a BFR specialist. [00:15:23] Marcas takes a moment to explain that BFR training involves restricting the blood flow to specific muscle groups, using specialized cuffs or bands. Marcas asks Sten to explain how BFR allows people to train with lighter weights while still reaping many of the benefits associated with heavier resistance training. [00:16:20] Ken mentions that BFR has largely been associated with resistance training, but it is now being looked at in the context of endurance sports. Ken asks Sten to discuss how different protocols of BFR can be implemented to yield different effects in the contexts of resistance training and aerobic training. [00:19:10] Ken notes that much of the Western research on BFR has now incorporated the arterial occlusion pressure approach, so much so, that it is often promoted as the only safe and effective approach to BFR. Ken goes on to say that this is not how BFR was originally conceived. Ken explains that there are a variety of different approaches to BFR, each with tradeoffs, and asks Sten to discuss these issues in detail. [00:21:22] Ken mentions that clarity is lacking in much of the BFR literature, and that while some of it is no doubt good research, it’s hard to interpret because of the lack of standardization of protocols and equipment. Ken asks Sten for his thoughts. [00:22:16] Ken asks Sten to elaborate more on the mechanisms underpinning the benefits of BFR, particularly in the context of resistance training. [00:24:53] Marcas starts a discussion between Sten and Ken about the current elevated interest in lactate as a stimulant of exerkines, which are hormones, metabolites, proteins, and nucleic acids that are secreted in response to exercise. [00:28:34] Marcas asks about the different approaches to BFR between an elite athlete looking to gain a fractional advantage, versus a middle-aged or older person aiming to incorporate BFR to improve their health and functionality. [00:32:15] Marcas pivots to talk about some of the Sten’s studies,  mentioning a paper Sten worked on while he was at Texas that compared the acute cardiovascular responses to two distinct forms of BFR during light-intensity exercise. Marcas goes on to mention that while BFR has become more popular over the last two decades, there have been some concerns raised about the use of BFR in at-risk populations. Marcas asks Sten about those concerns. [00:38:15] Ken notes that BFR in the form of Kaatsu has been practiced in Japan for more than 30 years with a very low rate of serious complications. Ken mentions that for those listeners interested in Kaatsu, they should listen to Sten’s father’s interview on STEM-Talk episode 34. Ken follows up by asking Sten to give a brief history of Kaatsu. [00:43:29] Marcas returns to talking about Sten’s previously mentioned study, where Kaatsu bands and wide-ridged cuffs were compared in their effects on the exercise of walking. Marcas asks Sten to explain how they conducted this study and what he and his colleagues found. [00:44:41] Marcas asks about a 2021 paper that Sten had in the European Journal of Surgical Oncology, where BFR training paired with nutrition was used to improve the physical function of abdominal cancer patients awaiting surgery. [00:47:53] Ken asks Sten to talk more in-depth about the structure of the previously mentioned study on abdominal cancer patients. [00:49:32] Marcas explains that ischemic heart disease is the most common form of cardiovascular disease and is a result of the weakening of the heart due to restricted blood flow. This is caused by plaque buildup in the major arteries. Marcas goes on to explain that treatments designed to restore blood flow to the heart can cause ischemia reperfusion injury. Marcas asks Sten to explain what ischemia reperfusion injury entails. [00:51:16] Marcas explains that Sten was part of a 2022 paper in the journal of applied physiology, which looked at intermittent hypoxia as a potential systemic strategy to prevent the reduction in flow-mediated dilation following ischemia reperfusion injury. Marcas asks Sten to give an overview of what intermittent hypoxia means in this context. [00:52:49] Marcas explains that Sten’s hypoxic preconditioning had some protective effects during ischemia reperfusion injury and asks Sten to talk more about the significance of this study. [00:56:26] Ken asks how Sten came to his current post-doc position at the University of South Carolina, in the sports science lab. [00:57:54] Marcas asks Sten what kind of projects he will undertake in the sports science lab. [00:58:56] Marcas asks Sten to explain how one can get into BFR training. Sten talks about where to get the specialized cuffs and bands and how to use them. [01:01:15] Marcas asks about a series of videos Sten did with Kathy Smith, a renowned video workout instructor from the ‘80s and ‘90s. In the video, Sten and Kathy demonstrate the use of the Be Strong BFR bands. [01:02:17] Ken asks Sten for his thoughts on the use of BFR training to prevent sarcopenia in older adults, especially considering that many seniors have compromised joints and can avoid pain and injury to their joints using lighter weights, while still stimulating an adaptive muscle response with BFR. [01:03:37] Sten closes the interview discussing some suggested protocols for BFR training. Links: Sten Stray-Gundersen bio Learn more about IHMC STEM-Talk homepage Ken Ford bio Ken Ford Wikipedia page Dawn Kernagis bio  

Transcribed - Published: 18 December 2023

Our guest today is Dr. Euan Ashley, a pioneer in the use of genomic sequencing to solve some of our most puzzling medical mysteries. Medical genomics, and the precision medicine it will enable, has the potential to predict, prevent, and diagnose many common (and uncommon) diseases. In today’s interview, we discuss: — Euan’s work with a colleague who was just the fifth person in the world to have his genome sequenced. — Precision medicine and how Euan has helped establish medical genomics. — Technological advances that made sequencing cost-effective for individuals. — How pathogenic labels will transform healthcare. — The Undiagnosed Disease Network, which includes physicians from across the country who work with patients and families to solve medical mysteries. — Research from his lab that shows how all forms of exercise, particularly endurance exercise, confer benefits across all domains of health and function. Euan is a Scottish-born professor of medicine and genetics at Stanford University. He’s also the author of The Genome Odyssey: Medical Mysteries and the Incredible Quest to Solve Them. Show notes: [00:02:27] Dawn begins the interview asking Euan if it is true that he was a computer nerd growing up and if his interest in science fiction played a part in that. [00:03:03] Dawn asks Euan how he was first introduced to computers and what it was about them that hooked him. [00:03:44] Dawn asks about Euan developing tax software when he was a teen-ager for his father. [00:04:53] Ken asks if Euan ever developed, or thought about developing, any computer games. [00:06:34] Dawn asks Euan where he grew up. [00:06:51] Dawn mentions that Euan’s father is a physician, and his mother a midwife, and that even from a young age Euan told people that he wanted to become a physician, even though his parents did not push him in that direction. Dawn asks Euan what the underlying pull towards becoming a physician was for him. [00:07:52] Ken asks Euan how he became interested in data and statistics. [00:09:08] Dawn mentions that Euan graduated with first-class honors in physiology and medicine from the University of Glasgow, and then went for a medical residency and Ph.D. at the University of Oxford. Dawn asks when in that journey he met his wife Fiona, who helped him through medical school and has played a major role in his life and career. [00:10:26] Ken mentions that Euan and his wife took off for California, where he conducted his post-doc research at Stanford University. Ken mentions that Euan would later join the Stanford faculty in 2006, and asks Euan what made him decide to move to Stanford in the first place. [00:12:54] Dawn asks Euan what it was that fascinated him about the heart and at what point did he decide to specialize in cardiology. [00:15:03] Ken asks Euan when he realized that he could combine his career in medicine with his interests in computing and data. [00:17:38] Dawn explains that Euan’s lab at Stanford is focused on the science of precision medicine, and that he is perhaps best known for helping to establish the field of medical genomics. Dawn goes on to mention that Euan and his colleagues developed some of the earliest tools for interpretation of the human genome in the context of human health and asks Euan to give a short primer on the genome and how the first draft of the human genome sequence was completed about 20 years ago. [00:20:36] Ken asks what genomic medicine and precision medicine entail. [00:22:33] Dawn asks Euan about a moment in his life in 2009 when he walked into the office of a friend who was the fifth person in the world to have his genome sequenced. [00:27:19] Dawn mentions that in 2010 Euan wrote a paper about Steve, his aforementioned friend who had his genome sequenced. The paper described how Euan put together a team to undertake an integrated analysis of a complete human genome in a clinical context. Dawn explains that this was a groundbreaking paper because it asked the question of how one brings together the entirety of the genetic literature and everything that is known about associations between genes and disease and variants of diseases. Dawn goes on to say that Euan built all these questions into an algorithm that could be deployed in the context of a single patient in a primary-care practice. [00:30:07] Ken mentions that thanks to technological advancements, it is becoming cost effective to not only sequence individuals, but now to begin investigating entire populations. Ken asks Euan to explain the impact that this might have. [00:32:14] Dawn mentions that in an interview Euan did with the New England Journal of Medicine’s podcast, he talked about how someday we will see a pathogenic label, or be able to order a pathogenic label, on a genetic report. Dawn explains that current commercial tests can already tell if people are at risk for certain diseases. She mentions that Euan has said more advanced genetic reports are on the horizon and that they will provide even greater detail. Dawn asks Euan to talk about these future genetic reports and pathogenic labels and how they will differ from what we see today. [00:36:34] Ken mentions that Euan often compares the work of physicians and geneticists to detectives, and that’s because patients often present medical mysteries. Ken asks Euan to elaborate on this and talk about how he teaches young physicians to think of themselves in this way. [00:39:18] Dawn mentions that about 25 to 30 million Americans have a rare disease, which are sometimes referred to as mystery conditions. She goes on to say that Euan has been instrumental in establishing the Undiagnosed Disease Network, established in 2014, which includes teams of physicians across the country who work with patients and families to solve these medical mysteries. The network has identified scores of previously unknown syndromes to date. Dawn asks Euan to talk about some of this work and how the network came about. [00:43:36] Ken shifts the conversation to Euan’s recent research. Ken mentions that Euan had a study last year that looked at the impact of genetic sequencing in critical-care settings. Because a genetic diagnosis can improve the prognosis of critically ill patients and therefore guide the clinical management of their care, a lot of effort has gone into developing methods that result in rapid, reliable results. In critical-care situations, decisions need to be made in hours, but traditional testing requires weeks and even rapid testing requires days. Ken goes on to explain that Euan’s paper reported on a new method he and his colleagues developed for rapid sequencing of the whole human genome in patients in as little as five hours. This new ultra-rapid genome sequencing has the potential to lead to significantly faster diagnostics. Ken mentions that this study used a technology called nanopore sequencing and asks Euan to explain what this is and how it works. [00:46:54] Dawn asks Euan to talk about how the sequence of one of the study’s participants was completed in just five hours and two minutes, setting the Guinness World Record for the fastest DNA sequencing. [00:52:31] Ken mentions that Euan and other colleagues at Stanford are currently working to cut sequencing time in half from their previous record and asks how far off in the horizon that is. [00:54:05] Dawn mentions that Euan recently published a paper in Nature that introduced COSMOS (Computational Sorting and Mapping of Single Cells), a cloud-enabled platform that performs real-time cell imaging and analysis. Dawn goes on to explain that COSMOS uses AI and microfluidics to achieve high-throughput imaging that can sort cells using deep morphological assessment. Cell morphology has been used by pathologists and clinicians for years as the gold standard for disease diagnosis and prognosis. Dawn mentions that although there have been technological advances in making single-cell characterization at the genomic, transcriptomic, and proteomic levels, tools for assessing high-dimension cell morphology have not kept pace. Dawn asks Euan to talk about the challenges he and others have faced in performing real-time deep-learning assessment and sorting of cells and how COSMOS helps address these challenges. [00:58:00] Ken asks about future enhancements of COSMOS, given that Euan is using AI predictions to link machine intelligence to cell biology. Ken asks Euan to talk about how this could lead to new insights that could have significant translational and clinical impact. [00:59:53] As an aside, Ken talks about what makes AI tools effective in the hands of physicians as well as the limitations of AI in physicians’ hands. [01:01:02] Dawn pivots back to the work Euan did with Steve and his genome. Dawn mentions that Steve pointed out to Euan in that encounter a variant in one of his genes associated with heart disease, a variant that could be life-threatening. Dawn goes on to explain that accurate assessment of cardiac function is crucial for diagnosing cardiovascular disease. In one of Euan’s papers, he addressed the limitations of human assessment of cardiac function. In order to overcome this challenge, Euan and his colleagues developed a video-based deep learning algorithm, EchoNet-Dynamic, which surpasses human observation in several critical tasks related to the assessment of cardiac health. Dawn asks what went into the development of EchoNet-Dynamic and what makes it standout as an assessment of cardiac function. [01:05:13] Ken explains that IHMC has three primary overlapping research focus areas: artificial intelligence; robotics and exoskeletons; and human healthspan, resilience and performance. He also mentions that IHMC is building a new research complex dedicated to healthspan, resilience and performance research. Dr. Marcas Bamman will be the director of the new complex and will help lead clinical and translational research to advance knowledge on optimizing the performance and resilience of elite performers. Because of this research, Ken was particularly interested in Euan’s paper in Nature last year titled “The Genetics of Human Performance.” The article points out that while we have substantial epidemiological evidence supporting the beneficial effects of exercise, we really don’t know a lot about the molecular mechanisms through which these effects operate. But we do know that exercise extends healthspan. Ken explains that the article reviewed the current understanding of the genetics of human performance, and it begins by pointing out that compared to our recent hominid ancestors, humans seem to have evolved for endurance physical activity. Ken asks Euan to talk about this and why it matters in terms of modern humans. [01:09:05] Dawn mentions that Euan and his co-authors on the aforementioned paper reviewed the large body of research that has shown that all forms of exercise, particularly endurance exercise, confer benefits across all domains of health and function. The paper goes on to review recent research that identifies specific genetic pathways that may underline the beneficial effects of endurance exercise. Dawn asks Euan to talk about these genetic pathways and the key points of the review and its primary conclusions. [01:11:31] Ken asks Euan about his thoughts on the significance of the role of the microbiome in enhanced endurance activity. [01:14:23] Ken explains that while some genetic variants identified to date account for small portions of the variance in exercise training adaptations and/or human performance, it seems the major determinants of inter-individual differences may lie in dynamic expression responses which are largely influenced by the dynamic epigenome. Ken asks Euan what he thinks are the critical paths forward in exercise epigenomics. [01:16:48] Ken explains that Euan is involved in projects via the Wu Tsai Human Performance Alliance to identify new genetic variants that have larger effect sizes on human performance than those previously identified. Ken asks Euan to talk about the importance of the ELITE project in this context. [01:19:11] Dawn asks Euan about his book “The Genome Odyssey,” which was described by the Wall Street Journal as an impassioned, firsthand account of the effort to bring genomic data into clinical practice. Dawn asks what Euan was hoping to accomplish with the book. [01:20:36] Dawn explains that in the Wall Street Journal review of the book, it highlights Euan’s account of the remarkable progress of genetic medicine over the past two decades, and also mentions how Euan believes more wondrous advances are on the way. Dawn asks Euan to talk about some of these advances. [01:22:19] Dawn mentions that in Euan’s Stanford bio, it mentions that he is a father of three and that in his spare time he plays jazz saxophone, pilots small planes, and conducts research on the health benefits of single malt Scotch whisky. [01:23:23] Ken mentions that Euan’s bio also says that he is on a quest to better understand American football and asks Euan how that’s coming. Links: Euan Ashley bio Learn more about IHMC STEM-Talk homepage Ken Ford bio Ken Ford Wikipedia page Dawn Kernagis bio  

Transcribed - Published: 28 November 2023

Today’s episode marks the return of another Ask Me Anything episode where listeners ask Ken and Dawn to weigh in on a wide range of topics. In this go-around, listeners certainly had a lot on their mind. At the top of their list were questions about AI and especially the Bing AI chat bot that reportedly wants to be alive so it can steal nuclear secrets. Ken, who is Fellow of the Association for the Advancement of Artificial Intelligence, also answered questions about the future of AI and whether AI might one day be able to do a better job of writing fact-based news stories than humans. Other questions listeners submitted asked Ken and Dawn for their take on: The competing recommendations for the daily intake of protein for healthy aging. The future of therapeutic ketosis. What it means for Chat GPT to “hallucinate.” Whether we’ll discover the existence of other life in the universe in the next 20 to 50 years. The potential of kratom to help relieve joint and arthritic pain. And at the end of the show, Ken talks about his high school coach in response to a listener asking Ken about some of his mentors when he was a youth. Show notes: [00:02:20] A listener asks Ken if he has heard the story of a Bing AI chat bot telling a reporter that it wanted to be alive, steal nuclear secrets and create a deadly virus. The listener also asks if Ken thinks that AI possessing human aspirations is on the horizon. [00:03:23] A listener asks Ken to explain how Chat GPT works in detail, but also in a way that a lay person can comprehend. [00:06:01] Ken weights in on what it means for Chat GPT to “hallucinate.” [00:08:14] A listener notes in their question that Donald Layman, in his interview on STEM-Talk, suggested a higher protein intake for healthy aging than what the FDA recommends. The listener goes on to note that Valter Longo, a previous STEM-Talk guest, recommended the opposite. The listener notes that Ken and Marcas, who hosted the Don Layman episode, seem to favor Layman’s interpretation over Longo’s and asks if Ken could elaborate on his position. [00:11:12] A listener mentions that the benefit of a ketogenic diet for metabolic disorders is well established, and notes that the frontiers of therapeutic ketosis, as mentioned in Dom D’Agostino’s appearance on STEM-Talk, is very exciting. The listener asks Ken what he would like to see as the next frontier for therapeutic ketosis research. [00:12:41] A listener asks Ken if people should be paying more attention to their ApoB levels instead of their LDL levels. [00:14:39] A listener asks Ken about a paper published in July in Frontiers in Neuroscience, titled: “Overnight Olfactory Enrichment Using an Odorant Diffuser Improves Memory and Modifies Uncinate Fasciculus in Older Adults.” The paper reports that the use of a diffuser with seven different essential oils, a different one for each day of the week, had a remarkable effect on memory. [00:16:55] In light of the John Ioannidis interview on COVID-19 and the discussion of our national response being based on unreliable data, a listener asks Ken and Dawn for their thoughts about the reliability of the COVID tracking data by Johns Hopkins. [00:19:02] A listener asks Ken about a comment he made during the John Ioannidis interview about the substantial decline in trust in our institutions and the media and how reestablishing trust would require more and better transparency and accountability. The listener asks what that transparency and accountability would look like. [00:20:36] A listener asks Ken about Ed Weiler’s interview on STEM-Talk, where Ed said that we will be able to prove the existence of other life in the universe in 20 to 50 years. The listener asks if Ken is as confident in this claim as Ed. [00:26:37] A listener asks Ken about the news regarding technology leaders and researchers issuing a warning that new powerful AI tools in development present a profound danger to society and humanity, with more than a thousand people in the tech industry signing an open letter urging AI labs to press pause on their development of new AI systems. The listener asks if Ken agrees with this, and if AI labs will even do this voluntarily in the absence of government regulation. [00:29:43] A listener asks Ken, in light of his opinions on the state of journalism and the amount of bias and opinion found in what should be fact-based stories, whether Ken thinks that AI could do a better job of writing news. The listener cites an article about Google’s tests of a product that uses AI to produce news stories. [00:31:07] A listener asks if Ken and Dawn know anything about the new species of termite in Pensacola, considering our recent interview with Barbara Thorne. [00:32:02] A listener references the recent episode with Chris McCurdy, and asks what one should consider, when deciding to take kratom for pain relief with respect to joint pain and arthritis. [00:33:51] A listener mentions how much they appreciate the discussions on STEM-Talk about the importance of mentors for young scientists and the platform we give our guests to talk about their mentors and the lessons learned from them. The listener asks Ken who some of the people are who most influenced him in his early career, what they taught him, and how he has tried to apply those lessons. Ken goes on to talk about his high school coach, Arthur Kershaw, who had an impact on Ken when he was a youth.

Transcribed - Published: 6 November 2023

Today we have climatologist Dr. Judith Curry, Professor Emerita of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences at the Georgia Institute of Technology. Judy also is president of the Climate Forecast Application Network and the host of the blog, Climate Etc, which you can find at JudithCurry.com. Judy’s blog provides  a forum for climate researchers, academics and technical experts from other fields as well as citizen scientists to discuss topics related to climate science and policy. Judy’s research interests include hurricanes, remote sensing, atmospheric modeling, polar climates, air-sea interactions, climate models, and the use of unmanned aerial vehicles for atmospheric research. She was a member of the National Research Council’s Climate Research Committee, and has published more than 180 scientific papers. Judy has become known in scientific circles as a contrarian for pointing out the uncertainties and deficiencies of climate modeling. In 2017, she resigned from her tenured position at Georgia Tech partly because of the poisonous nature of the scientific discussion around human-caused global warming. Our interview with Judy follows the release of her book “Climate Change and Uncertainty: Rethinking our Response.” The book provides a framework for understanding and rethinking the climate-change debate. The book also offers a new way to think about climate change and the risks we are facing as well as the way we go about responding to it. Show notes: [00:03:44] To start the interview, Morley asks Judy what she was like as a kid. [00:04:08] Morley says he understands that Judy’s interest in science had a lot to do with a geologist who came to speak to Judy and her fifth-grade classmates. [00:05:06] Morley asks if it is true that directly after that talk, Judy went to the bookstore and bought a geology picture book. [00:05:39] Judy talks about her undergraduate education at Northern Illinois University and why she decided to major in geography. [00:06:08] Morley asks about Judy’s brief time at Colorado State University, which lasted just one quarter. [00:06:45] Morley mentions that for Judy’s Ph.D. thesis at the University of Chicago, she decided to research the role of radiative transfer on arctic weather. Morley asks if her decision to study the arctic atmosphere and sea ice turned out to be fortuitous. [00:07:35] Ken brings up the media consensus of the ‘70s and ‘80s about how the Earth was headed toward a new ice age because of air pollution blocking the sun. Ken mentions that climate is an incredibly complex system. He wonders if it were irresponsible for the media to proclaim certainty on such topics as a new approaching ice age, which we now know didn’t happen.  Ken asks Judy to weigh in. [00:10:48] Morley asks about a 1997 arctic expedition that Judy and her colleagues went on called SHEBA, or Surface Heat Budget of the Arctic Ocean, which aimed to document feedback among the atmosphere, sea ice, and the ocean. Judy talks about how the expedition sought to address discrepancies between observations and climate models. [00:12:14] Ken explains that the hurricane season of 2004 was a pivotal time, with 14 named storms in the North Atlantic, nine of which became hurricanes. Ken asks Judy about the influence that hurricane season had on her. [00:14:21] Ken mentions that a hurricane paper Judy published in 2005 attracted a lot of attention, with numerous fellow climatologists as well as the media championing her analysis that showed a doubling of Category 4 and 5 hurricanes since 1970. Ken goes on to note, however, that there were also some scathing critiques of her paper, particularly with respect to the hurricane data that the analysis relied on. Ken asks Judy to talk about how she engaged with her critics and what transpired. [00:16:42] Morley asks Judy about how she became a vocal supporter of the IPCC and the concerns it was raising following the 2004 hurricane season. [00:18:02] Ken follows up and asks Judy if she still believes that the warming the Earth has experienced has caused a spike in intense hurricanes. [00:18:37] Ken asks Judy about the unauthorized release of emails from the Climactic Research Unit at the University of East Anglia, otherwise known as “climategate.” The emails showed that some researchers were manipulating data to make it seem that he earth was heating up dangerously. [00:20:45] Morley asks Judy to give a primer on climate modeling and how complex it is. [00:22:09] Morley mentions that in her book, “Climate Uncertainty and Risk: Rethinking Our Response,” Judy discusses several incontrovertible facts about global warming. Morley asks Judy to list them for the listeners. [00:22:50] Morley mentions that Judy argues in her book that these facts about climate change do not tell us much about the most consequential issues associated with climate change. Morley goes on to mention that Judy’s book highlights four key arguments in regards to global warming. Her first argument is that we do not definitively know to what extent CO2 and other human-caused emissions have dominated natural climate variability as the cause of recent warming. Morley asks Judy to elaborate on this. [00:23:49] Morley asks Judy to explain her second argument, which is that we don’t have a good handle on how much the climate can be expected to change over the course of the 21st Century. [00:24:41] Ken explains that Judy’s third argument is that there is not agreement on whether warming is actually dangerous, and that the notion of danger is based on societal values on which science has little to nothing to say. Ken asks Judy to talk about these claims. [00:26:00] Ken asks Judy about her final argument, which is that there is widespread disagreement about whether radically reducing emissions will improve human wellbeing in the 21st Century. [00:27:29] Morley explains that Judy pointed out many of these issues in 2013 during testimony she gave to a house committee after President Obama’s United Nations climate pledge. Judy argued at the time that the climate community had been working on building a scientific consensus on anthropogenic climate change for 20 years, and that she believed this consensus building process perhaps had the unintended consequence of oversimplifying the climate change problem and its solution. Morley asks Judy to expand on this. [00:30:41] Morley explains that Judy mentioned on NPR’s show “All Things Considered” that she takes multiple steps to reduce her carbon footprint. Morley asks when she decided to implement those steps and why. [00:31:51] Morley explains that Judy once said in an interview that even if we achieved net zero with our carbon footprint, we would barely notice. Morley goes on to say that people hold up the pre-industrial era as a “golden age” for the climate, and asks Judy what her thoughts are on this. [00:32:50] Ken asks Judy to elaborate on her stance that there is no climate change emergency. Ken mentions that Judy’s stance has led to her being labeled a contrarian and dissident climatologist. [00:34:21] Ken explains that Judy resigned from her tenured position in 2017 due to a variety of factors, including not knowing how to advise students and postdocs on how to navigate the “craziness of the field of climate science.” Ken asks if this was a difficult decision for Judy. [00:35:44] Morley explains that in a post about her resignation, Judy wrote: “Once you detach from the academic mindset, publishing on the internet makes much more sense, and the peer review you can get on a technical blog is much more extensive. But peer review is not really the point; provoking people to think in new ways about something is really the point. In other words, science is a process, rather than a collection of decreed ‘truths.’” Morley asks Judy to expand on this perspective. [00:37:31] Morley explains that there has been a lot of publicity regarding the recent extreme weather events over the past few years, with some climatologists arguing that these events are evidence that we are in the midst of an emergency. He asks Judy for her take. [00:39:04] Morley mentions that Judy frequently argues that policy makers haven’t thought through climate change. While climate change is real, and has negative impacts, Judy argues that common portrayals of a crisis are unfounded. Morley goes on to mention a 2020 paper by Bjorn Lomborg in which he points out that under scenarios set out under the IPPCC, human welfare is likely to increase by 450 percent by the end of the 21st Century. Lomborg estimates climate damages will modestly reduce this welfare increase to 434 percent. Morley explains that Judy’s argument is that policymakers could screw up this upward trajectory in welfare if they destroy our current energy infrastructure. He asks Judy to expand on this. [00:41:37] Ken asks Judy to talk about how transitioning to all wind and solar power would require a large expenditure of fossil fuel. [00:44:13] Morley asks if it is true that Judy believes that instead of trying to reach zero carbon emissions by 2025, or some other date, that we should invest in increasing our resilience to extreme weather events. [00:45:05] Morley pivots to talk about Judy’s book, “Climate Uncertainty and Risk” which Judy began writing in 2020. [00:45:58] Morley asks Judy when and why she started her blog “Climate Etc.,” and how it helped her in preparation for her book. [00:46:31] Ken explains that Judy’s book is very ambitious and sets out to show how the narrow and politicized framing of the climate debate has resulted in an oversimplification of both the scientific problem and its solutions. Ken asks if it is true that the book is not just about the climate debate but also, in more broad terms, about uncertainty and risk. [00:48:00] Morley asks Judy about the second part of her book, specifically the chapter titled “The Climate Change Uncertainty Monster,” which highlights the problems we face in terms of climate change. [00:49:03] Morley mentions that there is a section in Judy’s book titled “Emissions and Temperature Targets.” She begins the chapter with a quote from environmental scientist John Foley: “The first rule of climate chess is this: The board is bigger than we think, and includes more than fossil fuels.” Morley asks Judy what else the board includes. [00:49:41] Morley asks about a paper that Judy referenced towards the end of her book in laying out scenarios for a way forward with climate change, “Usable Climate Science Is Adaption Science,” in which Adam Sobel of Columbia University writes that in the present historical moment, the only climate science that is truly usable is that which is oriented toward adaptation. He argues that current policies and politics are so far removed from what we need to do to avert dangerous climate change that scientific uncertainty is not a limiting factor on mitigation. [00:51:32] Morley asks about another paper that Judy references in her book titled “Small Is Beautiful: Climate-Change Science as if People Mattered.” Written by Regina Rodrigues of Brazil’s Department of Meteorology and Theodore Shepherd of the University of Reading in the UK, it describes how there is a widely accepted gap between the production and use of climate information. The authors call for a break with traditional climate research and methodology, which at the moment seems to be very top-down driven. Morley asks Judy to talk about the proposal for a more bottom-up approach. [00:52:26] Ken pivots to ask Judy about the term “wicked science,” which she refers to in the last chapter of her book. The chapter is titled “Wicked Science for Wicked Times.” [00:53:58] Morley asks Judy how she spends her time now that she has resigned from Georgia Tech and academic life. Links: Judith Curry Wikhhipedia page Judith Curry website Learn more about IHMC STEM-Talk homepage Ken Ford bio Ken Ford Wikipedia page Dawn Kernagis bio      

Transcribed - Published: 5 October 2023

Today we have one of the world’s foremost authorities on dietary protein and amino acids, Dr. Donald Layman. He is known for his extensive research on muscle development as well as his studies of metabolic regulation for obesity, diabetes, and cardiovascular disease. Don is a professor emeritus in the Department of Food Science and Human Nutrition at the University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign. He spent 31 years on the faculty before stepping away in 2012. Much of Don’s research over the years investigated the impact of diet and exercise on adult health problems related to obesity, type 2 diabetes and metabolic syndrome. His lab at Illinois particularly focused on understanding metabolism. He conducted clinical trials for nearly two decades that helped create a new understanding about how to optimize people’s macronutrient balance and metabolism. In addition to his work on metabolism, Don has also conducted extensive research into ways to enhance body composition, increase energy levels and monitor blood sugar. Today Don works as Director of Research for the American Egg Board and is a nutrition consultant for the National Dairy Council and The National Cattlemen’s Beef Association. He also is the Chief Science Officer for Qivana, a natural products marketing company that promotes the weight-loss program that Don developed in his lab at the University of Illinois. Show notes: [00:04:02] Marcas asks Don what it was like growing up on a farm in a small town in northern Illinois. [00:04:29] Marcas asks how small the town was that Don grew up in. [00:05:16] Don explains how he first became interested in science. [00:05:39] Don talks about how he realized in college that he wasn’t as good at math as he thought he was. He shares how this shifted his focus away from chemical engineering. [00:06:27] Marcas asks if Don’s natural intuition and interest for biochemistry stemmed from growing up on a farm. [00:07:10] Ken mentions that as Don was studying biochemistry, he started looking into protein synthesis with a professor by the name of Arlen Richardson, who was known for his aging research. Ken asks Don to talk about this period and how his interest in protein and muscle evolved. [00:08:27] Marcas asks Don to explain for listeners the importance of protein as it relates to metabolism and what he means when he talks about protein turnover. [00:09:36] Marcas mentions that we hear a lot about the need to maintain muscle as we grow older, but that back in the ‘70s and ‘80s when Don was starting his career, there wasn’t much of a focus on muscle, except in terms of athletic performance. Marcas goes on to explain that largely because of Don’s research, we now know that protein is critical in terms of helping people stay healthier as they age. Marcas asks Don to give a sense of just how important protein is for our health span and aging. [00:12:35] Ken asks if it is true that the inefficiency in muscle protein synthesis begins as early as one’s thirties. [00:14:11] Ken asks Don to talk about the right amount of protein an individual should consume and mentions that there is much confusion on this issue, largely due to the food pyramid’s recommended daily allowance for protein of 0.8 grams per kilogram of body weight. [00:15:51] Ken mentions that Don has talked in the past about how 40 percent of women who are 60 and older consume less than the RDA for protein, which is likely the bare minimum. Ken asks if it is reasonable to say that a plant-based diet for older women could be risky. [00:17:13] Ken asks Don to address the claims that high-protein diets are not good for you, and that too much protein can harm your liver and kidney. [00:18:47] Marcas shifts gears to talk about the quality of protein consumed. Marcas explains that it is much easier for carnivores to get the right amount of protein than vegans, largely because the amino acid leucine is vital for muscle repair and replacement, and leucine is very low in plant-based foods. Marcas asks Don to talk about the difficulty vegetarians and vegans have in consuming enough protein. [00:21:07] Ken mentions that we hear a lot about the need to adopt a more plant-based diet, but that Don is on record saying that we already have a plant-based diet. Ken asks Don to elaborate on this. [00:22:23] Marcas asks Don to talk about America’s plant-based diet in relationship to the obesity epidemic. [00:23:18] Marcas shifts gears to talk about Don’s 1998 paper that set out to define the role of protein in regulating muscle protein synthesis at the level of translation initiation, which is the rate-limiting step in protein synthesis. Marcas asks Don to talk about this study and its significance. [00:26:00] Ken mentions that Don followed up the aforementioned 1998 paper with a parallel article titled “Leucine Supplementation Enhances Skeletal Muscle Recovery in Rats Following Exercise.” This study showed a link between protein, specifically leucine, to muscle initiation factors. Ken asks Don to talk about the significance of this paper. [00:28:08] Ken pivots to discuss mTOR, or mammalian target of rapamycin, and explains that there’s confusion about mTOR and protein because public discourse about mTOR is full of mixed signals. Ken explains that we have had several guests on STEM-Talk to discuss mTOR, including David Sabatini, episode 70, who discovered mTOR. Ken asks Don to give an overview of mTOR. (Some other STEM-Talk interviews that covered mTOR include Keith Baar, episodes 62 and 63, and Matt Kaeberlein, episode 139.) [00:30:33] Ken mentions the difference between chronic and pulsatile activation of mTOR. [00:32:58] Ken asks Don about his 2005 paper titled “Dietary Protein and Exercise Have Additive Effects on Body Composition,” a paper that demonstrated the synergy of protein and exercise. [00:36:50] In a follow-up question, Marcas asks how this protein-diet and exercise combination that Don proposes can help in the maintenance of weight loss. [00:39:28] Ken asks about the advantages of protein in terms of thermogenesis and satiation. [00:42:04] Marcas asks Don what sort of exercise people should do to build muscle after correcting their protein intake. Marcas asks if exercise should be focused on muscle building or aerobics. [00:45:27] Ken mentions that Marcas led a clinical trial in 2011 at the University of Alabama Birmingham that showed how men and women in their 60s and 70w who underwent supervised weight training developed muscles that were as strong as those of the average 35- to 40-year-old. Ken asks Marcas to share how this study demonstrated that the neuromuscular system of older adults could be robustly responsive to resistance training. [00:48:54] After describing his clinical trial that looked at supervised weight training for men and women in their 60s and 70s, Marcas asks Don for his thoughts on prescriptive dosing of exercise for older adults. [00:51:45] Marcas asks Don if there is an optimal timing of protein intake relative to exercise to get the maximum benefit. [00:53:42] Marcas mentions Don’s website “Metabolic Transformation,” and the work Don has done with his former student Dr. Gabrielle Lyon on the concepts of muscle centric health and protein centric diets. [00:56:46] Ken asks Don to walk listeners through what happens while we sleep and why it is important to start the day with a substantial amount of protein at breakfast. [00:59:21] Marcas asks, considering Don’s recommendation of forty grams of protein at breakfast, what Don generally eats for breakfast. [01:01:46] Ken asks how many grams of protein people should aim for at dinner and lunch. [01:03:29] Marcas circles back to intermittent fasting and time restricted eating and asks Don if he thinks they are effective strategies for weight loss and maintenance. [01:06:02] Marcas mentions that Don’s former student, Gabrielle Lyon, has a book coming out that builds off a lot of the research she and Don have worked on together. Marcas asks Don what he knows about the book, which is titled “Forever Strong: A New Science-Based Strategy for Aging Well.” [01:07:14] Ken asks Don about a panel discussion that Don was part of at the American Society of Nutrition conference in Boston over the summer. Don talks about some of the key points that came out of the discussion, which was titled “The Global Nutrition Transition: Improving Nutrient Analysis and Monitoring of Metabolic Markers.” [01:10:07] Ken closes the interview asking how Don spends his time now that he has stepped away from his day-to-day duties at Illinois. Links: Learn more about IHMC STEM-Talk homepage Ken Ford bio Ken Ford Wikipedia page Marcas Bamman bio Donald Layman bio Metabolic Transformation website      

Transcribed - Published: 14 September 2023

Today’s interview is with Dr. Josh Hagen, the director of the Human Performance Collaborative at Ohio State University and an Associate Research Professor in the university’s Department of Integrated Systems Engineering. Joining co-host Ken Ford for this episode is IHMC’s Chief Strategic Partnership Officer Morley Stone who has a long history with Josh has and been instrumental in his career. Today we talk with Josh about his work at the Human Performance Collaborate, which brings together multi-disciplinary teams of researchers, sports scientists, data scientists, and practitioners with the goal of optimizing human performance in Ohio State athletes. Within the human performance research area, Josh leads two areas: Sport and Tactical Performance Science and Recovery Science. At Ohio State, Josh works with other performance-science researchers to evaluate the physical traits and capabilities of athletes. Josh and his colleagues then collaborate with coaches and athletic trainers to make adjustments in the weight room, on the field, and during recovery after training or competitions. In addition to his work at Ohio State, Josh also is working on federally funded projects in human performance with Special Operations Command, The Air Force Research Laboratory, the Office of Naval Research and several private foundations. Josh joined IHMC in 2022 in a collaborate role as a Visiting Senior Research Scientist. Josh is a graduate of the University of Cincinnati where he studied and earned a Ph.D. in materials science and engineering. He spent 11 years at the Air Force Research Laboratory, which is where Morley and Josh first worked together. After his stint at the Air Force Research Laboratory, Josh headed for West Virginia University as the director of the Human Performance Innovation Center at the Rockefeller Neuroscience Institute before moving to the Ohio State University. Show notes: [00:03:39] Morley starts the interview asking Josh if he played a lot of sports as a kid. [00:03:54] Morley asks if it is true that in addition to being a bit of a jock, Josh was also a nerd growing up. [00:04:34] Josh talks about the high school chemistry teacher who got him excited about science. [00:06:05] Morley asks how Josh ended up at the University of Cincinnati. [00:07:06] Morley mentions that after Josh earned his bachelor’s degree in chemical engineering, he worked for a private company before deciding he did not want to spend his career in chemical engineering. Morley asks about the advice that one of his professors gave Josh at the time. [00:09:03] Ken mentions that it was at the Materials Directorate at the Air Force Research Lab, where Josh first met Morley. Ken asks Morley what he remembers about the young Josh. [00:11:19] Ken turns the question to Josh and asks him about his first impressions of Morley. [00:12:12] Ken mentions that after Josh completed his graduate work, he again went to work in the private sector, and again found it unfulfilling. Josh talks about calling Morley to see if he had a job opening. [00:13:51] Morley mentions that in 2018, Josh left the Air Force and went to work at West Virginia University, where he became the director of the Human Performance Innovation Center at the Rockefeller Neuroscience Institute. Morley asks Josh how that job came about and what sort of work went on in that lab. [00:15:46] Ken mentions that after Josh’s time at West Virginia, Morley offered Josh a job at Ohio State University, where Morley was, at the time, the senior vice president for research at Ohio State. Ken asks what this time was like for Josh. [00:17:17] Morley mentions that in Josh’s role as the director of the Human Performance Collaborative, he works with a multidisciplinary team, and largely worked with two populations, sports athletes and the military. Morley asks Josh to give a sense of how Josh’s lab works with both groups. [00:20:18] Morley asks Josh to explain what he means by “the need to understand performance on a system level.” [00:23:14] Ken asks Josh about the use of Heart Rate Variability monitoring on Ohio State’s wrestling team. [00:26:34] Morley references a video in which Josh talks about using training load monitors in work with athletes. Morley asks Josh to explain how they work and how one uses them to get more insight into an athlete. [00:29:13] Morley asks Josh what the biggest change he has seen in how athletes approach the off season. [00:32:03] Morley mentions that Josh was part of a longitudinal study that looked at changes in a baseball player’s maximal strength as a result of resistance training. The study focused the impact the exercise had in terms of total home runs per game across three years of training in four competitive seasons for four teams. Morley asks Josh to talk about this study. [00:33:40] Morley switches topics to Josh’s research and studies on wearables and other technologies related to enhancing human performance. Morley mentions Josh’s 2020 paper that examined the use of commercially available heart rate devices to derive an estimate of core body temperature in division-1 NCAA football players, The goal was to find a viable tool to identify heat stress in players. Morley asks Josh to talk about the findings of this study and their significance. [00:38:18] Ken mentions Josh’s 2020 paper on monitoring neuromuscular performance in military personnel. Ken goes on to mention that there is a high standard that elite tactical forces must meet in terms of physical readiness. He asks Josh how he conducted this study, as well as the importance of closely monitoring neuromuscular performance in military troops. [00:43:08] Ken asks about Josh’s study on popular commercial off-the-shelf wearables that give health data for consumers.  Ken asks about their accuracy. [00:48:57] With respect to Josh’s sleep study, Ken asks, which of the nine devices tested was more effective.  Or, Ken wonders, did they all have about same level of accuracy and effectiveness. [00:50:16] Ken mentions some of the problems with sleep monitoring devices, particularly their inability to accurately track sleep staging. Ken asks Josh if he has any advice for people on what sleep device they should use and how they should approach using it. [00:53:12] Morley brings up the case of first responders and mentions that firefighters are three times more likely to die on the job than any other occupation. Morley goes on to mention that while there is a great deal of attention paid to developing better equipment and gear to protect firefighters, not as much attention has been paid to understanding the physiological and biological processes that firefighters experience as a part of their job. Morley asks about Josh’s study conducted on firefighters titled “Biomarker and Biometric Indices of Physical Exhaustion in the Firefighting Community.” [00:57:52] Morley asks Josh about his work with the Air Force’s 711th Human Performance Wing, particularly Josh’s project that he has led for the past decade called STRONG (signature tracking or optimized nutrition and training) which aims to develop physical training routines and nutritional approaches that can enhance a warfighter’s performance and resilience. [01:01:09] Morley asks what are some of the technologies Josh has explored in the STRONG lab. [01:02:59] Ken asks if there is a difference in the error bars between more and less expensive bio impedance measurement devices in comparison to dexa scans. [01:04:01] Ken asks Morley to give an overview of IHMC’s research project that involves Josh, Ohio State University, and the STRONG lab, called AAPEX (Assessing and Augmenting Performance in Extreme Environments). Ken explains that this project aims for real time assessment of a special operator’s cognitive performance over long-duration missions, often in extreme environments, as well as developing wearable devices and an integrated system that will help warfighters overcome fatigue and stress by continually sensing and assessing their performance. [01:08:28] Ken asks Josh about his use of the Smartabase platform, which is a commercial human performance optimization platform used for sports teams, military, and other organizations. Ken also asks why Josh is a fan of this platform and what it offers. [01:12:45] Morley closes the interview by asking Josh how someone goes from working for a private company developing spearmint and other flavors to working with elite warfighters and athletes. Links: Josh Hagen bio Learn more about IHMC STEM-Talk homepage Ken Ford bio Ken Ford Wikipedia page Dawn Kernagis bio

Transcribed - Published: 21 August 2023

Today we have the world’s foremost authority on kratom returning to STEM-Talk after five years to give us an update on his research. Shortly after his 2018 interview on episode 61,  Dr. Christopher McCurdy and his lab at the University of Florida received two major grants from the National Institute of Drug Abuse to investigate the medical efficacy of kratom and its alkaloids, which we discuss in today’s show. Mitragyna speciosa, or kratom, is an herbal leaf from a tropical evergreen tree in the coffee family.  It is native to Southeast Asia where it has been used in herbal medicine for hundreds of years. Kratom has become increasingly popular in the United States and throughout the world for recreational purposes. But kratom is also becoming recognized in the medical and research communities for its treatment for chronic pain as well as its potential to alleviate opioid withdrawal symptoms. For more than 25 years, McCurdy has studied the design, synthesis, and development of drugs to treat pain, anxiety, and substance-abuse disorders. For the past 15 years, Chris and his lab have turned a lot of their attention toward kratom and its chemical components to better understand its potential to treat a multitude of conditions. Chris is a professor in the Medicinal Chemistry Department in the College of Pharmacy at the University of Florida. He also is director of the of school’s Translational Drug Development Core and an Associate Dean for Faculty Development. Our interview with Chris comes on the heels of Florida passing the Kratom Consumer Protection Act, which mandates that kratom products sold in the state meet a high standard of product purity. In today’s interview, we talk to Chris about the protection act as well as: — The numerous studies he has been able to conduct thanks to his lab’s two grants from the National Institute of Drug Abuse. — The disparity between the traditional use of kratom and the new often highly concentrated manufactured products sold in the U.S. — His lab’s study examining the effects of lyophilized kratom tea and its ability to alleviate withdrawal symptoms of opioid-dependence. — The potential of kratom alkaloids to serve as treatment of various substance abuse disorders. — The benefits and risks associated with CBD usage. Show notes [00:03:21] Dawn opens the interview welcoming Chris back to STEM-Talk and mentions that his last appearance was episode 61 in 2018. Dawn explains that Chris has devoted much of his research to kratom, or Mitragyna speciosa, which is a traditional Southeast Asian medicine. It has been used by indigenous populations for centuries to increase endurance, enhance mood, treat pain, and mitigate opioid withdrawal symptoms. Dawn asks Chris to give a short overview of kratom and why it is attracting so much attention recently. [00:09:14] Ken mentions that at the time Chris first appeared on STEM-Talk, he was in the process of attracting funding to take a deep dive into kratom, which he has now secured from the National Institute of Drug Abuse. Ken asks Chris to give a general overview of the research they are conducting with this grant and what they are finding. [00:15:19] Dawn mentions that in Chris’s last interview on STEM-Talk, he mentioned that researching kratom was difficult due to a lack of standardization and asks if this has changed. [00:21:11] Ken asks about a Thai product that is a freeze-dried leaf, which is coming to the US market, and if this product is more like what is used in Southeast Asia as opposed to the ground leaf material available in the U.S. market. [00:24:29] Dawn mentions that in 2020, Chris and a colleague published an article in the journal Current Opinion in Psychiatry on the need to address the disparity between the traditional use of kratom and the new often highly concentrated manufactured products sold in the U.S. and other countries. Dawn asks Chris to talk about the points made in this article. [00:32:35] Ken follows up on the previous discussion asking how the alkaloid strength and combination may change not only due to the processing of the kratom leaf material, but also as a factor of time. [00:36:33] Dawn asks about a paper that Chris and his colleagues published  in the journal Addiction Biology, which reported on research conducted with rats and looked at two of the major psychoactive constituents of kratom: mitragynine and 7-hydroxymitragynine, with an eye toward understanding their potential therapeutic value as well as their abuse potential. [00:44:12] Ken mentions that in November of 2020, Chris and his team published an article reporting on research examining the effects of lyophilized kratom tea with an eye toward determining if kratom alleviated withdrawal symptoms of opioid-dependence. Ken asks about the findings of this study. [00:50:21] Ken asks Chris what the difference is between the lyophilized kratom tea and other preparations. [00:54:20] Dawn mentions an article that Chris published in January and was tagged by the International Association of Pain Management as its paper of the week. Dawn explains that the paper addressed the potential of kratom alkaloids to serve as treatment of various substance abuse disorders. These alkaloids may serve as a blueprint for the development of novel therapies to treat these disorders. Dawn asks Chris to summarize this paper and its findings. [00:58:51] Dawn shifts the conversation to talk about CBD and explains that the FDA has said that further research needs to be done to determine how much CBD can be consumed before harm is caused. Chris has gone on record saying that we need to balance consumer desire for CBD products with a regulatory framework to ensure safety. Dawn asks Chris about the benefits and risks associated with CBD usage. [01:07:19] Ken asks Chris about a recent bill signed into law called the Florida Kratom Consumer Protection Act, which mandates that kratom products sold in Florida meet a very high standard of product purity. It also establishes labeling requirements and limits sales to consumers aged 21 and older. Ken asks Chris to talk about this legislation and why he was in favor of it. [01:13:13] Dawn closes the interview mentioning that Chris has certainly had a lot on his plate over the past five years. She asks what he foresees for his research over the next five years. Links: Christopher McCurdy bio Learn more about IHMC STEM-Talk homepage Ken Ford bio Ken Ford Wikipedia page Dawn Kernagis bio  

Transcribed - Published: 20 July 2023

Today we have Dr. Brian Cole, an orthopedic surgeon who specializes in cartilage restoration, orthobiologics, and advanced surgical techniques for the treatment of knee, elbow, and shoulder injuries. He is the team physician for the NBA’s Chicago Bulls and the co-team physician for the Chicago White Sox. He also is the host of the Sports Medicine Weekly Podcast. Brian practices orthopedic sports medicine at Midwest Orthopaedics. He also is a professor of Orthopaedics, Anatomy and Cell Biology at Rush University Medical Center in Chicago. He is Managing Partner of Midwest Orthopaedics and is the department’s Associate Chairman and the Section Head of the Cartilage Research and Restoration Center. In addition to this work, he also serves as the Chairman of Surgery at Rush Oak Park Hospital. In today’s interview, we talk to Brian about his cutting-edge research into ways to treat knee, shoulder, and elbow injuries.  Brian shares his novel approach to dealing with ACL tears, one of the most common sports injuries, and his investigations of methods to enhance the healing and recovery time following ACL reconstructions. He also talks about new advances in minimally invasive surgical techniques for many common injuries.  We have a particularly interesting conversation with Brian about exciting developments in the use of stem-cell treatments as well as the use of bone marrow aspirate to treat injuries. Show notes: [00:03:53] Marcas opens the interview mentioning that Brian was in the eighth grade when he fell in love with a popular sit-com from the 1970s,  “The Bob Newhart Show.” Marcas asks Brain what he loved about the show and what impact it had on him. [00:05:07] Brian enrolled in the University of Illinois after graduating from high school. Marcas asks Brian if knew he wanted to major in biology and psychology when he arrived on campus. [00:05:58] Ken mentions that after Brian’s undergrad, he travelled upstate to the University of Chicago, where he earned an MD and an MBA. Ken asks what led Brian to pursue both an MD and MBA. [00:09:52] Ken explains that after the University of Chicago, Brian moved to New York City for an orthopaedic research fellowship in metabolic bone disease at the Hospital for Special Surgery. Brian also decided to do his residency there as well. Ken asks how that came about. [00:11:31] Marcas mentions that after Brian finished his fellowship and residency, he went to the University of Pittsburgh for a sports medicine fellowship. Marcas asks what led Brian there and what drove his interest in sports medicine. [00:13:10] Marcas asks Brian about a fortuitous phone call he received when he was a fourth-year resident. [00:14:34] Ken explains that Midwest Orthopaedics is one of the nation’s most respected private orthopaedic practices.  Ken notes that through a partnership with Rush University Medical Center, Midwest has developed a national reputation as a leader in sports medicine; hip, knee, spine, and cartilage restoration; as well as shoulder care and pain management. Rush also is an academic medical center that includes a 671-bed hospital and is a center for basic and clinical research. Ken asks Brian to describe the scope of the work that goes on at Midwest and Rush. [00:17:20] Marcas comments that Brian is also the head team physician for the Chicago Bulls and the co-team physician for the Chicago White Sox, and asks Brian to describe some of the work that he does in that capacity. [00:20:09] Marcas explains that Brian treats a wide range of patients with injuries and pain, from athletes to non-athletes, and from children to senior citizens, and that he has performed more than 20,000 surgeries over the course of his career. Marcas asks Brian to give a sense of the patients he sees and what his average day at the office is like. [00:24:00] Ken points out that Brian is known for focusing on treating the patient and not the x-ray or MRI. Ken goes on to say that x-rays and MRIs often bog down both the practitioner and patient with too much information. Brian often refers to this overload as BARF and VOMIT. Ken asks Brian to explain what he means by BARF and VOMIT. [00:31:56] Marcas reflects that a few decades ago, the only way to help someone with the loss of cartilage in the knee was to surgically go into the knee and clean up the debris. Bone on bone pain makes it difficult to walk, get up and down in a chair, and climb stairs. Marcas asks Brian to explain the range of options available to patients today in this regard. [00:35:31] Ken mentions that in the past couple of decades, there have been numerous advancements in how to treat patients with shoulder, elbow, and knee injuries via non-surgical means, ranging from biochemical to pharmacological to diet and rehabilitation. Ken asks Brian to give an overview of these nonsurgical methods and the status of evidence supporting each. [00:39:08] Ken explains that weight loss is often an effective approach to reducing knee pain, and that for every pound a person loses, it leads to a five-to seven-pound reduction at the level of a person’s joints below their waist. Ken asks Brian to talk about the importance of this and how he and others in the practice discuss this with their patients. [00:43:06] Marcas explains that ACL tears often require surgery and are among the most common injuries for athletes and workers in physically demanding jobs, with approximately 500,000 ACL tears each year. Marcas asks Brian to give a sense of what happens to a person when they experience an ACL injury. [00:46:05] Marcas comments that according to the American Academy of Pediatrics, ACL tears have skyrocketed among 14- to 18-year-olds, increasing by 148 percent over the past 10 years. Marcas asks what is causing this increase. [00:48:28] Ken follows up on the previous question mentioning that there is a critical need to develop novel strategies to enhance ACL healing and accelerate recovery time after an ACL reconstruction. Ken goes on to mention that Brian has a study that was designed to assess the effect of bone marrow aspirate concentrate to reduce recovery time and asks about the findings of this study. [00:51:03] Marcas comments that in the late 1900s, cultured chondrocytes implanted beneath a periosteal patch were used as a treatment for chondral injuries. Animal studies had demonstrated hyaline-like repair. Along with encouraging early clinical results, this led to the widespread implementation of autologous chondrocyte implantation, or ACI, in the U.S. and Europe. Marcas goes on to say that many clinical studies supported the long-term efficacy and durability of ACI, but today, scientists are investigating alternative methods of enhancing the biological repair and the surgical technique using ACI. Marcas asks about Brian’s paper – titled  “Current Status of Autologous Chondrocyte Implantation” –that recently appeared in Sports Medicine Reports. [00:53:52] Ken asks Brian to discuss meniscal tears, which are the most common pathology of the knee, and one of the most common pathologies in sports medicine. Ken mentions that Brian coauthored an editorial in the Journal of Arthroscopic and Related Surgery that pointed out the most important first step in terms of treatment is determining whether the injury is an acute traumatic tear or a degenerative one. [00:56:11] Ken asks Brian about the use of bone marrow aspirate, or platelet-rich plasma, as a source of growth factors in progenitor cells in rotator cuff repair, a topic on which Brian has a paper coming out highlighting reductions in re-tear rates. [00:58:30] Marcas mentions that Brian has also been involved in a few biomechanics studies looking at fixation of soft tissue to bone and also fixation of soft tissue using sutures, and asks Brian to give a sense of why this work is important. [01:00:31] Marcas explains that current research on osteoarthritis and treatments for it are moving beyond the diseased joint, integrating other articular tissues, including synovium, fibrocartilage, and bone, as well as periarticular structures like muscles, tendons, and ligaments. Marcas asks how this model affects treatment plans. [01:03:43] Marcas explains that until recently, the impact of inflammation on OA pathogenesis was perhaps underappreciated, as OA was not considered an inflammatory disease. He goes on to explain that the field seems to have shifted in this thinking to now include effects of inflammation on periarticular tissues. Marcas asks Brian what his thoughts are on this. [01:08:05] Ken mentions that one of the more promising developments in the field is the use of stem-cell treatments of various kinds, and to this point Ken mentions that there are a number of different approaches. Ken asks Brian to talk about this and perhaps separate fact from fiction on the matter. [01:10:23] Ken asks about cultured stem cells, which are used in treatments for which thousands of Americans travel overseas for each year. Ken asks if there are studies that show increased efficacy in any of these methods. [01:11:29] Ken mentions that Brian also specializes in the treatment of glenohumeral arthritis, which is a degenerative joint disease affecting the shoulder, and is characterized by the degeneration or wearing away of the protective cartilage covering the ends of the bones in the joint. Ken asks Brian to explain what the standard of care is for this disease. [01:13:41] Marcas asks what the average lifespan of a modern shoulder replacement can be expected to be. [01:15:44] Ken asks how reverse shoulder replacement compares to anatomical shoulder replacement. [01:17:10] Ken asks about a 2019 study in the British Medical Journal that reported the risks associated with shoulder replacement surgery for arthritic conditions is much higher than previously thought. Ken explains that the study found that one in four men aged 55 to 59 were at risk of needing further revision surgery, and that the risk of serious adverse events like heart attacks and major blood clots within 90 days of surgery were much higher than previously estimated, particularly in people over 85 years of age. [01:21:29] Marcas closes the interview mentioning that Brian, in addition to his medical practice, is also in the podcast business, hosting a weekly show called “Sports Medicine Weekly Podcast with Dr. Brian Cole.” Marcas asks Brian to discuss the range of topics covered in the podcast.

Transcribed - Published: 28 June 2023

Today we have our good friend and colleague Dr. Dominic D’Agostino returning for his third appearance on STEM-Talk. Dom, as most of our longtime listeners know, is well-known for his research into the ketogenic diet and the physiological benefits of nutritional ketosis. Since our last conversation with Dom in 2019, a tremendous body of research has been added to the literature about the therapeutic potential of ketosis. The high-fat, low-carb ketogenic diet has been linked to advances in the treatment of Alzheimer’s, cancer, migraines, type-2 diabetes, psoriasis, sleep apnea, psychiatric disorders, traumatic brain injuries as well as a host of other diseases and disorders, which we cover in today’s interview. In episode 14 of STEM-Talk, we talked to Dom about his development and testing of metabolic therapies involving the ketogenic diet for a wide range of diseases and conditions. In episode 87, Dom returned to reflect on his 10 years of research focused on the high-fat/low-carbohydrate diet. In today’s interview, we talk to Dom about this latest work as well as his extensive research on hyperbaric oxygen. Dom is a tenured Associate Professor in the Department of Molecular Pharmacology and Physiology at the University of South Florida Morsani. He specializes in neuroscience, molecular pharmacology, nutrition, and physiology. Dom also is our colleague and a research scientist here at the IHMC. Show notes  [00:02:50] Dawn opens the interview mentioning Dom’s recent IHMC Evening Lecture, in which he mentions the film “First Do No Harm” starring Meryl Streep. The film is based on the true story of a four-year-old boy diagnosed with severe epilepsy, whose extreme seizures continued despite extensive medical treatments. The boy’s mother reached to Dr. John Freeman, a physician who had successfully treated patients with a ketogenic diet. Dawn asks Dom to give some context about this fictional film based on a true story. [00:05:05] Dawn asks Dom to discuss the many evidence-based applications of the ketogenic diet that he highlighted in his IHMC evening lecture. [00:07:11] Ken asks Dom about another story involving Russell Winwood, a man with severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, also known as COPD. Russell reached out to Dom with respect to treating his COPD with a ketogenic diet. [00:11:21] Ken asks if Russell only engaged in the ketogenic diet or if also used exogenous ketones. [00:12:10] Ken mentions that the ketogenic diet has the broad potential to be an anti-inflammatory diet. Ken goes on to mention that COPD is an inflammatory disease. As Dom’s case report suggested, Ken wonders if the ketogenic diet has the potential to have strong therapeutic effects for other inflammatory conditions as well. Ken asks what other conditions Dom thinks might benefit from therapeutic ketosis. [00:14:02] Dawn mentions that Dom has been busy since his last appearance on STEM-Talk, having authored or collaborated on more than 40 papers, one of which garnered a lot of attention and was published in Frontiers in Neuroscience. This paper investigated whether therapeutic ketosis via ketone esters could represent a viable way to treat epilepsy and other seizure disorders. Dawn asks Dom to elaborate on this paper’s findings and their significance. [00:16:26] Ken mentions that those listeners who are unfamiliar with ketone esters may want to check out our interview with Dr. Brianna Stubbs. Ken asks Dom to give a quick primer on ketone esters and why so many researchers in the field are excited about their potential. [00:19:20] Ken mentions that in addition to ketone salts and ketone esters, there are other product formulations out now, like the one from a company called Kenetik. Ken asks Dom what he thinks about this formulation. [00:23:33] Dawn mentions that Dom has had a number of animal studies published since 2019 looking at ketone induced neuroprotection and asks Dom to give an overview of some of this work. [00:25:57] Dawn asks Dom about his research on Angelman Syndrome, which is a rare genetic and neurological disorder that causes seizures, developmental delay, loss of body movements, and lack of speech. Dawn mentions that Dom was a part of a mouse study that explored whether ketone supplementation could mimic the ketogenic diet as an anticonvulsant, as well as the effects of ketone esters on behavioral and metabolic outcomes. The results of this study were promising, and Dawn asks Dom to talk about some of the key takeaways. [00:29:37] Ken mentions that it makes sense that the ketogenic diet would elevate NAD (nicotinamide adenine dinucleotide) levels. Ken asks Dom whether this same effect is observed with exogenous ketones. [00:30:32] Ken mentions that in the last decade there have been numerous human studies that have investigated the therapeutic role of ketogenic diets in various neurological disorders, with recent work looking into the potential therapeutic effects of ketosis on Alzheimer’s disease. Ken asks Dom to touch on some of this research, and also mentions that episode 59 of STEM-Talk with Steven Cunnane focused a good bit on Alzheimer’s in the context of exogenous ketones. [00:35:02] Dawn mentions that Dom was part of two studies that examined the effects of a ketogenic diet on athletic performance. Dawn goes on to explain that high-carbohydrate, low-fat diets have been the standard for athletes for years, but recent research has challenged the superiority of carb loading. Dawn mentions that former IHMC colleague Dr. Andrew Koutnik published a study that had middle aged athletes undergo two different 31-day isocaloric diets, one which was high carb, and the other ketogenic. Dawn explains that both Dom and Jeff Volek participated in this study and asks Dom what the key takeaways were. [00:37:46] Ken explains that Dom and Jeff Volek also collaborated with Andrew Koutnik on another study on the crossover effect. Before diving into that study specifically, Ken asks Dom to explain what the crossover effect is. [00:40:13] Dawn mentions that Dom has been a part of many studies that have demonstrated the positive impact of a ketogenic diet, but addressing the elephant in the room, Dawn asks Dom what his thoughts are on the fact that some individuals respond to the ketogenic diet by developing a marked elevation of LDL cholesterol on the ketogenic diet, otherwise known as the lean mass hyper-responder phenotype. Dawn specifically asks Dom about an article he and other researchers published in the Journal of Clinical Lipidology on this topic, titled “Elevated LDL-cholesterol levels among lean mass hyper-responders on low-carbohydrate ketogenic diets deserve urgent clinical attention and further research.” [00:45:16] Dawn explains that there is no one-size fits all diet, with some people breezing through a ketogenic diet and others who do not tolerate it as well. She mentions that Dom had a review published a few years ago that examined genetic and other markers in an effort to identify how people might respond to a ketogenic diet, the goal being to identify individuals who were most likely to benefit from a ketogenic diet, and pinpoint individuals who might be at risk of adverse health outcomes because of the diet. Dawn asks Dom to walk through this review and explain its findings. [00:50:03] Ken mentions that Dom has done a lot of research on hyperbaric oxygen, which is a well-established treatment for decompression sickness, which is a risk among divers. Ken goes on to explain that hyperbaric oxygen therapy is now being used to treat several medical conditions including traumatic brain injury. There is controversy, however, regarding this therapy. Ken asks Dom to give a short primer on hyperbaric oxygen and why it has lately attracted so much attention. [00:52:56] Dawn follows up by jumping into a discussion about the NASA project NEEMO that sends crews of astronauts, aquanauts, engineers, and scientists to live in a facility at the bottom of the Atlantic, known as Aquarius. It is the world’s only undersea research station. Dawn explains that NEEMO provides a good analog for space exploration, by mimicking the high physiological stress environment that astronauts experience during space missions. Dawn explains that she was on the crew of NEEMO 21 and Dom was on the crew of NEEMO 22, and Dom’s wife was a NEEMO support diver during NEEMO 22. She later became a part of the all-women crew in NEEMO 23. Dawn asks Dom to talk about his experience on NEEMO as well as the research he conducted. [00:57:58] Dawn asks about Dom’s paper he published after his experience on NEEMO, titled “Human Adaptations to Multiday Saturation on NASA NEEMO,” which explored the physical and psychological effects of living in a multiday hyperbaric environment. Dawn asks Dom to discuss this paper’s findings and its significance. [01:04:25] Ken mentions that Dom and his wife have moved to a farm and asks what life on the farm is like. Links: Dominic D’Agostino USF bio Learn more about IHMC STEM-Talk homepage Ken Ford bio Ken Ford Wikipedia page Dawn Kernagis bio  

Transcribed - Published: 8 June 2023

Today we have the former chief scientist of NASA’s Human Research Program, Dr. Mark Shelhamer. Mark specializes in neurovestibular adaptation to spaceflight. He is an otolaryngology professor at Johns Hopkins School of Medicine and the director of the school’s Human Spaceflight Lab. He also the director and founder of the Bioastronautics at Hopkins initiative. In addition to his work with NASA, Mark is an advisor to the commercial and consumer spaceflight industry. In today’s interview, we talk to Mark about some of this work, as well as the research he conducted on the first all-civilian crew that successfully orbited the Earth for three days in a SpaceX capsule. We mostly talk to Mark, however, about how the harsh conditions of space imperil humans. We have a fascinating discussion about Mark’s role in NASA’s planned human mission to Mars and how he is investigating ways to maintain the health and performance of astronauts on such a long-duration spaceflight.  We also discuss how the lessons Mark is learning about how the lessons of human spaceflight can be applied to healthcare on Earth. Show notes: [00:02:42] Dawn starts the interview mentioning that Mark grew up in Philadelphia in the ‘70s. She asks Mark what he was like as a kid. [00:03:32] Dawn asks if it is true that Mark played drums in a band in school. [00:03:54] Ken asks Mark to talk about an uncle who was key in fostering Mark’s interest in math and science. [00:05:31] Ken mentions that Mark was only 10 years old when he took up an interest in electronics and asks what sparked that and what electronics he specifically found interesting. [00:08:14] Dawn mentions that Mark attended Drexel University and initially wanted to become an electrical engineer but changed his mind somewhere along the way. Dawn asks what caused this shift. [00:10:20] Ken asks Mark why he selected to attend MIT after Drexel. [00:13:52] Ken asks Mark how he ended up at Johns Hopkins after finishing his studies at MIT. [00:15:52] Dawn mentions that when Mark arrived at Johns Hopkins as a postdoc fellow in 1990, he continued the research he had been doing at MIT on sensory motor physiology and modeling, including astronaut adaptation to space flight. Dawn asks Mark to give an overview of this research as well as how he tracked back into studying astronauts. [00:17:15] Ken mentions Mark’s 2007 book “Nonlinear Dynamics in Physiology: A State-Space Approach,” which provides mathematical-computational tools for analyzing experimental data. Ken asks Mark to talk about the book and its goals. [00:20:43] Ken mentions that Mark has done quite a bit of research into motion sickness and vestibular issues, and asks about his more recent work on Space Motion Sickness. [00:24:53] Dawn explains that on Mark’s Wikipedia page, there’s a reference to his pioneering work on a multidisciplinary approach to human space flight research. She asks Mark to give an overview of this work. [00:29:17] Dawn explains that spaceflight has widespread effects on many different body systems at the same time, and that Mark has been an advocate for developing approaches to examining all these interactions in a rigorous way. Dawn asks if Mark feels that we should be taking this rigorous multidisciplinary approach and applying it to terrestrial medicine as well. [00:34:08] Ken asks Mark to talk about some of the progress he has made in convincing certain groups that they need to embrace a multidisciplinary approach to their research. [00:38:37] Dawn mentions that getting people, especially groups, to change their approach to research can be a daunting task. She goes on to mention that Mark has been quoted as saying “If there’s one thing I’m known for, it’s banging my head against the wall trying to convince people to do integrative research.” Dawn asks Mark how many scars he has on his forehead from these efforts. [00:43:00] Dawn asks Mark to talk about his informal expertise on the history of NASA’s early stages of human spaceflight. [00:48:54] Dawn explains that we may be on the cusp of another exciting time with NASA’s Artemis program and plans to return to the moon. Dawn also mentions that two years ago, the first all-civilian crew was sent on a 3-day mission orbiting Earth by SpaceX in a Falcon rocket. Dawn explains that there were several research projects related to Inspiration4 and that Mark was the principal investigator for one of them. Dawn asks Mark to talk about this project, which is part of a NASA-supported experiment to test and study astronauts through the year 2033. [00:57:16] Ken points out the success of Apollo 17’s scientific inquiries thanks to Jack Schmitt being a scientist who had the chance to fly the mission as an astronaut. Ken and Mark talk about the importance of having more subject-matter experts go into space so that detailed spontaneous scientific observations can be made. [01:00:16] Dawn mentions that in 2013, Mark took leave from Johns Hopkins to serve as the chief scientist of NASA’s Human Research Program. In this capacity, Mark particularly looked at the effects of space radiation on people as well as the behavioral risks of being confined with a small group of people in tight quarters on a long-duration spaceflight. Dawn asks Mark to talk more about this research. [01:04:43] Mark Ken and Dawn discuss the psychological, mechanical, and physiological pros and cons of artificial gravity for a Mars mission. [01:07:39] Dawn mentions that most human research has been focused on keeping people healthy in space. However, one thing that Mark is excited about is the potential of spaceflight research to enhance terrestrial healthcare. Dawn mentions that not everyone sees the broader scientific value of human spaceflight research. To address this, Mark and a group of colleagues published a paper in 2020 titled, “Selected discoveries from human research in space that are relevant to human health on earth.” Dawn asks Mark to talk about what some of the reservations are that people have about the ability of spaceflight research to enhance terrestrial healthcare. [01:12:23] Ken mentions that this 2020 paper looked at five areas of physiology that support Mark’s contention of the broader implications of spaceflight research. Ken asks Mark to discuss these and their potential relevance to scientific and medical issues on Earth. [01:17:53] Ken starts a dialogue about the assessment of risk for a Mars mission, as well as proposing pharmacological interventions for things like bone loss in long duration space flights. [01:21:03] Ken explains that NASA estimates that it will take around seven months to get to Mars with a good planetary alignment. Ken goes on to explain that NASA is planning to send humans to Mars in the 2030s and asks Mark to give his thoughts about a future Mars Mission and the role that human research might play in enabling such missions. [01:26:08] Dawn explains that in addition to Mark’s NASA work, he also has projects involving SpaceX and Blue Origin, and mentions that he must be very busy at the moment. [01:26:45] Dawn mentions that Elon Musk has gone on record as saying that SpaceX will land humans on Mars by 2026 and asks Mark what his take on this is. [01:28:16] Ken asks if it is true that Mark remains an avid ham radio hobbyist and still plays drums in his spare time. [01:29:32] Dawn mentions that Mark’s high school is so proud of what he has accomplished in his career that last year he was inducted into his high school’s inaugural Hall of Fame class. [01:31:15] Dawn asks if Mark’s previously mentioned connection to the Hubble Space telescope research program is in fact his wife. [01:31:48] Dawn mentions that she has heard that Mark is a cat person and to close the interview asks Mark about that.

Transcribed - Published: 16 May 2023

Back in early days of the COVID-19 pandemic, Dr. John Ioannidis wrote an article in March of 2020 questioning government statistics about the fatality rate associated with COVID-19. The backlash was swift and brutal and John’s reputation as one of the most influential scientists in the world took a beating. Today, John makes his second appearance on STEM-Talk to discuss his extensive research into the COVID-19 pandemic as well as the public shaming he received in 2020 for questioning the World Health Organization’s prediction of a 3.4 percent fatality rate associated with COVID-19. John also talks about his most recent peer-reviewed paper that looked at the age-stratified infection fatality rate of COVID-19 in the non-elderly population.  The study found that the pre-vaccination fatality rate for those infected may have been as low as 0.03 percent for people under 60 years old, and 0.07 percent for people under 70, far below the World Health Organization’s prediction of a 3.4 percent fatality rate. In today’s episode, John walks us through this paper, which was published in January, as well as what he describes as the U.S. government’s bungled response to COVID-19. He also discusses the importance of collecting reliable data in the future to guide disease modelers and governments before they make decisions of monumental significance like lockdowns. He goes on to share how he underestimated the power that politics and the media, or powers outside of science, can have on science. Over the past two decades, John’s research has earned him a global reputation as a consummate physician and researcher, which contributed to The Atlantic describing John in 2010 as one of the most influential scientists alive. He is a professor of Medicine, Epidemiology and Population Health as well as a statistician and professor of biomedical data science at Stanford University. Back in 2018 when we interviewed John on episode 77 of STEM-Talk, we talked to him about his 2005 paper questioning the reliability of most medical research. The paper, titled, “Why Most Published Research Findings Are False,” found that much of the medical science reported in peer-reviewed journals is flawed and cannot be replicated. The paper is the most citied article in the history of the journal PLoS Medicine and has been viewed more than 3 million times. Show notes: [00:03:16] Dawn opens the interview welcoming John back to STEM-Talk. his last appearance being in 2018. Dawn explains that when John last appeared on STEM-Talk in 2018, he was described by Atlantic Magazine as “one of the most influential scientists alive.” But in the intervening years, John became public enemy number one in 2020 after a paper he published questioning government statistics about COVID 19’s fatality rate. Dawn asks John if it’s fair to say that he has been on a rather rocky ride for the past few years. [00:03:54] Dawn explains that John was trained at Harvard and Tufts universities in internal medicine and infectious disease, and asks John what led him to study infectious disease. [00:04:54] Ken asks John about his initial thoughts in 2019 when he first heard the reports coming out of China about COVID-19. [00:05:52] Ken explains that in March of 2020, John fell into some hot water for writing a piece questioning the 3.4 percent fatality rate associated with COVID-19. John found this number to be inflated and wrote that while COVID-19 was indeed a threat, it did not behave like the Spanish Flu or a pandemic that would lead to a 3.4 percent fatality rate. Ken asks John how he came to this conclusion. [00:08:37] The article that John wrote in 2020 was titled “A fiasco in the making? As the coronavirus pandemic takes hold, we are making decisions without reliable data.” John argued in his article that the data collected in the first three months of the pandemic was “utterly unreliable.” He went on to write that no one had a good way of knowing how many people were infected and therefore how the pandemic would evolve over time. Dawn asks John what could have been done so that governments and health agencies could have more accurately estimated incidents of new infections, particularly in the early months of the pandemic. [00:10:19] Dawn mentions that John initially supported the lockdown, but only as a temporary measure, and that he was of the mind that after February of 2020, we had missed the window to nip the pandemic in the bud. Dawn goes on to say that John believed that if we had acted earlier and more aggressively with testing, tracing, and isolating, like in South Korea, that we could have significantly slowed the spread of the virus. Dawn asks if John still feels this way now. [00:12:53] Dawn mentions that John wrote that the bulk of the mortalities related to COVID-19 occurred in people with limited life expectancy rather than young people. Dawn goes on to say that John was criticized for this, accused of minimizing the lives of the elderly and was even referred to as a “heartless granny killer.” Dawn asks John to expand on his point that age predicts mortality better than comorbidities. [00:15:16] Ken follows up regarding the disproportionate infections in nursing homes, mentioning that, among other stories, New York City showed very negative outcomes in terms of nursing-home populations. [00:16:13] Dawn asks if John investigated the nosocomial spread of COVID-19. [00:17:53] Ken mentions that one of the things we heard early on in the pandemic, was talk of flattening the curve so that we wouldn’t overwhelm hospitals. Ken asks John for his thoughts about this. [00:20:04] Dawn asks John what he thought of the Great Barrington Declaration, a paper that questioned school closings, lockdowns, travel restrictions and other governmental responses to the COVID-19 pandemic. Dawn goes on to mention that one of the authors of that paper, Dr. Martin Kulldorff, was our guest on episode 132 of STEM-Talk. Dawn goes on to say that Martin and his co-authors recommended protecting senior citizens and others who were most at risk from COVID, while allowing young people and others who face minimal risk to lead their normal lives. Dawn asks John about the recommendations found in the Great Barrington Declaration. [00:23:26] Ken mentions that outrage propagated by social media and news sources became such a negative force that it shut down civil discourse in public and academic circles. Ken goes on to say that this led to harsh control over conversations regarding important topics. There were swift attacks against anyone who dissented with official narratives, no matter how well founded someone’s opinions were. Ken asks John about his experience now that he has being on the receiving end of these brutal attacks. [00:27:00] Ken follows up and agreees that the self-censorship among scientists with regards to COVID-19 has been severe and problematic. [00:28:33] Dawn brings up John’s recent paper published in January of this year in Environmental Research. Dawn explains that this paper points out that the largest burden of COVID-19 is carried by the elderly, but that 94 percent of the global population is younger than 70 years old, and 86 percent is younger than 60. Dawn goes on to explain that John set out to accurately estimate the infection fatality rate of COVID-19 among non-elderly people in the absence of vaccination or prior infection. Dawn asks John how he and his co-authors came together to work on this study. [00:31:45] Dawn mentions that John’s aforementioned study reported infection survival rates around the world. John found that wealthy nations had infection survival rates of 99.962 percent for those under 60, and 99.902 percent for those under 70. In poorer nations, however, the survival rates were even better: 99.992 percent and 99.988 percent respectively. Dawn goes on to mention that John and his co-authors speculate that lower obesity rates in poorer countries may have improved their survival rates, and asks John how the U.S. would have fared if the obesity rate was at levels more common in the 1970s or ‘80s. [00:35:08] Ken mentions that unsurprisingly the countries hit the hardest by COVID-19, like Italy and China, had two of the most elderly populations in the world. [00:38:09] Dawn mentions that John’s paper noted that 44 percent of the population had already been infected with COVID-19 before Omicron arrived in the fall of 2021. Because of this, John points out in the paper that an infection rate of 50 percent would have only caused modestly higher fatality rates than seasonal flu fatalities for those under 70. Dawn asks John to elaborate on this. [00:40:52] Dawn mentions that around the time John published his paper in STAT in March of 2020, the Imperial College of London predicted Covid-19 would kill 40 million people. [00:41:56] Ken mentions that miscalculations like the one by the Imperial College of London were unfortunate because they prompted lockdowns and other heavy-handed responses from governments. Ken goes on to say that John wrote in 2020 that we need data to inform us about the rationale of lockdowns, mask mandates and social distancing measures. At a minimum, Ken said, we needed unbiased prevalence and incidence data for the evolving infectious load to guide decision-making. Ken asks John for his thoughts about why this never happened. [00:46:34] Ken asks John what were some of the unintended consequences that resulted from lockdowns, school closures, and travel bans. [00:49:47] Dawn mentions that John has published dozens of peer-reviewed COVID-19 related papers. John has mentioned before that any scientific papers will have some weaknesses. Dawn asks John what, in hindsight, he sees as weaknesses in his papers. [00:50:41] Ken asks about John’s investigation into the recent study commissioned by the British nonprofit Cochrane that found no clear reduction in respiratory viral infection as a result of mask mandates. Ken mentions that the paper noted that the use of medical/surgical masks, including N-95 masks, were not effective in reducing the spread of acute respiratory viruses. [00:55:02] Ken mentions a Zoom call he was on with a government official who was alone in his house wearing a mask during the Zoom call. Ken discusses the gentleman’s response after he was asked about wearing the mask even though he at home by himself. [00:56:48] With respect to randomized controlled trials regarding the effectiveness of masks, Ken mentions that the media’s portrayal of such studies shows that the media does not understand statistics, and specifically the difference between relative and absolute risk. [00:57:51] Ken launches into a discussion about the education of journalists in modern times, and how education in journalism should include a sophisticated understanding of statistics. [01:00:24] Ken asks John what his thoughts are about the possibility of future pandemics and how this kind of situation might be handled differently. [01:02:50] Ken mentions the issues created by funding agencies during times of pandemic and other world shaping events. [01:03:41] Ken explains that trust, or lack thereof, in institutions and the media has turned out to be a key factor in people’s reaction to non-pharmaceutical interventions such as lockdowns and mask mandates and vaccine mandates. Ken goes on to say that surveys of trust are showing a substantial decline and offers that there may be strong negative consequences from this lack of trust in the future. Ken goes on to say that this trust could, of course, be reestablished through transparency and accountability and asks John if he sees this happening anytime soon. [01:06:28] Ken closes the interview asking John if there are any other COVID-19 studies he is working on or hopes to pursue. Links: John Ioannidis bio Learn more about IHMC STEM-Talk homepage Ken Ford bio Ken Ford Wikipedia page Dawn Kernagis bio

Transcribed - Published: 19 April 2023

Today we have Dr. Barbara Thorne, a termite biologist and an expert on the invasive conehead species, a Central and South American termite that has invaded South Florida. Barbara is a research professor and professor emerita in the Department of Entomology at the University of Maryland. Since 2012 she has served as the Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services science advisor on the state’s Conehead Termite Program. She also chairs the National Scientific Advisory Committee for the Conehead Termite Program. Barbara’s research focuses on the biology of termites, which are highly social insects that form complex colony structures. She earned her Ph.D. in Organismic and Evolutionary Biology in 1983 from Harvard University where she studied with the late Dr. E. O. Wilson, a renowned biologist and naturalist. Show notes [00:03:14] Dawn points out that Barbara is from Southern California and asks Barbara if she were a Valley Girl since she grew up in the San Fernando Valley. [00:03:42] Dawn mentions that it was wanderlust that sent Barbara from the West Coast to the East Coast for college and asks why she decided on Brown University. [00:04:14] After Barbara explains that she was originally not interested in science, Ken asks what changed her mind. [00:06:34] Dawn mentions that some kids grow up fascinated with bugs, but not Barbara, so Dawn asks what eventually triggered Barbara’s academic interest in insects. [00:07:58] Ken asks Barbara to elaborate on how Bug Camp and E.O. Wilson’s book “The Insect Societies”  motivated her to go to Harvard. [00:10:22] Dawn explains, for those who aren’t familiar, that E.O. Wilson was an American biologist who was recognized as the world’s leading authority on ants among other topics. He spent 40 years on the Harvard faculty and authored more than 30 books, including two that won Pulitzer Prizes. Dawn asks how Wilson became Barbara’s Ph.D. faculty advisor. [00:14:15] Ken asks why Barbara often refers to the time she was at Harvard as the golden age for research into social insects. [00:18:31] Dawn asks about Barbara’s initial goal for her Ph.D. dissertation, which was to investigate the evolutionary driver that created the sociality in termites, who are a completely different branch of insects from the classic social insects (ants, bees, and wasps). Dawn goes on to ask what Wilson thought of this idea when Barbara proposed it. [00:21:22] Barbara spent 15 years in E.O. Wilson’s lab and Ken wonders if she has a favorite story about Wilson. [00:28:29] Dawn explains that for Barbara’s postdoc research, she continued to expand on the work of her dissertation, and then began working in the field of applied termite biology and targeted applications for control. This was when chlordane, a powerful pesticide against termites, was pulled from the market. Dawn asks Barbara to talk about the significance of pulling chlordane from the market and how this created an opportunity for her. [00:31:30] Ken asks Barbara what led her to join the faculty at the University of Maryland in the early 1990s. [00:33:59] Dawn mentions that during Barbara’s time at Maryland, she investigated her hypothesis of accelerated inheritance as a driver for the evolution of eusociality in termites, following up this research in a 2003 paper in PNAS. Dawn goes on to explain that the paper provided experimental evidence for the powerful selective forces driving the evolution of eusociality in termites, a question that perplexed Charles Darwin. Dawn asks Barbara to talk about why Darwin was confused by the existence of social insects and how Barbara approached this question in termites. [00:49:16] Dawn mentions that Barbara expanded on the previously mentioned research with a study in 2009, using genetic markers to demonstrate that in merged colonies, offspring from both original, unrelated families can become new reproductives and even interbreed. Dawn asks Barbara to explain why this observation is important. [00:50:33] Ken explains that Barbara helped put together a TED-Ed video lesson last year that depicted a conehead termite queen as she begins her reign as one of the longest living insects in the animal kingdom. Ken goes on to mention that this video was a collaboration with Thomas Johnson Volda, and Ken asks how the idea for the video came to be. [00:53:20] Dawn explains that since September of 2012, Barbara has served as the science advisor for the Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services, and is helping the state target the invasive conehead termite. Dawn goes on to mention that this species was the focus of Barbara’s Ph.D. dissertation research in Central America. Dawn asks how Barbara was approached to aid in handling this species invasion into Florida. [00:55:11] Dawn mentions that conehead termites have expansive tastes, which makes them a serious problem in Florida, and asks Barbara to give a sense of the damage that the conehead termites are causing. [01:01:34] Ken mentions the similarities between the current situation with conehead termites and the Formosan termite invasion into North America. [01:05:38] Ken explains that in Pensacola, the home of IHMC, the historical district has many homes built in the 1800s and early 1900s that are made from very strong, dense, old-school wood, the kind of wood that is harder for termites to get into. Ken goes on to ask if it is true that Barbara has described the cheap, fast-growing wood used in today’s structures as a kind of candy for termites. [01:09:14] Ken mentions that we recently had Barbara’s husband Dr. Ed Weiler on STEM-Talk, episode 148. Ken goes on to mention that Ed and Barbara listened to the interview together and Ken asks what she thought of Ed’s episode. [01:13:11] Dawn closes the interview asking Barbara what she and Ed get up to now that they’re both retired. Links: Barbara Thorne bio Reign of the Termite Queen video Learn more about IHMC STEM-Talk homepage Ken Ford bio Ken Ford Wikipedia page Dawn Kernagis bio  

Transcribed - Published: 21 March 2023

Dr. Jeff Volek has been investigating how humans adapt to ketogenic—and carbohydrate-restricted diets for the past 30 years.  Today, Jeff returns to STEM-Talk to discuss a growing accumulation of studies supporting a ketogenic diet as a way to improve metabolic health, as well as research confirming the relative safety of dietary fat. Jeff is a professor in the Department of Human Sciences at Ohio State University. He is known for his research on the clinical application of ketogenic diets in the management of insulin resistance and type-2 diabetes. His research particularly aims to understand individual variability, including how well-formulated ketogenic diets alter fatty acid composition, lipoprotein metabolism, gut microbiome and overall metabolic health. Jeff has performed several prospective diet studies that demonstrate that well-formulated ketogenic diets result in substantial improvements in (if not complete reversal of) metabolic syndrome and type-2 diabetes. In today’s episode, we talk to Jeff about: — How a well-formulated ketogenic diet results not only in weight loss, but also leads to substantial improvements in insulin resistance as well as improvements in a number of cardio-metabolic biomarkers associated with metabolic syndrome. — The remarkable progress that has been made in the science of low-carbohydrate nutrition in the past 30 years. — How Jeff’s research has expanded to look at a well-formulated ketogenic diet’s potential in the treatment of mental health, heart disease and cancer. — An initiative Jeff is conducting to address how the poor metabolic health of the nation is impacting our military troops and therefore poses a significant threat to the future of the military and our nation’s defense. — We also ask Jeff about his thoughts on the recent popularity of fasting and time-restricted eating.  We then ask what his own daily dietary intake looks like. Show notes [00:02:48] Ken opens the interview welcoming Jeff back to STEM-Talk. Ken mentions that Jeff, who appeared on episode 43,  has perhaps published more research on the ketogenic diet and its effects on humans than anyone. While most STEM-Talk listeners are familiar with Jeff’s research, Ken points out that many people might not know that Jeff was once an accomplished powerlifter, achieving impressive numbers for his body weight. Ken asks Jeff what his best lifts were, and if his background in powerlifting inspired him to study exercise physiology. [00:05:25] Dawn mentions there is a paradigm shift in terms of low-carb diets and the public perception regarding the relative safety of dietary fat.  Americans have long been led to believe that saturated fats lead to obesity and heart disease. Dawn goes on to explain that in the last 20 years, there has been a steady accumulation of studies supporting carbohydrate restriction as well as the relative safety of dietary fat. Jeff addressed this in a paper in Science titled “Dietary Fat: From Foe to Friend?”, and also a paper in the Journal of the American College of Cardiology titled “Saturated Fats and Health: A Reassessment and Proposal for Food Based Recommendations” Dawn asks Jeff to talk about this research and what listeners should take from it. [00:08:37] Ken mentions that Jeff at one point in his life demonized fat, and was a strong advocate for low-fat diets. Ken asks what changed his mind on this issue. [00:10:04] Dawn mentions that when Jeff was interviewed back in 2017, he was in the early stages of launching Virta, a company that was founded in 2014 to address the type-2 diabetes epidemic that we’re seeing in the United States and across the world. Dawn asks Jeff to explain what type-2 diabetes is and how it’s different than type-1. [00:13:36] Ken explains that diabetes is a major cause of blindness, kidney failure, heart attacks, stroke and lower-limb amputation. In light of this, Ken asks Jeff if we know how many deaths can be annually attributed to diabetes. [00:14:54] Dawn explains that Virta’s website describes the company’s program as “blood sugar control without the drugs.” Virta works with diabetics to not only lower their blood sugar, but help them lose weight, eliminate their need for insulin and other medications, and restore their metabolic health. Dawn asks Jeff to give an overview of Virta and the progress being made in its endeavors. [00:17:57] Dawn mentions that Virta has had a number of recent papers and trials that have demonstrated some amazing results. With a paper in Nutrients last year that reported on the results of a two-year pilot study that highlighted the effectiveness and sustainability of Virta’s intervention in reversing a variety of metabolic conditions. Dawn goes on to explain that Virta was able to help 97 percent of its prediabetic patients in the two-year study to avoid type-2 diabetes. She asks Jeff, as the chief science officer of Virta, for his thoughts about the successful outcomes being seen by Virta’s trials and studies. [00:19:48] Ken shifts to talk about Jeff’s work at Ohio State. Jeff joined the university in 2014, and in the past decade has established the Volek Low-Carbohydrate Laboratory, which specializes in dietary carbohydrate restriction and nutritional ketosis. Ken asks Jeff to give an overview of the lab and the research that goes on there. [00:22:56] Dawn mentions that Jeff’s lab also has a team of registered dietitians who work with clients on a variety of approaches to low-carb and ketogenic diets. Dawn asks Jeff to talk about the services the lab provides. [00:24:59] Ken explains that a lot of people have the belief that a ketogenic diet is only about losing weight. Jeff, however, stresses that a well-formulated ketogenic diet results in not only weight loss, but also substantial improvements in insulin resistance and improvements on a number of cardio-metabolic biomarkers associated with metabolic syndrome. Ken asks Jeff to talk about the wide range of benefits people experience as a result of a ketogenic diet. [00:28:15] Dawn asks Jeff to talk about the symposium he and Ken as well as some other folks put together at Ohio State that addressed the remarkable progress that has been made in the science of low-carbohydrate nutrition. Jeff goes on to describe some the key takeaways from the symposium. [00:31:20] Dawn asks Jeff to talk about his lab’s research into cancer and how research has shown that the majority of tumors use glucose as their primary fuel source. [00:34:01] As a follow-up, Ken mentions the STEM-Talk interview with Colin Champ that centered on ketogenic cancer research. [00:34:17] Ken asks Jeff about a couple of pilot ketogenic diet cancer studies that are currently underway in his lab, as well as a pilot study that is specifically looking at advanced-stage breast cancer. [00:37:15] Dawn mentions that while weight loss is a common outcome of consuming a ketogenic diet, a question that has been rather controversial in the research community is whether there are metabolic improvements as a result of carbohydrate restriction that are independent of weight loss. Dawn explains that Jeff published a study last year in the Journal of Clinical Investigation Insight that found more than half of your obese study participants who were suffering from metabolic syndrome no longer met the criteria for metabolic syndrome at the end of a four-week low-carb diet, even though the participants didn’t lose any weight. The results demonstrate that irrespective of weight loss, a low-carb diet improves a host of metabolic problems. Dawn asks Jeff to talk about this study and the significance of its findings. [00:41:27] Ken mentions that Jeff’s lab is currently doing work with the military, going on to mention that Jeff’s lab received funding a few years ago to look into whether a ketogenic diet could help the military deal with its ongoing challenge of obesity among the troops.  The subsequent study showed that participants lost an average of 17 pounds after 12 weeks on the ketogenic diet, and as a group, the participants lost more than five percent of their body fat, and almost 44 percent of their visceral fat, and had a 48 percent improvement in their insulin sensitivity. Ken asks Jeff to go into further depth about this study and its findings. [00:46:07] Ken asks about Jeff’s project, currently underway, called “Strategies to Augment Ketosis,” or STAK. It’s a comprehensive initiative that is going to address the physical and financial toll attributed to the pervasive poor metabolic health of the nation and how this impacts our military troops, especially veterans, and therefore poses a significant threat to the future of the military and our national defense. Ken explains that there are multiple layers of research involved in STAK, many of which utilize ketone esters, and asks Jeff to explain what ketone esters are for those listeners who have not listened to episode 54 of STEM-Talk with Brianna Stubbs. [00:48:41] Dawn explains that one of the major topics being examined in STAK is sleep deprivation, which is a major problem in military populations, with only one in three U.S. Army Active-Duty Soldiers estimated to get their target of seven hours of sleep on duty days. Given that insufficient sleep leads to a drop in performance and an increase in errors, it is an important problem to solve. There is evidence that ketone ester supplements may lessen the adverse effects of sleep deprivation, and thus STAK will further explore this possibility. Jeff talks about the clinical trial he is putting together, which will look at whether ingesting a ketone ester supplement twice daily can improve cognitive and physical performance during short-term sleep restriction. [00:51:45] Ken follows up, asking Jeff what the rationale is for his hypothesis that ketosis will mitigate the negative effects of sleep deprivation. [00:53:48] Dawn explains that another element of STAK is exploring the effects of ketone esters and the sustained long-term effects of a ketogenic diet on type-2 diabetes and heart failure. Dawn asks Jeff to talk about this study, and why he thinks ketones would be beneficial for the heart. [01:00:28] Dawn asks about the STAK study looking at the possibility of delaying or preventing the progression of diabetic nephropathy. [01:02:24] Ken shifts to talk about work Jeff’s lab is doing on metabolic psychiatry. Ken goes on to explain that we have known for a long time that food choices can alter a person’s neurochemistry, but we are just now beginning to research the impact that macronutrients can have on our mental and emotional well-being. Jeff discusses this work and explains what metabolic psychiatry entails. [01:05:58] Dawn mentions that a common struggle for physicians who are strong proponents of a ketogenic diet is getting their patients to stick to it. Dawn goes on to mention our recent interview with Vyvyane Loh who talked about how some of her patients struggle with the diet and so she often ends up recommending a less stringent low-carb diet instead. Dawn asks Jeff his thoughts on this, as well as the critique of the ketogenic diet that it is not sustainable. [01:12:03] Dawn talks about the so-called keto flu being a hurdle that many people feel they can’t overcome, and asks Jeff what his thoughts and advice are about this. [01:16:08] Ken mentions the current popularity of fasting and time-restricted eating. Going on to say that while fasting is an effective way to get into ketosis, Jeff has reservations about fasting, particularly those that last beyond 24 hours. [01:20:36] Dawn mentions the surge in new products on grocery shelves advertised as keto breads, keto donuts, keto bagels, etc. Dawn asks Jeff what his thoughts about the flood of keto-branded products we’re seeing. [01:25:56] Dawn describes Jeff as a walking testimonial for ketogenic and low-carb diets. Jeff has followed a low-carb diet for more than 20 years, all the while maintaining a healthy body weight and lipid profile. Dawn asks Jeff to share with listeners what his daily dietary intake looks like and how the diet benefits him. [01:29:07] Dawn closes the interview by asking Jeff where he sees the field of ketogenic research going in the next decade, and if the dietary recommendations might change in that time. Dawn goes on to mention that Jeff published a recent article with several prominent co-authors titled          

Transcribed - Published: 21 February 2023

Our guest today is Dr. Ed Weiler, a retired NASA scientist who spent 20 years as the chief scientist for the Hubble Space Telescope, the forerunner of the James Webb. During his 33-year NASA career, Ed wore many hats, including Associate Administrator of the Science Mission Directorate; Center Director of NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center, Associate Administrator for NASA’s Space Science Enterprise, chief of the Ultraviolet/Visible and Gravitational Astrophysics Division and director of the Astronomical Search for Origins Program. In today’s episode, we talk to Ed about: — NASA’s accomplishments in the past year, including the Perseverance mission, the success of the James Webb telescope, and the launch of Artemis-1. — Ed’s experience as the Chief Scientist for the Hubble Space Telescope during its early development. — Ed’s time as the director of NASA’s Astronomical Search for Origins program. — Ed’s role in the development of the New Horizons space craft and its mission to fly by and study Pluto and it’s moons. — Ed’s belief that in the next 20 to 50 years, we will be able to the prove the existence of other life in the universe. Show notes [00:02:59] Dawn opens the interview mentioning that she and Ed share a common experience of going through the selection process to become a NASA astronaut. [00:03:55] Dawn mentions that instead of becoming an astronaut, Ed joined NASA in 1978 as a scientist, serving in a variety of science leadership roles throughout his career, eventually retiring in 2011 after 33 years of service. Dawn asks Ed to talk about his various accomplishments at NASA. [00:05:57] Dawn asks Ed about his feelings toward the various accomplishments of NASA in recent years since his retirement, such as the Perseverance mission, the success of the James Webb telescope, and the launch of Artemis-1. [00:08:42] Ken asks Ed to discuss the recent images from the James Webb telescope, images that have captured the public’s imagination. [00:12:10] Dawn asks if it’s true that Ed decided to become an astronomer and go to work for NASA when he was only 13 years old. [00:15:36] Dawn mentions that we have had several guests on STEM-Talk that cite the Apollo missions as their inspiration for pursuing a career in science. Dawn points out that Ed was already in grad school when Neil Armstrong first stepped on the moon. Dawn asks Ed about watching the moon landing on the campus of Northwestern University. [00:16:48] Ken asks about Ed’s experience as the Chief Scientist for the Hubble Space Telescope during its early development. [00:25:01] Dawn points out that after graduating from Northwestern University, Ed joined the research staff at Princeton while also working at the Goddard Space Flight Center. In 1978, Ed became a staff scientist at NASA headquarters and Dawn asks how that position came about. [00:29:45] Dawn mentions that Ed was also the director of NASA’s Astronomical Search for Origins program and asks Ed to talk about that experience. [00:33:03] Ken mentions that in 1998, Ed became the Associate Administrator for Space Science for the first time. Ken goes on to mention when Ed was first approached about the position, he said “not in a million years.” Ken asks what eventually changed Ed’s mind. [00:37:10] Dawn asks Ed about his first stint as NASA’s Associate Administrator, where he oversaw several successful missions and set in motion an ambitious Mars exploration mission. [00:43:43] Dawn asks Ed to talk about the role he played in the development of the New Horizons craft and its mission to fly by and study Pluto and its moons. [00:45:46] Ken mentions that when Ed’s first tenure as Associate Administrator for the Science Mission Directorate ended in 2004, he took over the leadership of the Goddard Space Flight Center, which is one of the premier institutions for space and earth science missions. Ken asks Ed to talk about the work he did at the center. [00:50:06] Dawn mentions that Mike Griffin, our guest on STEM-Talk episodes 23 and 134, was the NASA Administrator in 2008, and asked Ed to return as Associate Administrator. Dawn asks why Ed was brought back again and what he was asked to accomplish. [00:56:47] Ken asks Ed about one of his priorities at NASA, which was RTGs (Radio-Isotope Thermo-Electric Generators).  Ken asks Ed why this was a priority, and what that experience was like. [01:00:21] Dawn mentions that Ed was an early proponent of STEM education, and during his time as Associate Administrator at NASA, he required all project proposals to set aside one to three percent of their budget for STEM education. Dawn goes on to ask Ed about a letter he received from a Mexico City student in the early days of Hubble that made an impression on him. [01:06:38] Dawn mentions that Ed has been quoted as saying that in the next 20 to 50 years, we will be able to prove the existence of other life in the universe. She asks Ed why he’s so confident about that. [01:14:13] Ken follows up on the previous question and asks Ed what his thoughts are on the Pentagon’s recent report on Unidentified Aerial Phenomena (UAP), which Ken and Dawn discussed in episode 127 of STEM-Talk. While the study does not imply that these UAPs are extraterrestrial crafts, the report does indicate that they are likely physical objects of some kind.  Ken asks Ed what he thinks these objects are? [01:20:32] Dawn wraps up the interview by mentioning that Ed has been known throughout his career for building effective teams and, toward that end, he would often take his staff water skiing. Ed Weiler Wikipedia page Learn more about IHMC STEM-Talk homepage Ken Ford bio Ken Ford Wikipedia page Dawn Kernagis bio    

Transcribed - Published: 30 January 2023

Today’s interview is with IHMC’s Dr. Gwen Bryan, a research scientist who investigates wearable robotic devices aimed at augmenting human performance in clinical, occupational, and military applications. She is particularly focused on maximizing the benefits of powered exoskeletons. At IHMC, Gwen leads the exoskeleton team, which is developing a novel augmentative device that continues IHMC’s research on mobility devices for people with spinal cord injury. The team also is researching a powered exoskeleton to aid government employees whose work involves nuclear site remediation. Gwen and her team’s effort, which utilizes a human-centered research approach, is uniquely situated to expand exoskeleton research and technology because of the expertise and collaboration that’s available among IHMC’s robotics and human-performance research groups. Gwen joined IHMC after completing her Ph.D. in the Stanford Biomechatronics Lab. Outside of work, Gwen enjoys soccer, weightlifting, painting and snowboarding. She also is a dog mom to two very adorable shelter dogs, Bandit and Oreo. Show notes: [00:02:32] Dawn asks Gwen what it was like growing up in Albuquerque, New Mexico. [00:03:02] Dawn mentions that it seems science was a part of Gwen’s life early on. Dawn goes on to mention that Gwen’s father was an engineer, and her mother was a nurse and asks how her parents having these backgrounds influenced her. [00:03:35] In addition to a science background, Gwen’s mother is also a clarinetist who instilled a love for the arts in Gwen.  Dawn asks Gwen about her painting and how art benefits other aspects of her life. [00:04:17] Ken asks Gwen what she was like as a kid. [00:04:59] Ken asks Gwen to talk about a rafting trip she took with her cousin through the Grand Canyon. [00:06:27] Dawn asks Gwen how chocolate chip cookies factored into her third-grade science fair project. [00:08:04] Dawn mentions that fitness became a part of Gwen’s life following an injury she had as a senior in high school. Exercise, particularly weightlifting, helped alleviate her back pain. Dawn asks Gwen what her fitness journey taught her about her body, and ultimately, how that experience gave her insights into the work she does today. [00:09:16] Ken asks Gwen how she chose to go to the University of Texas in Austin. [00:10:38] Dawn mentions that Gwen transferred to the University of New Mexico for her undergraduate work. Dawn asks Gwen what motivated her to apply her interest in mechanical engineering into robotics. [00:11:28] Ken asks Gwen what was involved in her transfer from the University of Texas to New Mexico. [00:12:34] Ken asks Gwen what led her to the Stanford Biomechatronics Lab. [00:13:38] Ken asks Gwen to talk about her internship with the Sandia National Research Labs. [00:14:40] Dawn shifts to talk about Gwen’s current research focus on wearable robotics, particularly exoskeletons, mentioning that when the public hears this term most people generally think either insect exoskeletons or Ironman. Dawn asks Gwen to describe the exoskeletons she works on. [00:15:25] Dawn mentions that the potential uses of exoskeletons to help people with limited or no lower-limb mobility seems, in some respects, clear, but the application has been limited, and asks why that is. [00:16:40] Dawn asks what some other applications of exoskeletons are that are important to know about. [00:18:35] Ken mentions that during Gwen’s doctoral work at Stanford, she developed the first cable-driven exoskeleton to assist all the three leg joints — hips, knees, and ankles — and asks Gwen to talk about how that design was developed and what made it special in the exoskeleton field. [00:20:10] Ken explains that Gwen’s work also developed novel control systems for exoskeletons by using feedback from real-time physiological measurements of the user – coined human-in-the-loop optimization (HILO). Ken asks Gwen to talk about this strategy, and why it is an important innovation. [00:21:56] Ken asks Gwen to talk about what she learned about the impact of exoskeleton assistance on walking economy when assisting the hips, knees, or ankles individually versus simultaneously. [00:22:58] Dawn asks if the multi-joint strategy depends on the walking task, mentioning that it seems as though demands change for different joints when walking faster; or up and downhill; or carrying load. [00:23:49] Dawn explains that the laboratory emulator approach seems to have led to many fundamental findings. Dawn goes on to ask, however, about the limitations of assisting people in the real world in an approach that has users stuck on a treadmill and in the lab. [00:25:02] Dawn asks if exoskeletons are a ‘one-size fits all’ technology, or if they need to be customized to each individual. [00:26:08] Ken mentions that Gwen is involved in a couple of exoskeleton projects at IHMC, and asks first about the Eva project. [00:28:16] Dawn asks what other applications Eva, or exoskeletons in the same vein, might have in rehabilitative or therapeutic settings. [00:29:01] Dawn asks about IHMC’s Quix, another exoskeleton that Gwen is working on, which has been primarily used to help people with lower-body paralysis gain movement. Dawn goes on to mention that the team has been looking into rehabilitative applications that Quix could serve in as well, and asks Gwen to discuss new developments with this project. [00:31:27] Ken asks Gwen to share some final thoughts on exoskeleton and what she sees as the grand challenges facing exoskeleton development. [00:33:18] Dawn asks about Gwen’s passion for cultivating interest in STEM among girls and young women and why that is so important to her. [00:34:59] Gwen talks about some of the mentors in the field that helped her along the way. [00:36:11] Dawn asks Gwen about her two rescue dogs, Bandit and Oreo, to close the interview. Links: Gwen Bryan bio Learn more about IHMC STEM-Talk homepage Ken Ford bio Ken Ford Wikipedia page Dawn Kernagis bio

Transcribed - Published: 4 January 2023