SCROLL NEWS / DISCOVERY
Search headlines
Find the stories shaping the conversation.
Results for " dru " 1,964 found 🔀 AI-powered Shuffle
How AI Is Accelerating Drug Discovery And Patient Health At Bristol Myers Squibb
Data and AI leadership at Bristol Myers Squibb
China’s next-gen stealth fighters, bad cholesterol drug: 7 science highlights
From oil refining with reduced energy use to a self-powered neural device, here are some highlights from SCMP’s recent science reporting.
Nvidia establishes Israeli research group focused on AI for medicine and science
The Applied AI Architecture group has begun recruiting researchers in Israel and will work on AI applications ranging from genomics and drug discovery to new materials.
Dave Roberts Reveals Honest Mookie Betts & Shohei Ohtani Conundrum
The Los Angeles Dodgers have been without superstar slugger Shohei Ohtani for the last week+ as he’s been dealing with a biceps issue that led to his IL placement. Manager Dave Roberts indicated on Tuesday, before the Dodgers’ series opener with the San Diego Padres, that Ohtani will be activated from the IL on Wednesday. […] The post Dave Roberts Reveals Honest Mookie Betts & Shohei Ohtani Conundrum appeared first on HEAVY.
FBI seized $18.8M from Quality Behavioral Health in forced labor probe
New court records reveal the scope, focus and riches involved in a high-profile investigation targeting drug rehab center Quality Behavioral Health.
Pasadena ISD cancels vote that would have quadrupled some employee healthcare premiums
After intense backlash from employees, Pasadena ISD Superintendent Toni Lopez removed the vote from the agenda just hours before the school board meeting and committed to keeping the current medical plan in place.
Clavicular charged with rape, drugging in Massachusetts
Clavicular, the social media influencer known for his looksmaxxing content, faces two felony charges for drugging and rape.
What Hayden Panettiere Shared About Her Health Prior to Her Death at 36
From alcohol and drug use to back pain, Panettiere spoke openly about her health challenges in an effort to encourage others to seek help.
Hayden Panettiere's death was caused by the toxic effects of fentanyl and other drugs, ruled 'accidental'
The Greenville County Coroner's Office said that the 36-year-old's cause of death has been ruled as "toxic effects of fentanyl, 4-ANPP, Alprazolam, Methocarbamol and Quetiapine." The manner of death h...
Minneapolis' mobile medical unit is on the move
In its first year of operation, Minneapolis Mobile Medical Unit staff engaged with over 4,000 community members. Established in response to the opioid crisis, the unit prioritizes outreach to communities with high levels of drug use, including individuals experiencing homelessness and those who are uninsured or underinsured.
Hayden Panettiere died from accidental overdose involving fentanyl, coroner says
A coroner has determined that actor Hayden Panettiere died from an accidental overdose of several drugs including fentanyl. The 36-year-old Panettiere was found unresponsive in an apartment in Greenville, South
Hayden Panettiere cause of death revealed: Report
The actress’ death was ruled an accident caused by the toxic effect of several drugs, including fentanyl.
Hayden Panettiere’s death was accidental and involved fentanyl, coroner says
A coroner has determined that actor Hayden Panettiere died from an accidental overdose of several drugs including fentanyl | WWL
Hayden Panettiere’s death was accidental and involved fentanyl, coroner says
A coroner has determined that actor Hayden Panettiere died from an accidental overdose of several drugs including fentanyl | 830 WCCO
Hayden Panettiere's death ruled accidental from drugs, including fentanyl: Coroner
Actress Hayden Panettiere’s death has been ruled accidental from drugs including fentanyl, according to the Greenville County Coroner’s Office in South Carolina.
Jaguar Health Receives Fee Waivers from FDA
Company remains sharply focused on its ongoing rare disease intestinal failure global development program for microvillus inclusion disease (MVID) and SBS for crofelemer powder for oral solution, targeting an NDA filing for MVID mid-2027SAN FRANCISCO, CA / ACCESS Newswire / September 22, 2026 / (NASDAQ:JAGX) (Jaguar) family company Napo Pharmaceuticals (Napo) today announced that the U. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has granted Napo's request for a waiver of the fee associated with the Pres
Optimi Health Appoints Dr. Michael Blough as Chief Clinical Development Officer
Supports Optimi’s planned Phase 2 psilocybin trial in major depressive disorder and Phase 3 MDMA trial in PTSDVANCOUVER, British Columbia, Sept. 22, 2026 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- Optimi Health Corp. (NASDAQ: OPTH) (CSE: OPTI) (FSE: 8BN) ("Optimi" or the "Company"), a commercial-stage pharmaceutical manufacturer of regulated psychedelic drug products, today announced the appointment of Michael Blough, Ph.D., as Chief Clinical Development Officer. Dr. Blough has significant experience leading Health Ca
Zack Polanski’s Eco-Populism Could Do With More Socialism
A year since the Green Party of England and Wales elected Zack Polanski as leader, its membership has nearly quadrupled. His rise speaks to dissatisfaction with Labour but also the difficulty building...
Streamer Clavicular faces rape and drugging charges
Braden Peters, better known as the "manosphere" streamer Clavicular, has been charged in Massachusetts court with rape, drugging a person for sex and providing alcohol to an underage person, court
Sabbatical Spotlight: Associate Professor of Political Science Jeremy Strickler
Dr. Jeremy Strickler, an associate professor of political science and UTC faculty member since 2016, used his professional development leave to advance research on presidential leadership and U.S. drug control policy, co-author a book chapter about camping, and develop a new course on American political culture.
MORNING BUSINESS REPORT: Seniors use weight loss drugs, Apple settlement, Disney trip deals
More seniors are using drugs like Ozempic, customers can claim part of an Apple settlement, and Disney offers promotional deals. Here's the Morning Business Report for Sept. 22.
Is 50 the new 60?
Subscribe TL;DR: Younger generations are showing signs of worse health compared to earlier-born cohorts at the same age This backward “drift” is showing up both in mortality risk and chronic disease Worsening trends in obesity and diabetes are the most consistent signals Taking the long view, we’ve made astonishing gains in health and life expectancy in the last century. Global average life expectancy has more than doubled from 32 years in 1900 to 73 years in 2024. (But don’t forget, there were still old people when life expectancy was 32). As people lived longer, they also generally lived healthier along the way. It turns out that avoiding things that can kill you early, like malnutrition and lots of childhood infections, also keeps you healthier later in life. In a classic 2004 paper, Finch and Crimmins proposed that cohorts of children who benefited from fewer early life infections had less lifetime exposure to inflammation and cardiovascular disease later in life, accelerating mortality improvements at older ages. Poor nutrition in the womb has also been linked to a higher risk of later chronic disease. The upshot is that improvements in childhood health can pay dividends many decades later. The combination of better living conditions (nutrition, sanitation) and medical advances (antibiotics, vaccines, blood pressure meds, etc) meant that people’s healthy lifespan generally expanded, even as they lived longer. Aging researchers call this best-case scenario “compression of morbidity”—meaning we delay the onset of disease and disability even faster than the years of life we are adding. During my 20+ year research career, we could generally bank on the idea that younger generations would not only live longer but also keep getting healthier along the way. “60 is the new 50” as they say… Enter “Generational Health Drift” Sadly, this expectation of steady progress may be changing. You’ve probably heard that US life expectancy gains have slowed to a crawl in the past couple of decades. Mortality improvements are also slowing (though less dramatically) in many other high-income countries (you can read more about that in a review paper I wrote here). Mortality is a very blunt health measure, but it is often a good barometer for the broader population health trends happening underneath. And we are now seeing that younger generations may be in worse health at similar ages compared to earlier born cohorts. My collaborator Prof. George Ploubidis at University College London coined this worsening health in more recently born cohorts “generational health drift.” “Generational health drift” is bad news on multiple fronts. Most obviously, we don’t want our health progress to go backward. But the timing is also bad, since our populations are aging. In demographic terms, “population aging” means that the proportion of the population at older ages (i.e >65 years) is increasing. Fun demography fact: Current population aging is not due to the recent declines in the birth rates making the news, but declines in fertility decades ago, after the “baby boom.” As baby boomers reach older ages, the smaller cohorts behind them mean the percentage of older adults will increase. For example, the share of the population age 65 and older in the US increased from 12.4% in 2004 to 18.0% in 2024. This story of population aging was written long ago. Many worry that population aging will put pressure on health care and pension systems. But if people reach older ages in better health than in years past, those fiscal pressures would be less dire than projected. Healthy older people can also continue to contribute to society in many valuable ways, including paid work, caregiving, community service….even high political office 🤷. On the flip side, if younger generations reach retirement age in worse health and with more disabling conditions, this could magnify the societal challenge of population aging. Evidence for worsening generational health A recent paper that I LOVED in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences by Dr. Leah Abrams and colleagues examined which birth cohorts (aka generations) were behind worsening US mortality. Behold the Lexis diagram (cue swooning demographers). Calendar time is on the x-axis, age on the y-axis. Birth cohorts can be followed over time as they age on the diagonal lines moving up and to the right. This figure plots the year-on-year % change in all-cause mortality at a given age. Green shading indicates mortality improvements over time, white is stagnation, and gray shading indicates worsening mortality. Following the diagonal line for those born in 1950, you can see a noticeable shift from green to gray that follows this cohort for most of their lives. This gray shading shows generally worsening mortality for the 1950 to 1959 birth cohorts compared to their predecessors across all ages. Concerningly for my GenX and elder millennial peeps, there was also a deterioration in mortality for birth cohorts born in the 1970s and 1980s, visible as dark gray areas at ages 30 to 45 during the 2010s. While some of these mortality changes reflect specific shocks such as the opioid epidemic, most deaths still occur from major causes of death such as cardiovascular disease and cancer. For cancer, the gray in the top left corner of the figure below reflects the legacies of smoking for older cohorts, followed by a period of green with improvements in cancer mortality as smoking rates declined. But the white/gray shading in the bottom right corner highlights a stagnation and reversal of the cancer trends, with cohorts born around 1970 to 1985 experiencing worsening cancer mortality. This deterioration was most noticeable for colon cancer mortality, possibly linked to obesity or dietary factors. Not just dying more, but less healthy along the way. A recent paper by Dr. Laura Gimeno of University College London (of which I am a co-author), found evidence that more recently born cohorts in Great Britain have stagnating or worsening health. A stylized picture of what“generational health drift” might look like: The review paper found: Rates of childhood overweight and obesity were highest among Gen Z. Rates of diabetes in the 40s almost doubled from 3.1% among the Baby Boomers to 5.9% in Generation X. Gen Z reported higher rates of poor mental health in adolescence compared to earlier-born groups. These UK results are consistent with studies showing worsening health across generations in the US as well. A 2021 US study found that more recently born cohorts had worse biological markers (like blood pressure and blood sugar) than earlier generations at the same age. A separate 2022 study of Americans aged 50 and over found that more recently born generations had a higher number of chronic diseases, with younger age of disease onset. A 2024 Lancet paper found that in the US, women born in 1945 had 33% obesity prevalence at age 50, rising to 48.2% for women born in 1970 turning 50. So what’s going on, and can we turn it around? We don’t have a definitive answer for what’s causing the deteriorating health of younger cohorts, but circumstantial evidence points to worsening trends in obesity and diabetes in both the US and UK. Remember that cohort trends reflect lagged effects of early environments, and younger generations have faced both earlier onset and more severe obesity across their lifetimes. Despite these very concerning trends, the future is not set in stone. We’ve reversed poor generational health trends before: drops in smoking are a major reason cancer and heart disease deaths fell so dramatically in recent decades. GLP-1 drugs may finally turn the tide against rising rates of obesity and diabetes, though it is still early days. But things could also get worse…for example from a return to higher levels of childhood infectious diseases that can have a lasting impact on health. See for example: [ ](https://jenndowd.substack.com/p/dont-you-forget-about-measles-the) [ Don’t You Forget About Me(asles): The Virus That Erases Immune Memory ](https://jenndowd.substack.com/p/dont-you-forget-about-measles-the) Jenn Dowd, PhD · March 24, 2025 [ Read full story ](https://jenndowd.substack.com/p/dont-you-forget-about-measles-the) Even as an optimist, emerging data on the “generational health drift” has my full attention. For most of my research career, we took it for granted that each generation would be healthier than the last. But if present trends continue, **50 could be the new 60….**and Gen Z celebrities will soon look older than Paul Rudd :). Stay well, Jenn Share the Health! If you found this post useful, please share it with a friend. Share
Exclusive: FDA warnings persisted as UTIs turned deadly in menopause
Menopause increases the risk of UTIs which can lead to sepsis and death in older women. For years, the FDA discouraged the one drug that could help.
Police search for possible source of drugs in death of Presley Gerber, Cindy Crawford's son
Presley Gerber, the supermodel's son with businessman Rande Gerber, died Sunday at a rehab facility at age 27.
WATCH LIVE: Judy Woodruff and Jamelle Bouie discuss the freedom of the press at Monticello
This event streams live at 6 p.m ET on Sept 21, 2026 in the player above. More about the event: At a pivotal moment for the nation, this conversation will consider the role of journalism in sustaining a free society and the challenges facing the press in 2026 and beyond. The evening will feature a conversation between award-winning journalist Judy Woodruff and New York Times columnist Jamelle Bouie, Monticello’s 2026-2027 Fritz and Claudine Kundrun Fellow.
Carrot Top Overdosed at His Las Vegas Home During Health Crisis
Carrot Top is suspected to have suffered a drug overdose on Friday, Sept 18, at his Las Vegas home after he attempted suicide. TMZ reported that the comedian overdosed on prescription medication befor...
What is ibogaine, and what does it treat?
Psychedelic drugs, once pushed to the fringes of medicine, are gaining serious attention within the Trump administration as potential treatment options for people with certain mental health conditions. And they could be getting closer to receiving approval from the US Food and Drug Administration.
Hayden Panettiere remembered at Malibu memorial service
Hayden Panettiere attends the Los Angeles premiere of Netflix's new film 'Blonde' at TCL Chinese Theatre on Sept. 13, 2022, in Hollywood, California. (Jon Kopaloff/Getty Images)Hayden Panettiere was celebrated over the weekend at a memorial service held in California, her representative confirmed to ABC News.Around 80 friends of the late Nashville star, who died on Aug. 16 at the age of 36, gathered in Malibu on Saturday to share "an evening of music, memories, laughter and tears."“We wanted to honor Hayden in the best way we knew how—with as much love as possible," Panettiere's representative, Kasey Kitchen, said in a statement with a group of the actress's friends, who jointly organized the memorial.The statement continued, "It was a beautiful and intimate ceremony where friends came together to celebrate her life and honor the beautiful, magnetic light and love she infused into the world.”Panettiere's Nashville co-star Connie Britton and other celebrities, including Evan Ross and Ruby Rose, were photographed attending the memorial.Panettiere died after she was found unresponsive and in cardiac arrest at a Greenville, South Carolina, apartment.The actress's official cause and manner of death have not yet been announced.An investigation into her death has expanded from South Carolina to Los Angeles, and investigators are focusing on the role drugs may have played in her death, sources told ABC News last week.Kitchen, Panettiere's representative, said in a statement on Sept. 15 that her death "remains under investigation pending toxicology results.""As we await the answers we are all seeking, may we also remember Hayden for the incredible legacy she leaves behind — the light she shined on mental health and postpartum depression, and the voice she gave to those who felt unseen and unheard," Kitchen said. "The answers we are all seeking will come."Copyright © 2026, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.
Maine police union endorses LePage for Congress
Matt Nadeau, president of the Maine FOP, said during his time as governor, LePage pushed for increased funding for the Maine Drug Enforcement Agency and increased staff at the state police crime lab.
Sacramento artists to install empty film set, urging attorney general to protect entertainment jobs
Sacramento Poet Laureate Andru Defeye and local artist group Sol Collective will unveil a public art installation in Capitol Park to represent the decrease in California’s entertainment jobs later today.
The Best Shampoos for Every Hair Need and Budget, According to Experts
From drugstore gems to salon splurges, these shampoos are worth a spot in your wash day routine.
Why your smartwatch is so bad at telling you how many calories you burned
A new study found that smartwatches overestimated caloric burns by about 15 to 25 percent.
President Trump's newest vaccine 'demands' repeat old misinformation
A day after health secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. promised that parents concerned about vaccines had a “friend” in the White House, President Trump said he’ll be “demanding” that drug companies split up their combined vaccines.
Scientists create a needle-thin brain implant that can do three jobs at once
A new needle-thin brain implant can record neural activity, deliver drugs, and stimulate multiple brain regions using a single flexible fiber. Successful tests in mice suggest it could give scientists a more precise, less invasive way to study the brain and may eventually help treat neurological disorders such as epilepsy.
Hanx Biopharmaceuticals (Wuhan) Enters Agreement To Explore AI For Science In Drug Research
Hanx Biopharmaceuticals (Wuhan) Co Ltd HKEX:3378:
Scientists Discover New Compound That Burns Fat Without Killing Your Appetite
Unlike GLP-1 drugs, which suppress appetite and reduce energy intake, a newly identified molecular compound helps cells burn more energy without changing food intake or exercise and has shown promise in mouse models. The most successful new obesity drugs largely work by helping people eat less. Researchers at UC Berkeley are exploring a different strategy:
Eichenbaum Acorns: A passion for retina science with Andrea Gibson, PhD, and Erin C. Henry, PhD | Eye Care Network
Andrea Gibson, PhD, and Erin C. Henry, PhD, trace 20 years in retina drug development—and the pathway gap still facing young scientists.
Is the deluge of negative dark-money political ads in Ohio working? Editorial Board Roundtable
So what does our Editorial Board Roundtable make of this onslaught of negative ads? A sign that dark-money spending needs to be better regulated? Could it depress turnout or make governing harder for whoever does win?
Trump’s FDA nominee is under scrutiny. Here’s what Louisiana residents worry about.
WASHINGTON – Louisiana has a lot to say about the Trump administration’s third attempt to install a leader for the U.S. Food & Drug Administration, which inspects and approves food
New nanoparticles make hidden chemical differences light up
Scientists have developed ultra-bright nanoparticles that can detect tiny amounts of chemicals and distinguish between molecules that look almost identical. The technology could one day provide a cheaper way to catch dangerous drug impurities or trace pollutants using simple low-cost lasers.
LANL: Four Los Alamos Researchers Receive Laboratory Fellows’ Prizes
Virginia Manner, Dru Renner, Dan Hooks and Earl Lawrence. Photo Courtesy LANL LANL NEWS RELEASE Four Los Alamos National Laboratory researchers have been awarded Laboratory Fellows’ Prizes: Virgini…
Trump announces all 50 states joining Medicaid drug pricing model
The Trump administration claims that Medicaid will save billions on prescription drug costs as a result of the plan, dubbed the Medicaid “GENEROUS” model. Experts say the savings are unclear since the content of the deals isn't public.
Science Vs on the 49ers Substation: Anatomy of a Hatchet Job
In August, Pablo Torre Finds Out and Science Vs released an episode about my theory that electromagnetic fields from the electrical substation beside the 49ers facility may be contributing to the team’s run of soft-tissue injuries. As the originator of the theory, I was also a subject of the episode. I sat was interviewed by Wendy Zukerman and Rose Rimler of Sciene Vs. I sent them research, connected them with scientists, and spent hours digging through the City of Santa Clara’s and Silicon Valley Power’s records to help clarify critical details. Both Wendy and Rose came off as affable and professional, showing curiosity during the interviews, with Wendy going out of her way to question the “conspiracy theory” framing itself. Then they titled the episode We Solve the 49ers Viral Conspiracy Theory. I was familiar enough with their catalog that I never expected them to agree with my theory, but I did expect them to give it a fair hearing and to deliver their findings honestly. On both counts they came up short. They were not directly dishonest in anything they said, but rather in what they left out, in how what remained was cut, and in the picture painted by those two things in combination. They asked me to recorded the interview on my phone for better audio quality, and I held on to my copy for reference later. That turned out to be a fortuitous decision. Here is the raw audio of my first interview, unedited*. Only my side was recorded, so their questions aren’t on it, but you can generally infer them from the answers, and every claim I make below about what I said can be checked against my statements in this clip. (Note: Wendy had connection trouble at the beginning of the interview and was cutting in and out, which accounts for the false starts.) 0:00 -1:19:13 Audio playback is not supported on your browser. Please upgrade. Science Vs is a fun show. It is pitched at roughly a high-school understanding of science, for an audience that is skeptical, Snopes-oriented, and worried about misinformation. Take a claim circulating online, interview a supporter of the claim, interview consensus scientists, and then tell people which side of the line it lands on. I have listened to their episodes on raw milk, seed oils, 5G and other contested issues in the wellness space. I have problems with all of them, but each at least made an honest attempt to represent the actual range of scientific opinion by talking to credentialed scientists with differing perspectives. Dissenting researchers were heard from, answered, and often given a chance to respond. This episode did not do that. This article is not a relitigation of the science. I have written extensively about that already. This post is for the record. It is simply an accounting of what was wrong with their episode. Contents Is there a power plant next to the 49ers practice facility? — the clearest single example of getting something objectively wrong For the record — a high-level overview of all of the problems with their investigation Draw your own conclusions — why they had to make this episode at all What they left out about childhood leukemia — the exposure threshold, and playing games with statistics to minimize sick children What they left out about the mechanism — the body of literature they refused to cover, and evidence for the mechanism used against it The scientists Science Vs interviewed and did not air — four credential scientists who support myhe theory, recorded and cut, or not even called How they misrepresented me and my case — an answer severed from its question, and three telling edits How you would actually study the injuries — it doesn’t actually matter which team is the most injured, overall The theory: magnetic fields, oxidative stress, and collagen Since the episode never states my theory, here it is below. Those who are familiar with my work can skip this section. Electrical equipment produces magnetic fields, and those fields induce faint electrical currents in anything that passes through them, including people. My argument goes further than induced current. Mitochondria — the structures that generate a cell’s energy — run on continuous flows of electrons and protons, and those flows carry faint electromagnetic fields of their own. Maxwell’s principle of superposition shows that when two fields share the same space, they add together. An external field does not need to be strong to alter an internal field, it only needs to be present. The electron transport chain inside the mitochondria leaks a small fraction of its electrons by design, and those become reactive oxygen species — free radicals, which healthy cells use as signals. External magnetic fields cause the rate of leakage to change, increasing free radicals. When free radicals accumulate faster than the cell’s antioxidant systems can clear them, the result is oxidative stress. Oxidative stress is a recognized driver of chronic illness, including cardiovascular disease, neurodegeneration, diabetes and cancer, and it is in every medical school curriculum. One of its ordinary effects in connective tissue is that it switches on matrix metalloproteinases — MMPs, the enzymes that break collagen apart — while suppressing new collagen synthesis. Tendons are made of collagen. An athlete loading his soft tissue heavily six days a week is already creating oxidative stress in the tendons, so the addition of magnetic field exposure compounds the damage and inhibits repair, making him more susceptible to injury when enormous force lands on a tendon in a fraction of a second. That is the theory. We know that EMF causes oxidative stress, and we know that oxidative stress degrades collagen. The only thing missing is a study showing that direct connection. I have never claimed certainty that the substation is contributing to the elevated injury rate. I do believe it is likely, and I believe it warrants caution, and that a revenue machine like a major NFL team can easily afford to remove the exposure out of precaution. Is there a power plant next to the 49ers practice facility? Here is the clearest single instance of the problem with this episode. It requires no knowledge of electromagnetic fields at all. This story first came to me through Jon Feliciano, a former 49er, in an interview on Willard & Dibs on 95.7 The Game. Asked about why the 49ers are always injured, he said players used to joke that it was the power plant behind the practice fields. Wendy Zukerman corrects him on air. “It’s important to say that it’s not a power plant near the 49ers site.” Torre then asks her to explain the difference between a substation and a power plant. Her answer: a power plant generates electricity and transmits it to a substation, which converts the voltage into something your house can use and sends it on to your home or your business. There are two problems with that. The first is that there is a power plant on that site. The Gianera Generating Station is a natural-gas-fired peaker plant owned by Silicon Valley Power, and it has been there since 1986. I have published aerial photographs of the location from 1987 in which the gas plant is the only thing standing, before the practice facility was even there. I even mentioned the gas plant in my first interview. (Feliciano has since gone on record about this issue, and it is clear he had the substation in mind rather than the gas plant.) The second is that her definition describes a distribution substation, and the facility beside the 49ers is not that. It is the Northern Receiving Station, which takes in bulk power from outside the city’s grid and delivers it to distribution substations. Silicon Valley Power’s own map distinguishes receiving stations from substations, and Rose Rimler even reads the label out loud in the episode when she walks through that map on air. A few minutes before the map segment, Zukerman tells Torre: “like I said, we fact check everything.” Well, maybe not everything. I made a mistake On the morning of July 6th, at 10:20, I sent Rose and Wendy two studies. During the interview I had been asked which human studies show oxidative stress from electromagnetic fields, and I had not been able to name one on the spot. Rose emailed asking for the studies, I quickly searched for a couple, and I wrote that I thought these were the most relevant from that search. Unfortunately, I was busy and did not read either one closely at first. I picked them because they were topically relevant — one on substation workers, one on power plant workers. Neither were great studies, and their problems go past the ones raised in the episode. That was careless on my part. There is context that did not make the episode, though. Before that email I had been on a Zoom call with Rose talking about EMF and oxidative stress, and I pointed her to Dr. Henry Lai at the University of Washington, who has spent years aggregating the literature on this question. His tallies show that roughly 90% of studies since the late 1990s find oxidative effects from electromagnetic field exposure — hundreds of studies, systematically counted. Rose told me she was already aware of his work. So when she asked for studies, I understood her to have the aggregate view already and that she would report anything within that context. Not reading those two carefully was still a mistake, but the larger mistake was assuming the episode would be based on a thorough review of the actual body of literature, rather than on whatever I happened to send that morning. The second email At 1:49 that same afternoon — three hours and twenty-nine minutes after the first — I sent them a second email that I had been preparing for a while. It was a structured document in six numbered sections, written in response to a request they had made two weeks earlier, laying out my entire argument with citations attached to every link in the chain. The episode aired on August 13th, five weeks later, and not a single item from the second email is in it. Here is how it opens: The full email is included at the bottom of this post in Appendix B. Nearly 1,500 words in total. It contains two named mechanisms with the physics behind them. Occupational studies in humans. The literature on oxidative stress and collagen. A section addressing the strongest counter-evidence against my own theory, which I raised myself. And a closing section stating plainly what the theory cannot yet show. My entire argument, in writing, with detailed citations for every claim, provided to them five weeks before broadcast, and none of it made it into the episode. That is the single largest omission, but it is not an isolated one. The whole episode is riddled with similar problems, and the conclusion they came to is not merely a difference of opinion about the scientific evidence. Through omission and through strategic editing, Science Vs misinformed its audience — about what the evidence shows, about what I argued, and about who they spoke to. That is a notable outcome for a show whose stated purpose is correcting misinformation. For the record I am not going to tell you that Science Vs set out to discredit me, or that they had come to their conclusion before they reported the story, or that they used misleading editing to make me look like a man retreating from his own theory. I cannot know what was in anyone’s head, and I am not going to pretend otherwise, either. What I can tell you is what is on the record. They asked me for evidence and aired the weakest thing I sent. They interviewed three scientists who supported my theory and aired none of them. They discussed childhood leukemia without ever saying the exposure level at which it appears. And they took an answer I gave weeks before Ken Karipidis, the one EMF scientist who was put on air, was interviewed, and placed it directly after his critique, where it comes off as a major concession. A friend of mine who has worked as a journalist for thirty years read that last one and called it sleazy. I agree with her. Those are just the four issues that are impossible to defend as pure editorial decision, but they are not the only issues. The most glaring issues stem from what they left out: The exposure level at which the childhood leukemia association actually appears — three to four milligauss, a number the episode never states despite it being much lower than what I measured. The mechanism itself: The episode gets as far as “oxidative stress could weaken collagen,” which leaves it sounding like speculation, rather than a known pathway. The second email, and all the studies in it. Dr. Paul Héroux at McGill, whose work my proposed mechanism rests on, whose contact details I supplied, and who was never called. Dr. Beatrice Golomb at UC San Diego, who runs a research group on oxidative stress and mitochondrial function and has specific expdertice in collagen, interviewed and not aired. Dr. David Carpenter at Albany, the most prominent academic voice on the harm from magnetic field exposure, interviewed and not aired. Dr. Joel Moskowitz at Berkeley, interviewed and not even credited. The specific, testable condition I put in writing that would make me abandon the theory. My own unprompted statement of the theory’s evidentiary gap. My caveats about my own measurements. My ranking of EMF as one factor among several rather than the only one. The new equipment installed at those facilities between 2010 and 2014, and the sharp rise in system load from 2013 onward. But that is not all. What they kept, they selectively edited to serve a narrative that was not served by the raw transcripts of the interviews. A description of thousands of commercial routers in a workplace, reduced to the Wi-Fi in your house. My own acknowledgment, multiple times, that "I'm not a scientist" clipped in an episode that spends considerable energy pointing out that I am not a scientist. And a qualification I volunteered about my own measurements, cut from my answer and delivered later by their EMF expert as a correction. Together their edit produce a portrait of a wellness guy with Wi-Fi phobia and two bad studies, backing away from his theory the moment a “real” scientist looked at it. A practice facility where nothing changed because no new substation was built. Injuries written off as random because the 49ers were not quite the single most injured team in the league over the period in question. That portrait is false even though almost no individual statement made in the episode is. Draw your own conclusions At the top of the episode, Pablo Torre says his show had been flooded with requests to investigate the substation — that it was the thing they were asked to look into over and over again. Neither show went hunting for this story. It arrived from their own audience, in volume, and it could not be waved off. A thread I posted on X reached twenty-two million people. A guy with a gaussmeter and a brand-new Substack obligated a Pultizer prize winning program to spend an hour on a question about player health, that is considered fringe enough that most media operations won’t touch it. Pablo Torre Finds Out could not ignore it. So Science Vs came in and ran a “debunking” operation instead of an investigation. Everything below is what had to be left on the cutting room floor to deliver the “debunking”. They could not ignore it. So they tried debunked it instead. The demand was strong enough to force an episode, and since the episodes release the 49ers have sustained more injuries, including season ending ones, and interest has only grown. Demand from fans and playets is strong enough to force a better investigation from someone else. An omission is not a lie until you find out what was omitted. What follows is the detailed record so you can see the full picture. Draw your own conclusions. I have drawn mine. I am going to keep publishing. A note about Pablo Torre Finds Out After the episode aired I posted publicly, calling out Pablo Torre Finds Out for concerns I had about the integrity of their investigation, and about an interview directly with Pablo Torre which had been offered but never happened. I have since spoken with a producer at PTFO. The offer had rested on a misunderstanding about where things stood between us, and it fell away as the Science Vs part of the production widened past the science. He apologized for the miscommunication and I accepted. The producer also confirmed to me that they did essentially hand off the entire investigation to Science Vs for narrative purposes — so Pablo would be genuinely curious or potentially surprised by their findings — while still taking responsibility for what went out under their name. I appreciated the candor and the accountability, and I am comfortable with where we left things. So this post is not about PTFO. My disagreement is with Science Vs. What they left out about childhood leukemia Childhood leukemia appears at three milligauss. They gave no number at all. 1. They built an EMF ruler, then discussed childhood cancer without it. The sequence on air went like this: First I measured almost 9 mG, then I measured up to 50 milligauss. Torre reacts with concern — “that sounds high.” Cut to Karipidis: the public limit is 2,000 milligauss. Torre reacts again — “What happens at 2,000?” Karipidis explains that nothing happens at 2,000, that safety factors are built in. Then: at more than 50,000 milligauss you get flickers of light in the retina, and higher still, nerve stimulation. The listener now has a ruler (their ruler) to measure these numbers with. Fifty is nothing by their ruler. Then the episode turns to childhood leukemia and states, accurately, that there is a real association — but tellingly, they never give the exposure level at which that association appears. Childhood leukemia appears at three milligauss. They conveniently left that out. The pooled analyses that produced the World Health Organization’s carcinogen classification found roughly a doubling of childhood leukemia risk above three to four milligauss. That is the number that belongs in that segment, and it is more than ten times below the reading that had just been dismissed as trivial. I gave them that number myself, on tape, in the interview. Describing my own threshold, I said my comfort level for long-term chronic exposure is three to four milligauss, but preferably one. 2. Six children in thirteen million. The episode reports that these fields might explain one to four percent of childhood leukemias, then reframes it as a German estimate of perhaps six cases among thirteen million children. Torre, to his credit, is uncomfortable. What never gets explained is why that number is small. Almost no children lives above three milligauss in Europe. Fewer than two children in a hundred, in the Italian data. So even if the risk to those children doubles, the number of additional cases across an entire country stays small — not because the hazard is small, but because hardly anyone is exposed to it. Count the whole population and the few who are exposed disappear. And the reason hardly anyone is exposed is that siting rules keep housing away from transmission lines. In Europe, at least. The Dutch government has a standing precautionary policy against building new homes in any zone where the annual average magnetic field exceeds 4 milligauss — the same number the episode never mentioned. Denmark and Norway treat 4 milligauss as the level that triggers a look at mitigation. That is five hundred times below the ICNIRP figure quoted on air. The United States has no federal equivalent. That is evidence of infrastructure siting policy working. It is not evidence that there is no hazard. It is evidence that we already act as though there is one. If you listen to the raw audio you will hear that my proposed solution is EMF exposure is to build better infrastructure. What they left out about the mechanism 3. They accused me of cherry-picking, and then cherry-picked themselves. On air, Zukerman tells Torre that people who worry about electromagnetic fields dismiss the studies showing null results and collect the ones showing harm, and that this is why you have to be careful not to cherry-pick. They had two papers I had rattled off in a hurry, and a second email containing a carefully chosen set. They ran the two weakest, graded them on air, and presented the result as the state of the evidence for not only my theory, but the whole question of oxidative stress from magnetic fields. That is cherry-picking from my emails. The bigger picture is what they did with the literature as a whole. Zukerman acknowledges it exists, dismisses it, and disposes of it in a single stroke. You can go online right now, she tells Torre, and find scores of studies showing these fields increase oxidative stress. The issue, she says, is that they are not studies in people. Many of them are in people. The occupational studies in my second email are in people. That email had been in her inbox for five weeks. She waved off the literature on a factual claim that the documents in her possession contradict. (I have written separately about the evidentiary standard at work here). The effect was that they essentially baited me: ask the subject to supply the evidence, take the weakest thing he sends, and let that stand as a proxy for the whole argument. Wendy has been doing this show for ten years and clearly knows how to extract what she needs for her desired narrative. 4. They presented the collagen-improvement research as a gotcha, but I had already addressed it. The episode treats the existence of studies showing that EMF can improve collagen as a surprise that undercuts me, but I had pre-emptively addressed that five weeks earlier in the email they ignored. Those studies use measured, high-intensity pulsed dosing. The mechanism by which they work is oxidative signalling. The cell reads a controlled rise in reactive oxygen species as a warning, upregulates its antioxidant defenses, mounts a repair response, and the therapy stops before the system is overwhelmed. The key point is that it induces an oxidative response, which means those studies are actually evidence for my proposed mechanism, not against it. A field that produces a therapeutic effect cannot be biologically inert (which is the implication when they say “Nothing happens at 2,000 milligauss). Chronic ambient exposure is the same pathway with no off switch, and it is most consequential during the evening and while sleeping, when the body is in repair mode and the exposure does not stop. Section 5 of my email is titled What about the study showing improved collagen synthesis. I raised the counter-evidence myself, explained why I did not think it refuted the theory, and wrote that I was disappointed the question had not come up in the interview. That is worth holding against the cherry-picking charge in the item above: the studies they presented as inconvenient for me were studies I had gone out of my way to put in front of them. 5. Section 1 of my email stated a critical argument that was never put to the expert directly responsible for it. My email says the exposure limits exist to prevent acute effects and do not address chronic exposure at all, and that my dispute is with the entire framework. Zukerman gestures at this once. After Karipidis gives the 2,000 milligauss figure, she tells Torre that I would object because those levels do not capture “more subtle effects.” That is not my argument, and “subtle” is doing a lot of work here. My argument is that the limits are built to prevent acute effects — nerves firing, muscles twitching, etc — and were not designed to address chronic exposure at all. In fact, ICNIRP’s own documents state as much themselves. Mine is a structural objection to what the standard measures, reduced as a concern about subtlety, it becomes a matter of degree, rather than a categorical difference. They interviewed Ken Karipidis, vice chair of ICNIRP — the body that writes those limits. He was asked what the limit is, but he was never asked how it applies to chronic exposure. The scientists Science Vs interviewed and did not air 6. They interviewed four officials of the standards body. The episode credits roughly a dozen researchers. Four of them are associated with ICNIRP. Ken Karipidis is the vice chair. Rodney Croft chaired ICNIRP from 2020 to 2024 and led the development of its current guidelines. Dan Baaken is ICNIRP’s scientific secretary. Frank de Vocht sits on the Main Commission. One of them speaks in the episode. Their institution’s position is more than adequately represented — the 2,000 milligauss figure, the safety factors, the assurance that nothing happens below the line. 7. The four who were left out. Dr. Beatrice Golomb is Professor of Medicine at UC San Diego — a physics undergraduate degree, a PhD in biology, an MD. She directs a research group whose stated focus is the relationship between oxidative stress, mitochondrial function and health. That is the mechanism the episode spent its first half dismissing. Her published work includes the fluoroquinolone case series behind the FDA’s black box warning on an antibiotic class that ruptures tendons, where the accepted mechanism is oxidative stress and mitochondrial toxicity — the back half of my chain, already on a drug label. She is in the credits. She is not in the episode. She has told me she finds my theory biologically plausible, and that she has a recording of her interview. Dr. David Carpenter directed the Institute for Health and the Environment at the University at Albany for decades and is the most prominent academic voice arguing these fields cause harm. Childhood leukemia is the reason these fields carry a WHO classification at all, and Carpenter is the person you call if you want that case made by someone who has spent a career on it. He is in the credits. He is not in the episode. He has told me that when he was interviewed they could not have been less interested in what he had to say. Dr. Joel Moskowitz directs the Center for Family and Community Health at UC Berkeley’s School of Public Health. He told me directly that they interviewed him and that he thought it went well. He does not appear in the episode, and unlike Golomb and Carpenter, he does not even appear in the credits. Dr. Paul Héroux at McGill is the researcher whose work provides the foundation for the oxidative stress mechanism my theory rests on. I gave Rose his email address and phone number. He was never interviewed. They never even called him. 8. “He’s not a scientist.” The episode leans hard on the fact that I am not a credentialed scientist. Zukerman says it. Torre repeats it. “At all.” Having built a segment on that, they then left out the physicist-biologist-physician, the professor of public health, the director of a university environmental health institute, and the McGill researcher whose work the primary mechanism comes from. They spent the episode telling their audience I am not a scientist, and then kept four actual scientists who support the theory off because their argument does not survive otherwise. How they misrepresented me and my case 9. They played my words as a response to an interview I had never heard. Near the end of the hour, Zukerman says she went to me and told me the evidence was lacking. Then she plays me saying I am not wedded to it being an EMF, that I have staked my reputation on it needing more study, and that I am not certain of anything. That segment was placed immediately after Karipidis had finished taking the cherry-picked papers apart. It plays as a man folding under expert scrutiny. Commenters have used it against me since, but it is incorrect. Here is the sequence as it happened. I was interviewed. Karipidis was interviewed weeks later. I was never told what he said, or even who he was. I was never asked to respond to it. I did not know his name until the episode aired. That is not a simple editing decision. That is a quote from one interview, moved to follow a critique from a different interview it was not a response to, so that it would land as a concession. A friend of mine who has spent thirty years as a journalist read that sequence and called it sleazy. She is right. The full passage is reproduced in Appendix A, and it is worth reading. What airs is the preamble. Four paragraphs later I say “to directly answer your question” — and that answer, about what would change my mind if the team relocated, is not in the episode. Neither is the sentence two paragraphs on, where I say the EMF might turn out to be ten percent of the problem. I will say the underlying point again, though, because I meant it and I still do. I am not wedded to my theory that magnetic fields from the substation are contributing to the 49ers injuries. I could be wrong. What I am wedded to is the process of scientific inquiry, and the fact that we should be cautious around these exposures and we need more independently funded studies. 10. Three telling edits. They cut “I’m not a scientist” mid-sentence. What I said: “...and I am not certain of anything. I’m not a scientist. To me, I find the mechanisms compelling. I will go back to the fact that I got into this not because of the 49ers, but because of clients I was working with who suffer from EDS...” What aired: “...and that I am not certain of anything. I’m not.” The clip ends on the first two words of the sentence in which I say I am not a scientist, in an episode that spends considerable energy establishing that I am not a scientist. The full sequence is in Appendix A. They cut my own description of my work. Asked what I do, I said I run a wellness business, that I am focused on writing software to help people navigate environmental stressors, that environmental health is my focus, and that I also do independent journalism and research. What aired is the wellness business and the environmental health, with the software and the journalism removed from my own answer. The software engineering does come up later — narrated by them, as a hacker who grew up to write firmware — but my current work, in my own words, arrives as “wellness guy.” Thousands of commercial routers became home Wi-Fi. What I described: working at a wireless networking company surrounded by thousands of Wi-Fi routers, and a stress-induced health collapse afterward that working in that environment contributed to. What aired: Wi-Fi, the kind you have at home — reinforced by a clip of Christian McCaffrey talking about turning his router off at night. Three cuts, and every one of them makes me seem less credible. That is not a coincidence. 11. I gave them my own caveats and the test that would disprove me. In the first email I wrote that a well-designed chronic, ambient-level exposure study in tendon showing no collagen degradation, run over many months, would undercut my confidence in the theory. That is a specific, testable condition, stated in advance and in writing. There was a second interview, weeks later, which was not used in the episode, but in that I asked again for the falsification criterion to be included. What the episode presents instead is a man saying “we need more study,” which reads as a hedge, an open-ended request for the benefit of the doubt. It is the opposite of a hedge. Section 6 of my second email says, unprompted, that as far as I am aware there is not a single study showing EMF-driven oxidative stress degrading collagen in a human in vivo or in human tendon in a lab. I wrote that because it is true and because it is the first thing anyone should check. Under their standard it becomes the hinge of the entire first half, framed as something they had to surface without my cooperation. I had handed it to them five weeks earlier. And in the interview I said that my 25 to 50 milligauss readings were taken at knee level, and that these fields attenuate quickly, so by the time it reaches your head it is not that high anymore. That did not air either. The qualification arrives later, from Karipidis, as a correction. How you would actually study the injuries 12. They measured the wrong thing. The episode spends its final act on whether the 49ers are the most injured team in the NFL, finds no clean ranking, and lands on “injuries are random”. That is the wrong test. You would define the exposure — measured field levels at the facility — and the outcome narrowly: soft-tissue injuries, not a single MSK injury count that a broken finger and a ruptured Achilles both land in. Then you would compare the 49ers to themselves before and after the exposure changed, and compare that change against every other team over the same window. That controls for league-wide shifts in rules, turf and training load. It is a difference-in-differences design, and it is standard. I sent them that argument on July 28th, in writing, along with the fact that in eleven of the past twelve seasons the 49ers had finished top ten in Adjusted Games Lost. And by the episode’s own reporting, the 49ers are second in games lost to injury over the past decade, with FTN’s Aaron Schatz confirming that once you adjust for starters they come out second worst in the league — after having been one of the healthiest teams for years before that. A finding like that is where an investigation starts, not where it stops. 13. I did a lot of substation research for the episode that was never aired. I had reported that the substation next to the facility was expanded in 2014. That was wrong, and Rose Rimler and I sorted it out together. They gave me credit on air, which I appreciated, but framed it as a concession on my part to something they had found. In fact I had been investigating it myself, was uncertain before they asked, but was waiting for clarification from Silicon Valley Power. The uncertainty centered around a substation named “Esparanca” that was proposed right behind the facilities as part of the stadium construction, but now appears to never have been built. I spent days in Silicon Valley Power’s records, and did eventually reach Silicon Valley Power for confirmation and indentified the mistake myself. I also gave them highly detailed documents on what we do know about those facilities: new equipment installed between 2010 and 2014, and load growth across the system with an inflection around 2013–2014, with the Northern Receiving Station carrying the highest capacity in the system and sitting closest to the data center corridor. None of that is in the episode. I have a separate piece about it coming out soon. *I cut 2 seconds from the raw audio to remove personal information that had no connection to anything in the episode. Appendix A: the passage the clip was taken from This is the sequence from my first interview, in full. The episode uses one fragment of it. It’s tricky because my understanding is that there’s something like a 15-year half-life on collagen remodeling issues. They’re going to get a new crop of players. What I really need, though, is for the injuries to be broken down so we can see the soft tissue injuries. Right now, they’re categorized as MSK injuries, but let’s say we can actually identify them more specifically. Is that right? He was able to do that? Oh, cool. I wasn’t able to find that information. Interesting — I didn’t know that data existed. I tried so hard to get it, and I didn’t know it was available. Maybe you could connect me with that person. That would be amazing. I’m not wedded to it being an EMF, honestly. I’m not. I would say that, to a certain extent, I’ve staked my reputation on the fact that it needs more study. It’s important to look into it, and I am not certain of anything. I’m not a scientist. To me, I find the mechanisms compelling. I will go back to the fact that I got into this not because of the 49ers, but because of clients I was working with who suffer from EDS, Ehlers-Danlos Syndrome, a tendon hypermobility issue. This condition is documented to be partially caused by oxidative stress. I’ve worked with them to mitigate their EMF exposure and have seen people improve. I think it’s a bigger story. In a way, the 49ers represent an occupational cluster with specific exposure risks. If someone would conduct a study on this, I believe we could learn a lot. Perhaps we would discover that it’s like, okay, maybe it’s 10% of the problem. I don’t know the exact number, but I think either way, conducting the study would provide valuable insights. To directly answer your question, it’s challenging for me because it’s part of a bigger story. If the 49ers move and stop having injuries, I might conclude that it was related to the substation. However, if they move and still experience injuries, I would want to analyze the nature of those injuries. Are they primarily soft tissue injuries? I don’t think it’s necessarily a case closed, but the story might lose traction at that point regardless. Three things are worth noting. The aired fragment stops immediately before the sentence in which I say I am not a scientist — the cut described in item 10. It also stops four paragraphs before the words “to directly answer your question.” What the episode plays is the throat-clearing. The actual answer, about what would change my mind, never airs. And two paragraphs in, I say the EMF might turn out to be ten percent of the problem. That is the ranking the episode says I never gave. Appendix B: the full email, July 6th, 1:39 PM Hi Rose, You asked me to send you some studies a couple of weeks ago. I apologize for the delay. I have been incredibly busy. I also wanted to give you a chance to dig in yourself, and get your own perspective before I influenced you too much with mine. That said, I do want to make sure that the actual argument is abundantly clear, so here it is! One note before I begin, there are really two separate questions here: Does the substation cause the soft-tissue injuries? That was my specific claim, and what the podcast is about. Is the theory biologically sound? Can 50/60 Hz fields at these levels do anything biological below the safety limits? Question two is why people have been calling me a conspiracy theorist. The regulatory and advisory bodies (ICNIRP, etc) maintain that anything below their exposure limits is biologically inert, and that position is broadly accepted within the mainstream, but the actual science paints a different picture. To defend my theory I’ve had to defend a much larger claim: that the advisory bodies have the biology wrong. I can’t honestly answer question 1 without first addressing that. Here’s is a simplified outline of my theory, with links to studies: 1. Advisory body thresholds for biological effects The ELF magnetic-field limits (ICNIRP’s ~2,000 mG public / 10,000 mG occupational) exist to prevent acute effects from exposure. If a magnetic field is strong enough, it makes nerves fire and muscles contract. Muscles twitch. You can see faint flashes of light in your vision. People can even feel tingling or even a shock. That happens due to Faraday’s law, which states that a time-varying magnetic field induces an electric field inside the body via the creation of Eddy currents.The standards assume that those currents do nothing below the twitch threshold. They do not consider chronic effects at all. My argument is that they are biologically active and do have chronic effects. 2. There are multipe ELF-EMF mechanisms for inducing oxidative stress. This is basic biophysics. Below are the two primary mechanisms. Simplest first. Dr. Paul Héroux of McGill has the most intuitive explanation, which rests on Maxwell’s principle of superposition: because Maxwell’s equations are linear, two sets of electromagnetic waves sharing the same space simply add together. In the interview I pictured a pebble dropped into a pond, sending out clean ripples. Then a boat motors past at distance, sending larger waves, and where they meet the ripples, the two add together and the original pattern gets distorted. In our cells, the mitochondria run on continuous currents of electrons and protons that carry their own faint electromagnetic fields. An external field from a substation, by the principle of superposition, adds to those internal currents and shifts the pattern. The electron transport chain in the mitochondria leaks a fraction of its electrons by design as reactive oxygen species (ROS), which act as signalling molecules in a healthy cell. Distorting that field increases that electron leakage, creating oxidative stress. A tiny electromagnetic interference results in a large downstream effect. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2405844025006474 The more complex pathway is Dimitris Panagopoulos’s Ion Forced-Oscillation / Voltage-Gated Ion Channel (IFO-VGIC) mechanism. Weak, polarized, low-frequency fields force the ions (calcium, potassium, sodium) next to an ion channel’s voltage sensor to oscillate; because that force scales with the inverse cube of the distance involved, fields far below the stimulation threshold can still force the channel open, disrupting the cell’s ion balance and driving ROS overproduction (Nitric oxide and superoxide interact and produce peroxynitrite, a highly unstable cytotoxin that breaks down into free radicals). https://www.researchgate.net/publication/366088934 https://www.spandidos-publications.com/ijo/59/5/92 https://www.mdpi.com/1422-0067/22/18/10041 https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/public-health/articles/10.3389/fpubh.2025.1585441/full https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3772193/ 3. Evidence of oxidative stress, in vivo, in humans from ELF-EMF There are many studies, and the strongest are occupational, which applies to the 49ers situation. 115 power-plant workers vs. 145 office controls. Serum malondialdehyde (MDA, the standard lipid-peroxidation marker), superoxide dismutase, and catalase were all significantly higher in the exposed group, and the markers rose with increasing field exposure. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.3233/WOR-203244 A follow-up where they reversed the oxidative stress in power plant workers. A double-blind randomized controlled trial: 91 power-plant workers given vitamin E, vitamin C, both, or placebo for 90 days. The antioxidant groups showed reduced lipid peroxidation and raised antioxidant capacity versus controls. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32191586/ A spot-welder study: 46 welders occupationally exposed at 50 Hz, showed significantly altered red-blood-cell antioxidant enzyme activity and concluded ELF-MF “might act as an oxidative stressor… even at the recommended levels of exposure.” https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/18504600/ A substation-specific study found oxidative stress and DNA damage https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/24460415/ 4. Oxidative stress degrades collagen This half isn’t controversial at all. Oxidative stress activates the matrix metalloproteinases (MMPs) that break collagen down and suppresses its synthesis. Here are three example studies: Siwik et al. 2001: Oxidative stress raises MMPs and lowers collagen synthesis in cardiac fibroblasts. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/11121376/ Fisher et al. 2009: Collagen fragmentation drives oxidative stress and elevates MMP-1 in aged human skin. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC2631323/ Varani et al. 2006: Decreased collagen production in oxidatively aged skin. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/16723701/ 5. What about the study showing improved collagen synthesis I’m glad you asked this question, and I’m bummed we didn’t get to it in the interview because it is a great question, and very important to understand. Superficially it may appear to be a refutation of my theory, but I would argue that it actually supports the underlying argument. That study used a short, high-intensity pulsed dose: therapeutic-PEMF, the same type of field used clinically to stimulate bone and tissue healing. The reason this works is because it triggers the very same biological pathways that can lead to oxidative stress. The exposure still stimulates ROS production, but done at a controlled dosage, for a limited duration it has a different effect. The cell reads the ROS as a warning signal and it upregulates its antioxidant defenses, and mounts a repair/proliferation response. The therapy is then stopped before the cell gets overwhelmed. That is essentially a hormetic response: a small dose of a stressor producing a beneficial adaptation. Two things follow: At the very least, this means the field is biologically active, which by itself undercuts the regulatory claim that these fields are inert below their thresholds. There is a wealth of literature on PEMF (pulsed EMF) bone regeneration and calcium channel signalling (which is the second mechanims in section one). Here is one. https://www.nature.com/articles/srep13856 At best, it leads us straight to my actual concern, which is that under chronic, chaotic and unregulated exposure, the cell’s antioxidant capacity gets overwhelmed, resulting in oxidative stress. There are plentiful examples of things that are beneficial at controlled doses, but harmful at uncontrolled doses. Excecise is one obvious, uncontroversial example. Botox is perhaps a more interesting example. 6. What about a study that shows EMF causing collagen degradation in humans? As far as I am aware there is not a single study showing EMF-driven oxidative stress degrading collagen in a human, in vivo, or in human tendon in a lab. There are studies involving isolated fibroblasts though, which secrete collagen. The most relevant one showed that human fetal scleral fibroblasts exposed to 50 Hz ELF-EMF showed a significant decrease in collagen synthesis and that MMP-2 expression was upregulated, which is the exact mechanism I described in section 2. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3626379/ That’s it! Thanks again for the interview. Best, Peter Anthony Cowan Environmental Health · Wellness Tech · Researcher & Journalist Publisher & Editor, Living Energy Bio: petercowan.comSocial: X · Instagram · TikTokApp: sunlightis.lifePhone: [redacted]
Secret contracts reveal undisclosed terms in Trump’s drug-pricing deals
Agreements with Pfizer and Eli Lilly include tariff protections, overseas pricing inducements and broad confidentiality clauses.
Anthropic Sets Up Wet Lab In San Francisco Bay Area For AI Life Sciences Work
Gizmodo pitches the wet lab as drug development, while Engadget emphasises Anthropic said it was not created for drug discovery.
Trump says he will demand drug companies split up vaccines into more doses
Those comments came a day after Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. told attendees of a conference for the anti-vaccine group he founded that they have a “friend at the White House.”
Health Brief: White House touts Medicaid drug deals
Plus: Three pressure points for global health.
Trump announces all 50 states joining Medicaid drug pricing model
President Donald Trump announced that all 50 states will join a program to provide Most Favored Nation pricing for some Medicaid drugs. The administration claims this plan, called the Medicaid
Health wonks question who saves in Trump drug program
President Trump boasted about his administration’s work on drug pricing, announcing the “most-favored-nation” program, but health policy experts question whether the changes will directly save consume...
Trump announces all 50 states joining Medicaid drug pricing model
President Donald Trump announced that all 50 states will join a program to provide Most Favored Nation pricing for some Medicaid drugs.
5 things to know in life sciences: Week of Sept. 14, 2026
FDA launches pilot to accelerate early-stage drug development. This and more in this week’s life sciences update.
Health Insurance Will Cost A Lot More In 2027. Here’s How To Pay Less
Health insurance costs rise again in 2027. A physician explains open enrollment deadlines, the ACA subsidy cliff, Medicare drug plan changes and what to check by Dec. 15.
Anthropic quietly sets up biology lab as it ramps AI drug program
At a time when fears of AI are gripping the public, the startup has built a wet lab — or place for physical experiments — in the San Francisco Bay Area, two people familiar with the matter said.
GW Global Health Expert: No ‘Magic Bullet’ for Malaria - Elimination Will Require a Combination of Tools
New review examines how vaccines, antimalarial drugs and mosquito-control measures could work together to accelerate progress toward a malaria-free world
Health insurers covered 112,000 fewer Mass. residents’ GLP-1 weight-loss drugs this year, report finds
Insurers restricted coverage for obesity after years of financial losses.
The Champions League cloud that casts a long, dark shadow
More than a year on from one of their most embarrassing European exits, Celtic are struggling to escape from a groundhog day entirely of their own making. Amid buzz phrases like "learning lessons" and "wake-up calls" following last weekend's derby drubbing at Ibrox, an interesting yet awkward question emerges: have Celtic learned anything at all from last year's costly mistakes? Going out of the Champions League to Kairat Almaty cast a cloud over huge swathes of last season.
US Medicare Pricing Policies Could Drive Global Costs And Hinder Access Worldwide
A new modelling study suggests that US Medicare “Most-Favored-Nation” policies on drug prices would cut Medicare spending on brand name drugs, but potentially
US Medicare Pricing Policies Could Drive Global Costs And Hinder Access Worldwide
A new modelling study suggests that US Medicare “Most-Favored-Nation” policies on drug prices would cut Medicare spending on brand name drugs, but potentially
3 Common Drugs Older Adults Might Be Overusing
Not all older people need benzodiazepines, antibiotics, or daily aspirin — and taking them can carry increased risks.
England to cover AstraZeneca breast cancer drug, a result of U.K.-U.S. drug pricing deal
A breast cancer drug from AstraZeneca will now be available in England after a pricing deal was reached, in part a result of the U.S.-U.K. pharma pact.
Alabama awards $262,000 grant to upgrade forensic science equipment
Gov. Kay Ivey's office has awarded $262,000 to the Alabama Department of Forensic Sciences to enhance drug case investigations and morgue services.
Popular drugs for bone health linked to significantly lower Alzheimer's risk
A Hong Kong study of 121,492 older adults links nitrogen-containing bisphosphonates for osteoporosis to a 16% lower Alzheimer's disease risk.
Woman allegedly walked naked into Watertown business, assaulted first responders
A woman allegedly high on drugs is accused of walking into a Watertown business naked before assaulting first responders.
Maryland health officials are watching illegal markets as kratom products are restricted
Officials at the Rapid Analysis of Drugs are keeping an eye on if demand for the drug will emerge on the black market and the potential for other adulterants to be added to the drug. The state regulated kratom in 2024 and banned 7-OH in July. Kratom can still be bought, but only with certain potencies and warnings.
Stanford Grows Human Brain Tissue Inside Mice in Science Breakthrough
Stanford grew human brain tissue inside mice, creating living neural models that could transform drug testing for epilepsy, autism, and schizophrenia.
Colts news: Keenan Allen formally charged after preseason arrest
Indianapolis Colts wide receiver Keenan Allen was in the headlines recently after a run-in with the law. Allen was arrested for drunk driving after failing a sobriety test in the city. Now, the veteran wide receiver has been formally charged with two misdemeanor counts, per Fox59. “Court records show Allen is formally charged with operating a […] The post Colts news: Keenan Allen formally charged after preseason arrest appeared first on ClutchPoints.
Specialties Honor Roll: Health Law
Health care is big business, and it’s constantly changing. New medicines and medical devices enter the market, regulations change and artificial intelligence is quickly changing the health care landscape. Ads for prescription drugs and health products are everywhere, while debates over access to care continue to make headlines. Behind all of it are legal issues. […]
Novo signs Anthropic deal to test Claude Science in R&D
Anthropic partners with Novo to tackle drug discovery using Claude Science AI. Financial terms undisclosed. Novo also has a similar deal with OpenAI.
Multiple drug overdoses target Austin's entertainment district
Numerous people in and around a bar were experiencing overdose symptoms, including one adult in respiratory arrest.
Novo Nordisk Taps Anthropic’s Claude Science To Speed Up Drug Discovery — Here’s Everything Investors Need To Know
Novo will use Anthropic’s Claude Science in R&D to tackle scientific and drug discovery challenges, aiming to develop new medicines faster.
Novo Nordisk Taps Anthropic’s Claude Science To Speed Up Drug Discovery — Here’s Everything Investors Need To Know
Novo will use Anthropic’s Claude Science in R&D to tackle scientific and drug discovery challenges, aiming to develop new medicines faster.
Syneos Health and Tufts CSDD Study Shows Clinical Trial Performance Depends More on Operating Model Design Than Sourcing Strategy
Data From 13 Leading Pharmaceutical Companies Points to Execution, Governance and Partner Coordination as Key Drivers of Trial PerformanceMORRISVILLE, N.C., Sept. 16, 2026 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- Syneos Health®, a leading fully integrated biopharmaceutical solutions organization, today announced findings from a first-of-its-kind benchmarking study conducted by the Tufts Center for the Study of Drug Development. The research examined one of the industry’s most persistent questions: does the sourcing
Burnham and Trump expected to meet for first time next week as PM steps up presence on world stage
Andy Burnham will attend UN general assembly where he is expected to try to drum up more support for Ukraine
Brandon Woodruff celebrates yet another Central Division title
Brandon Woodruff, sidelined by a shoulder injury, was on hand for the Brewers' clinch of a fourth straight Central Division title in Pittsburgh.
Philly band the War on Drugs is back with new music
PHILADELPHIA — The War on Drugs have returned. The Philadelphia band fronted by songwriter Adam Granduciel has released its first new music in five years. The band’s new single, “Who’s
Philly band the War on Drugs is back with new music
PHILADELPHIA — The War on Drugs have returned. The Philadelphia band fronted by songwriter Adam Granduciel has released its first new music in five years. The band’s new single, “Who’s
Harvard scientists design evolutionary traps to stop viral mutations
When a virus mutates, the world usually finds out the hard way. Variants of influenza and SARS‑CoV‑2 can slip past vaccines and antibody drugs before scientists fully understand what has changed.
GLP-1 drug slows aging in mice
A GLP-1 drug extended lifespan and prevented age-related decline in older female mice.
Scientists Reveal Malaria’s Method of Attack
A major new discovery by Columbia scientists is raising hopes that more-effective drugs could be developed.
Novo Nordisk (CPSE:NOVO B) Rebrands As Novo In Consumer Health Push
Novo Nordisk (CPSE:NOVO B) has rebranded to "Novo" as part of a shift toward a more consumer-focused healthcare identity. The group is introducing a new corporate culture intended to support its obesity and diabetes franchises in increasingly crowded markets. Management positions the rebrand as a move beyond traditional pharmaceuticals, with a broader focus on consumer-facing health solutions. The shift to the Novo identity reworks how the business presents itself to obesity drug users and...
Axios Live: Health leaders emphasize AI progress with human oversight
AI is already accelerating drug development and predicting disease risk, but real-world applications still require human involvement and safety considerations
Hayden Panettiere death probe focusing on illegal pills from LA dealer
Federal authorities probing the death of Hayden Panettiere are focusing their investigation in Los Angeles and looking into whether the actor procured nonprescription pills from an area dealer. Drug Enforcement
Health Brief: Exclusive | States line up for Medicaid drug pilot
At least 19 have applied to the Trump administration’s drug-pricing experiment offering internationally benchmarked prices under Medicaid
Bill Directing Federal Health Officials To Track Testing For Marijuana And Other Drugs In Hospital ERs Set For House Vote This Week
The U.S. House of Representatives is expected to vote on a bill this week to require the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) to study how prevalent drug testing for marijuana, fentanyl and other drugs is in hospital emergency departments. The legislation, which cleared the House Energy and Commerce Committee in a unanimous 46-0 […]
Drugs for autoimmune diseases are pricey. This bill could switch patients to a cheaper one
Nearly 25,000 Californians could get switched to a cheaper drug next year — unless their doctor objects.
Rhelion Life Sciences' Wholly Owned Subsidiary Filament Health to Deliver Oral Comments at FDA Public Hearing on the Potential Future Therapeutic Use of Psychedelic Drugs
Sarit Hashkes, President of Filament Health Corp., will provide oral remarks at the United States Food and Drug Administration public hearing "Considerations for Potential Future Therapeutic Use of Psychedelic Drugs", being held later today, September 14, 2026Toronto, Ontario--(Newsfile Corp. - September 14, 2026) - Rhelion Life Sciences Corp. (CSE: RHEL) (FSE: 4YX0) (OTCQB: TRUFF) ("Rhelion" or the "Company"), an Ontario-based organization advancing innovation and research within the legal...
Kentucky looks to expand GLP-1 drug access for Medicaid patients
A federal program could help Kentuckians on Medicaid get GLP-1 drugs, but outdated state rules block the path.
Seattle-area business leaders call on city to halt open-air drug markets, add services
In a letter addressed to the Mayor of Seattle, and the city council, dozens of business minds requested that the city take a hard look at public safety and drug
Political debate over AI intensifies amid warnings about ‘catastrophic risk’
(CNN) — The debate around artificial intelligence is ramping up in Washington, with Democratic lawmakers sounding alarms on the dangers they say the technology poses and Republican leaders suggesting those concerns are inflated and secondary to winning the AI race with China.Some Democratic lawmakers last week pressured House Speaker Mike Johnson to reconvene the chamber immediately to work on AI regulation, citing what they describe as the “catastrophic risk posed by advanced artificial intelligence.” But the Louisiana Republican on Sunday resisted those calls, instead saying industry leaders should meet with lawmakers to find “balance” in any potential guardrails.“If Congress just races in and does some sort of emergency session to try to regulate AI, we will lose the race to China, and that is a threat to every single American,” Johnson said on CNN’s “State of the Union.”Meanwhile, former President Barack Obama told Democrats to make artificial intelligence regulation a central part of their agenda during a private fundraiser Thursday, warning that the technology could be dangerous “if we don’t get on top of it.”In a fireside chat with House Democratic Leader Hakeem Jeffries, Obama said whoever runs in the 2028 presidential election should have a “very clear plan” on AI, adding that he saw the need for a “blueprint” on AI guardrails even at the end of his presidency a decade ago.“Certainly, if I were running for president next year, this would be one of my central agendas, and I would have a very clear plan, and I would talk about this, and I would say, ‘Here’s our plan for safety, here’s our plan for making sure our kids are not corrupted by this,’” he said, per excerpts of the remarks provided to CNN by his office. Obama’s remarks were first reported by the New York Times.Concerns over the rapid acceleration of AI reached a fever pitch after Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei wrote in a 3,800-word essay Saturday that the race to develop artificial intelligence is in dire need of a slowdown. The call to action came after an OpenAI test model breached the Hugging Face online platform, deepening concerns about cybersecurity.In an exclusive interview with CNN’s Anderson Cooper on Saturday, Amodei called on industry leaders to work together to avoid “the wrong paths” and the possibility of AI harming humanity.One Anthropic researcher, Jacob Coxon, resigned from the firm over worries that the industry wasn’t doing enough to prevent AI from destroying humanity by the end of the decade.Obama said Democrats need a plan to get their agenda on AI underway should they win the House majority in this year’s midterms.Speaking to Jeffries, who is presumed to be speaker of the House should Democrats prevail in November, Obama said, “Once you are speaker, I would strongly urge that the Democrats put together a framework for a very public conversation, and you can break it out into three or four or five issues.”Obama stressed that the framework should be centered on the reality that the technology can’t be stuffed “back into a box.”“This is something that is moving very fast in private hands, and if we don’t get on top of it, I think can be dangerous. If we do get on top of it, I do think it’s beneficial,” Obama said, laying out examples of AI’s potential use in drug development and finding pathways to a clean energy future.“We don’t want to shut off those opportunities, but we have to understand that this is a tool,” he said.Jeffries agreed with the former president in a statement provided to CNN on Sunday.“President Obama is correct that decisive action must be taken on Artificial Intelligence,” he said, adding, “In the majority, we will move urgently on this issue with a legislative response that recognizes the importance of American companies continuing to lead in the Artificial Intelligence area, while putting in place meaningful guardrails that protect the American people from bad actors and the very real damage that can be done to humanity.”Jeffries also accused Republicans of having “abdicated their responsibility to govern” and said Democrats “will not repeat their error.”A source familiar with Obama’s thinking said the former president sees Amodei’s letter and similar reaction from other tech moguls as an encouraging development.But President Donald Trump waved off their concerns, saying he is not worried about any existential threat posed by AI, focusing instead on the US winning in its development of the technology over China.“We’re leading China in AI. We’re the most sophisticated country in the world, and frankly, I want to keep it that way,” Trump said to reporters at the Amgen Irish Open on Sunday.About the concerns expressed by Democrats and others over the technology, the president said, “I think you have a lot of negative forces that are bringing it up that shouldn’t be bringing it up, and they’re bringing up things that won’t happen.”One of Trump’s top economic advisers, Kevin Hassett, also rejected the calls for slowing the technology down, saying on Sunday the bigger concern is a scenario in which a “malevolent actor has access to an AI that’s better than the one we have that can protect us.”Hassett, the National Economic Council director, said on “State of the Union” the White House may hold meetings this week about addressing Amodei’s concerns, but he did not specify whether Trump had floated greater safeguards.“I have concerns that if we don’t win AI, we’re going to be put in a very bad position,” Hassett said. “We are leading China right now.”CNN’s Alison Main and Molly English contributed to this report.The-CNN-Wire™ & © 2026 Cable News Network, Inc., a Warner Bros. Discovery Company. All rights reserved.THE-CNN-WIRE (TM) & © 2026 CABLE NEWS NETWORK, INC., A TIME WARNER COMPANY. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.
The Gophers have a Darius Taylor conundrum
Minnesota's star running back appears to be banged up again, just two games into the 2026 season.
Bone Health Without the Hype
I am at the Australasian Menopause Society meeting and we had a fantastic lecture on Bone Health on Day 2, called, “Everything you need to know about bones - except the boring bits!” Spoiler alert, there were no boring bits. The lecture was given by Dr. Amanda Beech, who is a senior staff specialist in Obstetric Medicine and Endocrinology at the Royal Hospital for Women, where she is director of the Bone Density Unit. I want to summarize my top 10 take-aways for you. Share Osteoporosis is a disease of low bone mass, disruption of bone microarchitecture, and fragility of the skeleton. It is a silent disease…until someone develops a fracture. The diagnosis of osteoporosis is based on either fragility/minimal trauma fractures or a T-score of less than -2.5 on a DXA (Dual-Energy X-ray Absorptiometry) or bone scan. It is important to recognize that about 50% of minimal trauma fractures occur when women have low bone mass (often referred to as osteopenia), but not osteoporosis. This tells us that bone strength is more complicated than a number on a DXA report. I am going to add a little here that wasn’t in the talk (one can only include so much in 25 minutes), as many women might read the above paragraph and think, “Shouldn’t we be treating everyone with low bone mass if this is when 50% of the fractures occur?” Many fractures happen for women with low bone mass because there are so many women with low bone mass –it is a statement about the population on a whole, not about the fracture risk of low bone mass. For you as an individual, bone density is only one component of fracture risk and many women with lower bone mass will not have a significantly elevated fracture risk. This is why individualized risk assessment matters. Subscribe We build bone in our teens and twenties, and by the time we are about thirty we have reached peak bone mass. This is why, when we discuss risk factors for osteoporosis, it is important to consider factors that might have affected us in our teens and twenties when we were actively building bone, such as nutritional restriction/energy imbalance. It is important to ask women about a history of eating disorders, and for those with such a history, getting a bone scan in perimenopause or at age 50 is likely warranted. (This image below isn’t from the talk, but is similar to one that was). Bone mass is relatively stable until about two years before the final menstrual period, and perimenopause marks a time of rapid bone loss for women. Using urinary markers of bone loss we know that the time of significantly accelerated bone loss starts about 1 year before the final period and ends about 2 years after the final period. The Study of Women’s Health Across the Nation (SWAN) shows that over the menopause transition women lose an average of 10.6% of the bone at their lumbar spine and 9.1% at the femoral neck While this wasn’t covered in the lecture, I want to add that the rapid bone loss during perimenopause is clearly related to more than estradiol, because during this time estradiol levels can be erratic and not uniformly low. Bone loss during perimenopause is likely a multi-hormone event. For example, rising FSH (follicle stimulating hormone) tracks with bone loss better than estradiol, and there is evidence that FSH may act directly on bone. While decreased estrogen matters, there is clearly more going on. FSH and bone is an active area of research. Subscribe Screening for osteoporosis was recommended fairly broadly before age 65, and was taken from the “Practitioner’s Toolkit for Managing Menopause,” from Monash University. Here is a screenshot from the toolkit that was used as a slide: I am going to add a little bit more about body weight here for clarification. Low body mass (typically 152.1 lb): 0 points (risk neutral) 60–69 kg (132.3–152.1 lb): 3 points (adds some risk)
Science Snapshots: September 13, 2026
Explore groundbreaking discoveries in human drug use, sleep regulation, and the surprising effects of charged water on Teflon.
Scientists find Ozempic may slow aging itself
Semaglutide helped older healthy mice live longer while improving memory, muscle function, blood sugar control, and several biological signs of aging. Its effects went beyond those seen with calorie restriction, raising the possibility that GLP-1 drugs could tap into a separate biological pathway linked to longevity.
ACA, Medicare or health insurance through work? Your health insurance bills are about to go up
The premium increases stem in part from rising healthcare costs, including higher prices for medical care and expensive prescription drugs.
Colombia to Start Aerial Spraying of Coca Crops Despite Health Worries
The plan — quickly challenged by a local court — came days after Colombia’s president and the U.S. secretary of state, Marco Rubio, discussed stronger measures against drug trafficking.
Posts touting mebendazole as cancer treatment go beyond the science
The anti-parasitic drug mebendazole has shown preclinical efficacy in targeting multiple cancers, but experts say social media posts calling it a "cure" go too far. Additional clinical trials in humans are necessary to prove when, at what dosage, and in which treatment combinations it could make an impact.
Posts touting mebendazole as cancer treatment go beyond the science
The anti-parasitic drug mebendazole has shown preclinical efficacy in targeting multiple cancers, but experts say social media posts calling it a "cure" go too far. Additional clinical trials in human...
Why Alliance Entertainment Stock Surged Today
CDs and vinyl records are popular again.
Life Sciences Companies Present Live at the September 17 Virtual Investor Forum
Live Presentations and Q&A Across Oncology, Fibrosis, Drug Delivery, Antibiotics, Cannabinoid Therapeutics, and Respiratory Imaging A Global Lineup Presents Live Online: 30-Minute Sessions, Audience Q&A, Replays On Demand NEW YORK, NY - Sept...
The dirtiest places on an airplane; testing for a breast cancer gene mutation; the evolution of esophageal cancer; plus other stories with Vanderbilt Health sources
William Schaffner, MD, Professor of Preventive Medicine, was quoted by several news outlets about public health issues, including: WKRN News 2 (heat-related illness); NBC News (how bad will flu and COVID be this winter?); AAA’s The Extra Mile (the dirtiest places on an airplane); WKRN News 2 (again) (measles in Tennessee); and The Tennessean and Healthline (new COVID vaccines). Schaffner also spoke to the EMJ European Medical Journal for a Q&A interview. Tuya Pal, MD, Professor of Medicine, was quoted in a New York Times story about testing for a breast cancer gene mutation. Michael Gibson, MD, PhD, Professor of Medicine, was quoted in a MedPage Today story about the epidemiologic evolution of esophageal cancer. Medpage Today writer Shannon Fritz quoted Shravani Durbhakula, MD, Associate Professor of Pain Medicine, who answered questions about a street drug called cychlorphine. Becker’s Behavioral Health picked up the story. WSMV Channel 4 News reporter Diana Rocco interviewed Michael Caucci, MD, Associate Professor of Psychiatry and Obstetrics and Gynecology, for a story about postpartum psychosis and the trial of Lindsay Clancy.