By Therese Markow
4.8
3737 ratings
The podcast currently has 157 episodes available.
Dr. Adam Schiavi is an assistant professor of anesthesiology and critical care medicine and neurology at the Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine. His areas of clinical expertise include anesthesiology, neurological critical care, disorders of consciousness and brain death diagnosis, clinical ethics, critical care medicine, and traumatic brain injury.
In this episode, Therese Markow and Dr. Adam Schiavi discuss how the definition of death has changed throughout history, what the current definition is, and how that is determined by the medical technology of the time. Brain death is the current definition of death, medically, but what happens to a body after brain death is determined can vary depending on the state you live in. This can be a trying time for families and for the providers involved with the now-deceased patient as the definition of death is not understood by everyone. They also discuss how brain death differs from other states of consciousness and how people often confuse the terminology of those different states, as well as the ability to hope for healing from all but brain death.
Key Takeaways:
The total cessation of all functions of the brain is the current definition of brain death in the United States. This definition is based on a clinical exam testing all parts of the brain, typically done by somebody certified in doing brain death determinations.
You have to have a reason for the neurologic exam to be declining. Without a reason, you can't call somebody brain dead.
You can replace every organ in the body, but you cannot replace the brain and when the brain dies, the body dies all the time 100% unless those organ systems are artificially supportive.
"Our culture changes with technology and the way we define death is a part of culture. As that culture has shifted, the way we define death has also shifted with our new technologies of how we can actually determine whether people are dead." — Dr. Adam Schiavi
Connect with Dr. Adam Schiavi:
Johns Hopkins Bio: Adam Schiavi, MD, PhD, MS
Email: [email protected]
Connect with Therese:
Website: www.criticallyspeaking.net
Threads: @critically_speaking
Email: [email protected]
Audio production by Turnkey Podcast Productions. You're the expert. Your podcast will prove it.
In this episode, Therese Markow and Dr. Katie Pelch discuss the harmful and pervasive effects of PFAS, also known as "forever chemicals." Found in various consumer and industrial products, contaminating air, water, and soil, they never break down. Dr. Pelch works for the Natural Resources Defence Council (NRDC) and has been studying PFAS throughout her career. Along with their many uses PFAS have been linked to serious health issues, including cancer and reduced vaccine effectiveness. The NRDC advocates for banning non-essential uses of PFAS and encourages public awareness and involvement in regulatory efforts. Dr. Pelch shares with us the prevalence of PFAS, its dangers, and the regulation or lack thereof.
Key Takeaways:
When you heat the nonstick cookware above a certain temperature, some of the PFAS can migrate from the pan and into the food you’re going to eat, or they could enter the air that you breathe.
Exposures from the air that we breathe and from our skin have generally been less well studied, but there is evidence to suggest that PFAS do enter our skin.
Per the CDC, at least 98% of people in the United States have PFAS in their bodies.
The EPA stepped up in a big way this year by finalizing the regulation of six PFAS in drinking water. This ban was preceded by many states proactively setting enforceable limits to PFAS in drinking water, some banning the unnecessary use of them entirely by 2032.
"Not only are PFAS persistent in the environment, but they're also persistent in our bodies, and in most cases, we don't have a great way to get PFAS out of our bodies. So the two most highly studied PFAS can last in our bodies for years." — Dr. Katie Pelch
Episode References:
Dark Waters: https://www.imdb.com/title/tt9071322/
The Devil We Know: https://www.imdb.com/title/tt7689910/
Environmental Working Group: https://www.ewg.org/
PFAS Exchange: https://pfas-exchange.org/
Connect with Dr. Katie Pelch:
Professional Bio: https://www.nrdc.org/bio/katie-pelch
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/katiepelch
Connect with Therese:
Website: www.criticallyspeaking.net
Threads: @critically_speaking
Email: [email protected]
Audio production by Turnkey Podcast Productions. You're the expert. Your podcast will prove it.
In this episode, Therese Markow and Dr. Alex Hinton explore the potential for genocide in the U.S., highlighting historical and contemporary atrocities. Dr. Hinton emphasizes that genocide can target groups based on social constructs such as race, gender, and sexuality, among others. They discuss the rise of white supremacism and hate speech, and Dr. Hinton identifies risk factors such as political upheaval, economic instability, and armed militias. Dr.Hinton also stresses the importance of critical thinking and depolarization to prevent genocide, and suggests an easy way for everyone to do so without committing 40 hours per week to stay abreast of all of the issues and topics.
Key Takeaways:
Genocide and mass violence are not typically planned from the beginning. They often evolve from other behaviors stemming from upheaval and past atrocities, scapegoating, grievance, and legitimation of formed hierarchies.
Hate speech is everywhere—left, right, and center. Wherever someone is on the political spectrum, they can agree it's bad. The problem is that people sometimes disagree about what constitutes it.
People are busy. Trying to keep informed can be a full-time job. One little thing everyone can do pretty easily to begin to do this in general, as we enter the political cycle, just pick a left-leaning, more centrist, and right-leaning news media source then on the top of the hour, turn on the TV, and flip between them and see the headlines.
"Ideology is central to all genocides, in some sense. Ideologies provide legitimation to disempower groups, and to legitimate different forms of hierarchy within a society and in the extreme. That then lays the basis for saying that groups are inferior." — Dr. Alex Hinton
Episode References:
We Charge Genocide - The 1951 Black Lives Matter Campaign: https://depts.washington.edu/moves/CRC_genocide.shtml
2019 Citizenship Amendment Act: https://www.uscirf.gov/resources/factsheet-citizenship-amendment-act-india
Connect with Dr. Alex Hinton:
Professional Bio: https://sasn.rutgers.edu/alex-hinton
Twitter: https://x.com/AlexLHinton
Center for the Study of Genocide & Human Rights: https://x.com/Rutgers_CGHR
Check out Dr. Hinton’s writings mentioned in this episode:
It Can Happen Here: White Power and the Rising Threat of Genocide in the US: https://www.amazon.com/Can-Happen-Here-Rising-Genocide-ebook/dp/B08L9JHRN6
Connect with Therese:
Website: www.criticallyspeaking.net
Threads: @critically_speaking
Email: [email protected]
Audio production by Turnkey Podcast Productions. You're the expert. Your podcast will prove it.
In this episode, Therese Markow and Dr. Alex Hinton discuss the complexities of genocide, its definitions, and the role of perpetrators. Dr. Hinton gives us the conventional, legal, and social scientific definitions of genocide and gives examples of how these affect the legal battles and social impact of different incidents, highlighting the Khmer Rouge mass killings in Cambodia. They also discuss the moral and legal implications of perpetrators and why none of us can be complacent in our understanding of genocide.
Key Takeaways:
"It's a potentiality that exists for ourselves and for our societies. You know, it's not comfortable. Many people will say ‘no,’ but that's the starting point of prevention, because only when you have that realization can you effectively begin to take action to stop genocide from taking place." — Dr. Alex Hinton
Episode References:
Connect with Dr. Alex Hinton:
Professional Bio: https://sasn.rutgers.edu/alex-hinton
Twitter: https://x.com/AlexLHinton
Center for the Study of Genocide & Human Rights: https://x.com/Rutgers_CGHR
Check out Dr. Hinton’s writings mentioned in this episode:
Connect with Therese:
Website: www.criticallyspeaking.net
Threads: @critically_speaking
Email: [email protected]
Audio production by Turnkey Podcast Productions. You're the expert. Your podcast will prove it.
In this episode, Therese Markow and Dr. Alan Rogol discuss the complexities of gender, sex, and identity in elite sports, with a focus on the societal expectations and controversies surrounding gender eligibility in sports. Dr. Rogol touches on some of the history of women’s identities in elite sports, including some from the recent 2024 Paris Summer Games. Throughout the discussion, Therese and Dr. Rogol highlight the need for inclusive politics and having a respectful approach to athletes’ identities. This is a complicated topic, still undecided as to what is fair and acceptable.
Key Takeaways:
When women were allowed to compete in the Olympics, originally it was only allowed in three events: croquet, golf, and tennis. All were considered socially appropriate, with no bodily contact, and while wearing normal clothes of full, layered skirts.
Sex and gender are not the same thing. Gender is self-identified, an expression, and is changeable. There are also varieties of sex - sex at birth, sex of rearing, legal sex, and chromosomal sex.
Many of the girls who find out they have an XY chromosome after being identified as female at birth often don’t find out until later in life. Because while they had testosterone, they also had a gene that prevented their bodies from responding to it. These girls never developed as males, and in fact went through female puberty, but lacked a uterus.
The IOC has many drugs that are banned except for certain situations. These include testosterone, endocrine drugs, growth hormones, and insulin among others.
"It is not the level of absolute testosterone that you have that counts. What counts is the stuff that is biologically active, and that is very complicated, and that's why numbers aren't so helpful." — Dr. Alan Rogol
Episode References:
Personal Account: A woman tried and tested by Maria José Martínez-Patiño: https://www.thelancet.com/pdfs/journals/lancet/PIIS0140673605678415.pdf
The New York Times: Running in a Body That’s My Own by Caster Semenya: https://www.nytimes.com/2023/10/21/opinion/running-body-semenya.html
Critically Speaking Episode 9: You Go Girl: Testosterone with Dr. Alan Rogol: https://criticallyspeaking.libsyn.com/009-dr-alan-rogol-you-go-girl-testosterone
Connect with Dr. Alan Rogol:
Professional Bio: https://med.virginia.edu/faculty/faculty-listing/adr/
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/alan-rogol-49b18018/
Connect with Therese:
Website: www.criticallyspeaking.net
Threads: @critically_speaking
Email: [email protected]
Audio production by Turnkey Podcast Productions. You're the expert. Your podcast will prove it.
In this episode, Therese Markow and Dr. Charles Easley IV discuss the significance of a father’s lifestyle before conception and its effects on prenatal development. This comes about not by mutations in the sperm DNA, but through heritable changes in the way the father’s genes are turned on and off during the development of the fetus. THese changes are referred to as epigenetic. So it’s not just about the mom, They thus explore the paternal origins of health and disease, highlight animal studies and human cohort studies that demonstrate intergenerational transmission of epigenetic changes, and discuss the dangers of toxic chemical exposure on male sperm.
Key Takeaways:
To study the paternal effects on the fetus, we are able to do animal studies in the lab, however, for human studies, we can only study in cohorts after the fact, such as with the Dutch Famine, Michigan PBB, or, lately, the effects of COVID-19.
Gary Miller is one of the leaders studying how paternal exposure prior to conception can have profound effects on the lifespan and healthy aging of future offspring.
While we cannot pinpoint all the chemicals as having a lasting effect yet, it is important to try to be as healthy as you can. Certain chemicals, such as BPA and certain pesticides, have been studied to have an effect. And not just the mother during pregnancy.
"We've got a lot more evidence to suggest that what the father does prior to conception can have a profound effect on the genes that are expressed during development, and can have profound effects on how these organs develop in the offspring." — Dr. Charles Easley IV
Episode References:
The Dutch Famine Birth Cohort: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7934722/
The Michigan PBB Cohort: https://stacks.cdc.gov/view/cdc/3929/cdc_3929_DS1.pdf
The Poisoning of Michigan by Joyce Egginton: https://www.amazon.com/Poisoning-Michigan-Joyce-Egginton/dp/0870138677
Connect with Dr. Charles Easley IV:
Professional Bio: https://publichealth.uga.edu/faculty-member/charles-a-easley/
Website: https://www.easleylab.com/
Email: [email protected]
Connect with Therese:
Website: www.criticallyspeaking.net
Threads: @critically_speaking
Email: [email protected]
Audio production by Turnkey Podcast Productions. You're the expert. Your podcast will prove it.
In this episode, Therese Markow and Dr. Daniel Aaron discuss the inadequate oversight of food additives by the FDA, particularly the agency's GRAS or “Generally Recognized as Safe” process, which allows unsafe additives to reach the market without proper scrutiny. Dr. Aaron highlights industry conflicts of interest, the lack of reporting requirements, the need for stricter regulation to protect public health, and discusses what is needed for the FDA to be better able to make impactful changes.
Key Takeaways:
The majority of food additives in the US are not vetted by the FDA. Since 1958, food additives have been presumed safe until proven otherwise.
The Clean Eating movement in the US is indicative of the skepticism of the American food supply.
While the FDA used to maintain a list of GRAS substances, today, reporting to the FDA is not required.
Europe uses a more precautionary approach to food additives. The EFSA must approve all chemical substances prior to their use in foods.
Food additives are known to cause synergistic harm. However, the FDA poorly regulates single additives so it is not surprising that its consideration of interacting chemicals is insufficient.
"The FDA is the most accountable to corporate power. The largest impediment, in my view, to food regulation is funding. FDA’s Food Center has been underfunded for decades. Further funding from Congress is needed, but our legislators often are supported by industry that doesn't necessarily want a more robust review of food additives." — Daniel Aaron, M.D., J.D.
Episode References:
Bystanders to a Public Health Crisis: The Failures of the U.S. Multi-Agency Regulatory Approach to Food Safety in the Face of Persistent Organic Pollutants by Katya S. Cronin: https://scholarship.law.gwu.edu/faculty_publications/1725/
EFSA: https://www.efsa.europa.eu/en
FDA Food Center: https://www.fda.gov/food
Connect with Daniel Aaron, M.D., J.D.:
Professional Bio: https://faculty.utah.edu/u6052921-DANIEL_G_AARON/hm/index.hml
Email: [email protected]
Connect with Therese:
Website: www.criticallyspeaking.net
Threads: @critically_speaking
Email: [email protected]
Audio production by Turnkey Podcast Productions. You're the expert. Your podcast will prove it.
In this episode, Therese Markow and Dr. Alexis Temkin, Senior Toxicologist at the Environmental Working Group, discuss toxic chemicals we can’t see or detect in our food and daily-use products. Dr. Temkin describes common pesticides and other chemicals used in agriculture and how they enter the human body. She also shares resources provided by the Environmental Working Group that can help keep you and your family safer.
Key Takeaways:
Chemicals in cosmetics and other daily-use products are often considered safe until proven otherwise. It often takes years before the harm is discovered and the chemical banned
Pesticides are introduced into our bodies through the food we consume.
Despite a lack of EPA regulations, consumers can decrease their exposure to potentially harmful pesticides.
Always wash your fruits and vegetables. It may not remove all pesticides, but it is good practice and will reduce at least some of your exposure to the chemicals.
"It’ll depend on the pesticide, but we’ve seen exposure to pesticides being linked to a variety of health harms. That could include brain and nervous system toxicity, we’ve seen associations with increased cancer after exposure to certain types of pesticides, impacts on reproduction, and dietary pesticide consumption has also been associated with cardiovascular health." — Dr. Alexis Temkin
Episode References:
EWG Consumer Guides: https://www.ewg.org/consumer-guides
Center for Biological Diversity: https://www.biologicaldiversity.org/
EWG’s 2024 Shopper’s Guide to Pesticides in Produce: https://www.ewg.org/foodnews/summary.php
Connect with Dr. Alexis Temkin:
Professional Bio: https://www.ewg.org/news-insights/our-experts/alexis-temkin-phd
Website: https://www.ewg.org/
Email: [email protected]
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/alexis-temkin-46345750
Connect with Therese:
Website: www.criticallyspeaking.net
Threads: @critically_speaking
Email: [email protected]
Audio production by Turnkey Podcast Productions. You're the expert. Your podcast will prove it.
In this episode, Therese Markow and Dr. Tara Zimmerman discuss how to “Fake News” proof children so that they can better interpret the vast amount of information available in the digital age, especially around misinformation and disinformation. They emphasize the importance of critical thinking skills, building those critical thinking skills, and how those important skills can be taught and practiced with children of all ages. In this digital age with so much information at our fingertips, media literacy and critical thinking are more important than ever and Dr. Zimmerman discusses how to empower everyone to make more informed decisions and draw more informed conclusions from what they see and hear every day.
Key Takeaways:
When we hear information from someone we know and generally agree with, we are more likely to perceive that information as true. That same information coming from someone you have a history of disagreeing with, the more likely you are to disbelieve that information.
Humans have developed a tendency to believe the information shared with us unless there is an overwhelming amount of evidence to the contrary. One person cannot know everything, so we trust others to pass on information to survive.
We can't possibly think critically about every single piece of information we're exposed to. The key is to determine what information is vital versus what information is superfluous to us.
Bias happens to everyone, no matter their social class, race, gender, intelligence, education level, or anything else.
As a society, we need to normalize being open to new information and changing our opinions when necessary.
"I believe the best way to help society overall is to focus on teaching children how to think critically about all the information that they encounter, because by helping them develop the skills and the habits of critical thinking early on, they will make the biggest long term effect on how society responds to information." — Dr. Tara Zimmerman
Connect with Dr. Tara Zimmerman:
Professional Bio: https://apps.twu.edu/my1cv/profile.aspx?type=twp&id=JyyM03CAxnlQZrrdrpan7Q%3d%3d
Website: http://www.tarazimmerman.net/
Email: [email protected]
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/tara-zimmerman-813421152/
Connect with Therese:
Website: www.criticallyspeaking.net
Threads: @critically_speaking
Email: [email protected]
Audio production by Turnkey Podcast Productions. You're the expert. Your podcast will prove it.
A serious type of turbulence has been encountered during commercial airline flights has been in the news lately. “Pancake turbulence”. Hard to detect in advance. Most recently, an Air Europa flight from Madrid to Uruguay was hit by “strong turbulence” and had to make an emergency landing in Brazil, In another recent event. a flight bound from London to Singapore with 211 passengers and 18 crew members encountered turbulence that resulted in the death of a passenger, and the hospitalization and critical care of about 20 more with spinal injuries. What's this type of turbulence all about? How concerned should we be about flying? Dr. Thomas Gwynn, head of the Department of Applied Aviation Sciences at the distinguished Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University, explains about this type of turbulence and how turbulence may be increasing with global warming.
Key Takeaways:
Turbulence result from eddies in the atmosphere and can be light, moderate, severe, and extreme.
Chop turbulence is usually more moderate and rhythmic, similar to driving a car over a rumble strip. It can be annoying but isn’t usually dangerous.
While onboard radar can help determine storms enabling pilots to avoid them, pancake turbulence, such as what affected these recent flights, cannot be detected by instruments. Pilots can only learn of these from other pilots.
Some studies seem to suggest that turbulence could be increasing with climate change.
No form of travel is without some level of risk, but flying is still, statistically, the safest mode of travel.
"The smaller the aircraft, the more vulnerable it's going to be to turbulence. For commercial airliners, generally, they have roughly the same vulnerability. So what really determines the vulnerability is something called the wing loading. The least vulnerable aircraft is going to be heavy aircraft with smaller wing sizes like your large jets. The greater weight makes it harder for the airflow to disrupt or move the aircraft." — Dr. Thomas Guinn
Connect with Dr. Thomas Guinn:
Professional Bio: https://faculty.erau.edu/Thomas.Guinn
Email: [email protected]
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/thomas-guinn-37686439
Connect with Therese:
Website: www.criticallyspeaking.net
Threads: @critically_speaking
Email: [email protected]
Audio production by Turnkey Podcast Productions. You're the expert. Your podcast will prove it.
The podcast currently has 157 episodes available.
32,040 Listeners
43,318 Listeners
110,255 Listeners
9,287 Listeners