Sign up to save your podcasts
Or
Share STEMTalks Archive - IHMC | Institute for Human & Machine Cognition
Share to email
Share to Facebook
Share to X
Share to email
Share to Facebook
Share to X
Or
STEMTalks Archive - IHMC | Institute for Human & Machine Cognition
STEMTalks Archive - IHMC | Institute for Human & Machine Cognition episodes
- Episode 199: Ken and Dawn respond to listener questions on aging, meat consumption and dementia, genetic testing, AI, exercise, a lunar mission and much more
Today we have the second of a two-part AMA. In part one, episode 198, we covered a multitude of listener questions about AI, which lately seems to dominate the news cycle. Other than one AI question that managed to sneak in, today’s AMA features a wide range of questions on a number of topics other than artificial intelligence.
Today, Ken and Dawn respond to listener questions that range from:
— Whether there’s a critical difference between whey protein powders and ready-to-drink protein shakes?
— Is there a sweat spot for how much time a person should spend on resistance training during a week?
— Ken’s thoughts on a paper that looked at whether higher meat consumption could be associated with a lower risk of dementia among people carrying the APOE ε4 gene variant.
— What kind of Pandora’s box will we open if parents start doing genetic tests on their infants to see if their children have, say, the APOE ε4 gene variant?
— Will NASA will be able to meet its target date of sending astronauts back to the Moon by 2028?
— And a lot more.
Show notes;
[00:03:05] A listener asks Ken about the 2019 Trim study by Gregory Fahy and colleagues in Aging Cell, which reported reversal of epigenetic aging and signs of thymic regeneration in nine healthy men treated with the growth hormone, DHEA, and metformin.[00:06:56] Ken responds to a question about the market being flooded with protein supplements. The listener asks if whether there’s a critical difference between whey protein and ready-to-drink protein shakes, and if there are any specific products he recommends.[00:10:50] A listener asks Ken about a recent article in Nature Reviews Neuroscience titled:[00:15:26] A listener asks Ken about a Chinese company called Moonshot AI and its open-weight model, Kimi K3. The listener references Gary Marcus who anticipates that the power of this model paired with the open-weight design will have immense implications. The listener asks for Ken’s take.[00:25:56] A listener mentions that they’ve heard that Ken likes to tell graduate students a fable about a rabbit pursuing their Ph.D. A listener asks Ken if he would share the fable.[00:30:15] A listener asks Ken about a study published in Jama Network Open by Norgren and company which suggests that higher meat consumption may be associated with lower Alzheimer’s risk for people carrying the APOE 4 gene variant, the strongest common genetic risk factor for late onset Alzheimer’s.[00:38:24] A listener mentions in their question for Ken that the Department of Health and Human Services recommends at least 150 minutes of moderate exercise per week, but this recommendation does not break down how much of that time should be spent on aerobic versus strength training. The listener goes on to mention a study in the that looked at identifying this sweet spot for resistance exercise, finding that between 90-119 minutes per week of weightlifting was associated with a 13 perent lower risk of premature death and a 27 percent reduction in neurological disease mortality, particularly Alzheimer’s. The listener also mentions that they are aware of IHMC’s ongoing clinical trial looking at the ability of exercise to mitigate the hallmarks of aging in people over 60 years old. The listener asks if this study is similarly trying to identify a sweet spot for resistance exercise, and if Ken has any recommendations on this topic.[00:46:32] Another listener mentions that they really enjoyed our interview with Doug Cooke on the Artimis II mission (episode 195), as well as our interview with Mike Griffin and Lisa Porter about NASA’s plan to return to the moon (episode 189). The listener goes on to mention that since then a Blue Origin rocket, one of the companies responsible for building a lunar lander, exploded on the launch pad in Florida. The listener asks if Ken is he’ still skeptical about the Artemis III mission architecture and timeframe in light of the recent news.[00:54:37] A listener asks Ken for his thoughts on the growing research efforts to investigate the feasibility of doing genetic testing on infants to identify their predisposition to specific diseases such as Alzheimer’s.[01:01:57] A listener asks for Kens thoughts on a study of creatine’s effects on physically active vegans. The study reported that 4 weeks of creatine supplementation improved lower-body power, especially jump height and flight time. But they did not find improvements in strength tests.[01:08:10] A listener asks for Ken’s thoughts on a recent White House report “Science: A New Golden Age”, which argues that the American scientific enterprise needs to be reformed and that agencies like NSF have become overly bureaucratic, slow, and risk averse.Links:
Learn more about IHMC
STEM-Talk homepage
Ken Ford bio
Ken Ford Wikipedia page
The post Episode 199: Ken and Dawn respond to listener questions on aging, meat consumption and dementia, genetic testing, AI, exercise, a lunar mission and much more appeared first on IHMC | Institute for Human & Machine Cognition.
1 hr 18 min - Episode 198: Blessing or curse? Dawn grills Ken on listeners’ toughest AI questions in this all-AI AMA
Today we have an Ask Me Anything episode that focuses on artificial intelligence. For the past year, AI has dominated the headlines. Perhaps because there’s so much media and public interest, as well as paranoia, about AI, listeners have been flooding our mailbox with AI-related questions.
So, today’s AMA is an exclusive focused on artificial intelligence. For our listeners who have been sending questions about ketamine; NASA’s Artemis mission to the Moon; or whether high meat consumption leads to dementia; fear not, because we will follow up today’s episode in a few weeks with a second round of AMA.
Dr. Ken Ford will be answering today’s AI questions. He has been working in AI since the 1980s and is a Fellow of the Association for the Advancement of Artificial Intelligence. As a result, he is well-positioned to help us today to separate real advances in AI from hype, panic and science fiction.
If you have questions for Ken and Dawn after listening to today’s episode, or any episode of STEM-Talk, email your questions to STEM-Talk producer Randy Hammer at rhammer.ihmc.org.
Show notes:
[00:03:15] Dawn opens our AMA episode on AI with a listener question for Ken on whether AI companies should be protected under section 230 of the U.S. Communications Decency Act.[00:08:03] Following up on the previous question, a listener asks if Ken foresees a day where laws and courts will designate AI as a judicial person, in the same way that corporations have rights under the legal doctrine of corporate personhood.[00:10:55] A listener asks Ken for his thoughts on a recent article published in the Atlantic titled “The Data-Center Panic is Overblown: Critics are Inflating the Costs.”[00:16:09] A listener asks Ken a question regarding episode 171 of STEM-Talk, in which Ken discussed a June 2024 report by Leopold Aschenbrenner which predicted rates of growth in both compute resources and power requirements for AI data centers. The listener asks how well these predictions have held up in the following year.[00:22:19] Another listener question about data centers asks Ken what his thoughts are on the notion of solving the electricity costs and cooling requirements for data centers by building them in orbit and powering them via solar energy.[00:30:07] Moving on to the applications of AI, Peter Attia recently wrote about a study out of Harvard that suggests that today’s large language models perform extremely well on medical licensing exams and often arrive at the correct diagnosis yet still struggle with differential diagnosis. The listener asks what this means about the use of AI in medicine.[00:36:53] A listener asks Ken about repeated public statements by Anthropic’s CEO that their AI models, and those expected in the future, are already powerful and dangerous enough to justify concern, while at the same time Anthropic and other leading AI companies are continuing to employ these systems and cautioning governments against regulation that could slow down innovation. The listener asks Ken how to resolve this contradiction.[00:45:18] A listener writes that in a previous AMA, STEM-Talk episode 184, Ken objected to the use of the word hallucination to describe errors made by large-language models and asks Ken to expound on this.[00:53:28] A listener asks Ken whether current AI models are evolving from being fundamentally prediction engines to being able to truly understand and reason, or if they are just becoming better and more convincing prediction engines.[00:59:37] A listener writes to Ken, mentioning that a few years ago, a thousand technology experts and researchers signed a letter urging AI labs and executives to pause the development of highly advanced AI systems and tools. This letter, drafted through the not-for-profit Future of Life Institute, warned that AI developers were locked in an out-of-control race to develop and deploy ever more powerful digital minds that no one, not even their creators, can understand, predict or reliably control. The listener also states that they learned recently that ChatGPT 5 was programmed using an earlier version of ChatGPT. If the concerns of tech leaders are to be taken seriously, the listener wonders if it is a good idea to have earlier versions of ChatGPT programing later versions of ChatGPT?[01:07:45] A listener asks Ken about the process of training smaller AI models from larger models, a process called distillation. The listener asks how this process works and if this is a way for the cost of training large models to benefit everyone.[01:14:56] A listener asks Ken what it means for China’s Open Weight GLM 5.2 to be reported to have achieved near parity with Anthropic’s Mythos. On several cyber security and vulnerability discovery benchmarks, it seems alarming that GLM 5.2 is operating at roughly 1/6th the cost and remaining openly available for download and deployment.[01:22:34] A listener writes that they recently heard a story about someone who asked an AI whether they should walk or drive to a car wash in order to get their car washed when the car wash was close by their starting location. The AI in this condition recommended that they walk instead of drive. The listener asks why the AI was unable to give the obviously correct answer to a simple common-sense question.[01:29:05] For our final question in this AMA, a listener writes that, recently, nearly 200 researchers and economists signed a statement warning that as AI becomes more powerful it could take over a large share of human work and lead to widespread joblessness. The listener wants to know if Ken would have signed the statement and what he thinks of the statement’s three points: One: AI may become radically more powerful over the next 10 years. Two: This could drive an unprecedented transformation of our economy larger than the industrial revolution and over a vastly shorter timeframe, with large scale job displacement. Three: Economists, policy makers, and tech leaders must act now in order to understand the economic impacts of transformative AI and to build the incentives guardrails and institutions need to steer AI in a direction that compliments humans and benefits society.Links:
Learn more about IHMC
STEM-Talk homepage
Ken Ford bio
Ken Ford Wikipedia page
Dawn Kernagis bio
The post Episode 198: Blessing or curse? Dawn grills Ken on listeners’ toughest AI questions in this all-AI AMA appeared first on IHMC | Institute for Human & Machine Cognition.
1 hr 40 min - Episode 197: Scott Sherr discusses hyperbaric oxygen therapy, methylene blue, and more
Today we have Dr. Scott Sherr, an internal medicine physician who specializes in Hyperbaric Oxygen Therapy.
Scott is the director of Integrative Hyperbaric Medicine and Heath Optimization at Hyperbaric Medical Solutions. It is a division of Hyperbaric Medical Solutions, an independent, hyperbaric oxygen therapy provider that aims to educate people about the benefits of hyperbaric oxygen therapy via telemedicine consulting. He also is COO of Troscriptions, which provides physician-formulated products including popular methylene blue products.
In today’s interview, Scott talks about how he uses Hyperbaric Oxygen Therapy (HBOT) to treat a number of health conditions. He also shares how he incorporates methylene blue into some of his treatment strategies and explains how HBOT is now being used as a complementary treatment for autoimmune diseases by helping reduce inflammation, improve blood flow and support immune function.
Show notes:
[00:03:29] Dawn tells Scott that she heard a story that Scott had his spine adjusted when he was just five minutes old. She asks Scott if he can share what happened.[00:04:15] Dawn mentions that Scott grew up in New York on Long Island and that as a child he spent a lot of time at his father’s chiropractic office. Dawn asks Scott about his father and his practice.[00:05:38] Ken notes that Scott was into sports as a kid and asks him to talk about his childhood and what he was like as a kid.[00:07:09] Dawn notes that after high school, Scott left New York for the West Coast, landing at UCLA. Dawn asks Scott to talk about what led him there.[00:08:00] Dawn explains that Scott initially started to major in biology but quickly changed majors. Scott explains why he changed majors.[00:08:41] Dawn asks Scott why he chose to attend the University of Maryland for medical school after graduating from UCLA.[00:09:26] Dawn asks Scott about the story of how he met his wife at the University of Maryland.[00:09:50] Dawn pivots back to Scott’s love of music, mentioning that Scott and three other medical school students at Maryland formed a band called The Airport Rocking Chairs. Scott describes how the band came together and how they performed at gigs around the Baltimore/D.C. area.[00:11:16] Ken asks Scott to talk about how his early ambition upon entering medical school was to find a way to bridge the gap between conventional and alternative/chiropractic medicine.[00:12:54] Ken explains that in Scott’s third year of medical school, he did rotations at the University Shock and Trauma Facility. Ken asks Scott to talk about why this was such an important experience for Scott.[00:14:32] Dawn explains that hyperbaric chambers are used to treat injuries like necrotizing fasciitis and severe wounds. Dawn asks Scott to talk about finding a hyperbaric chamber in the basement of the University Shock and Trauma Facility and how that led to his fascination with the potential for hyperbaric oxygen therapy.[00:15:51] Dawn asks Scott to talk about how his initial research on hyperbaric therapies led him to conclude that they were being vastly underutilized in conventional medicine.[00:16:31] Dawn mentions that people are likely familiar with hyperbaric oxygen therapy (HBOT) in terms of treating divers suffering from decompression sickness. She asks Scott to give a primer on the mechanisms by which HBOT affects the body and why it has potential to treat other conditions besides decompression sickness.[00:19:38] Ken asks Scott to talk more about other conditions, both acute and chronic, that HBOT might be helpful in treating.[00:22:51] Dawn asks about Scott’s experience as a hospitalist, which is an internal medicine physician who acts as a primary care physician in a hospital, and how this experience gave him a unique perspective on the strengths and limitations of modern medicine.[00:25:13] Ken asks Scott if it’s fair to say that his experience as a hospitalist was foundational in developing his understanding of patient care and healthspan.[00:26:51] Dawn explains that when Scott’s wife received a fellowship at Stanford University, Scott eventually left his career as a hospitalist to serve as the medical director for a hyperbaric medicine facility in the San Francisco Bay area. Dawn asks Scott to talk about how this experience deepened his understanding and expertise in hyperbaric oxygen therapy.[00:28:26] Ken asks Scott to talk about his relationship with Dominic D’Agostino, who was our recent guest on STEM-Talk episode 196, and who is very active in the field of hyperbaric oxygen therapy.[00:30:48] Dawn mentions that during Scott’s work as a hospitalist, he began to develop a more integrated approach to hyperbaric medicine, taking nutritional status, sleep patterns, mitochondrial function, and a number of other factors into consideration. Doing this work, Scott noticed that a number of patients would require weeks or months of preparation before beginning HBOT, contrary to the status quo of the time. Dawn asks Scott to talk about his insights and how this experience changed his views on medicine.[00:33:19] Dawn asks Scott to talk about the evolution of his work in developing an integrative hyperbaric medicine model and how he caught the attention of HBOT practitioners around the world.[00:35:21] Ken notes that interest in hyperbaric oxygen therapy has grown substantially in the last 20 years and goes on to mention that a particularly promising application of HBOT is as a complementary treatment for autoimmune diseases, being shown to reduce inflammation, improve blood flow and support immune function. Ken asks Scott to talk in depth about HBOT in the context of autoimmune disease treatment.[00:39:13] Following up on Scott’s mention of epigenetic changes following HBOT, Ken asks if this has been directly measured and if so, how long are these changes sustained.[00:41:14] Dawn asks Scott about the potential for HBOT to be used for athletes looking to speed up their recovery times from injuries.[00:43:19] Dawn asks Scott if there are certain populations who should avoid HBOT.[00:46:27] In order to optimize HBOT, Dawn explains that Scott works with people to tailor their treatment to their individual needs and asks Scott to walk listeners through how this process works in practice.[00:50:00] Ken notes that most HBOT studies describe dosages of HBOT in terms of oxygen concentration, oxygen pressure and number of sessions. He asks Scott how he defines a “dose” biologically and what metrics he uses to tell whether a patient has received enough treatment to induce durable change?[00:53:40] Ken asks Scott if his experience treating patients has informed him on different characteristics that can predict whether a patient will have a robust response to HBOT.[00:56:01] Dawn mentions that the benefits of HBOT are often explained in terms of either improved oxygen delivery or improved mitochondrial signaling and neuroplasticity. Dawn asks Scott what mechanisms are most important in the context of chronic neurological disease.[00:58:04] Dawn asks Scott for his thoughts on the hyperoxic-hypoxic paradox (HHP) as an explanation of HBOT-induced adaptation.[01:00:28] Ken asks Scott if he could only measure three variables before and after HBOT treatment, what would they be.[01:03:43] Ken goes on to asks Scott what he sees as the most important unanswered question in HBOT today.[01:06:22] Dawn mentions that in 2017 Scott met Dr. Ted Achacoso, who is the founder of Health Optimization Medicine. Dawn asks Scott to explain how Ted introduced him to a fundamentally different framework for understanding health.[01:10:08] Circling back to the topic of bridging the gap between conventional and alternative medicine, Dawn mentions that Scott has become part of a practice that isn’t afraid to tap into therapies that break from conventional medicine. As an example, Dawn explains that Scott sometimes integrates psychedelic therapy with HBOT. Dawn asks Scott to talk about the framework he uses, combining HBOT with psychedelic therapy.[01:13:56] Ken mentions that Scott also incorporates methylene blue into some of his treatment strategies, Ken directs listeners interested in learning more about how methylene blue can improve cognitive function and energy production to listen to STEM-Talk episode 191 with Francisco Gonzalez-Lima. Ken asks Scott to talk about his use of methylene blue in his practice.[01:20:15] Dawn asks Scott where people can go to learn more about him and his practice.[01:22:33] Ken asks Scott if he has any new projects looming on the horizon.[01:23:54] Dawn closes our interview with Scott by asking if he still plays guitar and if his old band The Airport Rocking Chairs have any plans for a reunion.Links:
Scott Sherr bio
Learn more about IHMC
STEM-Talk homepage
Ken Ford bio
Ken Ford Wikipedia page
Dawn Kernagis bio
The post Episode 197: Scott Sherr discusses hyperbaric oxygen therapy, methylene blue, and more appeared first on IHMC | Institute for Human & Machine Cognition.
1 hr 27 min - Episode 196: Dominic D’Agostino discusses advances in ketogenic metabolic therapy and hyperbaric oxygen therapy
Today we have Dr. Dominic D’Agostino, who over the past 10 years has been a frequent guest on STEM-Talk. Today Dom joins us to give us an update on his recent research into ketogenic metabolic therapies, ketone supplements as well as hyperbaric oxygen therapy for traumatic brain injuries. Dom and his lab at the University of South Florida have published more than 20 papers since his last appearance on STEM-Talk in 2023.
Dom is an Associate Professor in the Department of Molecular Pharmacology and Physiology at South Florida’s Morsani College of Medicine. Dom has a background in neuroscience, molecular pharmacology, nutrition and physiology.
In addition to developing and testing metabolic-based therapies, Dom’s lab also investigates seizure disorders, brain cancer, neurodegenerative diseases and rare genetic-metabolic disorders.
Show notes:
[00:03:28] Dawn welcomes Dom back to the show and explaining that he has been quite busy since his last appearance, authoring or co-authoring more than 20 papers. Over the past several years, Dom has been helping to advance the science and application of ketogenic metabolic therapy (KMT) with colleagues at Moffitt Cancer Center, particularly focusing on using KMT to enhance immune-based therapies for certain types of cancers. Dawn asks Dom about this collaboration.[00:05:04] Dawn explains that ketogenic metabolic therapy is a dietary approach that focuses on a high-fat/low-carb diet to reduce glucose availability for cancer cells, potentially slowing their growth and improving treatment outcomes. It has been explored as a complimentary treatment for a variety of cancers including gliomas by shifting the metabolism of tumor cells away from glucose. Dawn asks Dom to explain what is involved in KMT.[00:06:58] Dawn clarifies that KMT requires less than 20-25 grams of carbohydrates per day, and that ketosis is a metabolic state in which the body switches from glucose metabolism to metabolizing fats in the form of ketones. Dawn goes on to explain that cancer cells typically consume glucose at a higher rate than normal cells. However, cancer cells are also very adaptable, and Dawn asks Dom to talk about this feature of cancer cells.[00:09:14] Ken explains that KMT has shown the most promise in treating high-grade gliomas, or brain cancers, such as glioblastoma, which is the most aggressive primary brain tumor in adults. Ken explains that Dom was part of a massive review titled “Clinical research framework proposal for ketogenic metabolic therapy in glioblastoma,” which proposed guidelines for the management of glioblastoma based on an understanding of cancer as a metabolic disease, particularly involving mitochondria. Ken asks Dom to talk about this review.[00:11:21] From a patient advocacy perspective, Ken notes that the review recommends that there should be an aggressive education campaign that can arm patients with knowledge about KMT and other novel therapies. Ken asks Dom to talk about that recommendation.[00:13:15] Ken asks about the process of cutting the review from upwards of 200 pages down to around 50 pages with 49 authors.[00:15:04] Dawn mentions that Dom was part of another paper in 2024 titled “Targeting the mitochondrial stem cell connection in cancer treatment – a hybrid orthomolecular protocol.” Dawn explains that this paper looked at the mitochondrial stem cell connection theory (MSCC), which argues that cancer originates from chronic oxidative phosphorylation insufficiency in stem cells. This insufficiency leads to the formation of cancer stem cells and abnormal energy metabolism ultimately resulting in malignancy. There were 16 research centers and organizations involved in this paper which introduced a hybrid orthomolecular protocol to target the mitochondrial stem-cell connection. Dawn asks Dom to give an overview of MSCC.[00:18:26] Dawn explains that in this paper Dom and his co-authors propose a protocol that would enhance oxidative phosphorylation and inhibit the primary fuels of cancer, glucose and glutamine. This would target both cancer stem cells and metastasis. Dawn asks Dom to explain why this concept is attracting so much interest as a potential therapeutic approach for cancer.[00:20:48] Dawn asks if Dom could discuss the orthomolecular protocol, which is an approach that focuses on preventing and treating diseases by correcting nutritional balances in the body.[00:24:41] Ken asks if the proposed dietary intervention in the orthomolecular approach is different from a standard or typical ketogenic diet.[00:26:48] Ken shifts the discussion to talk about ketone supplements, explaining that Dom recently published a paper titled “Divergent hepatic outcomes of chronic ketone supplementation.” Ken goes on to explain that ketone salts preserve liver health, while some ketone esters and precursors appear to drive inflammation and steatosis. There is a lot of interest in ketone supplementation because they substantially elevate circulating ketones without having to restrict carbohydrates as strictly. The problem, as Ken explains, is that the long-term hepatic safety of ketone supplements remains unclear. In the aforementioned paper, Dom’s rodent study evaluated the formulation-dependent impact of chronic ketone supplementation on liver histopathology, inflammatory signaling and systemic biomarkers. Ken asks Dom to discuss this paper and its findings and to give an overview of the various ketone supplements currently available.[00:30:49] Dawn asks Dom to dive into the methods and findings of the rodent study.[00:34:36] Ken asks Dom what his confidence is in the rodent model used in this study, and what are the next step for further research.[00:37:47] Regarding the two different doses given to rats in the study, Ken asks Dom how these doses correlate to doses in humans[00:40:23] Ken mentions that Ben Bikman, who was our guest on episode 143, published a study in February which Dom helped co-author. It examined the effects of ketone supplements on liver function. Ken asks Dom to discuss this study.[00:44:38] Dawn pivots to ask about a joint paper that Dom did with Andrew Koutnik, who was our guest on episode 185, on carbohydrates and physical performance titled “Carbohydrate ingestion on exercise metabolism and physical performance.” Dawn asks Dom to talk about this paper, which showed that a small amount of carbohydrates is sufficient to fuel athletic performance, and how additional carbohydrate intake showed diminishing returns.[00:49:18] Ken follows up on the finding that endurance athletes who rely on carb loading can tend toward pre-diabetes.[00:51:39] Ken asks Dom about the University of South Florida trial that Dom is an advisor for on traumatic brain injury and hyperbaric oxygen therapy.[00:54:41] Dawn mentions that Dom recently had an editorial in Frontiers that gave an overview of the emerging applications of hyperbaric/hyperbaric-oxygen therapy in the treatment of different neurological disorders. Dawn asks Dom what the key points in that editorial were.[00:59:06] Dawn explains that Dom recently gave a lecture at IHMC (available to view on IHMC’s YouTube page), on traumatic brain injury and the populations at greatest risk in that context. Dawn asks Dom to give an overview of how an injury to the brain can result in neurometabolic crisis.[01:02:53] Ken asks Dom, excluding occupation demographics, what demographic is most at risk for traumatic brain injury (TBI) and why.[01:04:45] Ken mentions that it is understandable the risk that young people face with TBI due to the activities that young people engage in. Older people, however, have increased risk of TBI from falling as well as an additional age-related biological component that young people are not subject to. Ken asks Dom to elaborate on this.[01:07:12] Dawn mentions that several years ago, Dom and his wife bought some acreage in the countryside and started farming and asks Dom how the farm life is going.[01:07:57] Dawn closes the interview asking how Dom’s wife is doing.The post Episode 196: Dominic D’Agostino discusses advances in ketogenic metabolic therapy and hyperbaric oxygen therapy appeared first on IHMC | Institute for Human & Machine Cognition.
1 hr 11 min - Episode 195: Doug Cooke discusses NASA’s challenges in the space race to the Moon and Mars
Our guest today is Doug Cooke, an aerospace consultant who spent 38 years at NASA’s Johnson Space Center in Houston and NASA Headquarters in Washington, D.C.
STEM-Talk host and IHMC founder Dr. Ken Ford, a former Associate Director of NASA’s Ames Research Center and Director of NASA’s Center of Excellence in Information Technology, interviewed Doug just four days after the astronauts of NASA’s Artemis II mission splashed down in the Pacific Ocean following a historic 10-day roundtrip from the Earth to the Moon.
In today’s episode, Ken and Doug discuss the Artemis mission as well as NASA’s plans to return humans to the lunar surface by 2028. Doug also shares his concern that China could one day surpass America’s leadership role in human spaceflight.
During his 38 years at NASA, Doug played critical roles in the Space Shuttle, International Space Station and Human Exploration spaceflight programs. During the last three years of his NASA career, he served as Associate Administrator of the Exploration Systems Mission Directorate, which oversees the development of systems critical to NASA’s plans for human exploration of the Moon and Mars, including the Artemis program.
Show notes:
[00:04:05] Ken opens our interview with Doug by talking about the Artemis II mission, which is the first crewed mission beyond low earth orbit since Apollo 17 in 1972. Harrison Schmidtt, who was on Apollo 17, was our guest on episode 4. Ken asks Doug for his key takeaways of the Artemis II mission, which set the record for a manned mission from Earth, traveling 252,756 miles into space and breaking Apollo 13’s record.[00:06:18] Ken explains that the Artemis missions signal a new age of space exploration as well as the beginning of a new space race between the U.S. and China. NASA aims to land humans on the Moon by 2028 while China expects to land humans on the moon in 2030. Ken has previously stated that he does not have confidence in NASA’s current mission architecture to achieve NASA’s stated goal of 2028, and asks Doug for his thoughts on the matter.[00:07:28] Ken asks if it is true that Yuri Gagarin, who become the first human to fly into space, is what initially sparked Doug’s interest in science and space.[00:08:54] Ken notes that Gagarin’s orbit around the earth inspired President Kennedy to vow that the United States would ramp up its space program and become the first nation to land a man on the moon. Ken mentions that he believes the Apollo 11 mission, which landed astronauts Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin on the lunar surface, was one the greatest technological advances in world history. Ken asks Doug for his thoughts on the success of the Apollo program.[00:10:28] Ken mentions that Doug went to college at Texas A&M and majored in aerospace engineering. Kens asks Doug how he got a job at NASA after graduating.[00:12:21] Ken explains that Doug was instrumental in the development of the space shuttle and the International Space Station during his time at NASA. Doug talks about what it was like working on those projects at NASA.[00:15:16] Ken mentions that Doug also had an instrumental role in the Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter (LRO), Lunar Crater Observation and Sensing Satellite (LCROSS), and the broader Exploration Technology Program. Ken points out that Doug became head of the exploration technology program in 1990 under then NASA Associate Administrator Mike Griffin, who was our guest on episodes 134 and 189. Ken asks Doug about meeting Mike.[00:16:17] Ken mentions that Mike Griffin and Lisa Porter were our guests on episode 189, where they voiced concerns about NASA’s current plans for a return to the moon. Ken goes on to mention that near the end of Doug’s career at NASA, he was the head of Exploration Systems Mission Directorate (ESMD), which is responsible for the development of systems critical to NASA’s plans for future exploration of the Moon and Mars. Ken asks Doug to talk about his role as head of the directorate and the work he did there.[00:18:55] Ken explains that Doug has written extensively on the issues with the Artemis mission architecture, most notably in a recent article for space news. Before jumping into the article, Ken asks Doug to talk about why it is important and also a national-security concern that we return to the moon before China.[00:21:12] Looping back to Doug’s op-ed in Space News, Ken notes that Doug stressed the need for NASA to develop a plan-B for the Artemis mission, with Doug and others noting that without a plan-B, the U.S. risks of losing the space race to the Moon. Doug has also gone on record to say that China has a far simpler, more direct, and more technically conservative plan than NASA. Ken asks Doug to elaborate on this.[00:22:37] Ken asks Doug to talk about the issues he and others have identified with NASA’s current proposed landing system.[00:26:14] Ken asks Doug to give a better understanding for the listeners of just how tall the proposed SpaceX lander is, and why that is a potential problem for not only landing on the moon in the proposed locations, but also for the astronauts exiting and entering.[00:28:51] Ken asks Doug to talk about what plan-B for Artemis looks like.[00:30:12] Ken asks Doug about the powerful thrust generation of the SpaceX lander. This raises the concern of regolith blast and generating significant debris fields while landing and thus reducing the scientific value of the region immediately surrounding the landing site.[00:30:59] Ken asks if Doug has any other thoughts on a potential plan-B.[00:33:02] Ken notes that the success of the mission hinges on the least proven element, namely the lander. While other elements of the mission architecture are well established, the hardest and least tested elements are normally the weakest links. Ken asks Doug’s thoughts on this position.[00:34:31] Ken asks Doug to talk about the complexity of the Artemis mission architecture and that it is largely driven by the Lander and NASA’s requirements. There was a high interest in re-usability which increased complexity. Neither of the two Landers under development are an optimal design for a lunar lander.[00:35:37] Ken asks Doug about the role of commercial companies sometimes called “new space” in space exploration.[00:37:02] Ken asks Doug if he feels discouraged by the fact that the U.S. has squandered a 60-year head start in space exploration.[00:37:36] Ken explains that China aims to send humans to Mars by 2050, and NASA aims to do the same by 2040, while Elon Musk proposes to send humans to Mars by 2029, which Ken says is a completely untenable notion. Ken notes that statements such as that from Musk vastly understate the difficulty entailed in a Mars mission. Given that Doug was part of the early planning of a Mars mission at NASA, he asks Doug to talk about the challenges that such a mission faces.[00:42:17] Ken and Doug discuss the problem with EDL (Entry Descent and Landing) that Mars uniquely poses.[00:43:09] Ken also brings up the issue of crew health and wellness. By the time they reach Mars, given the extended time spent in a high-radiation, micro-gravity environment, maintaining crew health in transit is critical to mission success.[00:43:47] Ken poses the concern that if it becomes likely that China will reach the moon before the U.S. can return, then NASA or the political leadership may adopt the attitude that we’ve already been to the moon, and that we should just jump straight to Mars.[00:46:24] Ken asks for Doug’s thoughts on NASA’s current leadership and workforce.[00:49:01] Ken quizzes Doug about the aims, goals, and mission architecture of Artemis III and IV.[00:51:16] Ken notes that the design of Artemis III might negatively impact the overall mission goal of landing on the Moon by 2028.[00:52:04] Ken shifts to talk more about Artemis IV, elements of which, Ken notes, need much more testing to be ready.[00:52:58] Ken closes our interview noting that Doug will return for another interview on STEM-Talk in 2028 to see if Artemis is on schedule. Ken ends by asking Doug about how he started his hobby of collecting Civil War artifacts after he retired and moved to Gettysburg, as well as his hobby of collecting antique cars.[00:55:17] Ken closes by asking Doug to name the favorite car he has collected.Links:
Doug Cooke bio
Learn more about IHMC
STEM-Talk homepage
Ken Ford bio
Ken Ford Wikipedia page
The post Episode 195: Doug Cooke discusses NASA’s challenges in the space race to the Moon and Mars appeared first on IHMC | Institute for Human & Machine Cognition.
59 min - Episode 194: Tommy Wood discusses how to future-proof the adult brain
Neuroscientist and frequent STEM-Talk guest Dr. Tommy Wood rejoins us today for part two of our interview about Tommy’s book that is fresh off the press and now available in bookstores and Amazon, “The Stimulated Mind: Future-Proof Your Brain from Dementia and Stay Sharp at Any Age.”
Tommy is an Associate Professor of Pediatrics and Neuroscience at the University of Washington, where his laboratory focuses on brain health across human lifespan. Tommy is a colleague and good friend who also is a Visiting Research Scientist here at IHMC.
In part one of our interview with Tommy, episode 193, we discussed his mission to dispel the myth that the brain is doomed to decline with age. Tommy gave us a fascinating history of neuroscience and how researchers go about studying the brain. Tommy also talked about what is holding us back in terms of addressing an ever-increasing burden of cognitive and mental health disorders that we are experiencing not only here in the U.S., but also around the world.
Today, Tommy shares science-backed strategies to help people future-proof their brains. We talk about the importance of diet and exercise in terms of brain health as well as the importance of stimulating and challenging our brains throughout our lifespans.
Tommy has a bachelor’s degree in biochemistry from the University of Cambridge, a medical degree from the University of Oxford, and a Ph.D. in Physiology and Neuroscience from the University of Oslo.
Show notes:
[00:03:55 Dawn welcomes Tommy back for part two of his interview by asking him about his recent trip to the UK.[00:04:32] Dawn recaps where we left off with Tommy in part one of our interview, explaining that when we last spoke with Tommy about his book, The Stimulated Mind, we focused on dispelling myths about the adult brain, in particular the idea that the adult brain is fixed.[00:05:22] Ken asks Tommy about advice his father offered when Tommy got accepted into the University of Cambridge.[00:08:03] As a follow-up, Dawn asks if it’s fair to say that when Tommy first started working with patients, what he learned in textbooks and classrooms didn’t necessarily translate perfectly into the real world and that there is no one-size-fits-all fix.[00:11:54] Ken asks Tommy to expand on what he wrote in his book about the fact that while science can give us a framework for understanding the world, we are always only one experiment or one well-phrased question away from having to completely rethink everything.[00:16:44] Dawn launches into talking about what people can do to future-proof their brain, starting with diet. In the Nourish chapter of his book, Tommy seeks to help people see food as an opportunity for nourishment rather than a source of stress since there are so many conflicting messages about diet and healthy foods out there. Dawn asks Tommy if his opinion is that there is no one-size-fits-all diet?[00:22:21] Dawn explains that what we eat has a direct effect on our long-term health and dementia risk, and within the literature a common theme that emerges regarding eating for brain health is maximizing nutrients. Dawn asks Tommy to talk about what this looks like.[00:24:49] Dawn points out that people today are inundated with advice from health influencers in all directions. She asks Tommy to talk about his advice to tune out the noise and instead of chasing whatever supplement or super food that is currently in vogue, simply to focus on filling your diet with whole, nutrient dense foods.[00:29:43] Ken explains that nutrients are sometimes hard to get in the diet, with somewhere between 15 and 25 percent of people in the U.S. and Europe having inadequate intakes of most B vitamins and even higher deficits in iron, magnesium, calcium, and vitamins C and E, with nutrient deficiencies differing by sex. Women on average are lower in B12, iron, iodine, and calcium, while men are typically lower in magnesium, zinc, and various B vitamins. Ken asks Tommy to give an overview of what these nutrients do in the brain that makes them so critical to cognitive function.[00:35:51] Ken follows up on this discussion by moving on to the section in Tommy’s book titled “To Supplement or Not to Supplement” where he discusses the evidence of the benefits of targeted supplementation to fill in the nutrient gaps that exist in the diet. Ken asks Tommy to talk about this more in depth and maybe give a framework by which people can think about adding or not adding key nutrients via supplementation.[00:41:21] Given the controversial reputation red meat has, Ken asks Tommy to weigh in on how he thinks people should think about red meat.[00:46:26] Fish as well, Dawn explains, has become controversial, due to microplastics and mercury concerns. However, given the positive effects on cognitive health that fish consumption has, Dawn asks Tommy to talk about the costs and benefits of increasing fish consumption.[00:50:30] Ken asks about the genetic basis for dementia and in particular Alzheimer’s, particularly regarding the APOE genotypes and a recent paper that made the claim that homozygous APOE4/4 carriers were essentially guaranteed to develop ALzherimer’s, a strong claim that Ken is skeptical of.[00:57:06] Ken switches gears to talk about brain energy consumption, noting that while the brain is only about 2% of total body mass, it consumes roughly 20% of total energy at rest. Ken mentions that we discussed this topic in episode 59 with Steven Cunnane and asks Tommy to touch on the importance of getting enough energy for the brain and the consequences of not.[01:01:43] Dawn mentions that time restricted eating and fasting have become quite popular in recent years, and is a topic we discussed in episodes 7, and 133 with Mark Mattson. Dawn asks Tommy what some key considerations are for fasting and time restricted eating.[01:04:52] Ken contrasts low energy availability with the prevalent issue in today’s modern food environment of high energy availability, leading to epidemics of obesity and type 2 diabetes, both of which are associated with lower brain volume and are both also implicated in projections of higher dementia burdens in the coming decades. Ken asks Tommy to talk about this.[01:08:55] Dawn asks if Tommy has any practical recommendations on how people can assess whether they are fueling the needs of their brain properly.[01:10:38] Ken notes that brain health is tied closely to the extent to which we stimulate our brains, especially as we age, a topic which was discussed at length with Dr. Rudy Tanzi in episode 174. Ken goes on to ask Tommy to talk about the importance of stimulating our brains as we age.[01:13:38] Dawn notes that Tommy made the realization that the brain adapting to stimulus is very similar to how muscles adapt to resistance training after meeting Josh Turknet, a neuroscientist who loves the banjo as much as Tommy loves weight training. Dawn asks Tommy to talk about how his and Josh’s respective hobbies have more in common than he originally thought.[01:16:11] Ken asks if this analogy between the brain and muscle extends to ‘muscle memory’ or the phenomenon that people who were at one time more muscular are able to gain back that muscle mass more quickly than when they first trained.[01:19:11] Ken mentions that Josh Turknet, the author of the book Anyone Can Play Music, and our guest on episode 130, co-authored a paper with Tommy titled, “Demand coupling drives neurodegeneration, a model of age-related cognitive decline and dementia.” Ken asks Tommy to discuss this paper.[01:22:58] Dawn explains that Tommy writes in his book that exercise science and athletic coaching have given us a really good idea of how a specific stimulus effects performance. But when it comes to this kind of measurement tracking for cognitive function, it’s less straightforward. Dawn asks Tommy to talk about this.[01:25:22] Ken mentions that there are lots of ways to stimulate the brain, with some being more potent than others, such as learning a language or an instrument. Ken asks Tommy what some other examples are of good cognitive exercises and learning endeavors that can help develop cognitive headroom as we age.[01:29:14] Ken asks Tommy about the fact that retirement is often the point in someone’s life where their cognitive abilities are most at risk, and that delaying retirement, or retiring and choosing to reinvent oneself and engage in a new and challenging adventure can help prevent the cognitive risks associated with retirement.[01:32:32] Dawn notes that exercise is also incredibly important for brain health and asks Tommy to talk about his framework that people can use to think about movement and physical activity as a way to support brain health.[01:37:28] Ken asks Tommy about a study out of Norway that found that people who increased their fitness in their 50s and 60s decreased their subsequent risk of dementia.[01:39:52] Dawn asks Tommy to talk about the growing issue of social media causing people to lose their attention span.[01:44:03] Dawn asks Tommy how he sees AI affecting our brains today.[01:49:17] Ken notes that while most STEM-Talk guests who have written a book say that they would prefer to not repeat the experience, Tommy however, is already thinking about his next book. Ken asks if Tommy can share what this next book will be about.[01:51:26] Dawn asks Tommy about his wife Elizabeth, who was our guest on episode 71, and a researcher at the University of Washington.[01:52:52] Dawn wraps up asking Tommy if, since moving from North Carolina to Washington, if he and Elizabeth have had any luck finding good barbecue in Seattle.Links:
Tommy Wood bio
STEM-Talk episode 47 with Tommy Wood
STEM-Talk episode 110 with Tommy Wood
STEM-Talk episode 111 with Tommy Wood
STEM-Talk episode 128 with Tommy Wood
STEM-Talk episode 193 with Tommy Wood, part 1
Learn more about IHMC
STEM-Talk homepage
Ken Ford bio
Ken Ford Wikipedia page
Dawn Kernagis bio
The post Episode 194: Tommy Wood discusses how to future-proof the adult brain appeared first on IHMC | Institute for Human & Machine Cognition.
1 hr 56 min - Episode 193: Tommy Wood and his new book bust the belief that the adult brain is fixed
Today we have Dr. Tommy Wood, a neuroscientist and frequent STEM-Talk guest who joins today on the eve of the publication of his first book, “The Stimulated Mind: Future-Proof Your Brain from Dementia and Stay Sharp at Any Age.”
Tommy is an Associate Professor of Pediatrics and Neuroscience at the University of Washington, where his laboratory focuses on brain health across human lifespan. Tommy is a colleague and good friend who also is a Visiting Research Scientist here at IHMC.
Today we talk to Tommy about his mission to dispel the myth that the brain is doomed to decline with age. His book, which publishes on March 24 but is available for pre-order on Amazon, offers science-backed strategies to enhance mental sharpness and prevent cognitive decline, including Alzheimer’s disease.
There was so much to unpack with Tommy about his book, that we decided to split his interview into two parts. Today we talk to Tommy about the history of neuroscience and how researchers go about studying the brain. We also have a conversation with Tommy about what is holding us back in terms of addressing an ever-increasing burden of cognitive and mental health disorders we are experiencing not only here in the U.S., but also around the world. In part two of Tommy’ interview, which will air in a few weeks following today’s episode, Tommy shares science-backed strategies to help people future-proof their brains.
Tommy’s lab at the University of Washington focuses on brain health across the lifespan. He conducts research that focuses on ways to treat a range of brain injuries, including babies born preterm and adults who experience brain trauma. He also investigates lifestyle factors that affect long-term cognitive function and increase the risk of dementia.
Tommy has a bachelor’s degree in biochemistry from the University of Cambridge, a medical degree from the University of Oxford, and a Ph.D. in Physiology and Neuroscience from the University of Oslo.
Show notes:
[00:04:04] Dawn opens our interview congratulating Tommy on his new book, “The Stimulated Mind.” Dawn asks Tommy what inspired him to write his first book.[00:07:29] Since writing the book consumed more than 18 months of Tommy’s life, Dawn asks Tommy if he thinks he’ll write another one.[00:09:36] Dawn asks if it’s fair to say that the overarching theme of “The Stimulated Mind” is that the conventional belief the adult brain is fixed and incapable of change is wrong.[00:17:35] Ken explains that Tommy opens his book with a story about a study on barn owls, where researchers outfitted a group of owls with prism goggles that altered the perceived position of objects in the owls’ vision. While young owls were able to quickly adapt to the change in their vision and return to normal behavior and activities, adult owls, even after months of wearing the goggles, were unable to adapt and would miss mice that were directly under their beaks. However, the research group amended their study design and found something interesting. Ken asks Tommy to explain what they found when they amended their design.[00:22:40] Ken asks Tommy to share how a human study, which outfitted participants with goggles that flipped their vision upside down, demonstrated the adaptability of the adult brain.[00:25:32] Ken asks if these sorts of adaptations have been seen as beyond basic sensory modalities in higher cognitive functions.[00:31:25] Dawn zooms out in our discussion and asks Tommy, given the falsehood of our previous understanding of the adult brain as being fixed, what exactly do we know about the brain.[00:35:36] Dawn asks Tommy to talk about Santiago Ramón y Cajal, who is considered the first neuroscientist.[00:38:41] Dawn mentions chapter two of Tommy’s book, “How do Neuroscientists Study the Brain,” in which Tommy explains the complexity of the brain, which is comprised of almost 100 billion neurons which compose nearly a quadrillion synapses. Given the complexity of the brain, Tommy notes in his book that even an organ as complex as the human brain is incapable of fully comprehending its own complexity. Dawn asks Tommy to talk about how he and his colleagues approach studying the brain.[00:43:30] Ken notes the parallels between attempting to understand the function of the brain based on an understanding of its individual components to the process of trying to understand how a piece of software works on a computer by systematically studying the computer’s hardware. Ken goes on to start a discussion on the parallels between the brain as a self-referential system that is so complex it cannot even fully understand itself, to various paradoxes as well as Gödel’s theorem, while noting that such comparisons are a false equivalency, and the brain is not a formal system in the sense of mathematical proofs. Still, Ken notes, the parallels are interesting.[00:47:07] Dawn asks Tommy about a humorous but insightful section in his book that illustrates the complexity of neurological research called “Can a Biologist Fix a Broken Radio.” Dawn asks Tommy to explain what this analogy is about.[00:52:18] Dawn notes that the modern belief that the adult brain is fixed stems from work done by Cajal in the late 1800s where he claimed that after development the adult brain was no longer capable of regeneration or plasticity. Dawn asks Tommy to touch more on this.[00:56:26] Ken explains that while people are likely familiar with neurons, as the basic building block of the nervous system, most people are less familiar with glial cells, which, until recently, were considered to play a minor role in the brain. However, Tommy in his book, argues that glial cells should be seen as just as important as neurons. Ken notes that within the neuroscience community there is a renewed interest in these cells.[01:02:35] Dawn shifts the conversation to ask about the importance of cardiovascular health in brain health.[01:06:35] Dawn explains that Tommy ends part one of his book by looking at what the brain is actually for, and to answer that question, he first explains that although the brain is capable of adaptation and change over a lifespan, it requires the right environment. To illustrate this, and the fact that dementia is not predetermined, Dawn asks Tommy about the indigenous Tsimané people of the Bolivian Amazon, who have some of the lowest rates of dementia in the world.[01:08:27] Ken asks Tommy if it’s true that these people also have a lower prevalence of APOE 4/4 and 3/4 genotypes.[01:11:26] Dawn asks, since one of the aims of Tommy’s book is to help people improve their cognitive function and reduce their risk for dementia, if he could give listeners a brief history of Alzheimer’s disease.[01:17:07] Ken explains that general warnings that as we get better at treating various diseases and increasing lifespans, we will see an overwhelming number of people develop age-related dementia. Recent studies out of Europe, however, have shown the opposite trend, and that the likelihood of being diagnosed with dementia at the age of 70 is now lower than it was 20 years ago.[01:22:43] Ken and Dawn close out part one of our interview with Tommy by explaining that in part two we will focus our discussion with Tommy on ways people can stimulate neuroplasticity in their adult brains. Ken asks Tommy to close out by briefly discussing the recipe for changing and improving the adult brain.Links:
Tommy Wood bio
STEM-Talk episode 47 with Tommy Wood
STEM-Talk episode 110 with Tommy Wood
STEM-Talk episode 111 with Tommy Wood
STEM-Talk episode 128 with Tommy Wood
Learn more about IHMC
STEM-Talk homepage
Ken Ford bio
Ken Ford Wikipedia page
Dawn Kernagis bio
The post Episode 193: Tommy Wood and his new book bust the belief that the adult brain is fixed appeared first on IHMC | Institute for Human & Machine Cognition.
1 hr 29 min - Episode 192: Ken and Dawn weigh in on ChatGPT, ketamine, urolithin-A, rapamycin, and more in wide-ranging AMA
ChatGPT has been in the news a lot lately and, as a result, quite a few STEM-Talk listeners have tossed us questions about the reliability and limitations of generative-artificial intelligence chatbots as well as large-language models more broadly. Ken and Dawn tackle this question and a number of others in today’s Ask Me Anything episode.
We have listeners wondering why astronauts train in underwater conditions for spacewalks; icebreakers in antarctica; the value of supplementing with urolithin-A; and the effectiveness of L-citrulline in helping aging blood vessels.
Ken also weights in on questions related to lithium deficiency and the onset of Alzheimer’s disease; a study that found mTOR activation may not be necessary for ketamine’s beneficial effects in the context of depression; and a paper that demonstrated short-term mTOR inhibition by rapamycin improved cardiac and endothelial function in older men.
Show notes:
[00:02:49] Ken opens our AMA with a listener question for Dawn, which asks why, despite the differences between diving and zero-gravity environments, why do astronauts train in underwater conditions for spacewalks. The listener goes on to mention an article they read about NASA’s neutral buoyancy lab in Houston, which contains a partial replica of the International Space Station.[00:07:42] A listener asks Ken if he is still optimistic about the value of supplementing with urolithin-A, and if so, is there a brand he recommends. Ken mentions episodes 118, with Julie Anderson, and 173, with Anurag Singh. Ken also discusses a paper titled “Effect of the mitophagy inducer urolithin A on age related immune decline, a randomized placebo-controlled trial” co-authored by Anurag. Ken also mentions clinical research supporting the urolithin-A supplement Mitopure.[00:10:53] A listener asks Ken about a paper titled “Short-term mTOR inhibition by rapamycin improves cardiac and endothelial function in older men: a proof-of-concept pilot study.”[00:14:29] Ken discusses a 2020 paper from a research group at Yale, which suggested that mTOR activation may not be necessary for ketamine’s beneficial effects in the context of depression. The paper also reported that m-TOR suppression via rapamycin might prolong ketamine’s antidepressant effects.[00:18:47] A research scientist formerly working in Antarctica asks Ken about Russia’s dominance in the realm of ice breakers.[00:23:55] A listener mentions that for some people, when they used ChatGPT to ask about the assassination of political commentator Charlie Kirk, ChatGPT sometimes responded by denying the assassination occurred. The listener asks Ken about the credibility and reliability of generative AI and large-language models.[00:28:49] Several listeners have submitted questions for Ken regarding a paper published in Nature in August of last year titled “Lithium deficiency in the onset of Alzheimer’s disease.” Ken gives his thoughts on this paper.[00:31:56] For our final question this AMA, a listener asks Ken about the arginine paradox, which regards L-arginine, which is used by the body to make nitric oxide, which is necessary to relax and maintain flexibility of blood vessels. However, several papers have reported that supplementation of arginine does not reliably improve aging blood vessels. In contrast, recent research suggests that L-citrulline might be more effective. The listeners sent questions asking about the possible effects of citrulline in vascular health and aging.In his answer, Ken cites the following papers:
— Administration of L-arginine plus L-citrulline or L-citrulline alone successfully retarded endothelial senescence.
— Effects of L-Citrulline Supplementation on Endothelial Function, Arterial Stiffness, and Blood Glucose Level in the Fasted and Acute Hyperglycemic States in Middle-Aged and Older Adults with Type 2 Diabetes.
— Citrulline Supplementation Improves Microvascular Function and Muscle Strength in Middle-Aged and Older Adults with Type 2 Diabetes.
— Effects of L-citrulline supplementation and watermelon intake on arterial stiffness and endothelial function in middle-aged and older adults: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
— Citrulline regulates macrophage metabolism and inflammation to counter aging in mice.
If you have questions for Ken and Dawn after listening to today’s episode or any episode of STEM-Talk, please email our producer, Randy Hammer, at [email protected].
Links:
Learn more about IHMC
STEM-Talk homepage
Ken Ford bio
Ken Ford Wikipedia page
Dawn Kernagis bio
The post Episode 192: Ken and Dawn weigh in on ChatGPT, ketamine, urolithin-A, rapamycin, and more in wide-ranging AMA appeared first on IHMC | Institute for Human & Machine Cognition.
40 min - Episode 191: Francisco Gonzalez-Lima discusses methylene blue & noninvasive human brain stimulation
Today we have Dr. Francisco Gonzalez-Lima, a behavioral neuroscientist who was our guest in episodes 106 and 107 back in 2020.
Since those 2020 interviews, Francisco and his colleagues at the Gonzalez-Lima Lab have produced dozens of more studies and papers that have advanced their work on methylene blue, transcranial lasers, memory enhancement, neuroprotection and neurocognitive disorders.
Francisco and his lab at the University of Texas Austin are recognized as world leaders for their research on the relationships between brain energy metabolism, memory and neurobehavioral disorders.
In today’s interview, we talk to Francisco about his lab’s most recent research on the beneficial neurocognitive and emotional effects of noninvasive human brain stimulation in healthy, aging and mentally ill populations. This research primarily uses transcranial infrared laser stimulation and multimodal imaging, which we will discuss in today’s interview.
Be sure to check out our earlier interviews with Francisco where he talked aobut his work on brain metabolic mapping and Alzheimer’s, episode 106, and his research into methylene blue and near-infrared light as therapies for cognitive disorders, episode 107.
Show notes:
[00:04:32] Dawn and Ken open our interview with Francisco by mentioning that his lab has been very productive pursuing new research avenues since he was last on STEM-Talk. Ken mentions that Francisco has recently begun collaborating with his sister who has a PhD in computational and applied mathematics and asks Francisco to talk about the work they’re doing together.[00:06:21] Dawn shifts to talk about the roadblocks that Francisco and his team have been dealing with, particularly that the review process for academic papers is unusually slow, not just for Francisco’s team but at large. Dawn asks Francisco to discuss this issue.[00:10:37] Dawn recaps that in our previous interview with Francisco in 2020, the discussion focused on his research into methylene blue, which has been primarily used to treat methemoglobinemia, however, the potential for methylene blue to treat declining cognitive function is an active area of research. Despite Francisco’s successful work with methylene blue, he often gets asked about its safety, largely due to various misconceptions. Dawn asks Francisco to talk about the misconceptions about methylene blue.[00:14:57] Ken asks if Francisco what some other misconceptions about methylene blue are.[00:20:43] Given the discussion of dosing, Ken asks Francisco what the safe dose range is for methylene blue in humans.[00:28:15] Ken mentions an article published a few months ago titled “Beyond plaques: How methylene blue and ketones address vascular hypometabolism in Alzheimer’s disease” Ken goes on to mention that the article did a good job of summarizing Francisco’s work as well as the work of Steve Cunnane, who was our guest on episode 59. Ken asks Francisco to discuss his thoughts on the article.[00:34:25] Dawn shifts focus to discuss Francisco’s work on photobiomodulation, specifically transcranial infrared laser stimulation, which is a non-invasive method for neuroprotection and cognitive enhancement. Dawn explains that Francisco has written two chapters on this topic that summarizes his work in the area, one of which appeared in the Oxford handbook on transcranial stimulation, and the other is in a book on augmentation of brain function, based on a series of presentations he gave in Switzerland. Dawn asks Francisco to give a broad overview of his work on photobiomodulation and transcranial infrared laser stimulation.[00:43:52] Ken asks Francisco to talk about a paper titled “Light buckets and laser beams” that he and other researchers composed after attending a photobiomodulation workshop convened in 2023 by the director of the National Institute on Aging and several NIH lab directors.[00:51:25] Ken asks Francisco if there are any commercially available photobiomodulation devices that he thinks have substantial utility.[00:56:27] Ken asks Francisco to discuss mitochondrial disfunction in the context of neurodegeneration and his work on targeted stimulation of the mitochondria with photo biomodulation.[01:06:58] Ken asks Francisco to talk about the potential benefits of photobiomodulation on the aging process outside of neurodegenerative conditions.[01:17:16] Dawn mentions that transcranial infrared stimulation stimulates prefrontal energy metabolism and oxygenation, which produces cognitive enhancing effects. Dawn goes on to ask Francisco about his recent paper exploring this phenomenon in the context of depression titled “Augmenting internet based cognitive behavioral therapy for major depressive disorder with transcranial infrared laser stimulation.”[01:23:08] In light of the promising results of this study, Ken asks Francisco what he sees as the next research step to further this progress.[01:30:15] Ken comments on how Francisco has not only had great accomplishments in his recent research but also has a lot of fruitful opportunities ahead.[01:31:07] Ken asks Francisco if he has looked at photobiomodulation in combination with transcutaneous vagal nerve stimulation.[01:34:28] Ken mentions that for listeners interested in learning more about vagal nerve stimulation they can listen to episodes 179 with JP Erico, and 172 with Kevin Tracey. Francisco discusses the difficulty in knowing whether to attribute effects of vagus nerve stimulation to stimulation of the vagus nerve itself or incidental stimulation of the carotid artery … or some combination.[01:38:33] Ken mentions that Francisco is now trying to move away from animal studies and focus more on human studies. Ken asks what human trials he is hoping to conduct.[01:42:27] Dawn closes our interview thanking Francisco for once again joining us on STEM-Talk.Links:
Gonzalez-Lima Lab
Learn more about IHMC
STEM-Talk homepage
Ken Ford bio
Ken Ford Wikipedia page
Dawn Kernagis bio
The post Episode 191: Francisco Gonzalez-Lima discusses methylene blue & noninvasive human brain stimulation appeared first on IHMC | Institute for Human & Machine Cognition.
1 hr 45 min - Episode 190: Judith Curry and the Consequences of Climate Alarmism
Dr. Judith Curry, a climatologist known for her criticism of alarmist, doomsday rhetoric about climate change, returns to STEM-Talk for her second appearance.
Judy most recently was one of five researchers commissioned by the U.S. Department of Energy to draft a Climate Assessment Report summarizing the current state of climate science with a focus on how it relates to the United States. In this interview, Judy summarizes the climate report’s key points, including the finding that that carbon-dioxide induced warming of the planet appears to be less damaging economically than has been commonly believed. The report, which was released this past summer, also argues that aggressive mitigation strategies for carbon dioxide emissions could be more harmful than helpful.
Our interview comes on the heels of the prestigious journal Nature retracting a study that predicted climate change and carbon emissions would cause catastrophic economic damage by the end of the century. Our conversation with Judy also followed an about-face from Microsoft co-founder Bill Gates, who wrote last fall that it’s time to tamp down the alarmist rhetoric that climate change will lead to humanity’s demise.
Curry is president of the Climate Forecast Application Network and host of the blog, Climate Etc, which you can find at JudyCurry.com. Her blog provides a forum for climate researchers, academics and technical experts from other fields as well as citizen scientists to discuss topics related to climate science and science policy.
Her research interests include hurricanes, remote sensing, atmospheric modeling, polar climates, air-sea interactions, climate models, and the use of unmanned aerial vehicles for atmospheric research. She has published more than 100 scientific papers and is the author of “Climate Change and Uncertainty: Rethinking Our Response,” a book that provides a framework for understanding and rethinking the climate-change debate.
Show notes:
[00:03:59] Ken opens the interview explaining that Judy was one of the five authors of a climate assessment report commissioned by the U.S. Department of Energy. Before diving into the key findings of the report and the response it has received, Ken asks Judy to explain how she became one of the five authors.[00:06:21] Ken mentions that critics of the climate working group have accused the authors of being hand-picked skeptics of the effects of climate change. Judy argues that she and her co-authors are scientists determined to get the science right. Ken asks Judy to talk about her co-authors and the working relationship of the group.[00:09:18] Ken asks Judy to talk about how she and her co-authors came to their key finding that the economic impacts of climate change are less severe than typically thought.[00:13:08] Ken asks Judy to provide examples that demonstrate how climate mitigation strategies can be more harmful than helpful.[00:16:08] Ken follows up by asking about the report’s proposal to shift climate science from alarmism to focus more on a better understanding of natural climate variability.[00:18:14] Ken asks Judy what her thoughts are on the next steps that should be taken for a better understanding climate variability.[00:20:06] Ken asks Judy to elaborate on the findings of chapter six of the report regarding global warming and extreme weather events. In particular, Ken asks about the problems with associating specific extreme weather events like hurricanes to climate change, and the issues created by the short historical records we have at our disposal.[00:24:20] Ken asks Judy to talk about chapter nine of the report, which is about the need to focus on reducing vulnerabilities in our infrastructure instead of mitigating carbon emissions.[00:28:43] Ken asks Judy to comment on the accusations that she is a “climate change denier.”[00:31:18] Ken asks Judy to talk about a paper she co-authored with her colleague Dr. Harry DeAngelo titled “A critique of apocalyptic climate narrative.”[00:36:27] Ken brings up Bill Gates’ recent about-face on climate change and the need to pivot away from doomsday views of cataclysmic climate disasters. Ken asks Judy to elaborate on what she has dubbed “climate alarmism fatigue.”[00:39:32] Ken asks Judy to give her thoughts on the issue of sea level rise, particularly in light of the pushback that the DOE report faced on this topic. He also asks her to discuss the recent paper that was released after the DOE report titled “A global perspective on local sea level changes” which proports that there is no statistically significant acceleration of the rate of sea level rise for 98% of the suitable global locations.[00:50:47] Ken points listeners to Judy’s blog, Judycurry.com, where she discusses many of these same issues. Ken goes on to explain that his perspective as well as Judy’s perspective is that climate change has become a scapegoat for many issues. He asks Judy to talk about this phenomenon.[00:55:24] Ken asks Judy what she would like to see in terms of follow-up research to the DOE climate report.[01:00:23] Ken asks Judy about her book “Climate Uncertainty and Risk.”Links:
Judith Curry bio
Learn more about IHMC
STEM-Talk homepage
Ken Ford bio
Ken Ford Wikipedia page
The post Episode 190: Judith Curry and the Consequences of Climate Alarmism appeared first on IHMC | Institute for Human & Machine Cognition.
1 hr 6 min