Critically Speaking

CTE isn't just an NFL story, and a diagnosed concussion isn't the only warning sign. Dr. Jonathan Cherry explains how years of repetitive impacts may quietly change the brain, and why researchers are racing to find a way to detect it during life.
 
In this episode, Therese Markow and Dr. Jonathan Cherry discuss his research into understanding how repetitive head injuries cause progressive brain changes and their work to learn how to detect the disease during life. They break down the difference between CTE and concussions, explain who is more likely to get CTE, and explain the links between CTE and other cognitive diseases. 
 
Key Takeaways:
While it's only been talked about for the last 20 years or so, the first research on CTE was done in the 1920s on boxers.

There is currently no way to diagnose CTE in life. TES is being used as a way to diagnose people in life with symptoms of CTE, but at this time, CTE can only be diagnosed after death. 

While contact sports are one of the biggest contributors to CTE, it is not the only way to get it. CTE has also been seen in the brains of those afflicted by domestic violence and those in the military.

 
"CTE is from a history of repetitive head injury, and a concussion is essentially the damage as a result of one injury." —  Dr. Jonathan Cherry
 
Connect with Dr. Jonathan Cherry:
Professional Bio: https://www.bumc.bu.edu/camed/profile/jonathan-cherry/ 
Website: https://cherrylab.science/ 
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/jonathan-cherry-phd-80117695/ 
Google Scholar: https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=g3ztmrwAAAAJ&hl=en 
PubMed: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/myncbi/10iEdlxiameAD/bibliography/public/ 
 
Connect with Therese:
Website:  www.criticallyspeaking.net
Bluesky: @CriticallySpeaking.bsky.social
Instagram: @criticallyspeakingpodcast
Email: theresemarkow@criticallyspeaking.net
 
Audio production by Turnkey Podcast Productions. You're the expert. Your podcast will prove it.

Things you do or are exposed to early in life, including during fetal development, can actually affect your health later in adulthood. Normally, we're unaware of it, and it's difficult to make the connection. Today, Dr. Cheryl Rosenfeld dives into some of the research regarding placentas and their key implications in every life.
In this episode, Therese Markow and Dr. Cheryl Rosenfeld discuss how prenatal exposures can alter placental function, fetal brain development, and later-life health, with varying effects based on fetal sex. They expose the dangers of BPA and substitutes such as BPS, the importance of the neurotransmitters created by the placenta to the developing fetal brain, and the surprising results Dr. Rosenfeld has found in her research into maternal probiotic supplementation. 

 
 Key Takeaways:
The placenta is an endocrine organ. There are sex differences in the placenta between male and female fetuses. 

The placenta provides neurotransmitters, such as dopamine and serotonin, to the brain. If there's not enough serotonin, that could compromise early brain development and make a child unfortunately vulnerable to diseases later in life.

While many people try to avoid BPA, we are all impacted by it or by one of its substitutes. In a side-by-side study shot with BPA and BPS (a common substitute), it was found that both of them have equally harmful effects on the placenta.

 
"Essentially, all the fetal organs depend on that placenta. So if you affect the function of the placenta, it will affect the vital processing of all the other fetal organs." —  Dr. Cheryl Rosenfeld
 
Connect with Dr. Cheryl Rosenfeld:
Professional Bio: https://cvm.missouri.edu/pathobiology-and-integrative-biomedical-sciences/faculty/cheryl-s-rosenfeld-dvm-phd/ 
ResearchGate: https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Cheryl-Rosenfeld   
Google Scholar: https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=qluXCCYAAAAJ&hl=en&oi=ao
PubMed: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/?term=Rosenfeld+Cheryl+S&sort=date   
 
Connect with Therese:
Website:  www.criticallyspeaking.net
Bluesky: @CriticallySpeaking.bsky.social
Instagram: @criticallyspeakingpodcast
Email: theresemarkow@criticallyspeaking.net
   
Audio production by Turnkey Podcast Productions. You're the expert. Your podcast will prove it.

The U.S. declared measles eliminated in 2000 — so why are we seeing more cases and deaths than in the last 30 years? Dr. Jennifer Nuzzo reveals the hyper-local vaccination gaps driving the resurgence, and why preparing for the next pandemic starts on your block, not in Washington.
In this episode, Therese Markow and Dr. Jennifer Nuzzo discuss the recurring nature of pandemics that require prevention, preparedness, and coordinated action from global, national, and local organizations, institutions, and communities. They discuss the current preparedness systems, where they are working, and where they could be strengthened, as well as breaking down some vaccine-preventable disease outbreaks and the future risks of pandemics.
 
 Key Takeaways:
Pandemics happen regularly throughout history. We are not going to be able to prevent them from happening, but we can prepare for them in a way that will not put everything on hold and upend lives (or cause deaths). 

Pandemic means a global spread. It does not have to be deadly; it just has to be global. When talking about pandemics, respiratory viruses are the pathogens that are most worried about. 

Transparency in preparedness not only is shown to help the individuals in that one country, but also other countries because decisions can be made based on more complete information.

Immunization works by having the majority of a population covered by the vaccine. When more people are vaccinated, everyone can be protected. This makes the more immediate community, such as your child's school vaccination rate, more important than a larger population, such as the state or national vaccination rate. 

 
"There's a lot of stuff wrong with the world right now, and a lot of it is at the global level or at the national level. But the good news is that preparedness is a bottom-up exercise. It starts in your community, and just like when I talked about, it really matters what the vaccination coverage is in your school, in your kid's school, or what it is in your community. What happens locally absolutely matters." —  Dr. Jennifer Nuzzo
 
Connect with Jennifer Nuzzo:
Professional Bio: https://pandemics.sph.brown.edu/people/jennifer-nuzzo-drph 
Research: https://vivo.brown.edu/display/jnuzzo 
X: https://x.com/JenniferNuzzo   
Bluesky: https://bsky.app/profile/jennifernuzzo.bsky.social   
Website: http://thepandemiccenter.org/ 
 
Connect with Therese:
Website:  www.criticallyspeaking.net
Bluesky: @CriticallySpeaking.bsky.social
Instagram: @criticallyspeakingpodcast
Email: theresemarkow@criticallyspeaking.net
 
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: Daniel.Aaron@law.utah.edu 
 
Connect with Therese:
Website:  www.criticallyspeaking.net
Bluesky: @CriticallySpeaking.bsky.social
Instagram: @criticallyspeakingpodcast
Email: theresemarkow@criticallyspeaking.net 
 
Audio production by Turnkey Podcast Productions. You're the expert. Your podcast will prove it.

Have you ever wondered what the purpose of staying up to date on your vaccines is? Well, new research is showing that not only does it help to prevent the disease the vaccine is protecting you from, but it may also reduce your risk of Alzheimer's and other dementia related diseases. 
In this episode, Therese Markow and Dr. Paul Schulz discuss the exciting discovery that influenza vaccines may reduce the risk of Alzheimer's by up to 40%. Dr. Schulz's research suggests that high-dose vaccines (offered to those over the age of 65) are more effective, particularly in women. Additionally, other vaccines like shingles, pneumococcus, and Tdap also showed protective effects.
 
 Key Takeaways:
Every neurologist knows that when your Alzheimer's patient gets pneumonia, a UTI, bronchitis, a hip fracture, a hip replacement, or any inflammatory process in the body, it makes their Alzheimer's a lot worse.

Over the age of 65, patients are typically given a 4x dose of the influenza vaccine for as long as it is available. Evidence shows that the regular dose reduces Alzheimer's by about 40%, while the high dose reduces it by about 15% more. 

Other types of vaccines, including for shingles, pneumococcus, and Tdap, also show effectiveness in the reduction of Alzheimer's and related dementias. 

 
"The conclusion was that compared to people with no influenza vaccines, which turns out to be very common, unfortunately, in the United States, three annual vaccines out of six years is associated with a 20% reduction in Alzheimer's risk for up to eight years that we know of so far." —  Dr. Paul Schulz
 
Connect with Dr. Paul Schulz:
Professional Bio: https://med.uth.edu/neurosciences/dr-paul-e-schulz-md-2/ 
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/paul-schulz-199a9944/ 
Google Scholar: https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=MoJcqd4AAAAJ&hl=en 
 
Connect with Therese:
Website:  www.criticallyspeaking.net
Bluesky: @CriticallySpeaking.bsky.social
Instagram: @criticallyspeakingpodcast
Email: theresemarkow@criticallyspeaking.net
 
Audio production by Turnkey Podcast Productions. You're the expert. Your podcast will prove it.