16 Burst results for "national academy of medicine"

"national academy medicine" Discussed on Dogma Debate

Dogma Debate

05:58 min | 3 months ago

"national academy medicine" Discussed on Dogma Debate

"And because my shows based sort of science and skepticism and all of this i get sent videos at least once a month from someone that shows me these videos of bobby kennedy. And there's this one that i get a lot. Where an interviewer says to bobby's. There's a huge body of science. That disagrees with your position and bobby replies to him and i have the quote here he says show it to me. Show me one study if you can show me. One study. that shows vaccinated are healthier than unvaccinated. Children i will put that study on my website. And i will quit my job. And he says he doesn't trust what he calls the industry and then he goes on to say the institute of medicine and the national academy of science has repeatedly said to the cdc you are claiming you have studied the connection between autism and vaccines. But you have not. What can we say in response to that. So first of all. I've dealt with mr kennedy more more than i'd like to he. He has publicly and his instagram. He calls me the og villain. The original gangster villain So you're you're you're talking to the villain. May i mean. I had a look it up. I didn't even know what g. men that sounds terms of modern culture. But you know it sounds funny that i made my god but the problem. Is this a dog whistle for a lot of people who are not well who who believed that the stuff that he says in its. It's it puts smile my family and me and a lot of dangerous. Sometimes so this is. This is become tough stuff so yeah i mean in the book what i do is Go into quite a number of details. Showing dozens of studies clearly refuting any link to autism by the way one of the things the anti vaccine groups do as they keep moving the goalposts first. They said it was the measles. Mumps rubella vaccine that came out of the wakefield paper that was discredited by a brian deer a journalist From the sunday times in the british medical journal who provided all the evidence showing that of what was happening there. Okay then they switched it around. Rfk junior said no. No we didn't mean the mr vaccine we meant the thiab miroslaw preservative in vaccine and then it shifted again to spacing vaccines too close together and then it shifted again to Must be the aluminum and vaccine. So you're playing this kind of Ridiculous gabe whack-a-mole. You're knocking without another pops up. And now as people start to accept the fact from my writings and others that vaccines really do not cause autism. They pivot again to cross chronic illness or auto immunity. And it just goes on and on and on and then you realize that this is how anti-science movements work there. They're not interested in getting to any sort of truth in trusted and self propagation so when he says the institute of medicine the national academy of science has said to the cdc. You have never studied the link between autism and vaccines. Is he not telling the truth. Is there something to that. Is there a dispute there at all that not that i know i mean you know the well. I hasn't been called the institute of medicine for years. And that gives you a sense of how old anything he's talking about is In i think they did publish a summary in two thousand twelve that i would afforded it much differently number one and number two. It's now part of. I'm an elected number now. The national academy medicine that We now have so much more evidence on what autism is and and understanding the spectrum. And an how. It's much more common in girls and women than we previously thought and the geography of autism the epidemiology in one of the things. The anti vaccine group says it's the highest rates of autism are in the us in europe when the institute for health metrics and evaluation out of university of washington shows saddam actually highest in the middle east. And and so. Yeah so. I mean the. The evidence is overwhelming and just dope lack. plausibility mean. One of the things that the anti vaccine whoops can even do even come up with any mechanism That's that's logical in terms of explaining. Okay well if if they do think there's evidence for vaccines causing autism. How would that work. I mean the. There's a reason as the caller pervasive developed mental disorder. Changes are so global even in the neuro anatomy of the brain. How it a vaccine do that. And when when all of the processes are underway in early fetal brain development. There's just no plausibility of how a vaccine would even and then again i said they then they keep moving it again. They say now that they're not even talking much about autism anymore. They're talking about chronic illness or auto immunity in that. You're seeing all the kobe. Nineteen vaccine conspiracies coming up that it's causing genetically modified humans or five g in just lots of ridiculous stuff. Oh perfect transition. I mean and i guess i guess the last question just there on on mr kennedy when he says things like that. You know that that. There's there's no study showing this and then clearly there are and if you if you don't want to speak to this i totally understand you get enough attacks as it is. Do you think people who are in lead roles like that so to speak actually believe the things they're saying like do they really stand behind this or is this some sort of i. Guess ploy to get attention. I i can't say i you know i've spoken to mr kennedy a number of times and i don't have any any insight as to what his motivations are But it has caused a lot of damage in you know in..

autism mr kennedy national academy of science bobby institute of medicine Rfk junior bobby kennedy cdc institute of medicine the nati brian deer british medical journal anti vaccine group sunday times institute for health metrics a national academy saddam middle east europe us
"national academy medicine" Discussed on Boston Public Radio Podcast

Boston Public Radio Podcast

02:25 min | 5 months ago

"national academy medicine" Discussed on Boston Public Radio Podcast

"So i think the rollout isn't going to be the same in every state. But i think that'll be the rough sequence. I have to say. I still don't get this first of all the good news to me and the excitement is building. I know it's going to take months for months and months for everybody to get it but the notion that is early as according to pfizer a day or two after the vote on emergency use authorization which is december tenth. The first vaccines will be administered is just like so exciting coming as long as it doesn't cause people to let their guard down even more than they are leading guard down. But i just don't. I saw bill gates the other night. Mr vaccine. A lot of ways on with anderson cooper on cnn. And he's saying that if we had a normal federal government we already would have had websites sang the kind of things. You're talking about art. But i thought the cdc made the decision. I read this thing from some advisory committee on ethical immunization practices. I assume advice do recommendations. But i still think states can decide decide. Okay there have been there have been federal. Pardon me reports. National academy medicine had ethics guideline. There are plenty of papers out there recommendations including some by me and they're certainly gonna be advice from the cdc. There's going to be advice from the advisory committee on immunization practices which advises the cdc. I'll good but you know in the. Us states kind of decide not the federal government. That's just how we operate you know if you're talking to people making decisions. Can i pass on a recommendation. That i'm hopefully helping you would pass on. I would argue that. The people of south dakota should get the vaccine as soon as governor nome discovers one on her own. I mean how about that is a. Do you believe this woman is still opposing a mask mandate of this thing is raging through her state. As just it is it is criminal. We're talking our kaplan mental essence of course Private sector getting involved here and trying to talk people into a taking the vaccine. Fifty million dollar ad campaign proposed by the ad council nonprofit group advertising group. Is that enough. I don't know well. Fifty million dollar ad campaign would get them thirty seconds on this show..

cdc Us anderson cooper cnn south dakota governor nome National academy
"national academy medicine" Discussed on The 11th Hour with Brian Williams

The 11th Hour with Brian Williams

07:04 min | 8 months ago

"national academy medicine" Discussed on The 11th Hour with Brian Williams

"On. I. Think that's a mid range solution that strikes me as quite reasonable on that. You allow anyone with fear of Covid to use that as an excuse, don't require someone to provide a, you know a doctor's permission slip mobile election of his don't want to be determining health situations. This is the issue in Texas right now they're fighting over. So let's could do ballot applications out to everyone in those. States that have the capacity on. You could mail ballots everyone we need to be a little bit concerned. Some of these states may not be the handle capacity of eighty or ninety percent vote by mail Wisconsin was APP fifty percent, and as Angela pointed out chased some difficulties we want to avoid that again. So it's not just red and blue. As I said Brian I think a lot of Republican campaign operatives over the years have worked with absentee balloting this strike me as very unusual the rhetoric out here. I guess only peer pressure would force them to change their ways and there's a lot of that going around these days to our friends, Angela. Professor Paul Grungy. Thank you both for having us in on a Friday night and thanks for coming on to talk about this topic coming for US despite being months into a pandemic we still don't have the testing we need. We still don't have the national plan we need while asking er doctor who treats Kobe patients what can be done about it. As the administration used exhausted all of the executive authorities. Look. If you look under as president touted today's use it so much has administration actually exhausted it to get more supplies like reagents and tips and other testing supplies to the lab. Is that true? Everything's been done I'm going to say definitively yes. Would you say enough has been done enough has been done to make sure that everyone who needs a test gets a test in the That can possibly be done has been done. That was the White House Corona Virus testings are he was quick to defend the administration's strategy despite a drop and testing since the end of July? So, to that end with us again, tonight is Dr Mario Ramirez. He's an the R dot currently treating covid nineteen patients also is the former acting director of the White House Office of pandemic emerging threats, and in that job helped lead the Obama, White House Ebola response. So doctor you heard the admiral. Of you and I both know no doubt of cases where people are yet unable to get tested. Do you believe what the? Admiral said there do you think he believes it Will right away I feel a little sorry for doctor. He's in a really tough spy. You know he's you know forced to go out there and support a policy that I think most Americans can quickly realize you know he's not factually accurate. You know it's infuriating for me as a healthcare provider it's. Infuriating as tax paying citizen that this is the bested we've been able to achieve in this situation you know I? Think. What. Doctor Dr. missed that while it's true to the president may have expanded all of his existing authorities under the DPA's the role or the work of governance on behalf of the president, and the Congress is to create existing or create more authority. When the situation demanded where this response has failed this is truly the best that we can do, and this is what we did ended up ended up with I think any American should be upset about that. occurred to you. We are the first American generation to have reason to doubt what the CDC tells us to doubt numbers and advice from the Centers for Disease Control and I note their estimate today is one hundred, eighty, nine, thousand dead in the next three weeks I further note we lost twelve hundred eight souls just today in your view is there anything we can do or do are we just forced to watch it up? Well no Brian I mean I think there's absolutely more that we can do. I think that we need to be demanding more from our government. You know one of the things that I think came out of Emily Gerard statement yesterday with this was this is far as we're GONNA, go there's not going to be more testing, and so we need to just sort of accept that we can accept and in some ways the new doctor that the White House put onto the corona reiver's task force you know is pushing this idea of herd immunity. But I think we have to push back against that. We have to demand our government you know increase testing, and we have to increase the amount of PD providers out there and we have to give sounded vice. And, we have to empower the CDC out with a voice that actually has guided by scientific reason leaders who can support what is it? They're saying so that people know what to do. President talk today about what happens when a vaccine comes out I wanNA, play it for you. We'll discuss on the other side. Very. I will rely on the doctors to tell me that I would say probably the elderly, I would say nursing homes. A. Lot of people said, would you take it? I said, I'll take it of they want her I'll go first or last do whatever they want me to do. So, doc I'm sure there are protocols for this kind of thing and a lot of it depends on how many initial doses are available but what do you think should happen? What's being worked out actually pretty methodically right now, Brian in this scenario, them really glad that the government has been really active in. So a few weeks ago. The NIH director in the CDC director jointly established a new group under the national. Academies Medicine is going to issue some formal recommendations by Labor Day, and then those recommendations will go to the CDC and out of those two groups come formal recommendations about how this vaccine should be prioritized the different groups and I think it's great that this work is going on. Now what I think that those groups will find is that some of these vaccine candidates work at in certain populations, some older some younger. And I think we need to sort of amplify recommendations that come out of those groups so that folks have a very clear early understanding of how this is GonNa work. So everybody feels like there's equity everyone at ball. I think you just broke up, broke a big story. The notion that something is being carried out methodically in the midst of this pandemic in the twenty twenty that we are all experiencing together, doctor thank. You Dr Mario Ramirez returning to the broadcast. Appreciate it greatly coming up for us. Nothing's normal and twenty twenty. It's why we turn to historians to ask just how far from normal we have deviated and if we're still okay one of the great stars Kerns Goodwin standing by to talk with us. Hi everyone it's joy Reid. I'm so excited to tell you about my new MSNBC show the readout every weeknight I'm talking.

president Brian I Dr Mario Ramirez CDC Angela US Wisconsin Kobe Texas Doctor Dr. twenty twenty MSNBC White House Emily Gerard Admiral Kerns Goodwin acting director director
"national academy medicine" Discussed on Anderson Cooper 360

Anderson Cooper 360

05:44 min | 9 months ago

"national academy medicine" Discussed on Anderson Cooper 360

"Corona virus vaccine to millions of Americans as soon as one is Freddie. Operation Warp speed. The debate is already underway over who should get the first doses. Are Little uneasy about the government calling the shots here to reassure skeptical public, this decision will be political. The NIH director called the National Academy of Medicine on esteemed non-governmental organization and ask them to advise who should be first in line. A second group of CDC advisors are also asking who counts as an essential worker. Should race ethnicity factor in and where do teachers fall on the priority list with the clearly the vulnerable going to be? If not the top priority one of the top priorities, the trump administration is tapping top health officials and industry experts to lead vaccine plans rather than politicians, but the administration's vaccine effort operation warp speed is shrouded in secrecy. Burton ask for both your latitude, a little bit in terms of my lack of ability to provide a lot of specifics about what we're doing. Next developers already have contracts with the government to stockpile their product, and the administration hopes to have three hundred million doses available early next year. A timeline vaccine experts believe is overly optimistic. This is a big dust, even if you have a vaccine, get. Vaccinated is humongous. humongous desk because you need. The distribution alone is a monumental challenge. We right at the beginning of operation warp speed worked to lockdown fill finished capacity as well as syringes and needles and glassware, so we've secured that to be able to ensure that we'll be able to vaccinate the American people. The federal government has shelled out hundreds of millions of dollars to companies like corning glass vials needed to transport a vaccine. The US is kind of set a bar glass won't be the critical nick, and there'll be plenty to go around at the. Vaccine is. Is Reading hundreds of millions of syringes are on order to from companies like. Though contracts and industry experts suggest the government may come up short. It is I think the beginning of the process. The US government is preparing for a two shots of of the vaccine, and so assuming population of approximately three hundred and fifty million people were looking at. A total of seven, hundred and fifty million or excuse me. Seven hundred million syringes at least once a vaccine is available. It could take a year to inoculate enough Americans to slow the spread, and that's of Americans agree to get the vaccine at all safety concerns, politics and fears among minority communities that they may be exploited or left out. Are All contributing to Americans sedation? And Sara Murray joins US now Sarah you've reached out to the administration on this. What did they say? And how do they plan to inform the American people? What's a vaccine because available? That's right I. talked to a senior administration official earlier at HHS and they said look. They know they have transparency problem. They know they need to win over the American public and they're planning this big PR campaign. It's going to feature a number of the doctors we were used to seeing if those task force meetings like Dr Fauci Dr, Redfield and the surgeon general to try to talk to Americans. About coronavirus issues including future Vaccine Ciroma report. Thanks so much for being with US joining us now. Our CAPLAN director of medical ethics at New York University langone medical. Center in this really is one of the great questions surrounding medicine once there is a vile viable vaccine. How is it decided? WHO GETS IT I? Will usually important question remember? Nothing ever appears at once. If you're manufacturing drugs or vaccine, so it's GonNa. Come out gradually. We'll see a ten million, twenty, million, thirty, million fifty million doses released, so here's how I think people are thinking about this ought to think about it. One is who is it? That's likely to be armed so the at risk group! Group is a group that we really have to reach out I. Two that could be people working in nursing homes. People who are residents in nursing homes, first responders, healthcare workers would keep hearing that there are big outbreaks of meat plant areas food, handling prisons, so those are populations that we know are extreme risks, but let me also say John if you. Try to get after people who were extreme risk. You also have to realize that what was true. That produced FDA approval in terms of it worked in thirty thousand people doesn't mean it's going to work for nursing home resident. Who's older, maybe seventy five eighty five years old? This immune system is weaker, so we're GONNA have to wonder who goes first, but we're going to have to study it to make sure we know that it's working. That's how it aside. He goes I, who decides. Well right now, it's not clear who decides we have as was mentioned in the Early Report National Academy Medicine Most people have not heard of that group of esteem scientists. I. Think what we need is a national commission made up of interest groups. People can look at it and say there's someone from a stakeholder. Their nurses teachers people minority communities. We need credible body because that scene resistance Dotson fears about any new vaccine. They're not. Not Trivial. Weirdly we argue at one end who's going I and on the other hand? There's going to be I think a significant number of people. If they don't trust who's making the decisions you're going to say you. Go I wait a few months and see how it works out. Then there's the issue of the Anti Vaccine Community in the United States which is loud in organized, maybe disproportionately loud.

US Anti Vaccine Community director CDC federal government NIH National Academy of Medicine Freddie Early Report National Academy Sara Murray Burton HHS Dotson FDA Dr Fauci Dr New York University nick CAPLAN official
"national academy medicine" Discussed on Democracy Now! Audio

Democracy Now! Audio

10:57 min | 1 year ago

"national academy medicine" Discussed on Democracy Now! Audio

"The day period will make a decision as to which way want to go where we WANNA go timing. And essentially where referring to the timing of the opening essentially the opening of our country. Meanwhile calls are mounting to allow remote voting for lawmakers in Washington so they can avoid gathering and potentially spreading the corona virus. You know Senator Rand Paul. For example already tested positive for Cova nineteen seen just a few hours before the announcement came swimming in the Senate Pool House. Democrats I on a Presley. Ilhan Omar have unveiled a bill to cancel thirty thousand dollars for all student debts during the corona virus crisis. The Labor Department's expected to report a record breaking three million Americans filing first time claims for unemployment next week the US unemployment rate could hit thirty percent in the coming weeks and months for more. We're joined by JEFFREY SACHS LEADING ECONOMISTS Director of the Center for Sustainable Development at Columbia University. Interestingly he also led the World Health Organization's Commission on macroeconomics and health from two thousand to two thousand one playing a key role in conceiving and establishing the Global Fund to Fight AIDS Tuberculosis and malaria. Which helped distribute new medicines to fight infectious diseases? He's the author of a number of books including a new foreign policy beyond American exceptionalism his forthcoming book the ages of globalization joining us by democracy now stream and of course one Gonzales Co hosting from his home in New Brunswick New Jersey Jeffrey Sachs thanks. So much for joining us here. You work in New York. The epicenter of the pandemic in the United States talk about what's happening in Washington and then around the world and president trump switching. Once again yesterday reversing course his top scientific advisor not standing at his side noticed. Play Dr Vouch. -I saying the. Us is going to be open for business. Soon as the pandemic rate soar in this country amy. Thank you for your comprehensive coverage. Thank Swan it's terrifying This pandemic which is spreading all over the world is you so comprehensively reported and it's doubly terrifying that we have a complete nitwit as president. Who understands nothing listens to nothing? Judges nothing except by the stock market and is Endangering the American people so it's just hard to believe vote. What a colossal mess. Our country is in not only a virus to which the world population is immunologically naive. Another words wanted that can spread wild rapidly everywhere because there isn't a fire immunity. There is an experience with this virus but a president who is certainly the most incompetent president in the history of our country by who not only has personal incompetence but it is completely unable to bring together and listen to qualified people like Dr Vouch E and others who should be helping to control this pandemic instead we have one ignoramus after another without guidance without strategy so every mayor and governor in this country is on the front lines so without federal support and Congress. And it's just bewildering. There should have been money available immediately to the states and cities for every emergency step tech actually fight the pandemic instead. They're talking about the airline industry. They're talking about which bailouts of which sectors instead of fighting the spread of the virus you noted at the top of the show a remarkable fact which is probably the most pertinent packed for all of us to focus on in China at the very epicenter of this crisis at the star who Bay province. China battled this virus under control and is now lifting the lockdown measures. After about two months that is the result of rigorous containment policies tough but also comprehensive casting contact tracing isolation of people with symptoms. I end they've tracked hundreds and hundreds of thousands of cases they have been able to stop the spread of the pandemic and China's. Not Alone in that. It is a kind of East Asian model. Singapore Taiwan Hong Kong Japan Korea to a large extent. Have all used public. Health means to bring the spread of the virus under control. This is what our focus should be in the United States right. Now Stop the spread of the virus. Protect the frontline health workers. I contain the pandemic help people who are in a desperate situation to get by. There's not a lot of consumption to do right now. Other than our food and our basic provisioning and of course nobody being addicted or losing shelter or otherwise losing the means for their survival right now. We're not out partying. We don't need large money for entertainment. We don't need large money for travel to say the least we need survival mode but what the East Asian experience shows is that if you are aggressive in the public health response. The lockdown isn't for months. And here's the lockdown is sixty or ninety days depending on how well things are done and then it's possible to start going back to some kind of normal see with care but then with a greatly expanded public health effort in place which the US didn't have at the start of this APODACA which trump in his idiocy disdained. The man knows nothing. We should understand this. We need expertise right now. We've lost the vital weeks now. We need to build that capacity so that after sixty or ninety days we can start to lift the siege. And there's plenty of experience now of how to do this. We would only look. Learn an act. Jeffrey Sachs I wanted to ask you in terms of the actions in Congress. Oh right now you mentioned you were critical of the failure of Congress to act but isn't part of the problem here that rather than as you say a deal with appropriations that would help people stay in place and not fall further and further behind financially. The Senate has tried this huge package which obviously involves so much negotiations back and fourth between the Democrats in the House and the Senate that makes it far more difficult than for instance just to pass ninety days a full pay unemployment benefits for workers right now while they figure out the other aspects of what to do with businesses this attempt to create the the largest spending bill ever conceived in Congress all in one fell swoop. Like this is this going to adjust bog things down further on your completely right. The focus should be seriously on stopping the spread of the disease. Keeping people protected helping the health workers and especially helping the mayors and the governors around this country who are on the front line. There should have been immediately in emergency hundred billion dollars. Two hundred billion dollars for the governors and the mayors to quickly be able to get financial flows so that they can hire emergency social support. They can take whatever. Measures are available given the supply constraints for the hospitals for requisitioning a safe space for enabling there to be a viable and civilized shutdown. So that people who are in isolation can survive this period. That's the first order of priority. It should have been one day to recognize this. It should be supervised if we had a functioning. Cdc The Centers for Disease Control by CDC BY NIH by the National Academies of Science and National Academy Medicine. We could have improvised a kind of supervision. Not The dolt of a president who says I'm the one responsible my God. It's shocking with all the expertise in this country. But Congress went off on song kind of mind boggling economic excursion of two trillion dollars rather than focusing on the epidemic. They just don't understand what's actually happening. They should be listening to the mayors and the governors because those are the political leaders truly dealing on the front lines and they should be helping those on the front lines to keep the health workers alive to get the social support and to help people to stay home to shelter in place and to break the transmission and to stay safe. Personally those are the points of the shelter in place. Stay safe individually and.

president Congress United States Jeffrey Sachs China Washington Senator Rand Paul Senate Pool House Ilhan Omar Senate Cova Presley Centers for Disease Control New York World Health Organization's Co Labor Department Singapore Taiwan Hong Kong Jap scientific advisor
"national academy medicine" Discussed on Steve Forbes: What's Ahead

Steve Forbes: What's Ahead

05:59 min | 1 year ago

"national academy medicine" Discussed on Steve Forbes: What's Ahead

"Or special guests this week is Dr Gregory Pets Go. He's at Harvard Medical School. He's a researcher biochemist. He's held number positions in the medical world over the years. Specialty is something that people fear as they get older dementia most specifically Alzheimer's Disease Pets. Go makes the point point that. We've made very little progress fighting Alzheimer's since Dr Alzheimer's discovered this disease about over one hundred ten years ago. Why haven't we? We made progress. What hope do we have now? The news actually good were finally getting in the right direction. But I my special reads of the week. And what's ahead this time. We're combining both why because the Christmas season so instead of talking about about unemployment numbers unemployment filings brexit North Korean missiles and the like Oregon recommend a couple of things. One you can find anew you too. It's called a child's Christmas in Wales was written by Dylan Thomas. A Welsh poet died decades ago sadly at a young age from alcoholism but here his reading a child's Christmas in Wales. It is stirring and of course you must read Charles Dickens. Christmas Carol have been easier scrooge tiny tim and the like. And you're also be amused. Go Online and find commentary. Terry was Abanez. Groups released bad as Dickens. made him out to be. That'll give you a little diversion. No thing to watch over this coming week for the the holidays is a documentary. You can find it online. You can also find it in theaters. It's about the British army in World War One. It's called old. They shall not grow old. WHO's put together by Peter Jackson most famous for Lord of the Rings Jackson's grandfather died at a young age from gas gas attack in world? War One what he's done here was take footage of the war and the voices of soldiers of the war that were recorded by BBC Z.. In the early nineteen sixties. He's taken this footage and with great technology. Restored it to color and the sounds and voices of that period. It's a startling achievement. In gives what life was like and that hell of World War One which is churchill rightly said was Armageddon Hadden and profoundly changed the world and finally on a lighter note Forbes. This week is giving everyone the week off. Nothing much gets done between Christmas and new years. It's a paid holiday or by the companies. Do the same thing because you're not doing much work. Don't feel guilty. Just enjoy it. Finally those wonderful words peace on earth goodwill toward men and now my conversation with Dr Pets this go well today. We're pleased to have a special guest. Dr Gregory pets go Greg thank you so much for joining us. Thanks for having Eh Before we get into the topic of today the Great Thing that people still inordinately fear like we did cancer forty fifty years ago go before we really learn more about it and what we could do about it a little bit about your background You before we get to how you got into Alzheimer's and other other neurological disorders. What you might call the soul eater? Alzheimer's you also have been working obviously Parkinson's Al Less Lou GEHRIG's six disease but Your biochemist you're a member of the National Academy of Sciences National Academy Medicine and the American Philosophical Society. which which will touch on in a minute at the moment your professor of neurology at the Ann Romney Center for Neurological Disorders at Brigham and Women's Hospital and Harvard Medical School in the Boston before that you're director of the Alzheimer's Disease Research Institute of the Wild Cornell Medical College you have a distinguish wife Laurie? Glimcher I'm sure who was dean of Weill Cornell and his now. CEO of the Dana Farber Cancer Institute. You went to Princeton and you majored in classical literature. Originally I switched to chemistry at the and You're Rhode scholar but when you're going to Oxford you wanted to study epic poetry and you ended up with molecular biophysics enzymes in the light. So how did you go from homer to Molecular Biophysics so the would thing about a Rhodes scholarship is. It allows you to study anything you want for. Two or three years decided having switched to science as an undergraduate wrote that I would switch back to classical literature for a while and Redo mark. I love as it were So I applied to work with a man name. Maurice Bauer Sir Maurice Bar. who was at that time? The leading classicist in the world them was the vice chancellor of Oxford University which means he was running the place he was running the place and he he accepted me and so that was great at that time. All the Rhodes scholars travelled to England together. The thirty two of them in the United States going to lie I ship. I'll look exactly the Q two and not took about eight days and about somehow in the middle of the voyage. I don't know exactly when Maurice Bauer drop dead of a heart attack and I arrived in England with nobody to work for so I had done research work at Princeton with a man who was British and so I called him up from the United States and I said I got nobody to work for what should I do. And he said you should go over and see David Phillips in the Molecular Biophysics Program and do molecular biophysics and because I was running out of coins to put in the phone machine.

Alzheimer Alzheimer's Disease Molecular Biophysics Dr Gregory Dr Alzheimer Harvard Medical School Maurice Bauer Princeton Charles Dickens Peter Jackson United States researcher Molecular Biophysics Program Wales British army Dana Farber Cancer Institute England BBC
"national academy medicine" Discussed on C-SPAN Radio

C-SPAN Radio

02:54 min | 2 years ago

"national academy medicine" Discussed on C-SPAN Radio

"Bill and I was honored when the majority leader asked about a month ago if I would work together with him on a bipartisan Bill as two senators from tobacco states joining others to find a way to raise the rates the age from eighteen to twenty one ninety five percent of adult smokers begin smoking before the age of twenty one and the institute of medicine did research recently, now, the National Academy medicine showing that increasing the tobacco age to twenty one we'll overtime significantly reduce the number of young and young adults smoking, as well as smoking caused deaths improve public health, and saving lives. What is building our raises the federal minimum age to purchase any tobacco products from eighteen to twenty one. We direct the FDA to update their current regulations and enforcement structure for the current eighteen minimum and apply to it to the new twenty one h minimum we'd stakes pass their own laws raising the age to twenty one and required. The states enforce those laws. And meet other requirements as they currently do pursuant to the sign our amendment legislation would apply to all populations to all types of tobacco products, including e cigarettes, and as a father of a marine as a member of the Senate Armed Services committee. I feel strongly we should extend the same public health protections to members of the military as we do to their civilian counterparts. So I look forward to working with majority leader, and so many others on both sides of the I'll do a good thing for public health to do a good thing for our young people and raise the tobacco age to twenty one as the leader mentioned. There are other senators, senators round the young Senator shots urban Senator Murray who had invested their energies in this effort. We pledge to work together with all of them. We can come together to do this on behalf of our young people, and with that, Mr President, I thank you for the time. Thank you, to the majority leader in euless, look. Senator Tim Kaine democrat from Virginia earlier today on the Senate floor. You can continue following the Senate live on the free C-SPAN radio app. They're officially working on judicial nominations. The house. Also in today, a little bit later, and that also available on the free C span radio app or streamed at C span dot org. Just click on the, the life streams on this issue of raising the tobacco age, some public, health groups such as the American Heart Association have said at the tactic to avoid further regulation. The CEO of a Mantilla Brown put out a statement saying some of the Baco industry's largest companies had supported tobacco Twenty-one policies at the federal and state levels either dischord public relations win or weaken efforts to pass more restrictive policies WCS PFM Washington, the complete guide to congress is now available. It has lots of details about the house and.

Senate Senator Tim Kaine Bill Senate Armed Services committe Senator Murray Senator institute of medicine FDA American Heart Association euless National Academy Mr President Mantilla Brown CEO Washington Virginia
"national academy medicine" Discussed on KQED Radio

KQED Radio

10:57 min | 2 years ago

"national academy medicine" Discussed on KQED Radio

"And now and now as recreational marijuana is being legalized in states across the country, a closer look at the facts, you know, aggression violent crime psychosis. Schizophrenia, wait, what sounds like a sky is falling warning from the Reefer madness era. The New Yorkers Malcolm glad well is not saying those things are true, but others are. And he says, how do we know, Malcolm? Welcome back. Thank you been show. This is just so fascinating to read. You know, is it a gateway drug does it lead to things like car accidents? Not a lot is known about marijuana because it's been illegal for so long. Yeah. That's the paradox for years and years and years people who are advocating for the decriminalization of marijuana correctly pointed out that you can't start the drug again understand it unless you make it legal. We're not making it legal, and we have the opportunity to study it properly. But it's strikes me in some cases. We're not doing that. We're kind of jumping ahead of ourselves. Well for those who've been advocating for legal usage for maybe decades. Now, they are probably rolling their eyes as you know. But there's something that maybe they should here. Which is it's not the same marijuana. Yeah. That's puzzle. Number one, which is the kind of marijuana that people of my generation's smoked twenty years ago. Probably had. You know, one fifth of the THC levels that marijuana that's being sold now has in some and in some forms, but THC levels of marijuana are even higher like in some of the oils and things, and we don't really know a lot about what it means to crank up the active ingredient that high it's not necessarily a bad thing. But we knew very little going in to begin with. And we know even less about the new kinds of high potency marijuana that are being sold in many cases. Okay. Well, let's start with the reports that have come out much of the information is an over four hundred page report from the National Academy of medicine. They took a few years. It was released in two thousand seventeen. From your writing? It seems to tell us not much could go through the things that they are wondering about, but maybe don't have answers for soup before you any drug gets permitted to go to market basic questions have to be answered about its safety, advocacy. We don't know relatively basic questions about marijuana. Really simple. One is is it safe for pregnant women to smoke Hypo can see marijuana another good question would be what happens to people when they're high and they drive typically when they're high on the newest strains of marijuana, maybe they're fine. But having just been through, you know, pretty disastrous one hundred year long experience with drinking and driving. You would want to get our ducks in a row before we introduce another drug into the mix or a what age can someone safely start to smoke marijuana. What do we know about physically those crucial adolescent years? The answer not a lot. That's what the National Academy of medicine report was all about it was just saying, here's what we don't know. And it's more than you'd think. Here's a few paragraphs of your summing up. The report is it good for epilepsy insufficient evidence toretta syndrome, limited evidence, LS Huntington's and Parkinson's insufficient. Evidence anxiety, maybe depression, probably not and then it goes on to ask the questions that for which there are no answers some of which you already asked. But would impair academic achievement. Limited evidence goes on and on and on. So it makes the point that there's so much more that we don't know. But then you take a pivot here and you introduce us to reporter, Alex Berenson. And you say if we want to know about the worst case scenarios turned to his tell your children the truth about marijuana, mental illness and violence whose Alex Berenson, and what is this book? So experience is a former New York Times reporter who low see rights. Thrillers now, but his wife is a psychiatrist who deals with pretty troubled cases. And she got him interested in this question of what the potential dark side of marijuana might be. And he's written a book, which I think it's fair to describe as an alarmist manifesto about the worst case scenario for marijuana. Do I agree with Alex Berenson in totality? No. But I do think that when you don't know a lot, you know, what the parameters of the risks. Are he points to a bunch of interesting questions? Like, we know there is a link between smoking marijuana for prolonged periods at an increased risk of mental illness say that Malcolm, but I didn't know that. And as you say, the the National Academy report that we talked about one of its few unequivocal conclusions is cannabis use is likely to increase the risk of developing schizophrenia. Yeah. So they're talking about relatively prolonged use in a very specific and relatively small subset of the using population. Nonetheless, it is a real risk and the data that we have so far does appear to support that connection Berenson is really concerned about that. But I think that is clearly an area where we'd like to know more, right? I mean, it's not a trivial matter. We do know that cases of schizophrenia in countries that have seen increases in marijuana smoking in recent years have risen dramatically particularly in this country. We'd like to know how much of that is if any is to increase marijuana use. Well, is it also a chicken and egg question because maybe someone increases their marijuana use because they feel the onset of mental illness. Listen, they're trying to stave it off. I asked that question. But then I also see that Berenson's concern isn't, you know, young people, which is normally when you have onset of these kinds of mental illness. He's talking about stable middle class professionals. They've only used marijuana nothing else. And then they are developing diseases like schizophrenia later in life. Yeah. I mean, the very thing that makes marijuana so attractive to so many people that it's a powerful drug with a seemingly inexhaustible list of effects, many of them positive. Also makes it really hard to study. And also raises the possibility that it also along the way does some things that aren't that pleasant which is why we're back at the same position would really like to know more. What are the authors of the National Academy medicine study is someone I know she's always made the same argument. She's been trying to study this drug in a sophisticated thoughtful way for a long time, and it is nearly impossible. So that's the conundrum Marin, you know. Maybe we should just take a timeout. I don't know the barn horse thing. I'm not sure we mentioned that Berenson began this because his wife suggested something in what she was seeing was an increase in violence among young people who smoke marijuana, and he points to a twenty thirteen paper from the journal of interpersonal violence. They were looking at twelve thousand American high school students they expected to find more violence from those who were drinkers alcohol, and they presume that marijuana use would predict the opposite. In fact, the students used only marijuana was three times more likely to be physically aggressive than abstainers were. Yeah. So let's be clear that this part of Berenson's book using gauging in speculation. And I think he would be the first to say that these aren't definitive studies. They're very small a lot of what they're seeing is correlation Nakas Asian. So we have to be very very careful with it. But it goes back to this question. This is something you'd like to have answered let's study it figure that out and say, all right. We've now. Established or maybe it's confined to very specific population under specific circumstances fine. We'd like to know that. So we can move ahead. But what's not good is to know? So little that the best. We can do is have people right scary books. Right. Make us put our head in their hands and say, oh my God. What's happening? Well, just to touch on one less thing. The this notion of whether or not marijuana is a gateway drug it's long been claimed by the marijuana lobby not to be and then bears and looks at a study of identical twins in the Netherlands and in Australia to studies. And in fact, the twin that used cannabis before the age of seventeen when the other didn't was several times more likely to have an addiction to opioids. And he also Berendsen looked at states where there was higher cannabis use. And there was higher opioid addiction. Again, you know, we don't know if that's correlation or causes. We don't know. But it's certainly raises questions. This is the one that couldn't surnames many people the most. So our knowledge about this is miniscule a one point incredibly Berenson's book. He gets some statistician NYU to help him. They start trolling through state psychiatric databases. And that's how little we know that like guys who write thrillers are doing their own home. Studies. What if there's a threshold what if high potency strains are a gateway to more serious stuff? But low potency strains are not. And by the way, there's urgency on both sides of it. If marijuana is the opposite of a gateway drug, it prevents people from progressing to opiate addiction than it is essential that more states legalize it as soon as possible right by saying we need to know about more about the gate status at marijuana. We're not taking a position the point is we gotta know. Well, and we won't know until it's drug companies that are selling the marijuana because they are held liable for risk. And so they would do the studies. Yes, I think there is a kind of clear path to a middle ground here. Which is people who are advocates for marijuana have got. To get together with the scientific establishment. Sit down and say, what are the kinds of questions that we need to answer before we can safely. Go ahead. The overall cause of decriminalization is essential. Everyone is in agreement on that the status quo that we add for the last X number of decades was disastrous. The question is what is the most appropriate form that legalization ought to take? And how much of a regulatory burden off the advocates and marijuana use be required to carry smoke. I'm glad will will link you to his recent New Yorker article is marijuana safe. As we think, Malcolm, the answer to that question is we don't know. And we should thank you so much for talking to him.

marijuana Alex Berenson Malcolm National Academy of medicine National Academy cannabis New York Times reporter toretta syndrome NYU Berendsen Marin LS Huntington Parkinson journal of interpersonal Netherlands Australia one hundred year
"national academy medicine" Discussed on Here & Now

Here & Now

02:16 min | 2 years ago

"national academy medicine" Discussed on Here & Now

"And you as you write you say, the the National Academy report that we talked about one of its few unequivocal conclusions is cannabis use is likely to increase the risk of developing schizophrenia. Yeah. So they're talking about relatively prolonged use in a very. Specific and relatively small subset of the using population. Nonetheless, it is a real risk and the data that we have so far a does appear to support that connection Berenson is really concerned about that. But I think that is clearly an area where we'd like to know more, right? I mean, it's not a trivial matter. We do know the cases of schizophrenia in countries that have seen increases in marijuana smoking in recent years have risen dramatically tickly in this country. We'd like to know how much of that is if any is a tribute to increase marijuana use. Well, is it also a chicken and egg question because maybe someone increases their marijuana use because they feel the onset of mental illness, and they're trying to stave it off. I asked that question. But then I also see that, you know, Berenson's concern isn't, you know, young people, which is normally when you have onset of these kinds of mental illness. He's talking about stable middle class professionals. They've only. Only used marijuana nothing else. And then they are developing diseases like schizophrenia later in life. I mean, the very thing that makes marijuana so tractive to so many people that it's a powerful drug with a seemingly inexhaustible list of effects, many of them positive. Also makes it really hard to study. And also raises the possibility that it also along the way does some things that aren't that pleasant which is why we're back at the same position would really like to know more one of the authors of the National Academy medicine study is someone I know she's always made the same argument. She's been trying to study this drug in a sophisticated thoughtful way for a long time, and it is nearly impossible. So that's the conundrum Marin, you know. Maybe we should just take time out. I don't know at a barn horse thing. I'm not sure we mentioned that Berenson began this because his wife suggested something the what she was..

marijuana Berenson National Academy cannabis Marin
"national academy medicine" Discussed on Here & Now

Here & Now

03:06 min | 2 years ago

"national academy medicine" Discussed on Here & Now

"And what does this book so outs burns is a former near times reporter who mostly writes Villars? Now, but his wife is a psychiatrist who deals with pretty troubled cases. And she got him interested in this question of what the potential dark side of marijuana might be. And he has written a book, which I think it's fair to describe as an alarmist manifesto about the worst case scenario for marijuana. Do I agree with Alex Berenson in totality? No. But I do think that when you don't know allot if they know what the parameters of the risks. Are he points to a bunch of interesting questions? Like, we know there is a link between smoking marijuana for prolonged periods and an increased risk of mental illness now combat. I didn't know that. And you as you write you say, the the National Academy report that we talked about one of its few unequivocal conclusions is cannabis use is likely to increase the risk of developing schizophrenia. Yeah. So they're talking about relatively prolonged use in a very. Specific and relatively small subset of the using population. Nonetheless, it is a real risk and the data that we have so far a does appear to support that connection Berenson is really concerned about that. But I think that is clearly an area where we'd like to know more, right? I mean, it's not a trivial matter. We do know the cases of schizophrenia in countries that have seen increases in marijuana smoking in recent years have risen dramatically tickly in this country. We'd like to know how much of that is if any is a tribute to increase marijuana use. Well, is it also a chicken and egg question because maybe someone increases their marijuana use because they feel the onset of mental illness, and they're trying to stave it off. I asked that question. But then I also see that, you know, Berenson's concern isn't, you know, young people, which is normally when you have onset of these kinds of mental illness. He's talking about stable middle class professionals. They've only. Only used marijuana nothing else. And then they are developing diseases like schizophrenia later in life. I mean, the very thing that makes marijuana so tractive to so many people that it's a powerful drug with a seemingly inexhaustible list of effects, many of them positive. Also makes it really hard to study. And also raises the possibility that it also along the way does some things that aren't that pleasant which is why we're back at the same position would really like to know more one of the authors of the National Academy medicine study is someone I know she's always made the same argument. She's been trying to study this drug in a sophisticated thoughtful way for a long time, and it is nearly impossible. So that's the conundrum Marin, you know. Maybe we should just take time out. I don't know at a barn horse thing. I'm not sure we mentioned that Berenson began this because his wife suggested something the what she was..

marijuana Alex Berenson National Academy reporter Villars Marin cannabis
"national academy medicine" Discussed on a16z

a16z

09:04 min | 2 years ago

"national academy medicine" Discussed on a16z

"Hi, everyone. Welcome to the six z podcast. I'm all. So today, we have another one a special episodes with more special guests that was recorded during the recent J PM healthcare conference in San Francisco. The topic is all about diagnosing and treating cancer in pets to humans, but we also go into other topics relevant all kinds of health care and tech startup founders from data network affects to real world evidence and science to clinical trials to how to think about product and roadmap when building a bio company. So I are special guest is Amy Abernethy who has been named the new principal deputy Commissioner of the FDA the US food and Drug administration pending at its clearance. She is currently the chief medical and chief scientific officer at flat iron help. And we also have Christina Lopez CEO and co founder of one health which provides dogs access to the latest cancer treatments and in doing so contributes data to developing better future therapies for humans. She's the first voice you'll hear and finally we have as the general partner. Whore. Hey, Conde of the bio fund who will be moderating this episode, which ends with the question of what does it take to build bio companies, but begins with the question about why cancer in dogs and the link to humans, you know, dogs come from wolves, they call volved with us, right and similar to other animals. They are predisposed to cancer as we are very similar the idea. There is certain litters. I got Brad sadly are Brad with their beauty, and, you know, all sorts of great things, and sadly cancer, also, which is a disease of genetic origin mutation. Moreover, the EPA genetic factors the dogs as they shifted from safe farm animals to your home. They're also sharing often they eat the same food you do or eat. The scraps of what you eat obviously, they don't smoke, but they are exposed to secondhand smoking. They don't drink alcohol. So that one we can take off the table. But there's a lot of the environmental factors. And then if you factor in things like their lowered the ground there near golf courses, right? There's a plethora, and that's a more complicated. You know? I would have never thought of that. Yeah. Yeah. That's actually study is about that. Certain breeds near golf courses have had actually bladder cancer transitional cell carcinoma, it's action area of study. So it's it's actually a very compact way to look at you know, of snapshot of disease and health. Hopefully, also with those who give us their best right has the dog genome been sequins. So the genome of the dog was sequenced, but very recently, I believe it was two thousand ten two thousand five is very recent veterinary medicine has not had the resources and even from the anay level. What the mouse has been very well characterized and studied the dock really hasn't. So for me as a founder, I say massive this connect between the importance of the dog. The growing importance of the dog in our lives as a source of love, and then the lack of funding yet the families as you rightly put art spending in its cash and it's out of pocket and it's expensive. So let's talk about that six million cases the year of diagnosed cancer in the United States in dogs. How did they get diagnosed? And how did they get treated today? So the diagnosis is a historic path. So that's basically it stops there. They said that tuner do young who's took with all Aji that means you've gone to your vet. And you yes suspect that your dog has cancelled on the dogs will start lethargy doesn't want to eat is a big thing. This. I hear a law is my dog has come to the door every day and over the last week not once that that's a that's, you know, radical change of the behavior and from the data side what we're very interested in also is capturing the data from the families who this their studies all. So who will neglect themselves? You know, if you ask them to take diabetes medicine, they don't take it. They don't give you any feedback. But we'll be copiously observing the dog. And we'll give you huge like annotated reports of like, you know, fluffy didn't eat, you know, she loves this type of food. She usually runs to me at the door. All the little activities are not happening. So that that's a big that change of behavior is a big one. And and actually what we can capture their as disease progresses in real world. Evidence is is really fabulous to Amy. You've been a longtime adviser to one health. What is the link between dog cancer and human cancer? You know, it's really interesting. So first of all, I'm a melanoma, doctor by background. I wasn't human on college. It's definitely not a veterinarian college. Dogs get melanoma. They certainly do and to be honest before about five years ago. I didn't know that at all my interest in dogs, and sort of veterinarian college came as I started to understand the link between veterinary oncologist human oncology, and how understanding better and being better able to take care of pets. Could also help us understand and be better take care of humans and vice versa. It's what what is that link? What is the link between dog and human on college? So when Christine was talking about all of the different aspects that are contributors to a dog developing cancer, some of those are genetic and genomic aspects the fact that there's a lot of inbreeding some of them are exposure issues. So the fact that there's secondary smoke inhalation of the dog or exposure to pesticides. So as we think about the biologic pathways that ultimately the to the development of cancer, which is essentially cell division, gone awry. Those pathways are very similar between the dog and the human and further not only are some of those pathway similar actually at the biologic level within the context of the cell. There's pathways are very similar is that more similar say dog in human versus mouse and human or primate inhuman. Is there a reason why dog is a is a good model? So there's much more conserved biology between dog and human than mouse and him. And in fact, this now becomes a better model to think about for example exposure to a anticancer drug, and how that tumor is going to now melt in response to that drug or not. And so ultimately, if we think about human on college informing veterinary oncologist or vice versa. It is a better model system to look at the interrelationship between drugs, and whether or not the tumor is going to go away. So this is this is. For me. This is not common knowledge that there's such a tight link. What was the moment for you that made you connect those dots. I set on a component of the National Academy medicine sometimes called the institute of medicine. There's something called the National Cancer policy forum and a couple of years ago. We had a meeting on the conserved biology, but tween animals and humans and specifically dogs and humans and for me. Personally, the moment was I was sitting in this conference, which frankly, I was against having in the beginning. Because it seemed like it was extremists. And I'm sitting there, and the fact that if we could better understand how drugs perform and their impact on the tumor in dogs. We accelerate our understanding in humans was a huge aha moment. For me. They do we test human drugs dogs as part of the approval process, not standard. It's not necessarily standard of care. The whole. Message that really I walked away from that conference. With was that if we now embedded into the drug development process for human drug development, a better understanding of how those drugs performed in dogs. We could save many tens of millions of dollars in the development of each drug. Just by having better go no go decisions because we know how those drugs are working. And importantly, this is not just about testing and dogs where dogs are a essentially, you know, test models, but we don't care, but this is because we actually can also understand do these drugs. Help take care of pets. And can we ultimately treat veterinarian cancers in the same way, we can better treat human cancers yet so full circle? So something to that's really come up for us is both from the genomic side. But also immune illogically dogs that have natural disease. Spontaneous disease have an immune system. Also that's working, and that's a radical difference from the. Mm mice models that are much more engineered and sometimes they'll have an immune system to have the cancer. And then the ones that they really try to figure out to you know, have immune system and cancer last twenty days. He was incredible

cancer Amy Abernethy United States founder San Francisco Conde Christina Lopez chief scientific officer Drug administration general partner EPA FDA smoke inhalation Brad CEO institute of medicine principal co founder deputy Commissioner
"national academy medicine" Discussed on KCRW

KCRW

10:27 min | 2 years ago

"national academy medicine" Discussed on KCRW

"And Alex Berenson joins me now. Hi, hi, Madeleine. Thanks. Thanks for having me on great to have you. Well, I mean, I don't want to sound that I'm not taking this seriously. But how is this not the title of your book of like Reefer madness? Like pot is this dangerous drug that people used to talk about in the fifties? And that's pretty much mocked now. People think pilots benign, well, I would I would disagree with your intro. Honestly, there's been a tremendous amount of research done on the mental health consequences of using cannabis, and you know, in two thousand seventeen the National Academy medicine, which is a. Gold standard for giving health advice in the United States. It's a nonpartisan institute considered this issue, and they said that that using cannabis was likely to increase the risk of developing schizophrenia and other psychoses and that the more you used the greater the risk now. There are people out there. There's a there's a few people out there who who would say that that has not been proven to their satisfaction yet. But the mainstream consensus among physician, scientists who studied this the most and they've been studying it for a generation is that that is correct. That anybody who smokes weed as more likely to develop psychosis or schizophrenia? So so, okay. So the this very complicated. But if schizophrenia is essentially one way to look at it is that it's permanent psychosis. Now, it's more complicated than that. But for for for the purposes of of of this interview, let's let's define it as that schizophrenia is sort of the most severe form of psychosis. You can have. Have it lasts your whole life? It has terrible consequences. Most people don't work. They don't get married. Schizophrenia is a disabling disorder for most people who have it. If you use as an adolescent and you use regularly too heavily the best evidence is that you have a two to three times increase in developing schizophrenia at the same time. And I don't think even advocates for cannabis would disagree that cannabis can cause paranoia and psychosis temporarily even in healthy people people have bad trips there, you can go online and read, you know, endless stories about people who you know, who had panic attacks after using, you know, all the way up to psychosis. And so I though stories sort of get characteristics kind of a joke. They're not a joke. Psychosis makes people do bad things. So so this I'm not saying, by the way that everybody's going to have this or even a majority of people that are used are going to have this. That's clearly not true. But enough people are going to have this that it needs to be. Part of the conversation about legalisation. There's also evidence in this National Academy of medicine report that there is a statistical association between using cannabis and better cognitive performance of people who have already existing psychotic disorders. So so this gets into what schizophrenia is schizophrenic has positive symptoms, which are the hallucinations and delusions it has negative symptoms. That's like apathy and just inability to function, and it has cognitive symptoms, which are basically IQ in memory. They're they're it's possible that cannabis helps with high Q it's more likely that people who use cannabis and then go on to develop schizophrenia are different population than people who develop schizophrenia without using. But I guess what you're saying. Just to reiterate what you said earlier is that for the average teenager who does not exhibit symptoms of psychosis. Or schizophrenia if they are smoking marijuana take marijuana in any form. Regularly or heavily. They have a two to three times more higher chance of developing schizophrenia. That's I just wanna make sure that that's what the that's what the best evidence shows. Now again that also depends. If you start at thirteen it's a lot worse than starting at eighteen that is also clear, and by the way, it's not just that you're more likely to develop you're more likely to develop younger and younger development of schizophrenia is very strongly associated with a worse outcome for the disease. Okay. So aside from people who develop schizophrenia were prone to mental illness. What is the problem for everyone else? I smoke marijuana. Well, I think there are many people who can use marijuana without becoming schizophrenic or psychotic. There are many people use alcohol and don't have bad experiences. Although we know that on a population basis alcohol's associated with violence, it's associated with domestic violence. It's associated with bad outcomes. When you drive with with marijuana, you have some there's evidence of some of the same problems as well. As this tail risk issue of psychosis. I think as much as I am concerned about the real risks here, and they are real and and can be severe. I'm even more concerned with the messaging that advocates for cannabis are using which is this is medicine. This is harmless. This is beneficial those things are not supported by good evidence. But there are all sorts of cases, where cancer patients, for example, who are very sickened by let's say the effects of chemo. Therapy take cannabis and they get their appetite back or they don't have to take harder pharmaceutical drugs for for certain certain kinds of pain CBD's is is has been found to help people with epilepsy. They're all medical benefits. I I would say you basically gone through what the medical benefits are CBD's non intoxicating, and it doesn't seem to have an association with psychosis for most conditions. It's basically inexpensive placebo. And that's fine. We're talking about THC cannabis that's high in teach see and low and CBD which is what people use to get high. Really? There is very little evidence that those two drugs use anything or treat most of the stuff that that it's been speculated that they treat they appear to help as you say nauseous associated with with chemotherapy, they help pain. But in the long run, it's not clear. That they actually do much for for chronic pain. There's a really good study that came out from Australia last year that showed that people who had chronic pain and this covered fifteen hundred patients for four years. Those people who used cannabis for their pain one of actually reporting more pain at the end of the study, then the beginning and they had higher doses of opiates. You also talk about the increase in violence in various states that have legalized recreational marijuana. And you've made the link between the two. Corlett of and not causative. I mean, we don't know exactly what causes violence increased. So I think I think people have perhaps deliberately misunderstood the point that I'm making in the book before cannabis was legalized before voters in Colorado, and Washington and other states voted to legalize advocate said crime is going to go down. Police are going to have more time to focus on violent crime like murders. The black market will end crime will go down that is clearly untrue crime in the first four states to legalize has risen substantially since two thousand fourteen I'm talking about violent crime. I'm talking about murders and aggravated assaults. I am not saying that you can prove that that increase is related to legalization. It is too early to know. But do you suspect that it might have something to do with marijuana legalization? Because otherwise, why would you put it in the book? My point is that psychosis is a known risk factor for violence cannabis is a known risk factor for psychosis. There are clear cases where people used canvas over either short or long period of time and became violent. I talk about them in the book. So when we're looking at population level, data, it's very interesting and striking that on that that that the expected increase decrease in crime in those states, the decrease that advocates promised has not only not been the case. But that there's been an actual increase. But the vast majority of people with mental illness do not commit violent crimes at all are not violent at all that has majority of people with mental illness defined broadly. That is true for people with psychosis and untreated schizophrenia, there's a there's an appreciable risk that those people will become violent that is not to say that most of them are going to do that. They're not and when people are treated when they're taking their psychotics. They're relatively close. In risk to healthy people. But when they are not treated when they're having their first break, which is, you know, the first time you've become psychotic, and especially if they're using drugs. They are at much much higher risk. So do you agree with federal government that marijuana should be a schedule one drug then? I guess I don't think it should be a schedule one drug because I think research should be allowed. I think medical research should be allowed on marijuana. I'm not sure where to schedule it. But the the the scheduling it at schedule one doesn't mean that it's as dangerous as heroin. It's not it just means that there's no medical use. You can use cocaine a medical setting you can doctors actually do still do that sometimes and even methamphetamine, so that's why those are not schedule one drugs. There's gotta be some some better way to talk about marijuana than a schedule one drug, and and we need to figure out what that is. And what do you say to states and populations who are willing now to legalize it? Look legalization is a political question. And whether or not you're going to use the drug that's your choice. What I want is for there to be an honest discussion of the risks here. And and I personally think that legals Asian is gonna I mean, it's clear it increases access to the drug. It lowers the cost of the drug it overall. It drives use of the drug if you believe that these risks are real those are probably things we should be talking about before we decide to legalize. I think there's a I think there's a way to compromise on this. I think decriminalization where you're not sending anybody to jail for using cannabis makes a lot of sense. We're not gonna put forty million people in jail for using canvas. That's how many people used in two thousand seventeen but we need to figure out how to talk to people honestly about this. Thank you so much. Thanks for having me. That's Alex Berenson, his new book is called tell your.

cannabis Schizophrenia psychotic disorders marijuana Alex Berenson United States Madeleine National Academy National Academy of medicine Australia heroin Colorado Washington cocaine methamphetamine four years
"national academy medicine" Discussed on KCRW

KCRW

10:28 min | 2 years ago

"national academy medicine" Discussed on KCRW

"Violence and Alex Berenson joins me now. Hi, hi, Madeleine. Thanks. Thanks for having me on great to have you. Well, I mean, I don't wanna sound that I'm not taking this seriously. But how is this not the title of your book kinda like Reefer madness? Like, it sort of saying that this is pot is dangerous drug that people used to talk about in the fifties. And that's pretty much mocked now. People think potus benign. Well, I would I would disagree with your intro. Honestly, there's been a tremendous amount of research done on the mental health consequences of using canvas. And you know in two thousand seventeen the National Academy medicine, which is the gold standard for giving health advice in the United States. It's a nonpartisan institute considered this issue, and they said that using cannabis was likely to increase the risk of developing schizophrenia and other psychoses and that the more you use the greater the risk now. There are people out there. There's a there's a few people out there who who would say that that has not been proven to their satisfaction yet. But the mainstream consensus among the physician scientists who studied this the most and they've been studying it for a generation is that that is correct. That anybody who smokes weed is more likely to develop psychosis or schizophrenia. So so, okay. So this gets very complicated. But if schizophrenia is essentially one way to look at it is that it's permanent psychosis. Now, it's more complicated than that. But for for for the purposes of of of this interview, let's let's define it as that schizophrenia is sort of the most severe form of psychosis. You can have it lasts your whole life. It has terrible consequences. Most people don't work. They don't get married. Schizophrenia is a disabling disorder for most people who have it. If you use as an adolescent and you use regularly too heavily the best evidence is that you have a two to three times increase in developing schizophrenia at the same time. And I don't think even advocates for cannabis would disagree that canvas can cause paranoia and psychosis temporarily even in healthy people people have bad trips there, you can go online and read, you know, endless stories about people who you know, who had panic attacks after using. You know, all the way up to psychosis. And so I Don I those stories sort of get characteristics kind of a joke. They're not a joke. Psychosis makes people do bad things. So so I'm not saying, by the way that everybody's going to have this or even a majority of people that are used we're going to have this. That's clearly not true. But enough people are going to have that it needs to be part of the conversation about legalization. There's also evidence in this National Academy of medicine report that there is a statistical association between using cannabis and better cognitive performance with people who have already existing psychotic disorders. So so we so this gets into what schizophrenia is has positive symptoms, which are the hallucinations and delusions it has negative symptoms. That's like apathy and just inability to function, and it has cognitive symptoms, which are basically, I IQ memory. They're they're it's possible that cannabis help. With high Q, it's more likely that people who use cannabis and then go on to develop schizophrenia or different population than people who develop schizophrenia without using. But I guess what you're saying. Just to reiterate what you said earlier is that for the average teenager who does not exhibit symptoms of psychosis or schizophrenia if they are smoking marijuana or taking marijuana in any form regularly or heavily. They have a two to three times more higher chance of developing schizophrenia. That's I just want to make sure that that's what that's what the best evidence shows. Now again that also depends. If you start at thirteen it's a lot worse than starting at eighteen that is also clear, and by the way, it's not just that you're more likely to develop you're more likely to develop a younger and younger development of schizophrenia is very strongly associated with a worse outcome for the disease. Okay. So aside from people who develop schizophrenia over prone to mental illness. What is the problem for everyone else for smoking marijuana? Well, I think there are many people who can use marijuana without becoming schizophrenic or psychotic. There are many people use alcohol and don't have bad experiences. Although we know that on a population basis alcohol's associated with violence. It's associated with domestic violence is associated with you know, bad outcomes when you drive with with marijuana you have some of the there's evidence of some of the same problems as well as the tail risk issue of psychosis. I think as much as I am concerned about the real risks here, and they are real and and can be severe. I'm even more concerned with the messaging that advocates for cannabis are using which is this is medicine. This is harmless. This is beneficial those things are not supported by good evidence. But there are all sorts of cases, where cancer patients, for example, who are very sickened by let's say the effects of chemo. Therapy take cannabis and they get their appetite back or they don't have to take harder from cynical drugs for for certain certain kinds of pain CBD's is is has been found to help people with epilepsy. They're all medical benefits. I I would say you basically gone through what the medical benefits are CBD's non intoxicating, and it doesn't seem to have an association with psychosis for most conditions. It's basically inexpensive placebo. And that's fine. We're talking about THC cannabis that's high in teach see and low and CBD which is what people use to get high. Really? There is very little evidence that those two drugs use anything or treat most of the stuff that they that it's been speculated that they treat they appear to help as you say nausea associated with with chemotherapy, they help pain. But in the long run, it's not clear. That they actually do much for for chronic pain. There's a really good study that came out from Australia last year that showed that people who had chronic pain, and this covered fifteen hundred patients for four years, those people who used cannabis for their pain one of actually reporting more pain at the end of the study, then the beginning and they had higher doses of opiates. You also talk about the increase in violence in various states that have legalized recreational marijuana. And you've made the link between the two. Corlett of and not causative. I mean, we don't know exactly what causes violence. So I think I think people have perhaps deliberately misunderstood the point that I'm making in the book before cannabis was legalized before voters in Colorado, and Washington and other states voted to legalize advocates said crime is going to go down. Police are going to have more time to focus on violent crime like murders. The black market will end crime will go down that is clearly untrue crime in the first four states legalize has risen substantially since two thousand fourteen I'm talking about violent crime. I'm talking about murders in aggravated assaults. I am not saying that you can prove that that increase is related to legalization. It is too early to know. But do you suspect that it might have something to do with marijuana legalization? Because otherwise, why would you put it in the book? My point is that psychosis is a known risk factor for violence cannabis is a known risk factor for psychosis. There are clear cases where people used cannabis verse either short or long period of time and became violent. I talk about them in the book. So when we're looking at population level, data, it's very interesting and striking that on that that that the expected increase decrease in crime in those states, the decrease that advocates promised has not only not been the case. But that there's been an actual increase. But the vast majority of people with mental illness do not commit violent crimes at all are not violent at all the vast majority of people with mental illness defined broadly that is true for people with psychosis and untreated schizophrenia, there's a there's an appreciable risk that those people will become violent that is not to say that most of them are going to do that. They're not and when people are treated when they're taking their anti psychotics. They're relatively close. In risk to healthy people. But when they are not treated when they're having their first break, which is, you know, the first time he becomes psychotic, and especially if they're using drugs they are at much much higher risk. So do you agree with federal government that marijuana should be a schedule one drug, then I guess, I don't think it should be a schedule one drug because I think research should be allowed. I think medical research should be allowed on marijuana. I'm not sure where to schedule it. But the the scheduling it at schedule one doesn't mean that it's as dangerous as heroin. It's not it just means that there's no medical use you can use cocaine in a medical setting. You can doctors actually do still do that sometimes even methamphetamine so that's why those are not schedule one drugs. There's gotta be some some better way to talk about marijuana than a schedule one drug, and and we need to figure out what that is. And what do you say to states and populations who are willing now to legalize it? Look legalization is a political question. And whether or not you're going to use the drug that's your choice. What I want is for there to be an honest discussion of the risks here. And and I personally think legalization is going to. I mean, it's clear it it increases access to the drug. It lowers the cost of the drug it overall. It drives use of the drug if you believe that these risks are real those are probably things we should be talking about before we decide to legalize. I think there's a I think there's a way to compromise on this. I think decriminalization where you're not sending anybody to jail for using cannabis makes a lot of sense, we're not gonna put forty million people in jail for using cannabis. That's how many people used in two thousand seventeen but we need to figure out how to talk to people honestly about.

cannabis psychotic disorders Schizophrenia marijuana Alex Berenson Madeleine United States National Academy National Academy of medicine Australia heroin methamphetamine cocaine Colorado Washington four years
"national academy medicine" Discussed on News-Talk 1400 The Patriot

News-Talk 1400 The Patriot

12:20 min | 2 years ago

"national academy medicine" Discussed on News-Talk 1400 The Patriot

"Times in one thousand nine hundred and did a great deal of reporting on the drug industry, then he found a second career as a novelist, and you usually hear Alex on my show when we talk about who John weld books, but he's written a brand new book. Tell your children the truth about marijuana, mental illness and violence, which is an absolutely riveting must read book, which I read from DC to California yesterday. In the course of the seven hour flight from cover to cover, Alex Berenson, welcome to the Hugh Hewitt Show is great to be on with you. Thank you. Over the years. You've been such a you've been you always had me on about wells. And I feel like over the years sometimes gotten harder to have me honest. But but this is a whole new topic for us. In fact, it is so amazing to me that you wrote I'm gonna come to that in a second. But I don't want to bury the lead marijuana causes psychosis. Psychosis calls causes violence marijuana causes violence and people who are smoking it or parents of children who are smoking it need to know the science because when they know the science the use of marijuana drops dramatically as it did in Britain. How's that for a summary? That's a that's a very that's a very good summary. Yes. You you read the book, my friend. Oh, I read every page of the book, and I must tell you the fact that a black market has developed in the states where? Marijuana has been legalized was news to me the fact that there are all these awful crimes cited to the cannabis syndrome that is connected with psychosis. But I want to slow down. I why would you write this? I know your wife is a psychiatrist I know she matter-of-factly told you that marijuana is often involved in terrible crimes and mental illness and schizophrenia, and you went on this search. But why would you do this? You're very successful, novelist. Why would Alex Berenson undertake this? Well, I I, you know, I'd written all these wells books. And I think I was looking for a bit of a new challenge. And I you know journalism is my I love I think I'm actually a veteran journalist and novelist. And after after you know, Jackie Cohen does that for my wife told me this. I sorta look I was pretty skeptical and the more I read. This is unbelievable. This is a major public health story about a drug that is more and more heavily used that is that is becoming legal, but is likely to fully mingle nationally. And nobody knows this this connection, and it's not this is not open to debate. This is it is not open to debate that marijuana caused paranoia and psychosis and is not open to debate that psychosis is a huge risk factor for serious violent crime. Hey, it's it's it's like. I couldn't believe that. This issue was not getting more attention. You're going to face the same uphill struggle that those who warned about the connection between cigarette smoking and lung cancer faced fifty years ago. Moreover, you're up against an industry that's making billions, and as a politically unpopular position to say that marijuana is going to cause more psychosis in the people who are predisposed to it and breaks among those who have it as well as violent episodes of horrific nature, you're up against that. Have you already felt that? Yes, I have I've gotten a lot of, you know, a lot of nonsense on Twitter, and you know, a lot of disingenuous pushback from advocacy community. You know, what I I know what the science says, I talked to the, you know, the the leading position scientists on this issue. People have been looking at this for thirty years. And and and and they're all they're on the same page. And so I I've also heard from a lot of people a lot of a lot of parents whose who've already said, you know, what happened to my Tom. And I didn't I didn't really understand what was going on. Thank you. I thank you for putting contracts for me. I mean the books are not two days. Ran you know, five or six days ago. I'm shocked by how many people have said this to me and is said to me. Yeah. I don't want to overstate the fact that poses and schizophrenia. They're terrible. Not I mean, not just because they can cause they can cause violence, although boasts people don't become violent. If you know it increases your risk quite a bit. But we don't want to stigmatize everybody and say everybody's become but there are terrible diseases because terrible sufferings for the people who have them and for their families. I want to quote from early in the book, researchers agree the connection between marijuana and psychosis is not as strong as that between tobacco and lung cancer, the best guess is that adolescent marijuana use raises the risk of schizophrenia between two and six fold the great majority of teenagers who use marijuana will not develop the disorder. But your point is it is a huge risk. They're taking a huge risk. I kind of got my own analogy is if you were indifferent to your children driving after four or five drinks every night, you might be indifferent to their smoke. Marijuana. But if you're not indifferent to that, you shouldn't be indifferent to they're using dope. That's exactly right. That's a really good way to look at it. And, you know, host people we know cigarettes camper bay, but most of that risk that towards the end your life post, fifty five posts sixty if I had to choose to getting along cancer at sixty and and developing schizophrenia having having a psychotic break at twenty two and never getting my life back. There's my mind what I choose. Let me also go to the killer argument that you make. And I don't mean it literally kills people. But it does end the discussion if the marijuana lobby is so quote certain legalisation is not just the right public policy decision, but a moral imperative. Why won't they be honest about the risks close quote that is an unanswerable question. Alex berenson. Well, I think the answer is they want to get it legalized, and and I think that you know, I actually tweeted this a couple of days ago. The most powerful drug is denial. So you know, the cigarette companies as late as the nineties were arguing causation on lung cancer had not been proven. I mean that was it was a crazy crazy place for them to be, but they had money at stake. And they didn't care. I want to read again from page. Forty one today. Marijuana is far stronger regularly twenty percent to twenty five percent THC at that potency a single joint can contain more than one hundred milligrams of the drug and regular smokers sometimes coat their joints near pure THC oil extract further increasing the amount of THC the sharp rise in marijuana's THC content. Runs contrary to the argument of legalize IRS that banning drugs encouraging dealer to increase their potency discourages encourages dealers to increase their potency because they can then smuggled lessen the more concentrated substance demand from consumers not growers are dealers seem to have driven the move to higher. THC marijuana users prefer higher THC forms of the drug because they can. Smoke less than get high more quickly smokers want to party and get wasted. A grower told online magazine slate in two thousand thirteen article the legalize market has responded to their wishes. You know, if I told people that Fenton all was simply vote in the market responding to people's desire to have opioids. They would they would have acknowledged that people won't acknowledge this, Alex. No, they won't. And you know, and there's this marijuana marijuana's medicine, which has gotten worse and worse as we as as for profit companies have come in. You know, it's it's so strange that we pretend that this is not a recreational drug that this is you know, we alcohol has certain medicinal properties. But we don't say it's Madison it's not medicine and marijuana is not medicine and people want to use it to get high. Most of the time the National Academy of medicine this is on page. One twenty seven of tell your children the truth about marijuana, mental illness and violence. I just tweeted out the link you should go and get the book if you're a parent. You absolutely must read tell your children. The National Academy of medicine just last year or two years ago the association between cannabis use and the development of a psychotic disorder is supported by data sympathize and several good quality systematic reviews. The National Academy medicine wrote the magnitude of this association is moderate to large and appears to be dose dependent the primary literature reviewed by the committee confirms the conclusions of the systematic reviews after more of a year of working on this book. He wrote sometimes I felt like the only people who understand the link between marijuana and psychosis or the scientists who studied it the psychiatrist who traded it in the people who'd seen for themselves their family members, that's profound Alex. Well, thank you. I mean, that's why I wrote the book I want parents have informed conversation, and I want parents, look, I'm in my I'm in my forties. I smoked this stuff. A couple of times in college. And after it was not nearly as strong. I think there are a lot of parents in that position your weather in your thirties or forties. Certainly fifties. You know, you let it smoke some casually. And you just don't have any idea. What this stuff is right now. And there there are people out there saying, you know, what my kids smokes pot, you're as I try not to call a pot. It's a I treated with respect. Deserves its cannabis or marijuana. So they say my my my kid is using cannabis. That's okay. I'd rather have him or her use that alcohol that is exactly the wrong message right now with with this high THC stuff, no. Especially if your child is in is in his or her team. It's a crazy thing to allow or has any kind of pre psychotic tendency. And I just believe that any parent who reads tell your children from the truth about marijuana mental illness violence, we'll talk incessantly at their children about this. Because of the parents who failed to do so who ended up with psychotic children, and you detail some of those horrific stories. Yes. Yes. Psychosis really is a disease that destroys families it because it takes over the life. Not just the suffer. But of the parents and often of the siblings. It's it is a it's a terrible terrible illness, and and we don't have any cure for it. We have these sort of pretty lousy pharmaceuticals that that kind of knocked down the symptoms, but don't really cure, anybody and most people have it. They don't wind up getting married. They don't wind up having kids. It is. It is a life changing everybody in a life destroying really illness in its worst for last question. There are some people who have less function, and they can work a little bit. But but severe schizophrenia is a terrible. You don't wanna go near it. You should stop using marijuana today. If you're listening to me, and if you don't believe me read, tell your children so dispassionately argued Alex question is the book succeeding commercially. It's got to succeed commercially. It is actually somewhat somewhat to my surprise. I, you know, you don't know when something comes out what the reaction is going to be. And and I worried that people would just say without reading it. They would just dismiss it. But fortunately, Malcolm glad while at the New Yorker read it, and I found it compelling enough to write an article, and you know, he's probably arguably the most popular science journalist in the United States, you know, and the times and the Wall Street Journal. So this is something that has spanned that has crossed ideological Weinsberg responsible book mother Jones when when mother Jones and Fox News are both talking about something. And you I think that's a I think that's a pretty good sign for it. And so far it is selling copies. And I I hope that can teach. I concern is that the pushback, I know that you know, there's there's going to be people out there who really don't like it. But I just have to live with that. We gotta get a March on them. We really do. Tell your children the truth about marijuana, mental illness.

marijuana psychosis Alex Berenson schizophrenia cannabis Hugh Hewitt California John weld Twitter DC National Academy of medicine Jackie Cohen lung cancer Britain Wall Street Journal United States IRS National Academy Fenton
"national academy medicine" Discussed on 860AM The Answer

860AM The Answer

12:28 min | 2 years ago

"national academy medicine" Discussed on 860AM The Answer

"Berenson, former New York Times reporter award winning novelist. Born in New York attended Yale University. He joined the New York Times in one thousand nine thousand nine did a great deal of reporting on the drug industry, then he found a second career as a novelist, and you usually hear Alex on my show when we talk about his John weld books, but he's written a brand new book. Tell your children the truth about marijuana, mental illness and violence, which is an absolutely riveting must read book, which I read from DC to California yesterday in the course of the seven hour flight from cover to cover Alex Berenson, welcome to the Hugh Hewitt Show. Is it is great to be on with you. Thank you. Over the years. You've been such a. You've been you always have me on wells. And I feel like over the years. It's sometimes gotten harder to have me honest. But but this is a whole new topic for us. In fact, it is so amazing to me that you wrote I'm gonna come to that in a second. But I don't want to bury the lead marijuana causes psychosis. Psychosis college causes violence marijuana causes violence and people who are smoking it or parents of children who are smoking it need to know the science because when they know the science the use of marijuana drops dramatically as it did in Britain. How's that for a summary? That's a that's a very that's a very good summary. You read the book, my friend. Oh, I read every page of the book, and I must tell you the fact that a black market has developed in states where? Marijuana has been legalized was news to me the fact that there are all these awful crimes cited to the cannabis syndrome that is connected with psychosis. But I want to slow down. I why would you write this? I know your wife is a psychiatrist I know she matter-of-factly told you that marijuana is often involved in terrible crimes and mental illness and schizophrenia, and you went on this search. But why would you do this? You're very successful, novelist. Why would Alex Berenson undertake this? Well, I I, you know, I'd written all these wells books, and I think are looking for a bit of a new challenge. And I you know journalism is my I love I think I'm actually a veteran journalist and novelist. And after after, you know, Jackie Cohen is that for my wife told me this. I was pretty skeptical and the more I read this is unbelievable. This is a major public health story about a drug that is more and more heavily used that is becoming legal, but is likely to fully mingle nationally. And nobody knows this this connection, and it's not, you know, this is not open to debate. This is it is not open to debate that marijuana causes paranoia and psychosis, and it is not open to debate that psychosis say huge risk factor for serious violent crime. Hey, it's it's like. It's like, I couldn't believe that. This issue was not getting more attention. You're going to face the same uphill struggle that those who warned about the connection between cigarette smoking and lung cancer faced fifty years ago. Moreover, you're up against an industry that's making billions, and as a politically unpopular position to say that marijuana is going to cause more psychosis in the people who are predisposed to it and breaks among those who have it as well as violent episodes of horrific nature, you're up against that. Have you already felt that? Yes, I have I've done a lot of, you know, a lot of nonsense on Twitter, and you know, a lot of disingenuous pushback back from advocacy community. You know, what I I know what the science says, I talked to the, you know, the leading physician scientists on this issue. People have been looking at this for thirty years. And and and and they're all you know, they're on the same page. And so I I've also heard from a lot of people a lot of a lot of parents whose who've already written by this happened to my Tom, and I didn't I didn't really understand what was going on. Thank you for. You know, thank you for putting into contracts for me. I mean the books are not two days. Opposite ran Farber six days ago, I'm shocked by how many people have said this to me and and people suffer to set this to me. Yeah. You know, I I don't want to overstate the fact that psychosis and schizophrenia, they're terrible. Not I mean, not just because they can cause they can cause violence, although most people don't become violent. You know, it increases your risk quite a bit. But we don't want to stigmatize everybody and say everybody becomes, but there are terrible diseases that cause terrible suffering for the people who have them and for their families. I want to quote from early in the book, researchers agree the connection between marijuana and psychosis is not as strong as that between tobacco and lung cancer, the best guess is that adolescent marijuana use raises the risk of schizophrenia between two and six fold the great majority of teenagers who use marijuana will not develop the disorder. But your point is it is a huge risk. They're taking a huge risk. I kind of got my own analogy is if you were indifferent to your children driving after four or five drinks every night. You might. Be indifferent to their smoking marijuana. But if you're not indifferent to that, you shouldn't be indifferent to they're using doubt. That's that's exactly right. That's a really good way to look at it. And, you know, host people we know cigarettes camper bay, but most of that risk that towards the end of your life post fifty five post sixty if I had to choose between getting lung cancer at sixty and and developing schizophrenia having a having a psychotic break at twenty two and never getting my life back. There's no question in my mind. What I choose. Let me also go to the killer argument that you make. And I don't mean it literally kills people. But it does end the discussion if the marijuana lobby is so quote certain legalisation is not just the right public policy decision, but a moral imperative why won't they be honest about the risk close quote. That is an unanswerable question. Alex berenson. Well, I think the answer they want to get it legalized, and and I think that you know, I I actually tweeted this a couple of days ago. The most powerful drug is denial. So you know, the cigarette companies as late as the nineties were arguing causation on lung cancer had not been proven. I mean that was it was a crazy crazy place for them to be, but they had money at stake. And they didn't care. I wanna read again from page. Forty one today. Marijuana is far stronger regularly twenty percent to twenty five percent THC at that potency a single joint can contain more than one hundred milligrams of the drug and regular smokers sometimes coat their joints would near pure THC oil extract further increasing the amount of THC the sharp rise in marijuana THC content. Runs contrary to the argument of legalize IRS that banning drugs encouraging dealer to increase their potency discourages encourages dealers to increase their potency. Because they can then smuggled lessen the more concentrated substance demand from consumers not growers or dealers seem to have driven the move to higher. THC marijuana users prefer higher THC forms of the drug because they can. Smoke less and get high more quickly smokers want to party and get wasted. A grower told online magazine slate and a twenty thirteen article the legalize market has responded to their wishes. You know, if I told people that Fenton all was simply the market responding to people's desire to have opioids. They would they would have knowledge that people won't acknowledge this, Alex. No, they won't. And you know, and there's this the marijuana as medicine which has gotten worse and worse as we as as for profit companies have come in. Right. You know, it's it's so strange that we pretend that this is not a recreational drug that this is you know, we we alcohol has certain medicinal properties. But we don't say it's Madison it's not medicine and marijuana is not medicine and people, you know, want to use it to get high. Most of the time the National Academy of Madison this is on page. One twenty seven of tell your children the truth about marijuana, mental illness and violence, I tweeted out the link you should go and get the book if you're a parent. You absolutely must read tell your children. The National Academy of medicine just last year or two years ago the association between cannabis use and the development of a psychotic disorder is supported by data sympathize and several good quality systematic reviews. The National Academy medicine route the magnitude of this association is moderate to large and appears to be dose dependent the primary literature reviewed by the committee confirms the conclusions of the systematic reviews after more of a year of working on this book, you wrote sometimes I felt like the only people who understand the link between marijuana and psychosis or the scientists who studied it the psychiatrist who treated it and the people who'd seen for themselves their family members, that's profound Alex. Well, thank you. I mean, that's why I wrote the book I want parents have informed conversation, and I want parents, look, I'm in my, you know, I'm in my forties. I smoke the stuff a couple of times in college. And after it was not nearly as strong. I think there are a lot of parents in that position your weathering, thirties or forties. Certainly if you're fifty. You let us smoke some casually. And you just don't have any idea. What this stuff is right now there are there are people out there saying, you know, what my kids smokes pot. You're as I never I try not to call a pot. It's a drug treated with respect that it deserves its cannabis or marijuana. I'm so they say my my my kid is using cannabis. That's okay. I'd rather have him or her use that than alcohol that is exactly the wrong message right now with with this high THC stuff, no. If your child is in is in his or her team a crazy thing to allow or has any kind of pre psychotic tendency. And I just believe that any parent who reads tell your children. The truth about marijuana, mental illness and violence. We'll talk incessantly at their children about this. Because of the parents who failed to do so who ended up with psychotic children, and you detail some of those horrific stories. Yes. Yes. It is closest really is a disease that destroys families it because it takes over the life not just of the suffer. But of the parents and often of the siblings. It's it is. It's a terrible. It's a terrible illness. And and we don't have any cure for it. We have these sort of pretty lousy pharmaceuticals that that kind of knocked down the symptoms, but don't really cure anybody. And most people have it. They don't wind up getting married. They don't wind up having kids. It is it is a life changing and life destroying really illness in it's worse for last question. There are some people who ever, you know, less severe forms of making function, and they can work a little bit. But but severe schizophrenia is a terrible. You don't wanna go near you should stop using marijuana today. If you're listening to me, and if you don't believe me read, tell your children so dispassionately argued Alex last question is the book succeeding commercially. It's got to succeed commercially. It is actually somewhat somewhat to my surprise. I, you know, you don't know when something comes out what the reaction is going to be. And and I worried that people would just say without reading it. They would just dismiss it. But fortunately, knock I'm glad while at the New Yorker read it, and you know, compelling enough to write an article, and you know, he's probably arguably the most popular science journalists in the United States, you know, and the times and the Wall Street Journal. So this is something that has that has crossed ideological ones responsible book mother Jones when when mother Jones and Fox News are both talking about something. And you I think that's a I think that's a pretty good sign for it. And so far it is selling copies. And I you know, I hope that can teach. I is that the push back. I know that you know, there's there's gonna be people out there who really don't like it. But I just have to live with that. We get a March on them. We really do tell your children the truth about marijuana middle. Listen violence by Alex Berenson is..

marijuana Alex Berenson psychosis schizophrenia cannabis lung cancer New York Times New York Yale University John weld Hugh Hewitt reporter Twitter California Jackie Cohen DC Britain Farber Tom
"national academy medicine" Discussed on C-SPAN Radio

C-SPAN Radio

13:57 min | 2 years ago

"national academy medicine" Discussed on C-SPAN Radio

"I think that we have been very willing to pay for that. And you don't see rebates and those kinds of drugs, you just don't that's not in part d less than ten percent of those drugs are on rebates. So that I think is quite frankly, a smokescreen as to the really true net cost issue that we're dealing with not that it doesn't come up in conversation. You're talking about the rebates rebates back to the day drugs. The rebates are less than ten percents significant. But I'll challenge you on insulin insulin, it may be one hundred dollars net cost, but a four hundred dollar cost. Now industries trying to make a Lisa industry, but I can tell you my diabetics. There's a guy in Lafayette, Louisiana is wears me out because his daughter the diabetic is. Pain so much. So there are some part d drugs in which rebates an incredible percent of that list price. And if the patients in the portion where she is paying one hundred percent, she's getting hosed and she's getting I say. Net lowest cost and. Also, administer place of administration another issue that they should that should be irrelevant right in terms of total cost. I would agree with you. I mean, we completely support. The issue of gets the lowest net cost. I want to ask one last question. I wanted to have time to open up to the entire audience. I'm sure they have lots of questions ask the moderator is Dr Victor he is president of the National Academy of medicine, but I don't want to a far away from the conversation of innovation because today we heard about the Kantian ovation. And you're right, Ken. I mean these miraculous advances, which is amazing. And we did talk about the sustainability of this approach, and you know, with all agree that innovation moving at reputation. We've never seen as fast as this before. Right. So the question is can catch up with in fact, this paceman ovation can we meaning setting? Prices cetera. So this comes back to what's value based pricing. And the earlier panel talk about you know, what's cost effective. Let's look at each one and measure to one another what other mechanism we can use to at least begin to have some way to assess what in fact should be the right cause for major innovation. That's saving lives or maybe a me too. Right. So how do we do that? I think there's a there's a couple of ways to think about that. And and I'll note that I spent last weekend at a cancer hospital in Florida or my dad's been recently diagnosed and appreciate not just the fact that his physician took the time to walk through the options, but that there were options, and that I was able to go look at the cross trial and other evidence that that that she cited as to why she was choosing the Roger and that she was choosing. So we want to be able to continue to bring forward innovation. I also want to have the ability that when I helped my. Parents choose a plan every year, they have the ability to choose a plan that's going to work for them. And the Medicare Advantage announcement is done against the backdrop if people don't like the plan that they chose to have until the end of the end of March to say that what you said you were going to do may not be what is actually happening or isn't working for me to we're going to go somewhere else. I value based purchasing has a number of different meanings. I tend to prefer outcomes based contracting as it relates to the conversation that we're having here, and we don't believe that outcomes based contracting on it own is a panacea to the concept of drug pricing. I think we do recognize that some of our rules may be in the way of bona fide contracting negotiations between plans and manufacturers that may want agree on a bona fide therapeutic outcome and choose to contr. Based on that. But because of how our rules work at may affect their other price reporting mechanisms we're looking at ways to get the government out of that. But like choice and competition, we believe that the private sector needs the tools that that they have to be able to evaluate technology, and there's a fear that if the government tries to take on health technology assessment itself, it leads to that. This is the government making a choice. And this is the government ultimately denying access to a drug that someone like my mom or dad could name. And now the way of thinking about it, though is increasingly in cancer. We're actually looking at the genetic makeup of the persons to marry weather. It's an appropriate medicine for that patient, and that's another way of demonstrating value another way of reducing costs the system in addition to developing medicines that have lesser toxicities and require less hospitalizations. So I agree with the value based contracting thing, but it's not the only way which we can figure out value. If we can more precisely target medicines to the people for whom they will work in hepatitis C chancer, and those kinds of things then we could actually also demonstrate greater value system. Dominy sauce. We'll just quickly. Yeah. It's come up a little bit before. But to be one of the. Important aspects of value judgments is what is the impact of the treatment today over future costs. There's a great deal of leverage of medications. There were something that might be rather expensive today will produce a net gain discounted even back. Today's. Fun. So. The trouble art committee with value based pricing. Was it? Although we all liked the idea could exceptionally. That's basically the way you buy a car or bicycle or an apple. The difficulty determining value. When people's lives are involved. Even quality adjusted or what have you just just terribly difficult. What if they were a totally independent neutral evidence based organization that says? You know, you guys know one. That that you know, when you have this amazing Coty that comes through that one does really a deep dive assessment with economic logging and to at least recommend. Some organizations do so very independently to say his way, which say this should be have Billy to compare. If you will what's their what's in this. I mean is that something that could be considered a two track process to kind of take what my co-panelists have already said Australia has a way of evaluating medications. And if they decide that the medication doesn't really bring value, you can still get it. But you just have to pay the difference. So if there's a combo drug of over the counter Motrin with over the counter pep in which would cost you twenty bucks a month. But the as a combination is going to cost you two thousand well, if you wanna pay a nineteen thousand eight hundred and eighty dollars, whatever it is nine hundred dollars, then you can still get if you wish Republican Senator Bill Cassidy on the other hand, I think used to treat Crohn's patients. Now, there's someone in this room has Crohn's disease and you're in this room. You're not in a hospital. And it used to be that the major causes surgery. And a Crohn's patient was previous surgery, and you keep slipping away a portion of her bowel portion portion of about because you could not control the inflammation and give her high dose steroids, an Eugene, didn't she just a mess? And now, I take an infusion once a month, and they're great. They're great talk about value. And they would figure that out just like that. You don't need National Academy medicine to do that. Because you have the insurance company saying, wait one hospitalization pays where I have a lot of infusions. We're going the infusion route. So I think a two track period night. And I applaud the administration I think we can also rely upon market phenomena. I'll tell you it is amazing. The databases that once they're cross together can give you information regarding patient outcomes. And so it's somewhat fragmented at this time when you've tried to tackle this issue. I totally agree. It's fragmented. Yeah. So I'm just what he's saying that why shouldn't be a place whatever the mechanism is where we actually can look at it together. I agree with that. But for example, I see Rebecca the audience. I did maybe she's gone, but she's over there. So we've been working in Louisiana what if I get extra amount of dollars? And we treat all of our hepatitis C patients who are Medicaid and imprisoned. And what would that do to real cost? Now, I know how to do a spreadsheet I've put it together. You know, and using Medicaid data which was difficult to come by. But Medicaid data is different than your data. Which is so the payer mixes something is going to be very hard for anybody unless they are all seeing all knowing and that turns out to be God in order to get everybody's data in a way that would be effective not just for Medicaid, but also for Medicare and also for prison system. So I do think that at some point you got to introduce it into the real world and introducing it into an MA plan may work. Well, we to get there. Yes. Okay. Questions. Art Kelvin uniformed services university, just two quick points. One. I haven't heard it from the panel. But just remind Joel that a lot of high value discoveries that are funded are funded by taxpayers at the NIH, the DOD and through American academia, so tax payers have a lot of skin in this game already not knocking because you all helped bring it to market, but a lot of those game changing discoveries already paid for by the American people second. Every system is designed to get the results it gets and the way the market works in biomedical innovation today, you only make money by charging higher prices in the product, you're replace it. If that was true and consumer electronics iphone would be a two hundred and fifty thousand dollars. So one thing rand wrote about this in two thousand thirteen if we rethink how we run the markets in biomedical research and reward innovation. It lowers prices and gives rewards to the public. I think American ingenuity will knock this thing out of the park. But until we do we're going to continue to try to replace drugs were they more expensive drug technology with more expensive technologies we need to change the underlying market signals. Like y'all I believe in the market, but we have a market the rewards higher. Prices is set of a market that rewards better value. I'd be interested in what y'all think about both of those anyone can make a couple of comments is certainly it is definitely the case that everything. Thing that we do is based on basic research, which is essentially provided by NIH the other side of that is as I was saying about these immuno oncology drugs, they come after decades of translational research inside pharmaceutical company. So no question without someone understanding as we just saw the honcho just won the Nobel prize for the discovery of PD what, but it took forever for some companies, then to say, how do you translate that into practice their thousands of those targets out there? And I mentioned before we fail ninety to ninety five percent of the time because those targets can't be reduced to practice. So the five percent are what we actually grain to market. So I don't disagree with you. But don't underestimate how much it costs to do the translational part of the research. And then on the last point that you made I agree with the thrust of what you're saying. But I think we also have to look at the total cost of care is not just a question of whether drug. A is more expensive than drug be? It's also as we were just saying whether or not that drug when introduced into clinical practice reduces the holistic cost of the disease again, I wanna come back and say we're having a discussion today about whether we can afford the newest cancer drugs. The question also is can we afford cancer because cancer the natural disease? Progression has a much higher cost of the medicines. That is I agree that we need to find innovation. But when we have new things added to therapeutic categories costs should go down. So this is the only industry where we have not seen that. And we still see price increases for now improved outcome are affected that. So I think that's where I would disagree. Probably with my colleague here is that I do believe that we across many categories today should see price decreases much more dramatically than we've seen with the introduction of combat competition scale Boudreau is president and CEO. Anthem. And to that end. I think we are trying to send a signal with our payment rules to help pull through lower cost options. Like biosimilars? We are also in the questions that were asking about rebates and about regulatory shenanigans about patent thickets trying to get exactly to the to the answer that that Gaels describing about why some newer lower costs technology may not be taken advantage of in the marketplace. Cussin' over there. Yourself please can guard the near applied statistician my husband who's also here today. And I attended a recent national academies workshop on combination therapies..

Louisiana Medicaid president and CEO NIH Crohn Lafayette Pain Lisa industry cancer Dr Victor Nobel prize Crohn's disease Ken Australia National Academy of medicine Senator Bill Cassidy Florida Cussin Gaels apple