This One Is For the Fearless

Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
This is Twists. This Week in Science, episode number ten
thirty two, recorded on Wednesday, October first, twenty twenty five.
This one is for the fearless. Hey everyone, I'm doctor
Keik and tonight on the show we will fill your
head with lizard snakes, swimming cats, and some shocked crabs.

(00:25):
But first, thanks to our amazing Patreon sponsors for their
generous support of Twists. You can become a part of
the Patreon community at patreon dot com. Slash This Week in.

Speaker 2 (00:36):
Sciences claimer disclaimer disclaimer, the world lost a good one today.
This week Science mourns the passing of doctor Jane Goodall,
primatologist and conservative conservationist extraordinaire. For over six decades, she
blurred the lines between human and chimpanzee into behavior and emotion.

(01:02):
The first to reveal tool use by non human hands,
she dared to identify emotional states in chimpanzee eyes and
kinship in chimpanzee communities, concepts so foreign to the scientific
dogma at the time, and yet so apparent to the young,
open minded observer. She showed us that to understand nature,

(01:23):
you must respect it. To save it, you must fight
for it from the jungles of Tanzania to the halls
of the United Nations, from bare bones research huts to
the Jane Goodall Institute. She leaves behind a scientific movement.
We all live in a world forever changed by one
woman's courage to listen to the voices of the wild,

(01:44):
forever missed but never forgotten. Here on This Week in Science,
coming up next, I've.

Speaker 3 (01:53):
Got that kind of mind. I can't get enough. I
want to learn everything. I want to fill it all
up new discoveries. It happened every day of this week.
There's only one place to go to find a knowledge
and sek I want.

Speaker 4 (02:07):
To know what's happened. Has happened. Science has happened. That's
happened Science.

Speaker 2 (02:24):
Good science to your Kiki and Blair, and.

Speaker 1 (02:28):
A good science to you too, Justin Blair and everyone
out there. Welcome to another episode of This Week in Science.
Before we get into the stories of the week, I
want to just continue that incredible disclaimer and our our
thinking of this amazing woman who really, like you said,

(02:53):
changed the way that science was done, the way that
we looked at animals. Uh, there were researchers we kind
of studying.

Speaker 2 (03:01):
Granted, Here on this show because we have a weekly
dose of this from Blair. Hearing on this movement, uh,
for us here on the show every week for years,
and so to a lot of us, you know that
hearing the discoveries early discoveries of Jane Goodall sound like

(03:22):
is another one off from Blair. But it was at
the time when it was it was literally nobody believed
that chimpanzees or even other animals.

Speaker 1 (03:33):
At all had individuals, And like, now Blair you can
report and we can talk about well, duh, another another study.
Never But as a zoologist and as somebody who has

(03:53):
loved animals your whole life, honestly, I think, I mean,
I know how Jane Goodall impacted me as a few
male scientist good Lord birds are individuals. Do who knew
news at eleven? But for yourself, do you have any
stories or do you have any thoughts about how important

(04:15):
she was to you?

Speaker 2 (04:16):
Yeah?

Speaker 5 (04:17):
I mean yeah, it's I remember watching kind of specials
on PBS as a kid and her talking about what
it was like to be, first of all, to be
a woman in a male dominated field originally right, but
also to do these kind of you know, to your
your point in the name of the episode, these fearless things,
these things that seemed bonkers to everyone else around her.

(04:40):
I'm gonna go live with a bunch of chips, like what.
But I actually I was lucky enough to meet her once.
I used to go to this conference every year called
the Wildlife Conservation Network Conference the Expo in San Francisco,
And when I worked at the Zoo and I ran
teenvaln Your programs, I actually would bring teen volunteers with

(05:02):
me and they would table and help out at the event,
and then we would always get to go see her
keynote at the end of the day as kind of
a thank you for volunteering at the event, and hearing
her speak would always kind of give me goosebumps and
a nice kind of injection of hope, which is something
that was always needed in the conservation movement, but gosh

(05:24):
darn lately it's really been needed, right. But I think
the thing that was so impactful to me was actually
watching these teen volunteers listen to her, because you would
kind of watch they'd kind of be messing around, maybe
messing on their phones, maybe fidgeting whatever, and then throughout
the course of her keynote, they would kind of get
more and more interested, and towards the end you might

(05:47):
actually see a couple of them holding hands or hugging
each other or really feeling moved by her because she
was such She was so good at like capturing the
emotions of a moment and conveying things in a way
that seemed a matter of fact, but where there was
always hope. And I think that's I will always remember

(06:11):
watch watching that, watching these teens listen to her speak
at like eighty something years old and inspire a whole
nother generation with just you know, half an hour of
her day. It was it was really special.

Speaker 1 (06:26):
And I love that, you know, for her whole life,
she has not just you know, she started with curiosity
and a sense of adventure, a spirit of adventure. She
wasn't super wealthy. You know, she did have you know,
good family stuff, but she had to buy her own
ticket to Africa. And she got a job working for

(06:46):
Leaky and she was more than a secretary, and he
gave her this role. And I love the part of
the story is that she was supposed to have a chaperone,
and so she brought her mom and now so the
two of them, her and her Mom, are out there
watching the chimpanzees, trying to feed them and trying to

(07:11):
make them, not make them at least accept them as
parts of the environment and not to be feared. And
they were. They were able to She was able to
make advances that nobody else did before because she looked
at things in a different way and that is eternally important.

(07:33):
And as a woman in science, Oh my goodness, I
love that. She told Mom, it's a chaperon, so good.
What better chaperone? Mama bear, you're here, okay. But then
through her life she reported also she wrote about her

(07:54):
experience going to one of the conservationist meetings, you know,
an annual conference, and really seeing the plight of the chimpanzees,
the plight of these animals that were being killed for
various reasons. Hey, people, what's up? And she said, Oh,
I know a lot about these animals. I shouldn't just

(08:15):
be focusing on learning about them. I should take what
I know and try and make this important to people.
And that was the beginning of her activism and her
work to really work to create a better world for
humans and chimpanzees.

Speaker 3 (08:32):
Right.

Speaker 1 (08:34):
So, anyway, I don't know how many of you out
there have memories of Jane Goodall, or if you do
remember Jane Goodall from anything, but a great woman has
passed and her impact is going to last so so
long after she's gone. It's changed so many things. I

(08:56):
love it. We can all make an impact every day.
Little bit yeah kindness. Talking about science. We've got an
episode of this week in Science ahead of us right now, everyone,
Thanks for joining us. Lizzie, I've got science news coming up.

(09:16):
Microbes and mouse moms, old analyzed, junk food memories or not?
And a lizard snake. What do you have justin?

Speaker 2 (09:30):
I've got formative fun guy, good news about cancer rates
and robot double agents.

Speaker 1 (09:44):
Double agents agent.

Speaker 2 (09:47):
Robot that came in from the cold.

Speaker 1 (09:50):
This is the movie movie at eleven Blair. What's in
the animal corner?

Speaker 5 (09:55):
Well, I'm very excited to hear about the lizard snake.
I'm and needles about that because that just sounds like
a legless lizard. I brought swimming jaguars. I brought the
resurrection of the Dodo and female crabs. They're electric.

Speaker 2 (10:13):
Wait did they do that? Is the DoD back or
is it news of eleven? Oh god, it's a teaser
I gotta wait to.

Speaker 4 (10:20):
Talk about.

Speaker 5 (10:22):
If I gotta wait for the lizard snakes, you gotta
wait for the Dodo.

Speaker 2 (10:26):
All right, that's fair, that's fair.

Speaker 1 (10:29):
We're all waiting for each other's stories tonight. I'm so excited,
and I hope everyone out there is as excited as
we are to hear each other talk about science. All right, everybody,
this is this week in Science. If you really enjoy
the show and you are not yet subscribed, or you
think somebody should be, make sure that you're sharing and

(10:49):
you are subscribed and are finding us on your favorite
podcast platform, YouTube, Facebook, Twitch, we're there as well, and
we have a website twist dot org. We are on
some social medias. Thank you to Foda for making sure
that happens every week, even when we don't do the show.
He helps out with that and make sure there is

(11:10):
social media out there. But yeah, time for the science.

Speaker 2 (11:15):
It's brilliant.

Speaker 1 (11:21):
Week ago, two weeks ago, whatever Mars right, there was
the whole like, oh, there's nodules on Mars might be life.
There have been big questions though, about other places in
the Solar system that could harbor life, like the moons
of Saturn. A particular moon called Enceladus has been looked

(11:42):
at over and over again, considered to possibly have a
cold not water, but maybe like ethanol, ethane, methane kind
of sub ocean beneath the ice and where there is
water as well, and there's due to the tidal and
gravitational movement of the Moon's around Saturn, not that the

(12:05):
Enceladus actually has any volcanic activity of its own, but
the squishing and moving of the moon just because of
the fact that Saturn is so big and it's like
calum mirror and is like grabbing onto Enceladus, and Enceladus
is like, no, I'm going to stay in my orbit,
and so it's like all squishy, squishy, And in the
meantime what happens is the inside of the moon heats

(12:26):
up and so you have the potential for an icy
outer shell with a liquid inner ocean. And Enceladus has plumes,
these cracks that appear because of the squishy squishy and
so the plumes. Back years ago, to remember the thing
called Cassini, that mission.

Speaker 2 (12:49):
Oh yeah, of course, yeah.

Speaker 1 (12:51):
Into Saturn, dove into to Saturn and made me cry.
I cried a lot that day. Anyway, Cassini the data
lives on. We have had reports from Cassini for years,
people continuing to go through the data. Earlier, Cassini had

(13:13):
gotten data from the e ring of the rings of Saturn,
and there were these hints. They were like, oh, we
found stuff that's organic, these organic molecules. But they've been
here in the ring for a while, so these are
like half hour to like days old. They were very old,

(13:34):
so they could have been irradiated by solar rays also
by the electromagnetic field of Saturn itself. But then there
are these plumes, and Cassini actually dove through the plumes
of Enceladus at one point and in doing that recorded
a bunch of stuff that has been finally looked at

(13:56):
and reported on, and researchers are have just published in
Nature Astronomy their analysis of that plume, which has not
been sitting out in space in a ring for any
period of time. It is just moments sold ejected from
that watery interior under the ice.

Speaker 2 (14:14):
Show squishy squea squishy.

Speaker 1 (14:20):
Yeah. Anyway, my sound effects are not great tonight.

Speaker 5 (14:27):
Nature is any of the show. There's time you can
turn it around.

Speaker 1 (14:31):
I can turn the sound effects around for sure. Nature Astronomy.
The paper published today detection of organic compounds from freshly
ejected ice greens from Enceladus's ocean. They have they have
using the Cosmic Dust Analyzer SPECTRA revealed previously unobserved molecular

(14:51):
fragments identifying aliphatic, heterocyclic ester alkenes, ethers, ethyl's, and tentatively
nitrogen and oxygen bearing compounds. According to the abstract, so
finally we have the potential for organic molecules that could

(15:14):
especially with the nitrogen, you know, the I mean all
this stuff, maybe there could be stuff microbes mhm living
in that.

Speaker 2 (15:25):
That's like.

Speaker 5 (15:27):
The equivalent of like like scooping out ocean water and
saying there's some environmental DNA. I didn't get a fish,
but I got you know, some fish, some fish juice
in the ocean. I'm saying, I'm saying it's analogous. It's
not the same. I'm not saying that you got DNA

(15:49):
from the bacteria, but I'm saying, like, that's basically what
you're doing, right, is you're is you're getting an artifact
of something that could indicate that there's life under there
because you guys.

Speaker 1 (16:00):
And yeah, but I mean if you had a signal
of fish juice, and you didn't know that there were fish.

Speaker 2 (16:07):
Yeah, but you you had that in you'd be like, oh,
you know what a fish was?

Speaker 1 (16:11):
Fish juice. There's something fishy about this, right, yeah.

Speaker 2 (16:17):
Yeah, what you have is just chemistry as far as
I'm concerned.

Speaker 1 (16:24):
But the ice creams that the data, the spectra spectral
analyzes have have identified these ether ethyl compounds, you know,
different compounds that are relevant for organic organic chemistry, right,

(16:45):
which is potentially the substrate for biochemistry, which would be
the chemistry of life. And they found some very very
solid signals. And in this wonderful article they actually, yeah,
put forward a flow chart of potential chemical pathways between
organic compounds on enceladus so to suggest that no fish,

(17:13):
no fish, no, but they do to include they include
these esters, ethyls alkenes, you know, all the things that
they remember.

Speaker 5 (17:24):
Those chemistry exactly, the chemistry proteins and all sorts of stuff.

Speaker 2 (17:32):
Proteins they found proteins.

Speaker 1 (17:35):
No, oh my gosh, I'm sorry, that.

Speaker 2 (17:39):
Easy easy chemistry.

Speaker 1 (17:41):
Chemical pathways that are associated with life activities. And they
they suggest a whole bunch of chemical pathways between the
organic compounds to suggest how they could have arisen where
they how they could interact with each other, and how
they could be in a sesstence in this liquid ocean

(18:02):
under the crust of ice. Not that they have proven
it in any way. This is just they found some
stuff in an ice plum that Cassini ran through flew
through a while back, and.

Speaker 2 (18:13):
But we're still talking about chemistry interactions that can explain
the chemistry that they found. Yes, and if they can
explain it without needing life mm hmm, which is I
think what they've done this is more of a sign
that there's not.

Speaker 1 (18:31):
Life, not it is it is. These are pathways. There
are potential pathways. They have no idea, but they could
be significant in the context of a substrate or like
this is we're not saying life, We're not. We're not
like the dude on the Ancient Alien Show.

Speaker 5 (18:51):
It's the same as a couple of weeks ago. We're
saying there's a.

Speaker 1 (18:55):
Chance this is. You know, a couple of weeks ago
Justin was like, but this is a really like the
chemistry and the way they put it forward is they're
really really positive and they were using scientists speak to
like yo kind of couch it in terms that couldn't
be taken to be certainty, and I still think, you know,

(19:19):
we need to look at it, but they had much
stronger signal and like the chemistry is more suggestive of
the recent Mars finding than this chemistry is. This is
just organic molecule fragments.

Speaker 5 (19:34):
So I think it's an important distinction. I appreciate that
because I think that it's they're both there's a chance,
but it's like magnitudes different. There's a non zero chance,
but this is a much like this is a much
smaller non zero chance, just like the stuff is there

(19:56):
and Mars is like it looks halfway aid.

Speaker 1 (20:03):
Yeah, So that's that's the that's the different, Like that's
the that is the kind of counterpoint. Right, So this
particular study, they're finding evidence, and the more evidence they have,
the more I guess, uh like support they have scientifically
to send more missions. So the European Space Agency wants
to send a mission to Enceladus to actually go land

(20:26):
something and see if it can crack through the ice
and you know, take a really good look at what's
what's there. We want to go and find the possibles,
the possibilities in our solar system. Where else could I have.

Speaker 5 (20:42):
Found one without going too far on a tangentop too late?
I don't understand. Please explain to me. Because the moon,
our moon, our moon does not rotate, right, It's you're
always kind of it's doing this.

Speaker 2 (21:01):
Well, it depends on where you're standing.

Speaker 1 (21:03):
Yeah, it kind of does. It does like one rotation
time period of our orbit.

Speaker 5 (21:13):
Yeah, so the same side of it is always facing Earth.

Speaker 1 (21:16):
Yes, exactly, That's what I'm saying.

Speaker 5 (21:18):
So if we are assuming the same is true for
this moon, I have trouble understanding how you can have
a frozen surface and a squishy core.

Speaker 1 (21:35):
Right, because it's so big, and the gravitational forces at play,
Like you know, the gravitational forces of the moon and
our orbit around the Sun influenced the tides on our planet, right,
and so there is there are massive forces at play
that move things there. Those forces are also influencing the
rock and you know, but to a lesser extent. Because

(21:58):
of the size of the body and the forces at play,
there are inner play based on how far away the
moon is, where it is on what side of the
Earth at what time, and so there is a constant
you know, pull the two bodies are pulling on each other,
and so Saturn is massive, and Enceladus is in this

(22:20):
spot a sweet spot where it's not being pulled in
to crash into Saturn like Cassini, but it's orbit and
and the place it holds is being tugged on by
that massive gravitational field. And so this really so the.

Speaker 5 (22:39):
Tug is enough to like keep the juices moving.

Speaker 1 (22:42):
Yeah, got it?

Speaker 5 (22:43):
Okay, Yeah that makes sense.

Speaker 2 (22:46):
Yep.

Speaker 1 (22:46):
Interesting, It's enough to heat up the interior of that
body enough, just enough. But we're talking about not frozen,
not water. We're talking about like methane, right, Liquid methane
is a much much colder uh freezing points, so you know,
the the scales are different. It's it's really it's like

(23:11):
what that's why they look at extremophiles, right, go to Antarctica,
Why they go to different places to kind of see like, okay,
can these things? How can things live in really cold,
really acidic, really hot environments.

Speaker 5 (23:26):
The extremophiles came to us from out They started on Enceladus.
They came over the extremophiles pant Spermia, right, so there
you go.

Speaker 1 (23:39):
They started on Atlas three whatever you know, No, interstellar
interlopers brought them. Yeah, anyway, that's a fun story.

Speaker 2 (23:49):
The fun thing is that chemistry is already everywhere. We
don't have to pants spermy it at all, and we're
getting more more signs the more places that we look
that chemistry exists like we might expect it to everywhere
in the universe. Life on Earth did not start everywhere

(24:13):
all at once. In the beginning, there was just chemistry
slashing about in our oceans. Yeah. From this chemistry, single
celled life emerged, proliferate, proliferated and dominated as life's only
representative right. So come to Earth the sample the ocean. Eh,

(24:35):
there's no fish here, but there were single celled life
forms dominating planet Earth. So then some revolutionary change occurred,
not all at once, but many times, more than five
separate times. There was as a complex multicellular life evolved

(24:59):
independent and what we have classified or categorized as five
major groups. We've got animals, land plants, fungi, red algae,
and brown algae. These are the basic five major life
groups on planet Earth. Five categories of organisms complex organisms

(25:22):
with different origins in different timelines. Each one cells took
on specialized jobs and were organized into distinct organ and
tissue systems. This evolutionary leap required sophisticated new genomic tools
for each line, including mechanisms for cells to adhere to

(25:45):
one another to communicate across the larger organism, and each
of those arose independently of all the other major groups.
So dating the order of these evolutions relies heavily on

(26:05):
our fossil record, which is science's geological calendar for things
that happened a really long time ago. Red algae shows
up about one point six billion years ago in a
candidate seaweed like fossil from India. Animals don't show up
so like a billion years later, and are around six

(26:28):
hundred million years ago in our first Your oldest recorded relative,
which is known as the quilted pancake. Fun the ancestor
of all mankind and animal kingdom, is a started earliest
representative was a quilted pancake.

Speaker 1 (26:51):
That's the name of I love it.

Speaker 2 (26:54):
Oh, it's it's something dick in Sonia or something like that.
It's a I think the literature fan maybe got to
name it for the official name, but it's also known
as the quilted pancake. Land plants took root about four
hundred and seventy million years ago, and we know we've

(27:16):
got that based on fossil spores, so yeah, maybe older,
but that's our earliest timepoint brown algae. This is like
kelp stuff in the ocean that we're kind of used
to plants or the fish eating diversified tens to hundreds
of millions of years after plants. So we have there

(27:39):
are current chronological picture of life's emerging complexity, with one
notable exception. Fun Guy. The fung Gui Kingdom's history is
a riddle wrapped in a mystery, stuffed inside an enigma
long thought to be lost through the geological records deleted
spam folder basically there.

Speaker 5 (28:01):
Because they're so soft and.

Speaker 2 (28:05):
Very well. Yeah. So, unlike uh, animals or plants, which
appear to have a single origin to our complex multicellularity,
we also know that fun guys seem to actually have
evolved that that revolutionary multicellularity multiple times diverse array of

(28:29):
unicellular ancestors to fung Gui. So fun Guy as a
group is also all of these other first time multicellular
life forms. So we've kind of talked before about how
you know, sort of life seems to have only emerged
from one, one distinct time point, and still at least

(28:52):
we're still sort of there at the unicellular level. We
don't have a necessarily a diversity of unicellular life, time
pointed out, but multicellular life started multiple times that we
know of, and fun Guy could have kept just kept
going without the rest of us, and we would have

(29:13):
had the continued diversity of just fung Guy. So they
also so part of this is like also making it
difficult to pinpoint a single origin for fun Guy is
that not all fung Gui began at the same time point.
So whenever even we when we talk about the five emergencies,
we're missing origins of this group by wide margins. To

(29:37):
overcome this, scientists are now focused on the molecular clock,
the idea that genetic mutations accumulate in an organism's DNA
at a relatively steady rate over time over generations, kind
of like a ticks of a clock, but it's not calibrated,

(29:57):
meaning it can it can't really give us years. It
can tell us sort of generationally, but that doesn't always
answer everything, right, So they need anchor points somewhere in
Eric to say, okay, how does this relate to this
and where is that in the fossil record and is

(30:17):
that a given point? And there's a great scarcity of
the fossils and fungals, so that's also a challenge. So
horizontal gene transfer is what they've now turned to as
a form of a fossil record. So the kind of
the way they've got this constructed is if you have

(30:40):
genes from lineage AS found to have jumped into lineage B,
you can suggest that lineage A is at least as
old and older than lineage B. Now, lineage B could
also be very old and it just got it, but
we're at least knowing that they overlapped at this time

(31:01):
point and then.

Speaker 1 (31:04):
They were swapping genes at this point in time, right.

Speaker 2 (31:07):
So they were both coexisted at this set point in
time somewhere. Okay, So by identifying seventeen of these transfers,
and this is only going to be in currently extant,
it's currently living fungal organisms, right, So this is this
You can't tell us all the fungal forms that died

(31:30):
off before, you know, before the ones that are living,
if there were any, But we got this sort of
older than younger than relationship now in the fossil record
with the seventeen of these time point stamps, and the
analysis suggests a common ancestor for living fung guy dating
too roughly one point four to zero point nine billion

(31:54):
years ago. So that's well before the four hundred and
seventy million year old age of land plants.

Speaker 1 (32:01):
That's a long time ago.

Speaker 2 (32:03):
And what's super interesting about that is, of course the
fun guy are land creatures, which means that for maybe
a billion or more than a billion years before plants
took root on the land, the fung guy we're working away.

(32:23):
Their ancestors were working away out there bearing soil exactly,
recycling nutrients, altering land chemistry, perhaps changing the atmosphere. Partners,
do you know?

Speaker 5 (32:38):
Justin yes, Okay.

Speaker 2 (32:44):
The paper couches them as ecosystem engineers, creating the first
primitive soils, fundamentally altering the terrestrial environment.

Speaker 1 (32:53):
So are you are you? Are you talking? Blair? Are
you asking if there are there aquatic.

Speaker 5 (32:58):
There are yeah, hot choices, Kiki, Yeah, there are underwater fungui.

Speaker 2 (33:08):
That is a thing, oh, no doubt. But where is it?
What is their origin?

Speaker 5 (33:13):
I don't know, right so yeah, that's what I was
curious about, is do we know for sure that terrestrial
fung gui came first.

Speaker 1 (33:21):
The genes that are present, maybe to deal with aquatic
environments versus atmospheric and soil. I have no idea. I'm
making something up right now, but that's my that's my
hypothesis that.

Speaker 2 (33:35):
I don't know. I didn't know about underwater fung guy. Yeah, so,
but possibly a billion year more years of fungal recycling
of nutrients on land creating these soils. So and then
in this view, then plants when they get to land,
they aren't so much forging a new path for life

(33:59):
as their jumping into an ecosystem that has already got
had had, you know, eons of ancient and persistent activity
by the fungal friends preparing the way.

Speaker 1 (34:17):
And now I want the cartoon to be called Fungal
Friends Saturday Morning Science cartoon. This is my fungal friend
a city O my seats. That is that taking it

(34:38):
back that long that there were the fungi were prevalent
in active, I mean, it makes sense that there would
be something complex and working before.

Speaker 2 (34:49):
Yeah, the plants, well, we know that the planet was
I forgot what the name of it is. But those
weird treelike forms that were like giant, you know, thirty
meters tall or ten tall or whatever it was.

Speaker 5 (35:05):
It was just like last month we talked about those.

Speaker 2 (35:08):
Yeah, those weird fungal trees that they say isn't exactly
related to any current day fungus. But now you know,
and under this light of understanding that the fungal community
originated from different single cell organisms multiple multiple times, it
doesn't need to be related to current fungui to be

(35:29):
a fun guy, right by our broad definition.

Speaker 1 (35:35):
I love this new technique though, of using the horizontal
gene transfer as a way to like to control for
the fact that we don't know, we don't have fossilized stuff.
We can't go back and do the radio dating in
the traditional way. And if you know this one was
doing this, and this was doing this and the same
genes are at the same time, Oh my gosh.

Speaker 5 (35:56):
I just love that. It's not any fancy math. It's
just like we know this was happening at this time,
and we know that this was happening at the same
time as this thing. So basically we're just using the
transverse property of like if equals be equal see then
equal see.

Speaker 2 (36:11):
So like yeah, don't don't take my cartoon version of
how they did it.

Speaker 6 (36:16):
No, No, that's how relative dating works. That No, that
is how relative dating works. Is you're just saying, like,
I know it's at least this old because it's associated
with this other thing. Like that's that's how like relative
dating works when you go like, I know, this fossil
is here, and this fossil is from this time, and
this fossil is below that fossil, so it's older than that.

(36:39):
Like it's I just I love that it's not this
crazy calculus that's happening. It's just like it's it's all
relative logic. I think it's beautiful, and I love how
like simple the math is. It's it's I've always thought
it was really cool that it's like there's no there's
no that's it. That's just that's the whole you're just

(37:00):
using basic logic. Love it.

Speaker 1 (37:07):
And then's some math. You know there was math, but yeah,
of course.

Speaker 5 (37:11):
There was math when you were doing the actual radio
dating another things. But in terms of the relative dating,
there's not really any math. It's just this is more
than that.

Speaker 1 (37:21):
I love it. But it makes it. This is brilliant.
It makes so much sense. I love this, uh, this
new way of measuring, and maybe it'll come up with
some new discoveries of other microbes, other organisms that are
soft bodied that we hadn't we hadn't hit on yet,
because horizontal gene transfer is not just like it.

Speaker 2 (37:45):
It's a lot like but like a soft bodied you know,
the continents all being dominated by soft bodied life. Like
can we even imagine the fungal terrestrial scene without any plants,
animals or insects or anything, where.

Speaker 1 (38:05):
The world, the life.

Speaker 2 (38:09):
On land is just varieties of fungi, like, oh wow,
that world, that world existed and maybe for a billion years.

Speaker 1 (38:20):
Rockier Wild Blair. No, we debate every once in a
while about how whether or not fungi or animals. But
did you want to talk about animals?

Speaker 5 (38:34):
Yeah? Cats, Is you understanding that they like water? They
do not like water?

Speaker 2 (38:41):
No choice?

Speaker 1 (38:45):
People say they don't like water. You can like, if
you get them in water when they're babies, you can
get them to like it. It could be they.

Speaker 5 (38:53):
Could take baths and stuff.

Speaker 1 (38:54):
Yeah.

Speaker 5 (38:54):
No, cats are not like big.

Speaker 1 (38:57):
People don't think cats are big swimmers.

Speaker 5 (39:00):
Yeah, right, So when I worked at the zoo. We
would say most species of cats avoid the water. There's
a bunch of reasons for that. There's a lot of
cats that live in cold climates, so it would be
a bad evolutionary strategy to get wet when it's really cold.
A lot of cats do not have webbed feet, so
they are poor swimmers. But tigers the two.

Speaker 1 (39:23):
I love that you just said a lot of cats
do not have webbed feet.

Speaker 6 (39:26):
That.

Speaker 1 (39:27):
I don't think people would think that about cats very.

Speaker 5 (39:29):
Yeah, tigers have webbed feet. Fishing cats have webbed feet.
They are good swimmers. Jaguars, which is what this study
is about that I brought here. Jaguars have been understood
to be able to swim a maximum of about two
hundred meters, so they don't mind getting wet, they don't

(39:50):
mind jumping in water to grab a meal or to
cool off.

Speaker 2 (39:53):
That is much. I think I can swim two you get.

Speaker 5 (40:00):
I can do Georgia.

Speaker 1 (40:04):
Yes, that's two lengths of a pool, right, Olympic pool.

Speaker 5 (40:13):
I think Olympic pool. Yeah, yeah, it's it'd be fine.
But at point being yes, it's farther than a lot
of people would imagine a cat swimming, but you're not
summing long distances, and so, for example, in jaguar conservation,
it has long been assumed that reservoirs, wider stretches of

(40:39):
river and other bodies of water are a barrier to movement. However,
this week a jaguar has been identified based on their
unique spot patterns on the mainland in Brazil in Goaya
State and then also on an island two point four

(41:05):
to eight kilometers away. They were both recorded by a
camera trap three times. This cat was recorded on the
mainland and then one time it was recorded on the island.
They are very confident this is the same cat. By

(41:25):
looking at all of the potential trajectories. I love this
that they're not like, well, maybe you didn't just swim straight,
Like if you look at any of the possible paths
to get from the mainland to this island, either this
individual cat swam about two and a half kilometers straight
or more likely they use the stepping stone options. There's

(41:47):
a little islet that was about one kilometer away, and
then there was a one point three kilometer swim to
get to the island from there, so they were able
to kind of take a break and then keep going.
So based kind of like the relative dating, based on
the previous assumption that they can't some more than two
hundred meters, would it make more sense that they swam

(42:11):
two and a half kilometers or that they slam one
and then one point three, right, So the assumption would
be that they stopped halfway. All that being said, though,
even if they could swim a maximum in that case
of one point three kilometers, that is a huge difference
from two hundred meters. So this completely changes jaguar conservation.

(42:36):
This completely changes what they would consider quote unquote an
absolute barrier for a large carnivore. This impacts understanding of
island biogeography and why certain islands don't have large predators,
Like potentially there's something else going on here. But I
think the thing that's really interesting is they bring up

(42:57):
a new idea of an aquatic cost scale for modeling
connectivity between land masses. So you look at a low,
medium and a high cost ranking for water crossing. So yes,
mostly you might not see jaguars swim more than like
two hundred meters because that's what they're comfortable doing. So
low cost they would identify is less than three hundred meters,

(43:18):
medium between three hundred and one kilometer, and then higher
would be a kilometer or larger of just open water.
And so from that they're recognizing low, medium, and high difficulty.
And so what is the reason to be moving? Right?
Are you fleeing humans? Are you going after a high

(43:39):
quality food source? Are you going after mates?

Speaker 4 (43:44):
Is?

Speaker 5 (43:44):
Are there things pushing you out of the space that
you're in? Did your habitat get fragmented?

Speaker 2 (43:50):
Right? Yeah?

Speaker 1 (43:50):
Are you into extreme sports?

Speaker 2 (43:53):
Yes?

Speaker 1 (43:54):
To you?

Speaker 5 (43:54):
A jaguar who just loves to swim wants them again.

Speaker 2 (44:00):
I know that there's there's humans who could make this swim.
I would maybe struggle at the two hundred meters. That's
a long way for me to swim for you to swim.

Speaker 1 (44:14):
Right, But this is my point iskilometer, that's a lot.

Speaker 2 (44:19):
Is there is there as much diversity in like jaguar
athleticism as there is in humans, Like there's human athletes
who are going to outperform me at every athletic task.

Speaker 5 (44:35):
Right, there's like an easy answer to that question. There's
a hard answer to that question. The easy answer is no,
there's not as much variability, and that's because there's evolutionary pressure.
The harder answer to that, the more complicated answer is
that because of habitat fragmentation, because of human encroachment, because
of everything else going on, there are actually more kind

(44:57):
of like microcosms in have attacks than there ever have
been before, and so you might find some specialization happening.
This might be a recent selective pressure that has been
put on jaguars because of human activity. There's a lot
of things that could go into this, Like maybe jaguars
could only swim two hundred meters until twenty years ago,

(45:18):
and then the last three generations of jaguars have had
more pressure on them, right.

Speaker 2 (45:22):
Or maybe just this jaguar, just this one, because it's like,
turns out I'm a great swimmer. I want to go
where I want.

Speaker 1 (45:31):
It's like the garbage dump seagull. Right, It's like the
gull who ended up at the compost pile in the
Central Valley and was like, oh, this truck is amazing.
Yeah that a few times, she's amazing, But how many
other birds did, right? But so ors, Yeah, individuals can

(45:52):
be exceptional, right, But there there's also a question of
the metabolic needs of these different cats. Right, So we
have cheetahs who can run super super fast for a
little bit and then they get super tired out. They're
like made to run, right. And then you have like
tigers you said they have webbed feet, like they are

(46:14):
going to get in the water and they'll swim and
they're like they're water cats and they'll be fine with it,
and they go after aquatic prey. But so, what are
the lifestyles of these different animals. I know that I've
I have heard about jaguars in the jungles where there
are rivers being able to catch prey along the river

(46:35):
bank or get in the water for a short period
of time to catch prey and then they take it
back up to a tree and they like hang their
hang their hang their kill up in a tree where
they eat it. But so I'm just wondering about like
the different metabolic needs of the cats and like what, yeah,
like why would they say only two hundred meters Is

(46:57):
it just that they never saw it or that they
are thinking that metabolically it would be unlike.

Speaker 5 (47:04):
So this is of course reminding me of working in
the zoo field and designing exhibits based on what is
understood that an animal can and cannot do. And how
much that also has changed over the last even twenty
years that I've been in the field and.

Speaker 1 (47:26):
So inspired by Jane.

Speaker 2 (47:30):
Well that and every few years they realize, oh, tigers
can jump how high? Oh gosh, we need to build
an even bigger fence next time.

Speaker 5 (47:41):
Yeah, Or you know, chimps hate water. Oh, we just
discovered there was a chimp standing in open water, beckoning
people to come in to the with me. Oh, but
but I think that's That's my point is like, it's
so easy to look at animal adaptations in a vacuum, right,

(48:02):
and forget that we are on the treadmill. It's moving.
So even if fifty years ago or two hundred years ago,
when some white guy showed up in Brazil and wrote
about jaguars and decided that this is what jaguars could do,
that might actually have been the case two hundred years ago.

(48:22):
But although they.

Speaker 1 (48:23):
Didn't watch very far because they were comfortable in their
little camp, right, and they didn't see all the thing.

Speaker 5 (48:29):
It could have been either. It could have been that
the observation was flawed and has not been challenged even
though it should have been. It also could be and
it can be both right, that adaptations continue. And especially
remember like we live, you know, the human life span
is what like sixty to one hundred years, just being
like really really wide, right.

Speaker 1 (48:52):
But imagine a jaguar what like twenty or thirty maybe like.

Speaker 5 (48:57):
No, like twelve, like like eight fifteen, and so yeah, yeah,
but I'm saying like, on average is probably closer to ten, right,
And so that's a lot of generations, log got it right,
And so that means that that a lot there's an
opportunity for a lot of adaptation over that time, especially

(49:19):
with humans encroaching with new prey, with livestock and farming,
with all of these things happening. There is a lot
of opportunity for adaptation and evolution, and we are like
on the treadmill like it's happening, Like we are watching
animals evolve around us, and we forget that. I think
all the time that we we kind of have this

(49:39):
idea because we're at this little pin prick in evolutionary history, that.

Speaker 1 (49:43):
The preaching is the same. Everything is only six thousand
years old. It's all the same and has never changed
and will never change.

Speaker 5 (49:53):
Yes, And I will say I did not aggle, and.

Speaker 1 (49:55):
I apologize I apologize for backing there for a second.

Speaker 5 (50:02):
The Olympic sized pool is fifty meters long, so that
is four laps done.

Speaker 2 (50:10):
Pulled me out.

Speaker 5 (50:14):
Yeah, well, I'm just saying I could do it, so
it'd be fine.

Speaker 2 (50:18):
But you're saying, like I can do it, be fine,
Like it would be a walk in the park.

Speaker 5 (50:23):
You'd be yes, I mean me today, you're correct, But
five years ago it would have been no problem at all.
It would even.

Speaker 1 (50:35):
Oh gosh, but anyway, that's exciting. Yeah, so big carnivores
like the jaguar could have expanded their ranges and ended
up in different places than we in different ways than
we previously thought. Where previously we considered it all to
be overland or whatever. Now there are explanations that can

(50:58):
be used.

Speaker 5 (51:00):
Yeah, but we need more observations. One jaguar does not
a pattern, make right.

Speaker 1 (51:05):
No, it could just be the you know, extreme swimmer jaguar.
But yeah, that is so cool. I love though. The
more that we are tracking stuff, the more we're able
to come up with these kinds of you know, data points. Yeah,
be able to see that horizontal gene transfer in the jaguars.

(51:28):
What about mice? We don't look at them enough, do
we ever?

Speaker 2 (51:35):
No?

Speaker 1 (51:39):
Did you know? No, I'm not going to go there anyway.
Mice can be used as a model species for a
lot of studies, including maternity, and so it's easy to
manipulate the mice because thanks to places like the Jackson Lab,
we can have germ free mice and we can have

(52:00):
wild type mice that have all of the germs microbes.
So we've had conversations previously about the concern of offspring.
So when babies are being born, what does c sections
do versus natural birth? How do you control for the
microbes and the immune system of the child. But this

(52:23):
study looked at how the immune system and microbes influenced
the eggs of the mother. So they took germ free
mice and so those that had no microbes and regular mice,
and they set them up in a few different situations

(52:45):
and they did a number of different manipulations to get
to the results of this study, which really showed the
bottom line is microbes influence the immune system and lead
to a bunch of short chain fatty acids and other

(53:06):
molecules so acetate, proprionate, butyrate. These compounds make the ovaries
and the oocytes in mice, they haven't looked at it,
and people yet I'm just gonna say, but better, So
the germ free mice showed oocyte depletion. They showed and

(53:27):
they looked at it a different stages of development, so
like the first state, when the oocytes are starting to
form at different points of weaning from their parent, from
their mother, and then onto becoming an adult and having
their full complement of oocytes and being reproductively active. They
were able to show through the manipulations of this study

(53:48):
that there are all sorts of points through the mouse
life cycle at which microbes influence these molecules in the
in the gut really, so this is like not in
the follicles, This is in the cut, and those molecules
end up influencing the immune system and ovarian homeostasis and

(54:13):
the follicle reserve, and so microbes make for better fertility
in mice.

Speaker 2 (54:23):
So this isn't the gut Is this essentially? I mean,
it's a way of telling this story, and it's it's
interesting to see the downstream effects. But this is I mean,
if you just had a malnourished mouse, I mean, isn't
this isn't this essentially saying that's.

Speaker 1 (54:45):
The malnourishment is also going to have impacts that will
deplete the follicle reserve because he's going to do what
it can to stay alive, right.

Speaker 2 (54:54):
Because this is essentially saying that microbes are important for
like the way I'm here hearing it anyway, wait you
taking me these like microbes are essential for for nutrients,
breaking down food to pull the nutrients out, which then
affects X y Z. But like if you just had
a malnourished mouse, you would so, so I mean it's

(55:17):
to me, they're like they're they're connecting dots, which are real.

Speaker 1 (55:21):
I get what you're saying here. So they did try
and feed mice different fat, like fat additive diets to
be able to make up for the lack of microbes
and other things. But the microbes were the key that
it was that it that there are potentially ways to

(55:44):
you know, manipulate it, but it's not dietary produced at
the scene. It's so it's a yeah, this is just
studies looked at it in this depth and it's just yeah,
I get it.

Speaker 2 (56:00):
But isn't like the whole point of the gut microbiome
is that it is extracting nutrients from those raw ingredients
that we put into the gut. So whether you've got
all the nutrients in the food, whatever it is that
you're eating, if you don't have the microbes to break
it down to utilize it and then create whatever they're

(56:20):
creating as well. So it's again to me, it's just
they've malnourished.

Speaker 5 (56:28):
But I feel like we've we've heard other connections between
the microbiome and other systems in the body, right, Like
I I'm not making it up that the microbiome has
previously been linked to hormone regulation, right, Like we've talked
about that.

Speaker 2 (56:43):
I do believe the lining, the lining of it all
is neuronal tissue, so it is connected also to uh.

Speaker 5 (56:52):
Right, yes, absolutely, But I'm saying if we know that
the microbiome can have an impact on hormones, then naturally
that would impact your follicles and your follicle development. Yes,
so that's also It's not it can't just be the nutrients.

(57:17):
It feels like the microbiome is doing so many other So.

Speaker 1 (57:22):
The microbiome, the colonization of so these short chain fatty
acids were signals that they were able to measure. So
they were able to, uh to see the dysfunction slightly
alleviated in germ free mice when they gave them the
short chain fatty acids, but it wasn't to the same

(57:42):
level as mice that had never that had microbes. The
microbes themselves aren't just making the comp making these compounds,
they're also they're influencing signaling, and so the host microbe
interactions are change are it's an environment, right, an ecosystem,

(58:03):
and you can't just go and stick you know, you
go and you can stick the food in it, right,
make it not starved, but it's not the same as
the ecosystem effects of what's going on with the back
and forth between the microbes and the mother and so
of course this is not you know, the final news

(58:25):
on anything. This is published in Cell, Host and Microbe.
These researchers were able to just show that the gut
microbiota impacted reproductive capacity and that the mice that did
not have microbes, they saw their their reproductive capacity fail

(58:46):
more quickly and faster than mice that had conventional or
that were you know, that had microbes. And so the
question is right, so that.

Speaker 2 (59:00):
It's still pushed for UH. This is because the the
nervous system, the body brain believes it starving because it's
not gonna the signal feedback that it would expect from
a microbiome that is doing the work of nutrients. Even
if you've supplied the nutrients, the nutrients may not communicate

(59:24):
upon their on their own to say hey, I'm here,
everything's fine. You have this entire community that's sending out
signals of these processes that are going on that are
informat and they.

Speaker 1 (59:35):
And and and they're saying, yeah, this is you know,
this is correlation. You know, we are seeing that the
microbe there is a no microbe microbe difference, and these
short chain fatty acids are involved. There's that's going on there.

(59:56):
And they also found the thing that I think is
so fascinating. At different the different time points in development,
the shifts in the diet they they they match the
or the shift in the the ovary and the follicle
development matches the shifts in UH in development. So changing

(01:00:20):
from like suckling to being weaned and eating solid food.
So they said, as they as they looked at these transitions,
they saw the weaning transition was marked by the emergence
of Clestridia members. They this transition coincide with the onset
of solid food intake, which introduces dietary polysaccharides and complex

(01:00:43):
carbi carbohydrates to the intestine that support bacterial fermentation and
production of microbial meta metabolites. And at that point there
is also a shift in UH in the development of
the follicles, the over varian follicles. Additionally, at weaning there

(01:01:04):
on day twenty one to twenty eight, you have different
bacteria emerging and diversifying as changes occur in the follicle,
which I think the matching of development and the emergence

(01:01:24):
of certain bacterial species that would be bringing certain short
shained fatty acids with their metabolic metabolic processes that it
turns it into a really interesting question. And of course
we have no idea if this is what happens in people,
no clue, but we do know that there are lots
of people who have fertility issues and if it has

(01:01:48):
something to do with diet, if there are targets that
can be addressed, that maybe there is something that can
be done, you know, maybe an easy intervention as opposed
to something that is much more complex. People spend tens
of thousands of dollars on and stress out like their

(01:02:12):
lives are turned upside down by an IVF and if
that didn't have to be the process, you know, for
more peoples, exactly right, not a.

Speaker 2 (01:02:26):
Real doctor poop pill for whatever. Yeah, I mean it's
really not. It's really not at this point an illogical
thing too. No matter what ails, you go and have
your micro like, go in now and get a baseline,
and then go in if you're feeling ill or having
something that you're trying to address and see if it's changed,

(01:02:50):
or see if it's how different you are from the
the wild type human population whatever.

Speaker 1 (01:02:57):
You Yeah, And with these mouse experiments, it's I mean,
there are mice in cages and this is so very controlled,
but uh, they gave them fiber and it changed their fertility,
so like there is certain aspects to this that it's
like what.

Speaker 2 (01:03:16):
Like that.

Speaker 1 (01:03:17):
They're very very simple interventions and they saw impacts on
you know, on the O site meturation so anyway, mice,
not people, but they've never done like this. It's such
an interest. There's so much, so much to be dug
into here, and I think you're exactly right, justin like

(01:03:38):
there's there are other explanations possible, right, but it means, well.

Speaker 2 (01:03:44):
It's a combination of I think, I think, yeah, the
there's a there's definitely the self I would I would
suggest in signaling to the central nervous and system into
the brain about whether or not it's cost effective to
be doing reproduction right now based on what the gut

(01:04:07):
is telling. You know, the gut is going to be
basically like the eyes, ears, and sense of touch for
how the organism is doing for the brain to make
all of these complex decisions, and it's all going to
be signaling that seems to be happening in the gut

(01:04:29):
from activity of microbiome. And this is great example of that. Really,
I mean it's really like very cut and dry. Here's
how your body functions with and here's how your body
functions without input from your microbial guests or crew not

(01:04:52):
guess I guess is the crew of the ship, not
really the guests.

Speaker 1 (01:04:55):
And what I think is interesting they had these mice
on high fat diets, which when you think of like
the Western diet and what we eat, low fiber, high fat,
our reproduction rates are going, our fertility rates are dropping
and then give them fiber and the mice saw saw

(01:05:21):
returns of their fertility, sorry or deep decrease in the
loss of their their fertility, not people, mice ice and
last very controlled. That's a really great question.

Speaker 2 (01:05:40):
Oh, I can run through it really quick.

Speaker 7 (01:05:43):
Uh.

Speaker 2 (01:05:44):
And the segment that was long abandoned and then brought
back just for this occasion. Just good news everybody, cancer,
This is okay. I'll recap really quickly this story that
nobody could hear. In the last thirty years, cancer mortality

(01:06:09):
has fallen in half. At the same time, mortality remained
unchanged at five point nine deaths per hundred thousand in
his last thirty years. Because while mortality has fallen in half,
it's largely because detection of type of new cancer has doubled,

(01:06:31):
so incidents of cancer being recorded have doubled. Actual mortality
per hundred thousand has not moved, so the.

Speaker 5 (01:06:43):
Same number of people are dying relative to population. But
cancer is less deadly, So how many people did they did?
It's less deadly in that like the number of cases
relate relative to the number of deaths is different, right,
but how many people were diagnosed with cancer via autopsy? Right?

(01:07:09):
Like how many people were diagnosed with cancer when they
were already dead.

Speaker 2 (01:07:14):
Oh no, that was probably you know, that's a great point.
That was probably much more.

Speaker 5 (01:07:17):
They cut open and saw tumors everywhere, right, Like, that's
that's part of the detection.

Speaker 2 (01:07:23):
So I'm trying to I'm still trying to figure out.
So in this study, they have suggested that the higher
incidents of cancer rates that we've been seeing through diagnoses
are because diagnoses are way up, that we're detecting more

(01:07:46):
types of cancer earlier, and that it has uh and
it's that it's not that there's a new cancer epidemic
hitting that it's the same cancers we've always had, same
basically rates. I guess it's just that our ability to
detect them and detect them much earlier has improved. Okay,

(01:08:09):
But then then I have to question if the if
it's was it five point nine did I say deaths
per one hundred thousand is the Yeah, five point nine
deaths per one hundred thousand is unchanged between nineteen ninety

(01:08:29):
two and twenty twenty two. That tells me we've gotten
no better at fighting cancer.

Speaker 1 (01:08:39):
We have, we have, but we've been able there are
more cases we're better at finding it and seeing.

Speaker 2 (01:08:48):
What there's double the cases because.

Speaker 1 (01:08:51):
We are also but if there are double the cases,
we're also better at treating it because we are keeping
up with and continuing the decrease in You would.

Speaker 2 (01:09:02):
Then think that and death's the deaths per one hundred
thousand would go down. Now, the thing that Blair said,
how many of these are via autopsy means interesting because
that throws in the possibility that we just missed causes

(01:09:24):
of death previously. Sure it's still I mean, then then
you could say, like, ah, yes, actually the real number
from nineteen ninety two should have been more like ten
per hundred thousand. But because we weren't so as good
at diagnosing, we missed a lot of things that were
cancer that killed people, and but the numbers unchanged, which

(01:09:45):
is there's another possibility coincident, coincident.

Speaker 5 (01:09:49):
It would be very coincidental. But it is possible that
people are getting cancer more because of chemical and p
foss and you know whatever, just name random things highat
but that we are better at treating it, and the
rate of increased cancer and the rate of treatment is

(01:10:15):
like canceling.

Speaker 1 (01:10:16):
Each other exactly now at treating it to be able
to keep up with the wave.

Speaker 2 (01:10:23):
This current study, this current study which is out of
Harvard Medical School bring them in Women's Hospital and Dell
Medical School. Researchers are saying, no, no, the increased rates
of cancer, the doubling of the rates of cancer in

(01:10:44):
the last thirty years, is wholly due to improved screening
and earlier detection, which is amazing.

Speaker 5 (01:10:53):
Because people are dying, people are probably in less pain.

Speaker 1 (01:11:00):
So a lot of another study out this week that
is suggesting that the increase in cancer rates colon cancer,
specifically in younger adults, is specifically related to diet, and
they're trying to tie it to highly processed foods, which
could be possible. There could be things, but this is

(01:11:21):
we have this one study that came out is come
out and saying a lot more younger people are getting cancer.
But what you're saying and actually it actually you're diagnosing
it more.

Speaker 2 (01:11:34):
Actually here is as they say, chororectal mortality rose slightly,
rose slightly, while its incidents rose much faster, So not
everything moved together. Thyroid and kidney cancers display sharp incidents
increases alongside stable or declining mortality patterns, so that's more

(01:11:56):
consistent with potential over diagnosis, finding lots of what you
would call non fatal or maybe non dangerous cancers. Cancer
happens all the time. It's not all, you know, not
all it gets to the point where it's actually life threatening.

(01:12:19):
It's a lot of things sort of slides moving in
a different way. The part that still is bothering me
is if it was like, oh, it was five point
nine and now it's five point five, if there was
any difference that mortality rate, I'd be like, Okay, yeah,
it's a bunch of different things at play. But looking

(01:12:40):
at that mortality rate, I'm like, we just not any
better at this. That's the number of people per one
hundred thousand who die of cancer. So could you be
a question. It bothers me that it's the same number.

Speaker 1 (01:12:56):
Yeah, but it's over so many years that you know,
we have insurance companies here in the United States paying
for not treatment, treatment, but detection, right, so we have
more testing, we have better testing. People are actually going
to the doctor more, especially since the America Cares Act.

(01:13:16):
You know, people have insurance. People are going they're getting tested.
They oh you have cancer, right, as opposed to just
dying and not knowing why. Right, So now we have
better record keeping.

Speaker 2 (01:13:31):
We have better records, and that's what and that's what's
that's actually what's disturbing me because that's saying, even though
we've doubled our detection rate, our mortality rate hasn't really changed.
The only way, which is like sounds like we're winning,

(01:13:53):
it's because we've doubled the rate of the number of
people who we've diagnosed with cancer. Well, the actual number
per hundred thousand, it hasn't moved. That's frightening. That's terrifying.
That's not good news at all.

Speaker 1 (01:14:09):
I said it was down. That's good, but.

Speaker 2 (01:14:12):
That's because the.

Speaker 1 (01:14:15):
Percentages doubled numbers I know.

Speaker 2 (01:14:21):
Anyway. Yeah, so it may just be a giant coincidence.
Maybe it's not. How come none of my good news
stories ever ending good news. It started O great. You know,
cancers down.

Speaker 1 (01:14:38):
Because you pick them for them, just as you you
have all the power.

Speaker 2 (01:14:43):
No, I just the problem is I never read the
dang story to the end. I'm like, oh, this looks good,
I'll put it in there. It's good.

Speaker 5 (01:14:50):
So you're learning about it with all I see.

Speaker 1 (01:14:55):
Lies, lies and damn lies. Oh my gosh, well I
got a lizard.

Speaker 5 (01:15:00):
Yeah, let's hear about this lizard snake.

Speaker 2 (01:15:03):
Yeah, a lizard.

Speaker 1 (01:15:05):
Well it has legs, it's not a snake.

Speaker 5 (01:15:08):
So that it's a lizard.

Speaker 2 (01:15:13):
Maybe it is. Talk about lies, damn lies more.

Speaker 1 (01:15:20):
I mean, it would not be as exciting for me
to say, I've got a story about a fossil squamate.

Speaker 5 (01:15:26):
Yeah, it would be exciting to me.

Speaker 2 (01:15:32):
Okay, back up, all right.

Speaker 1 (01:15:35):
Squamates lizards and snakes, lots of them around the world.
They maybe originated about one hundred and ninety million years ago,
much younger than those fung guy you were talking about.
Researchers have found a new fossil, but it's old in
Scotland and they have called it brugnare elgo lensis because

(01:16:03):
it was found in Scotland, and so that's what you do.
They have taken Brugna and compared it based on its
morphology and other aspects that they have been able to
measure with in group and out group phylogenetic comparison, and
they're like, okay, it's definitely a lizard, maybe early snake.

(01:16:33):
It's very similar. It's got it's got a jaw like
a snake with big fangs like like a big Uh,
what are the big fat.

Speaker 5 (01:16:43):
Snakes a viper or not a viper?

Speaker 1 (01:16:47):
Like you know the big ones that are round anaconda anaconda. Yes,
got an anaconda because.

Speaker 5 (01:16:57):
So boas and anaconda's are constrictors. They have their tinier
rear fangs. They don't have the big venom injecting fangs
in the front.

Speaker 2 (01:17:06):
Yes.

Speaker 1 (01:17:07):
Yeah, So they had a big jaw and these kinds
of large snakelike fangs from an older snakiness. But it
also had little tiny legs that were very lizardy and
gecko ish, so it was kind of this. It had
get like old old lizard traits, reptile traits, but also

(01:17:30):
snaky traits, and so they were like who are you?
And so they gave it a new group, and so
Brugna there Elgolensis has been added to a new group
called the parvo raptors. And these parva raptorids are called

(01:17:52):
raptorids because they are thought to have hunted prey similar
to raptors like the dinosaur species velociraptors, so that the
parva raptors puts them within this squamate group. Apparently because
of the way the words work. So anyway, the clock

(01:18:14):
for this particular find takes takes us back to the
Middle Jurassic one hundred and sixty seven million years ago
in Scotland, and it's a really great, almost complete fossil find.
And because of the way they were able to see
all of these traits, they're like, this isn't here in
more modern groups. This is from older groups. This is

(01:18:36):
and they've been able to look at these snake like features,
the teeth and jaws, and then also with the gecko
leggy features, and there are comparisons in the phylogeny that
suggest that it could be more on the snake side
or in a different phylogenetic analysis said no, it's more

(01:18:58):
on the echo side. And so it's a really interesting
thing because it's still not answering the question of where
snakes came from. But because of the dating and the
particular particular traits that they are seeing, they are saying
that this particular group of these pover raptorids are taking

(01:19:22):
it are taking us back to a very very old
age within the Jurassic m co occurring with dinosaurs, raptor
raptors and others. So the squamates the the early early

(01:19:42):
where the snakes and the lizards come from. Yeah, anyway,
there's traits. They have a new this is a great,
great fossil find. They're really excited about it because it
potentially takes the question of of the origin of snakes

(01:20:03):
versus versus reptiles or lizards, and it it's getting at
the is this convergent evolution or is it actually you know, origination,
And so that is the question.

Speaker 5 (01:20:19):
So sorry, where on this diagram is the is this
new guy?

Speaker 1 (01:20:25):
So the for the phylogeny, here the stars. We've got
a couple of stars, and depending on the phylogenetic comparison
that they did, they put they put this dude in
different groups.

Speaker 2 (01:20:40):
So either.

Speaker 1 (01:20:43):
Yeah, it's super confusing. They're like, oh, we compared it
with this one data set, and we compared it with
this other data set, and depending on who's included and
what data is in there, this dude could be kind
of anywhere. So, uh, it's a mystery wrapped.

Speaker 2 (01:20:58):
So this is yes.

Speaker 5 (01:21:00):
So this is interesting because I have learned just from
kind of learning more and more about the evolutionary history
of reptiles, in particular that reptiles are a junk group,
there's no such thing as a reptile. It's polyphyletic. It's
like it's a mess. But evolutionary time has shown us

(01:21:22):
that a lizard looking thing is a successful body plan.
A lizard looking thing keeps happening, right, It's something that
that evolution returns to over and over again. And so
it's understandable that, you know, when people were first making
their buckets, they were like, you're a reptile, and you're
a reptile, and your reptile and you're a reptile, right,

(01:21:45):
But of course, like crocodiles are more closely related to
birds than they are to lizards. And then there's the tuatara,
which is what I really wanted to see on that
last on the phiologeny you just shown. Ricosophalia is called
out on there. So that's the twutar, which is not
a lizard and is the most lizard looking non lizard
you've ever seen. But you know, based on looking at

(01:22:08):
their skull and the arches in their skull that they
are completely unrelated, or at least they're not. They're not
a modern day lizard. They came about in the Triassic,
and so this is a very similar situation where they're like,
you don't quite fit into any of these categories, but
you look more like this.

Speaker 1 (01:22:28):
However, and this is not genetic. This is all morphological
and they're limited.

Speaker 2 (01:22:36):
However, this is older than snakes.

Speaker 1 (01:22:40):
Well, it's going, but it's going. Maybe the question is
the stem group, right, go.

Speaker 2 (01:22:46):
Back to that horrible grap.

Speaker 1 (01:22:48):
Did at what point in time did these did snakes
and lizards splinter?

Speaker 2 (01:22:59):
Right?

Speaker 1 (01:23:00):
At what point in time was there that differentiation?

Speaker 2 (01:23:04):
And that?

Speaker 1 (01:23:04):
And there's a massive hang on.

Speaker 2 (01:23:07):
There's a there's a point in time when snakes have
have limbs. There's a point in time when snakes had,
you know, want walkingered around on four little feet. We
don't know what they look like. Maybe they were gecko feet.
They were likely not hooked by in any case, right,
And so if we're looking at at this, it's around,

(01:23:30):
it looks like it's pinpointing itself before the advent of snakes.

Speaker 5 (01:23:39):
Time wise, there's three there's three stars the different places
that they think it might have landed, right.

Speaker 2 (01:23:46):
And and these all look like they're somewhat before the
advent of the serpentines on this on this list are
known history of this one is.

Speaker 5 (01:23:59):
A branch off of serpent serpentees.

Speaker 2 (01:24:01):
Yeah, right, one would be very closely related and left
and kept the legs right. And then there's others that
are building off of other forms, because again, this lizard form,
like you're saying, is so conserved that there's lots of
versions that kind of looked like somewhere in between. But

(01:24:21):
in any case, what we could be looking at is
a form of what a snake might have looked like
before they lost their limbs. I think that's a very
fair way of analysis of looking at this creature. It's
not necessarily the snake predecessor, but very much a picture
of what the snake probably looked like before losing their limbs.

(01:24:43):
I love.

Speaker 1 (01:24:44):
The end of the abstract says, these findings indicate high
levels of homoplasy and experimentation during the initial radiation of
squamets and highlight the potential importance of convergent morphological transformations
during deep evolutionary divergences. So they covered all their bases,

(01:25:04):
they said, we don't know. Yeah, that's exactly what you said.

Speaker 5 (01:25:08):
I know, I'm not as smart.

Speaker 2 (01:25:12):
All of their stars are showing something that is in
the ancestor pool of snakes.

Speaker 1 (01:25:20):
And hey they're all from Scotland. No, I don't know. Uh,
let's take I'm going to just say very very quickly
that I'm done with that story. Everybody. Thank you for
joining us tonight and enjoying this adventure through science Land
and the Internet. And I hope that you are just
having fun with us as we are having fun here
with you. If you enjoy Twist, please share with someone today.

(01:25:44):
Make sure you had to Twist dot org help people
subscribe to our podcast, to our live streams, to our
channels YouTube, Twitch, Facebook, and Patreon is where you can
support us in an ongoing fashion in a way that
helps us not be able to fix the Internet issues
that plagued us this evening. But you know, hopefully bias

(01:26:05):
new micro microphones when we need them and keep our
cables working well. So glad that you're all here. Thank
you for your support. All right, coming on back, It
is time right now.

Speaker 5 (01:26:19):
For that part of the show. What that part of
the show.

Speaker 1 (01:26:24):
We call it Blair's Animal Corners with Blair. Yeah, and
I'm going to hit the music button again soon. But
I realized that I didn't set everything up the same
way that I did from the last one So here goes.

Speaker 2 (01:26:42):
Thast creatures.

Speaker 5 (01:26:46):
By Pigel A.

Speaker 2 (01:26:47):
Pied don't pred animals if you want to hear about.

Speaker 7 (01:26:51):
The animals except for giant Blair.

Speaker 5 (01:27:03):
Oh goodness, I think I'm going to start with some crabs, everybody. Yeah,
was this study from the University of Portsmouth Institute of
Marine Science, and it is looking at crabs and their
sensitivity to electromagnetic fields. Now, this is not some like

(01:27:27):
crystals and incense situation. Underwater power cables actually emit electromagnetic
fields and there's generally an expectation that it doesn't do much.
They're pretty low amounts of energy that are releasing from
these power cables. But millions of crabs migrate along coastlines

(01:27:52):
every year to reproduce, and so they are walking directly over,
through and around these electric ro mametic fields. Now, just
you know, as a Californian and also as someone that
you know used to work at an aquarium on Paer
thirty nine, which is a crabbing, very heavily influenced kind

(01:28:14):
of crabbing zone, I knew right away, like, oh, well,
that's interesting because the take of crabs is very carefully
monitored because crab mating seasons and the time when they
lay their eggs is very specific, and so in fact,

(01:28:36):
you only can take male crabs. You are not allowed
to take female crabs. If you have female crabs in
your crab traps, you put them back. And there are
specific seasons because you don't want to take crabs during
mating season. You don't want to accidentally catch a female
that is egg bound, and so there's lots of protections

(01:28:56):
to make sure that the crab fisheries do not, you know, collapse.
Lots of people depend on crabs and also a lot
of animals. Of course, not to mention the fact that
crabs are detritivores and so they're like the janitors of
the ocean. Also so pretty gosh darn't important ecologically. Well,
what researchers found was that crabs do have a sensitivity

(01:29:20):
to electromagnetic fields being emitted by these power cables, but
specifically only female crabs have sensitivity. Why Yeah, So they
grabbed some crabs, popped them in the lab one hundred
and twenty juvenile common shore crabs, and they expose them

(01:29:41):
to electromagnetic fields and covering kind of the intensities that
you would find in underwater power cables. They started very,
very low, and then they kind of ratcheted up to
what you'd find in the high end. They showed significant
behavioral differences between male and female response. And of course

(01:30:01):
my assumption would be, oh, they hated it, right, No,
female crabs were attracted to it. They were twice as
likely to stay near areas with electromagnetic fields compared to
those without them. So this is an issue not of
hurting them, not of repelling them, but of attracting them

(01:30:23):
so heavily that they don't move and disperse.

Speaker 1 (01:30:28):
So the stick around in the electrical field and don't
go being excited by actual crabs.

Speaker 5 (01:30:38):
Yeah. Males meanwhile, not affected, no consistent spatial preference at
all across any strength of electromagnetic field. They don't care. Yeah,
And so they did, like I said, expose them to
a wide variety of kind of levels of electromagnetic field,
and they did find a statistical significant change in behavior

(01:30:59):
for a female even at low at the lowest amount,
and also at the highest amount. So it was just
across the whole span they found responses from these female crabs.
They did ten minute trials, they tracked their behavior. They
looked at zone preference, mobility, all this kind of stuff,
and they use some tracking software. So they found that

(01:31:21):
the adult female crabs, their movement was reduced by more
than a third thirty eight percent, and this was at
moderate field strengths, which is about a thousand micro tows
electric units. But they also found even noticeable effects at

(01:31:44):
super low and so I was looking. I was just like,
what kind of electromagnetic fields impact people? And so it
depends what the source of the field is, It depends
what the type of emitting is. But generally with a
electroidetic feels the main concern with human tissue is heating it,
and for there to be any impact, it actually has

(01:32:07):
to be like at least ten factors higher than any
of these highest ones that they were testing on the crabs.

Speaker 1 (01:32:14):
So that's like heating your heating your tissue. That's like
but not like your sense but not but not your
sensitive electrochemical nervous system.

Speaker 2 (01:32:25):
Right, So I don't want to I know this was
a study in crabs, but has have you guys noticed
there's a lot more electricity in big cities and there's
a lot more people.

Speaker 1 (01:32:40):
Oh my god, I'm going to I'm going to ask though,
like we do know that sharks and other and many
fishes have lateral line systems, that the electro magnetic sensory
system is very important. And it's interesting that like sharks
that are predators, you know what other predator species are

(01:33:02):
tuned in to that electromagnetic sense. And then why just
the females does this? Have we ever looked to see
if males emit anything in that electromagnetic spectrum?

Speaker 5 (01:33:20):
Yeah, yeah, I mean it's so there were a few
things that kind of struck me about this study. So
one is it's a very good reminder that when we
put things in the ocean, we like to assume it's
just like, don't worry about it. It's over there, it's underwater,
you can't see it. It's all good. So there's that.
There's definitely it's you know, whether it's intentional or not,

(01:33:40):
there's a little bit of that. But also underwater cables
so they're currently less than point one percent of the
ocean floor.

Speaker 1 (01:33:48):
But they're all covered in female crabs.

Speaker 5 (01:33:53):
But it's important to place them in the right place.
If you are placing them a long movement hathways of crabs.
Is that gonna be a problem. Are you placing them
in a shark nursery. Right where are they getting placed?
Because often these underwater cables, more and more of them
are going in as part of offshore wind farms, and

(01:34:17):
so specifically this is part of the effort to move
towards renewable energy, which is of course important, but when
we do that, we need to make sure that we're
also paying attention to yet how we're impacting. But the
other piece of this that I think is a good
reminder is the fact that the males and females had

(01:34:38):
such drastically different responses. So it is another reminder that
you cannot study literally anything on any animal subject without
testing both males and females, because you could you have
you have no idea, No one could have predicted that
male and female crabs care more or less about electromagnetic fields.

(01:35:03):
Like that is so unexpected and such an excellent reminder
that that you have to test both, and especially in
this case with crabs, you don't want to pull the
females from the wild because of fishery rules, So like,
do you get your extra permits, do you pull females
or do you go like, oh, I don't want to

(01:35:24):
make that ecological impact. I'm only going to pull males
for my study. Well, then you think that electromagnetic fields
don't matter, so it's still really important to do that work.

Speaker 2 (01:35:34):
I immediately have like three questions. Yeah, one is in
the chat room.

Speaker 5 (01:35:41):
Can you tell them apart? Yes? So it is so
if anyone wants to Google image search or male versus
female crab. I'm used to looking at it in dungeness crabs,
but this is true in other crabs too. It's so
think about a crab is a squished lobster, right, So
a lobster is a tail. The crab has a tail also,
but it is it is bent under and flush with

(01:36:05):
the body. If you pull the tail off, it looks
like it has a like a like a like a
perfectly fit kind of like indentation that it lives in. Right,
And so the tail is a completely different shape for
males and females. I remember, I think the female is
super wide. It looks like almost like a circle, and
then the male it looks like more like a point triangle.

(01:36:27):
I think that's the difference. The male is the point
and the female is wide because all the eggs are
hidden under the tail.

Speaker 2 (01:36:33):
Yeah, okay, so you just look under look at the tail.

Speaker 5 (01:36:35):
It's very obvious once you know what you're looking for.

Speaker 2 (01:36:37):
Okay, next question. The next thing that occurred to me is, uh,
could this be used as a is just the new habitat?
Is it perfectly acceptable for them to be in this location?
Will the males go and find them? Can this just
be like this is now where crabs live? And that's fine.

Speaker 5 (01:36:57):
So you want dispersal. You don't want all the crabs
in one place.

Speaker 2 (01:37:03):
You don't want to put all your crabs in one
crab basket. Okay, yes, And then the next one I
was thinking is does this have anything to do with
crab preference or is there is it a crab preference
like it's it's a it's a The crabs are detecting it, right,
the female crabs are detecting something in the electrical but

(01:37:25):
why mm hmmm. It's probably not a preference for an
electrical field. It's probably a signal for something else, something
that they would make, maybe a nutritional factor, something that
they would they would eat. That's that's normally itself attracted
to or generating.

Speaker 3 (01:37:45):
Yes.

Speaker 5 (01:37:45):
So, so Kiki brought up a good point about that
with sharks, for example, their lateral line detects uh electrical
signals because of like heartbeat basically, so they're test they're
they're they're sensing the chemical process of life, so like
like there's sensing the electrical current of life. So that

(01:38:06):
could be it. Absolutely, it could be that crabs are
like ooh, little fish, I can eat right, like totally
that's possible. But they are just tri divorce that usually
like poop and dead stuff. So I don't know, I'm
not sure. I think that's a really good rich future
study is figuring out what it is about the electrical signal.

(01:38:29):
Is it just something that's inadvertent that's triggering a chemical
pathway in their body like I would.

Speaker 2 (01:38:35):
My point would be the go look at existing crab
fields and check for like where they tend to congregate,
and then just see if there is some sort of
background electrical field being generated from something in there that
was that they're already being attracted to that We just
you know, maybe it's weaker, maybe it moves, and if

(01:38:56):
it moves, is it moving with currents? Is it kiki,
we can't hear you, so.

Speaker 1 (01:39:00):
Sorry, this is weaker and it's getting in the way right,
So it's getting it's it's stopping the it is attracting
and disrupting the natural behaviors of these creps, and that's bad.
So Blaire said, let's be smart, like it's the Dodo.

Speaker 5 (01:39:19):
Yeah, speaking of being smart, why are we bringing back
the Dodo? We're not, actually, but Colossal was in the
news again and I just wanted to bring it up
to kind of tell everybody what's going on because they
were in the news again and I wanted to talk
about what actually happened. So the headline was Colossal makes
huge leap in bringing the Dodo back from extinction. What

(01:39:44):
they did was they cleared an early hurdle by growing
primordial germ cells, which are the precursors to eggs and
sperm from the rock dove aka pigeons. So that's all.
That's so all, that's that's it. They created pregam meats.

Speaker 1 (01:40:06):
They did it, but rocked do mm hmm, pregam meats,
not Dodo.

Speaker 5 (01:40:16):
Pigeon, Yes, because they related, and yeah, it's they They
want to they want to have the primordial germ cells
stable enough to be able to gene edit them at
that stage because with mammal reproduction. You can edit like

(01:40:43):
DNA in an egg, okay, but you can't do that
with birds. Well yeah, and because that the egg is
actually developed much later, like the fetus starts developing before
there's an egg, basically because the egg is like like
it's it's co inciding that the egg is developing as
the fetus develops. And so because of that, they can't

(01:41:06):
use the same gene editing techniques of how they would
try to do it, like with the southern white rhino
and the Northern white rhino.

Speaker 1 (01:41:15):
Egg, like they can't like exactly the same right or
like they reported on the dire wolf.

Speaker 5 (01:41:20):
Right exactly, so they did the yeah.

Speaker 2 (01:41:24):
Hang on, So so this actually could be a major
are you saying this is a major breakthrough.

Speaker 5 (01:41:30):
For it's a pre breakthrough because all they did was pigeons.
All they did was make pre eggs out of pigeon
that I would argue the big jump in bird conservation

(01:41:52):
would be editing that pre egg. But they haven't done
that yet. That's actually the thing that's going to get
you anything. Right now, they're just like, we almost made
an egg all they did, which that's not even their plan.
They're not going to do the rock do of the

(01:42:13):
common pigeon, they actually have to do the nicobar pigeon
in Texas, which they've established a breeding colony of for
this activity. That's the one that they're going to have
to do because they are saying that that is like
the closest living relative to the DODO that they have
is this nicobar pigeon in Texas. So they have their

(01:42:34):
germ cells for editing. Then they're going to be able
to edit what they have in the niicobar pigeon germ
cells and then put them into chicken embryos, and then
the chickens would grow up with pigeon making cells and

(01:42:54):
their ovaries or testes. They would be the surrogates. They
would lay an egg with a a DODO in it.

Speaker 1 (01:43:02):
With an organism that is an approximation of the genetics,
the generatic the representation of a dodoct.

Speaker 5 (01:43:11):
So it's actually it's part of it's three different birds,
but one of them is a guess basically because we
don't have a Dodo genome. So it's they're basically just
like they're going to fiddle with the chickens and the
pigeons until they get something that looks like a dodo
is what they're trying to do.

Speaker 1 (01:43:35):
We do, but then that's why they're gonna but they
have to mess with the pigeon genes to be like,
they have to get it going so they can edit
the pigeon and chicken stuff to be able to be like,
we're putting in Dodo genes and.

Speaker 5 (01:43:46):
So yeah, it's not you can't you can't just inject
that into You have to make it functional with the
pigeon genome. So it's you can't just go, I'm gonna
put this in here exactly so you're gonna have your.

Speaker 2 (01:43:59):
Generation, and then you have to do it again to
add more DODO gene in. So it's going to be
a fast track of genetic evolution in a lab.

Speaker 5 (01:44:10):
But to Justin's point, Colossal's chief science officer says, by
developing these protocols, we're establishing crucial bio banking capabilities and
opening new possibilities for genetic rescue of endangered species. So,
as we've said before, this like pr Nightmare, is really
just fueling their ability to do just groundbreaking conservation efforts.

(01:44:34):
Later all that to say, they say that they have
a place to put these dodos, which I think is bonkers.
They're they're going to put them on an island country
off the coast of East Africa where birds were endemic
before they went extinct. So they like identified habitat for
the dode already, which I think is insane. But it's
I just I just wanted to bring to daylight that

(01:44:57):
once again.

Speaker 2 (01:44:58):
I mean, this is like, that's to be fair, to
be fair, to be fair, you like, if they hadn't
identified at least a place where they would plan on
putting them, you'd be like, and they don't even know
where they're going to put them, Like, no.

Speaker 5 (01:45:12):
Let's they're not going to make functional They're not going
to make a functional population of dodo. That is not
going to happen. They're going to have their twenty Dodo
that they have in zoos and they parade out at
the Bioscience conference on a leash like that is what's
going to happen with these animals. They are not going

(01:45:33):
to reassimilate into the wild. That's not Let's be real,
that's not what is going to happen here.

Speaker 2 (01:45:41):
Okay, But the technology they develop could return a variety
of pigeon perhaps back to the wild. Absolutely I am not.

Speaker 5 (01:45:55):
Saying it's not like sound science, but I think, you know,
as is always the case with these colossal articles, I
want to, you know, put some daylight on this and say,
they are not bringing the Dodo back from extinction. Even
if they made something that looked like a Dodo, it
wouldn't be the Dodo that they were bringing back from extinction,
just like it wasn't a dire wolf that they brought

(01:46:15):
back a couple months ago. It is not. It is ala,
and so they're not doing that. They're also, like I said,
they're not going to bring these guys back to the wild.
They're not. This is all proof of concept that's like
sexy and exciting for people to talk about in the news,
because like, I don't want a Dodo. I would love

(01:46:37):
to bet a Dodo. Oh my god, I'd love to
feed a Dodo a worm like it would It would
bring so much joy to my heart. But it is
also important that we remain grounded and recognize what's actually happening.

Speaker 1 (01:46:51):
Sensationalism pr in the service of science.

Speaker 2 (01:46:57):
If we give them any publicity here.

Speaker 5 (01:47:01):
Even though I said that.

Speaker 1 (01:47:03):
Mansh yeah, wow, hey, one one bright spot by mixing
it with the chickens.

Speaker 2 (01:47:11):
I had always heard that dodos tasted terrible.

Speaker 8 (01:47:17):
Chicken.

Speaker 5 (01:47:17):
They must have tasted great.

Speaker 2 (01:47:19):
No, My understanding was that was it was just a
matter if they were easy to catch because they weren't
afraid of humans, but that they actually like it's just
sailors stuck on an island, you know.

Speaker 5 (01:47:31):
Tough and greasy. Yeah, but you better believe Charles Darwin
ate one now they will.

Speaker 1 (01:47:38):
They will taste like chicken. Justin Do you want to
talk about something techy?

Speaker 2 (01:47:43):
Uh? Yeah, I've got I brought a tech story uh today,
which is, uh, I've never heard of this. Everybody needs
to google the g one humanoid robots. WHOA what I
this is that human? Some like, Okay, I'll just read
the story because I'm not I'm not hip to the

(01:48:05):
fact that we've got humanoid robots running around it.

Speaker 5 (01:48:08):
It says, oh no, it's this one. I hate this one,
all right, I'm sorry. I just looked at it.

Speaker 2 (01:48:14):
Researchers have it looks like a Cylon, like the ones
without the skin black.

Speaker 1 (01:48:21):
Yeah, yeah, when they were silver and black. Later yes,
go ahead. Sorry.

Speaker 2 (01:48:25):
Researchers have uncovered serious security flaws with the unitary g
one humanoid robot, something that's already being used apparently in
laboratories and in some police departments. Is that that's what
this is story is saying. I believe every word I hear.
I don't. Oh my gosh. They discovered that g one

(01:48:49):
can be used for covert surveillance and could potentially launch
a full scale cyber attack on networks.

Speaker 1 (01:48:59):
So this is all all within China.

Speaker 2 (01:49:04):
Right sounds like this stuff of science fiction nightmares, robots
that are secretly spying on you and could be controlled
by remote hackers. However, the concern is real as these
types of robots are becoming increasingly common in homes, businesses,
critical infrastructure in public spaces. So this is the articles

(01:49:25):
by Paul Arnold over at fizz dot org. It says
in a new study, cybersecurity experts from Alias Robotics describe
how they performed a digital audit on g One, reverse
engineering its internal software and easdropping on its internal communications

(01:49:46):
to identify critical weaknesses. One of the most serious flaws
was this Bluetooth low energy setup for connecting to Wi Fi,
something that's apparently common to many consumer robots. So they
found that the encryption protecting this process was incredibly weak
and easily broken, as it relies on a single secret
digital key hidden inside every Unitary robot, and simply encrypting

(01:50:10):
the word unitary with a hard coded key was enough
to bypass security and gain control of the robot's entire system,
which means hackers could easily take it over, inject some
malicious commands to crash it, or make it attack other devices.
Equally concerning was that g one acts as a trojan horse,

(01:50:32):
secretly and continuously sending data to service in China every
five minutes without any sort of acknowledgment to the user
that this is going on. Teams showed that g one's
onboard computer could be repurchased for offensive operations. Digitally, robots

(01:50:53):
custom encryption method to protect its internal configuration files is
fundamentally flawed because again, simple static key, that's the same
on every single robot. So if you figure out unlock wine,
you got them all. Oh my god.

Speaker 5 (01:51:11):
So this is the other thing. I just looked these up.
They are not as expensive as I thought they would be.

Speaker 1 (01:51:18):
No you want one now?

Speaker 5 (01:51:20):
No, absolutely, not never in a million years. But no,
I mean more than just like if they're so easy
to hack, but they're so they're they're relatively cheap. They're
like cheaper than a car. Like just I think that
compounds the issue a little bit. That you know, if
they have their way, there'd probably be quite a few

(01:51:42):
of these running around. Literally.

Speaker 1 (01:51:47):
It seems though, like like this is a basic technology issue,
right that networked devices we have, the back doors, we
have like issues related to the Dji drones across the country,
like they just which they just reassessed and said, nope,
they got back doors. You're probably given data to China.

(01:52:09):
So people still aren't allowed to use their Dji drone technology.
But these kinds of devices, if they're being put all
over the place and sometimes high security or in you
know areas, it can It's crazy, like it would take

(01:52:33):
so much work for a human to like record something
or like copy something and share it.

Speaker 2 (01:52:39):
Tend it to their secret contact in China.

Speaker 1 (01:52:41):
But meanwhile you have the robot is just like oops.

Speaker 2 (01:52:45):
Justnes every five minutes. That's wild.

Speaker 5 (01:52:52):
It's and you know this is unrelated, but I'm just
gonna quickly throw out there, can we stop making robots
look like humans? They don't need to be bi pedal,
they don't need to look like that they need to
have a head Can we stop? Can we? And especially
until we figure out how to not hack them?

Speaker 1 (01:53:09):
Can we top headless robots? Okay?

Speaker 5 (01:53:14):
I want I want something with like a like a
tank tread situation, like more like Rosy from the Jetsons.
Can we do that instead? It can just move towards
just like the the arm on a tank tread. It's
not make it look like a human. That would be
my preference.

Speaker 2 (01:53:33):
I don't I don't mind them making it look like
a human as long as they make it out of
cheap plastic. Right if if, if the future robots are
made out of some kind of cheap, cheap, lightweight plastic.
So if they do turn into murder bots, you know,
and they and they try to at it, they got

(01:53:54):
like like.

Speaker 5 (01:53:57):
Like a little swipe trip them because the bipedal design
is really dumb.

Speaker 1 (01:54:02):
Actually cheap beach chairs.

Speaker 2 (01:54:06):
From you know, the exactly exactly. Don't don't give me
the rosie, the Rosie the tank. Give me give me
some cheap plastic robots that are easy to push around.
And I think, you know, I'm less scared of them
being murder bots, but now that I know that they're
betraying us our every secret. And the other thing is

(01:54:27):
like that idea of the connectivity in today, like where
things are like connected to your central computer. You can
turn your lights and stereo up and down, and everything's
all connected. And you put this robot smart homes in
that smart home network, and then suddenly it's compromisable and
can turn everybody's lights off at once, or disconnected refrigerator

(01:54:49):
or order stuff on Amazon for you. Like it becomes
a problem.

Speaker 1 (01:54:53):
The problems you just listed were ridiculous. Oh bad, networked
robot turned off my lights.

Speaker 2 (01:55:04):
No, everybody's lights, everybody who's connected to like in acrass
the nation, Like, you gotta understand. This is like in
every it's like a it's like a really common Doctor
Who theme. We're like something that becomes ubiquitous within society.
Everybody's like, oh, this is a normal thing, and then

(01:55:25):
you find out there's like some sinister alien plot behind
all of it all along and then turns on everybody.

Speaker 1 (01:55:33):
And I totally agree. There is the TV show murder
Bot Mode Best. It is one of the best book series.
I love this book series so much. Murder Bot Diaries
highly recommend if you have not read them very fun.
If you like murder bots, yeah, it's great, it's good.

(01:55:55):
You know, imagine blood, It's fantastic. I have two stories
that I will get to over a very long time
because it's early. Still no think of this show like
a super centenarian right now. The length of the show

(01:56:17):
is like the lifespan of the world's oldest people. What
is it that defines the longevity of those individuals and
what is different about those individuals from the people who
just live normal lifespans or shorter lifespans. So researchers just

(01:56:38):
published in Cell Reports Medicine their analysis of one individual
compared against a whole bunch of other people. So they
did a complete multiomic blueprint of a super centenarian female
aged one hundred seventeen years old and one hundred and

(01:57:02):
sixty eight days Caucasian women born March fourth, nineteen o
seven in San Francisco from Spanish parents and settled in
Spain since she was eight. She had a lot of
great life experiences. She lived in Catalonia. There's another place,

(01:57:24):
m one one six another long lived individual. Life expectancy
in Catalonia for women is eighty six years. So that's
succeeded by more than thirty years. So what's going on there?
And so these researchers decided to look at everything, all
of the genes, all of the proteins, all of the

(01:57:46):
transcriptome so RNA, DNA proteins, microbes, everything. They looked at
it all, and what they found is that the majority
of the features of this individual were those of a
younger person. Immune response, microbiome, epigenetic clock, the inflammation, uh,

(01:58:16):
cardio metabolics, you know, all these things were similar to
someone who had not really gotten into the downward slide
of aging yet. Yeah, Hi, how are you what?

Speaker 2 (01:58:29):
Uh? Well? I I don't mean to interrupt at the
beginning here, but when you say younger person, I did
me did? I raise my hand and I started talking.
When they say younger person, I'm wondering if they mean
an eighty six year old no, or somebody who like

(01:58:50):
younger than one seventeen leaves like everybody.

Speaker 1 (01:58:55):
Right, it does absolutely Okay. So the comparison that they did,
they they were really looking. They compared this one individual
to like massive database of multiomics of individuals. And so

(01:59:15):
the comparison that they that they found is the chromosomal clock.
They found that the the telomeres, the short telomeres, they
had a smaller number of short telomeres they did find
and they say, actually, no, I said that wrong, and

(01:59:36):
I'm sorry. I'll correct myself. Right now, we talk about
telomeres being the ends of the DNA, the protective bits
that get worn down as cells divide and that protect
our DNA. This individual had a huge erosion of telomere sequences,

(01:59:56):
So what's going on there? So is the te mere
attrition more of a chromosomal clock rather than a predictor
of the diseases or the aging that's going to come.
So it's a different way of looking at telomeres.

Speaker 5 (02:00:13):
That would be wild if we kind of completely shifted
our thinking on telor meres because they're involved.

Speaker 1 (02:00:21):
But yeah, involved in the frame it right.

Speaker 2 (02:00:24):
I'm glad that that's there because it's the evidence that
this person is of the age. I'm always suspicious they
are old. Well, it's because like they have to have
you know, started life in the time with really poor
record keeping.

Speaker 5 (02:00:39):
And yeah, you reported on the blue zones and how
those were all kind of poor record keeping.

Speaker 2 (02:00:44):
Yeah, well, and then like like all the one hundred
and you know, twenty something year olds in China come
from a region that only started tracking berths in like
the nineteen fifties, so like like they had like naked
up birth certificates times or ages, right, they had they

(02:01:04):
were inventing their own birthdays once people started coming around
and creating IDs, Like, they didn't even have IDs at
that point. So then I'm like San Francisco Great Fire
records can't have been there. Oh maybe the family fled
to Spain after a murder and was like, oh, our
name is this and this is our child so and so,

(02:01:25):
and they're like, oh yeah, oh yeah, she's really a child.
She just looks whatever. The thing is, right, Like, no
suspicious of age. Now, hearing this highly deteriorated telomeres that's
tracking with one hundred and seventeen year old makes more
sense to me than them just having younger features, because
then I'm like, they're.

Speaker 1 (02:01:46):
Just not old, right, So they are older, right, they
are older, but they've got aspects that are similar to
younger individuals. And you asked about the age and the
younger individuals are around twenty five years old.

Speaker 2 (02:02:00):
Wow, that's incredible.

Speaker 1 (02:02:03):
Yeah, So these individuals who are living one hundred and
ten plus, right, you know these individuals really there, they
are younger forever. They're not aging the same way that
everyone else does. They did, so this woman, she did
still have age associated B cells. There were immune cells

(02:02:26):
that were related to aging and being older. There were
issues related to blood volume hematopuesis so the ability and
how your blood volume is being turned over. So there
is stuff that was getting older, right, and it was
not super young anymore. And there were mutations, which is

(02:02:48):
what you expect as you get older, as you live longer,
you accumulate more mutations. So there should have been more
mutations found in certain places in this analysis, and they
found them. But it's really very interesting. There's the good
living aspect of it. I mean, Catalonia probably not a
terrible place to live when you're you know, probably it

(02:03:09):
was great Mediterranean diet. I don't know. She lived through
a couple of world wars. You know, she lived through flus,
she lived through massive pandemics, global flu pandemics. She lived
through a lot of things and still was younger than me.

Speaker 2 (02:03:36):
So the lack of or the low grade inflammation, the
lack of inflammation is really interesting. My guess I'm going
to put out it. Yes, that this is going to
come down almost one to mitochondria.

Speaker 1 (02:04:00):
Possibly right or at least the I mean the genetic
profile or the immune system that allows the mitochondria to
stay healthy for that.

Speaker 2 (02:04:09):
Before that, it's going to before that, it's going to
come down to the ATP and oh, what is it?
The it's okay, So it's the nuclei within the mitochondria
build up. The precursors for RNA tend to build up

(02:04:33):
over time, and this is where you start to see
escence of cells and the what is it called the
that that signaling cascade that sends out sets off the
alerts that that starts inflammation. That whole process begins in
mitochondria and has a lot to do with whether or

(02:04:54):
not it has accumulated too much precursor because mitochondria doesn't
normally have a way of getting rid of this. Now,
hermigo chondria might be able to balance itself and expel
these precursor RNAs so that they don't become burdened, so
that balance stays good. And so those mitochondria we got

(02:05:15):
to study and figure out how she's getting rid of it.
Because that could be the key to walking the fountain
of youth.

Speaker 1 (02:05:19):
But you're guessing at this when this is an entire
systemic analysis and.

Speaker 2 (02:05:24):
It looks like it.

Speaker 1 (02:05:25):
Mitochondria are very very very important, I mean really truly.

Speaker 2 (02:05:30):
But I'm gonna I'm going to predict that this that's
where this is going to end up because this well,
this is not part of the study, but there are
the there have been these studies that have looked into
the building block nucleotide build up in mitochondria's effects on
inflammation and aging of cells. Like the main things that

(02:05:51):
we see as the aging of cells begins with uh
and maybe even ends with mitochondrial health.

Speaker 1 (02:06:01):
But if the if the immune system and the garbage,
the waste, the waste system is working fine, then the
mitochondria can stay healthy. I mean that's one of the aspects.

Speaker 2 (02:06:13):
But they still age. I mean that's where aging happens,
as where the cinescent cells happening. It's all it's all
mighty unreal health that affects cell health, that affects tissue health.
That it expands from there.

Speaker 1 (02:06:25):
Yeah, I mean she did. She she was old and
she died because aging happened. This wasn't a mitochondria study.
This was just looking at this person and I like
your hypothesis.

Speaker 2 (02:06:38):
That's why. I'm like, that's how is that not so?
She This is after the fact that she's she's gone,
which is unfortunate. They need to find those super agers
now and do just a complete mitochondria study on them
to see if it is.

Speaker 1 (02:06:53):
I think that is very Yeah, that could be very interesting.
I'm just I was pointing up to where Blair is
in my thing because look at her face. She's so tired.
I'm trying to finish.

Speaker 5 (02:07:03):
I'm saving fast.

Speaker 2 (02:07:05):
I know.

Speaker 1 (02:07:05):
I have one last story and that's it.

Speaker 5 (02:07:08):
That's everything.

Speaker 2 (02:07:09):
Story.

Speaker 1 (02:07:12):
Maybe if you want to have good memory, don't eat
junk food. That's it.

Speaker 2 (02:07:19):
Anyway.

Speaker 1 (02:07:21):
If yeah, did you forget already? Oh my gosh, what'd
you have for dinner? Yeah. Researchers at UNC School of
Medicine have just published a study in mice lod in people,
but in mice, because they're looking at you know, mouse metabolism.

(02:07:42):
But but oh my gosh. When they gave the mice
fat diets, you know, they were supposed to be like
our highly processed sugar fat diets of the West, they
found that it led to a change in the way

(02:08:02):
that the neurons used glucose, and they became less likely
to do the job that they were supposed to do.
And so neurons in the brain, the inter neurons in
the hippocampus, which is part of the memory hub of
the brain, they got weirdly active, but they were not

(02:08:23):
modulated in the way that they should be by the
amounts of glucose that were present. And so what they
are suggesting is that there are very sensitive memory circuits.
They're really sensitive. Do what we eat, and that is
not related to how much you weigh or whether or
not you have a metabolic disorder like diabetes. This is

(02:08:48):
specifically just brain glucose levels fat in the diet. And
the response of these neurons to what they are saying is,
you know, mouse junk food. They did find, however, even
though the neurons got all messed up and made it
so that basically short term memory and all that stuff

(02:09:08):
is not going to be great after you eat junk food.
Pay college students like cramming for your finals, junk food
during that period, maybe you know, eat a nice meal,
go to sleep. Also intermittent fasting. They found reversed the
effect of the junk food. So the junk food messes

(02:09:29):
things up. But when you go, let's like start over
with submit intermittent fasting and maybe there's other stuff you
can fix it. If you eat junk food, all is
not lost. Your memory will not be completely gone, but
that I hope you like it.

Speaker 2 (02:09:47):
Also, that's an energy use strategy, meaning we have a
lot of energy. Now, let's not waste any time remembering
what's going on. Let's go hunt, Let's go fish, let's
go do whatever mouse does with its dime off. Let's
get more resources. And well, now that we're fasting, now
we can like think back on life and ruminate about
things for a minute.

Speaker 1 (02:10:07):
But if you think of the way that animals eat
and then normally you don't have junk food, right, Like,
maybe you are a shark, a great white shark who
gets to eat the seal candy bar, right, but you
know with all the high fat and everything in the blubber.
But more often than not, what you're dealing with is

(02:10:28):
an evolutionary system that is set up to rest and
digest after you've taken on a very high calorie fat meal,
not keep going and act like that was lunch, like,
you know, fifteen minutes standing up or walking on your
way from place to place. So the way that we
function is not the way that evolution or adaptation and

(02:10:52):
adaptation let us to where we are anyway, junk food
it is.

Speaker 5 (02:10:58):
We're an extra long lunch hit my work. Yeah, Blair
needs to process her food or her memory will be bad.

Speaker 1 (02:11:10):
Yeah. If you want her to remember anything in the afternoon,
you really need to make sure she has time to
eat good food and a two hour lunch. Lunch exactly
anyway might just be telomeres and mitochondria. I don't know.
I hope everyone will remember this show forever. I hope

(02:11:33):
you have all of the stories and the conversations that
we have been having, yeah, in your brain, because you
know this isn't junk food. This show is nutrition. Are
we done? Ready to go?

Speaker 5 (02:11:49):
Let's zu Let's close it out.

Speaker 2 (02:11:51):
That's what I was gonna do.

Speaker 1 (02:11:52):
Justin looked like he was gonna fight it for a second.

Speaker 2 (02:11:55):
I'm like, oh, I'm going to be at work in
like a couple of hours.

Speaker 1 (02:12:00):
I know. Thank you for listening, everybody, Thank you for
being here. I'm so glad that you joined us for
this extra long show that we were going to finish
at ten o'clock. Shout outs Fada, thank you so much
for your help with show notes, social media, everything that
you do, Identity for Thank you for recording the show.
I know tonight's going to be a little bit weird.
Gord arn Loore, everyone who's in the chat rooms, thank

(02:12:23):
you for keeping it wonderful places to be. Thank you
for enjoying chatting and being part of it all. Rachel,
thank you for editing the show and assisting in the
way that you do. Thank you to our Patreon sponsors.
Can never forget them. Hey, everybody, thank you too. Aaron Anathema,

(02:12:46):
Adam Mischkan Ali Viola, Ali Coff And Andrew Swans and
Arthur Kepler, Ardiam, Bob Calder, Bob Coles, Brand and Minish,
Brian Carrington, Chris Wouznieck, Christopher Dreyer, Christopher Wrappin, Craig Landon,
Craig Potts, Dana Luis, Daryl my Shack, Dave Wilkinson, David.

Speaker 5 (02:12:58):
Yungla Done Monday.

Speaker 1 (02:13:00):
Us Dot of the Styles, A K Don Stylo, e
o Eden Mandel, Eric Knapp, flying Out, Fredis one O
four G Burdon, Latimore, George Chorus, Gregg Briggs, Jack Jason Olds,
John Attwoo, John McKee, John Rattaswami, Johnny Gridley, Ken Hayes,
Ken North Cote, Kevin Paratan, Kevin Reardon, Kurt Larson, Lawn Makes,
Lauren Gifford, Mary Gertz, Marjorie Mark Hessenflow Noodles, Patrick Pecerarro

(02:13:21):
I hope you're doing okay, Paul Pauldy Disney, Paul Ronovich,
Philip Shane, Pierre vellaz Are, p I g Richard, Richard Badge,
Robert Norland, Robert Farley, Rodney Lewis, Rigarcia, Remy De, Shaan Leris,
Nyam she Brew, Stephen Alboron, Steve Lee, spin At, Kacmasue Aster,
Teresa Smith, Tony Steele, Bagard's Chef's Dad. Thank you all
of you for supporting Twists. We really cannot do this

(02:13:42):
without you. Your support is essential and if you want
to support us on Patreon, head over to twists dot
org and click on that Patreon link.

Speaker 2 (02:13:54):
On next week's show, we will be back well some
of us Wednesday am Pacific time, broadcasting live from our Twitch,
YouTube and Facebook channels.

Speaker 5 (02:14:05):
Hey, do you want to listen to us as a podcast.
Perhaps will you drive to pick up your fast food
dinner than you probably shouldn't have for your brain. Just
search for this Week in Science or podcasts are found.
If you enjoyed the show, get your friends to subscribe
as well.

Speaker 2 (02:14:19):
For more information on anything you've heard here, today's show
notes links to stories we'll be available on our website
www dot twist dot org, where you can also sign
up for player's newsletter.

Speaker 5 (02:14:33):
We love your feedback. There's a topic you would like
us to cover or address, or suggestion for an interview,
please let us know in one of our social media accounts, or,
better yet, send us an email. Just be sure to
put twists twis on the subject line, or your email
will have no ties to a phylogenetic tree. It'll just

(02:14:56):
be a bunch of dotted lines and we'll liver see
it at all.

Speaker 2 (02:15:03):
Yes, but we do look forward to discuss science with
you again next week. And if you've learned anything from
the show, please remember it's.

Speaker 8 (02:15:15):
All this week in science, This week in science, This
week in science, This week in science. It's the end
of the world. So I'm setting up shop, got my batner,

(02:15:35):
refurl it says the scientist is in. I'm gonna sell
my advice. Tell them how to stop the robots with
a simple device.

Speaker 3 (02:15:43):
I'll reverse all the warming with a wave of my hand.

Speaker 4 (02:15:46):
And oh it'll coffee is a couple of grass.

Speaker 8 (02:15:52):
Because this week's science is coming your way. So everybody
listens to what I say. How use the science.

Speaker 3 (02:16:00):
Hymic method for all that it's worth, and I'll broadcast my.

Speaker 2 (02:16:03):
Opinion all over the.

Speaker 1 (02:16:07):
Go.

Speaker 3 (02:16:08):
It's this week in science, This week in science, This
week in science, Ycience, Science, Science, This week.

Speaker 8 (02:16:16):
In Science, this weekend Science, This week in science, This
week in science, This week in science, This week in Science,
This week in science, This week in Science,

All Episodes

Episode Transcript

Popular Podcasts

On Purpose with Jay Shetty

The Joe Rogan Experience

Stuff You Should Know

.css-15opob5{left:0;position:absolute;top:0.8rem;} All Episodes

.css-14f5ked{margin:0;word-break:break-word;display:-webkit-box;-webkit-box-orient:vertical;box-orient:vertical;-webkit-line-clamp:2;overflow:hidden;}This One Is For the Fearless

Episode Transcript

Popular Podcasts

.css-r6mb8g{margin:0;word-break:break-word;display:-webkit-box;-webkit-box-orient:vertical;box-orient:vertical;-webkit-line-clamp:1;overflow:hidden;}On Purpose with Jay Shetty

The Joe Rogan Experience

Stuff You Should Know

All Episodes

This One Is For the Fearless

On Purpose with Jay Shetty