On this week's episode of the pod, we discuss the history of epidemiology. We kick things off with a definition of the term and clarify that epidemiology is not specific to infectious disease but rather all diseases, as well as their risk factors. We take a trip down memory lane and revisit the different eras of epidemiology including the sanitary era, the infectious disease era, the risk factor and black box epidemiology era, and what many call the eco-epidemiology era of today. We dig into some epidemiological case studies of yesteryear, including the famous case of John Snow and the Broad Street Cholera outbreak of 1854. We also highlight some other key players in the evolution of epidemiology as a science and the critical roles they played. We also briefly discuss Hill's causal criteria and their use (still today!) in strengthening our confidence in attributing a causal link to an association. We hope you enjoy!PLEASE NOTE: The discussion and information provided in this podcast are for general educational, scientific, and informational purposes only and are not intended as, and should not be treated as, medical or other professional advice for any particular individual or individuals. Every person and medical issue is different, and diagnosis and treatment requires consideration of specific facts often unique to the individual. As such, the information contained in this podcast should not be used as a substitute for consultation with and/or treatment by a doctor or other medical professional. If you are experiencing any medical issue or have any medical concern, you should consult with a doctor or other medical professional. Further, due to the inherent limitations of a podcast such as this as well as ongoing scientific developments, we do not guarantee the completeness or accuracy of the information or analysis provided in this podcast, although, of course we always endeavor to provide comprehensive information and analysis. In no event may Unbiased Science or any of the participants in this podcast be held liable to the listener or anyone else for any decision allegedly made or action allegedly taken or not taken allegedly in reliance on the discussion or information in this podcast or for any damages allegedly resulting from such reliance. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

On this week's episode of the pod we talk about our respective careers in STEM. We discuss the paths that led us here, our education and training, and the different fields that one can pursue with advanced degrees in a STEM field ranging from academia to applied science. Andrea discusses her relatively linear path from a child fascinated by bugs to her PhD in immunology, and Jess describes her more circuitous route leading her to a DrPH. We welcome our first ever guest to the pod, Dr. Bill Gallo, a health economist and data scientist who left a decades-long career in academia to pursue an entrepreneurial venture. We discuss some of the challenges we faced along the way, as well as the things that keep us going. If you've ever considering pursuing a career in STEM, we encourage you to tune in!PLEASE NOTE: The discussion and information provided in this podcast are for general educational, scientific, and informational purposes only and are not intended as, and should not be treated as, medical or other professional advice for any particular individual or individuals. Every person and medical issue is different, and diagnosis and treatment requires consideration of specific facts often unique to the individual. As such, the information contained in this podcast should not be used as a substitute for consultation with and/or treatment by a doctor or other medical professional. If you are experiencing any medical issue or have any medical concern, you should consult with a doctor or other medical professional. Further, due to the inherent limitations of a podcast such as this as well as ongoing scientific developments, we do not guarantee the completeness or accuracy of the information or analysis provided in this podcast, although, of course we always endeavor to provide comprehensive information and analysis. In no event may Unbiased Science or any of the participants in this podcast be held liable to the listener or anyone else for any decision allegedly made or action allegedly taken or not taken allegedly in reliance on the discussion or information in this podcast or for any damages allegedly resulting from such reliance. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

On this week's pod, we continued the fun of exploring the science (or lack thereof) behind some popular old wives' tales! We tackled the old adage (pun intended) that pulling out a grey hair will result in two more growing in its place. Next, we discuss whether it's safe to swim within an hour of eating. We then revisited a topic we've covered in the past-- taking vitamin C to "cure" a cold (we do a deep dive on our "Spilling the Immuni-Tea" episode if you want to check that out). Next, we tackle whether it's true that having heartburn in pregnancy means you'll have a hairy baby (you'll be reminded of one of our favorite phrases, "correlation, not causation"). We also discuss whether saltwater cures a sore throat and whether honey cures a cough. Next, we move to fruits and veggies-- does an apple a day really keep the doctor away, and can eating carrots improve your vision? You'll have to tune in to find out!PLEASE NOTE: The discussion and information provided in this podcast are for general educational, scientific, and informational purposes only and are not intended as, and should not be treated as, medical or other professional advice for any particular individual or individuals. Every person and medical issue is different, and diagnosis and treatment requires consideration of specific facts often unique to the individual. As such, the information contained in this podcast should not be used as a substitute for consultation with and/or treatment by a doctor or other medical professional. If you are experiencing any medical issue or have any medical concern, you should consult with a doctor or other medical professional. Further, due to the inherent limitations of a podcast such as this as well as ongoing scientific developments, we do not guarantee the completeness or accuracy of the information or analysis provided in this podcast, although, of course we always endeavor to provide comprehensive information and analysis. In no event may Unbiased Science or any of the participants in this podcast be held liable to the listener or anyone else for any decision allegedly made or action allegedly taken or not taken allegedly in reliance on the discussion or information in this podcast or for any damages allegedly resulting from such reliance. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

On this episode of the pod, we take a little break from COVID-19 to debunk some common old wives' tales related to health. Lots of listeners wrote in with many great ideas, so this will be a two-parter! We kick things off by breaking down the old adage, "feed a cold, starve a fever" (and we recommend changing it to "feed a cold, feed a fever"). Next, we tackle the myth that you’ll get sick from being outside in the cold and/or going outside with wet hair in the winter (remember...correlation doesn't equal causation). Lots of people wanted us to discuss whether there's scientific support for drinking cranberry juice to treat and/or prevent urinary tract infections-- so we did! Finally, we talk about the [lack of] scientific evidence for putting raw cut onions on the soles of your feet to stave off a cold. Spoiler alert: that one really stinks! We hope you’ll tune in and enjoy!PLEASE NOTE: The discussion and information provided in this podcast are for general educational, scientific, and informational purposes only and are not intended as, and should not be treated as, medical or other professional advice for any particular individual or individuals. Every person and medical issue is different, and diagnosis and treatment requires consideration of specific facts often unique to the individual. As such, the information contained in this podcast should not be used as a substitute for consultation with and/or treatment by a doctor or other medical professional. If you are experiencing any medical issue or have any medical concern, you should consult with a doctor or other medical professional. Further, due to the inherent limitations of a podcast such as this as well as ongoing scientific developments, we do not guarantee the completeness or accuracy of the information or analysis provided in this podcast, although, of course we always endeavor to provide comprehensive information and analysis. In no event may Unbiased Science or any of the participants in this podcast be held liable to the listener or anyone else for any decision allegedly made or action allegedly taken or not taken allegedly in reliance on the discussion or information in this podcast or for any damages allegedly resulting from such reliance. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

On this week’s podcast episode, we get back to COVID-19 vaccine discussions, but with a different angle: focusing on the vaccine manufacturing, development, and deployment pipelines. We start with the U.S. and global statistics for vaccination rates, and then focus on a discussion of the parameters that impact the access to vaccines for countries around the world. We summarize the currently utilized vaccines globally and which countries are utilizing them, before focusing on the bottlenecks through the entire vaccine deployment process. We focus on bottlenecks encountered in manufacturing and supply chain of raw materials, bottlenecks with regard to personnel needed across all phases of a vaccination campaign, and bottlenecks involved with distribution and storage. We discuss some of the plans, both in the U.S. and globally, that are being implemented to address the current roadblocks, and some of the ways in which the world can address vaccine equity.PLEASE NOTE: The discussion and information provided in this podcast are for general educational, scientific, and informational purposes only and are not intended as, and should not be treated as, medical or other professional advice for any particular individual or individuals. Every person and medical issue is different, and diagnosis and treatment requires consideration of specific facts often unique to the individual. As such, the information contained in this podcast should not be used as a substitute for consultation with and/or treatment by a doctor or other medical professional. If you are experiencing any medical issue or have any medical concern, you should consult with a doctor or other medical professional. Further, due to the inherent limitations of a podcast such as this as well as ongoing scientific developments, we do not guarantee the completeness or accuracy of the information or analysis provided in this podcast, although, of course we always endeavor to provide comprehensive information and analysis. In no event may Unbiased Science or any of the participants in this podcast be held liable to the listener or anyone else for any decision allegedly made or action allegedly taken or not taken allegedly in reliance on the discussion or information in this podcast or for any damages allegedly resulting from such reliance. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

On this episode of the pod, we take a little break from COVID-19 to discuss essential oils. We kick things off with a description of essential oils, their history, and their applications. We discuss some of the purported benefits of essential oils and touted medicinal applications. We then dive into the scientific evidence (or lack thereof) on the actual benefits of essential oils and the findings from studies that have been conducted (and the difference between human trials and in vitro studies). We talk specifically about a few commonly used essential oils such as lavender and tea tree oil. We discuss the lack of regulation of essential oils and implications for inaccurate labeling of products. Finally, we spend some time talking about the potential harms of essential oils to humans and animals that must be taken into consideration.PLEASE NOTE: The discussion and information provided in this podcast are for general educational, scientific, and informational purposes only and are not intended as, and should not be treated as, medical or other professional advice for any particular individual or individuals. Every person and medical issue is different, and diagnosis and treatment requires consideration of specific facts often unique to the individual. As such, the information contained in this podcast should not be used as a substitute for consultation with and/or treatment by a doctor or other medical professional. If you are experiencing any medical issue or have any medical concern, you should consult with a doctor or other medical professional. Further, due to the inherent limitations of a podcast such as this as well as ongoing scientific developments, we do not guarantee the completeness or accuracy of the information or analysis provided in this podcast, although, of course we always endeavor to provide comprehensive information and analysis. In no event may Unbiased Science or any of the participants in this podcast be held liable to the listener or anyone else for any decision allegedly made or action allegedly taken or not taken allegedly in reliance on the discussion or information in this podcast or for any damages allegedly resulting from such reliance. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

On this week's episode we discuss mutations, specifically in the context of SARS-CoV-2. We set the stage by describing what a mutation is and how this random process occurs in all organisms. We discuss the emergence of SARS-CoV-2 and a primer on zoonotic diseases before focusing on mutation rates of SARS-CoV-2, and comparison to another RNA virus, influenza virus. We talk about the key mutations of the variants of concern B.1.1.7, B.1.351, and P.1 and the spike antigen of the virus, and why these mutations have become more prevalent. We wrap up with a discussion on the implications of vaccine efficacy in light of these new variants, and underscore the need for rapid vaccination globally.PLEASE NOTE: The discussion and information provided in this podcast are for general educational, scientific, and informational purposes only and are not intended as, and should not be treated as, medical or other professional advice for any particular individual or individuals. Every person and medical issue is different, and diagnosis and treatment requires consideration of specific facts often unique to the individual. As such, the information contained in this podcast should not be used as a substitute for consultation with and/or treatment by a doctor or other medical professional. If you are experiencing any medical issue or have any medical concern, you should consult with a doctor or other medical professional. Further, due to the inherent limitations of a podcast such as this as well as ongoing scientific developments, we do not guarantee the completeness or accuracy of the information or analysis provided in this podcast, although, of course we always endeavor to provide comprehensive information and analysis. In no event may Unbiased Science or any of the participants in this podcast be held liable to the listener or anyone else for any decision allegedly made or action allegedly taken or not taken allegedly in reliance on the discussion or information in this podcast or for any damages allegedly resulting from such reliance. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

On this week's episode of the podcast, we discuss protections in place for human research subjects. To start the conversation, we discuss some infamous examples of past injustices conducted in the name of "research" and the regulations they prompted as a result. We highlight four cases: the Holocaust experiments, the Tuskegee Syphilis Study, the work of James Marion Sims, and the case of Henrietta Lacks. We spend some time detailing historical documents and regulations that were developed to protect human subjects that came out of these horrific historical blunders and atrocities. Next, we discuss in detail what "informed consent" means, the rigorous regulatory process for any research involving humans, and the modern-day Institutional Review Board (IRB). We recognize that there continues to exist distrust of science and the medical establishment, particularly among populations of color, and our hope is that this episode sets the stage for future conversations that are needed to address this complex issue.PLEASE NOTE: The discussion and information provided in this podcast are for general educational, scientific, and informational purposes only and are not intended as, and should not be treated as, medical or other professional advice for any particular individual or individuals. Every person and medical issue is different, and diagnosis and treatment requires consideration of specific facts often unique to the individual. As such, the information contained in this podcast should not be used as a substitute for consultation with and/or treatment by a doctor or other medical professional. If you are experiencing any medical issue or have any medical concern, you should consult with a doctor or other medical professional. Further, due to the inherent limitations of a podcast such as this as well as ongoing scientific developments, we do not guarantee the completeness or accuracy of the information or analysis provided in this podcast, although, of course we always endeavor to provide comprehensive information and analysis. In no event may Unbiased Science or any of the participants in this podcast be held liable to the listener or anyone else for any decision allegedly made or action allegedly taken or not taken allegedly in reliance on the discussion or information in this podcast or for any damages allegedly resulting from such reliance. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

This week we answer a commonly encountered question: "why were we able to develop a COVID-19 vaccine in less than a year, but don't have a vaccine for HIV?"We begin with the population health statistics of HIV globally to set the stage. We then do a primer on classification of viruses to underscore the fact that not all viruses are the same. We focus on SARS-CoV-2 and HIV specifically, and do a brief compare and contrast between the two viruses and virus families.We focus specifically on the challenges of vaccine development in the context of HIV: complexity of the virus itself, immune response to the virus, and disease pathology. We reiterate that the foundational research for the SARS-CoV-2 vaccine has actually been ongoing since 2002, and wrap up with our hope that someday we will be able to successfully develop an effective HIV vaccine.PLEASE NOTE: The discussion and information provided in this podcast are for general educational, scientific, and informational purposes only and are not intended as, and should not be treated as, medical or other professional advice for any particular individual or individuals. Every person and medical issue is different, and diagnosis and treatment requires consideration of specific facts often unique to the individual. As such, the information contained in this podcast should not be used as a substitute for consultation with and/or treatment by a doctor or other medical professional. If you are experiencing any medical issue or have any medical concern, you should consult with a doctor or other medical professional. Further, due to the inherent limitations of a podcast such as this as well as ongoing scientific developments, we do not guarantee the completeness or accuracy of the information or analysis provided in this podcast, although, of course we always endeavor to provide comprehensive information and analysis. In no event may Unbiased Science or any of the participants in this podcast be held liable to the listener or anyone else for any decision allegedly made or action allegedly taken or not taken allegedly in reliance on the discussion or information in this podcast or for any damages allegedly resulting from such reliance. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

This week on the pod we discuss something we hear about all the time: the alkaline diet and alkaline water. Promised to prevent cancer and other ailments, this diet claims to be able to alter the pH of your body. First we set the stage with a primer on what the pH scale is and how it relates to acidity or alkalinity of substances. We discuss the concept of homeostasis in the human body and how our organ and buffer systems ensure the pH of our blood and other compartments are tightly regulated. We continue with a summary on the history of the alkaline diet origins, and wrap up with a review of the health claims affiliated with the alkaline diet, and whether the data supports or refutes those claims.PLEASE NOTE: The discussion and information provided in this podcast are for general educational, scientific, and informational purposes only and are not intended as, and should not be treated as, medical or other professional advice for any particular individual or individuals. Every person and medical issue is different, and diagnosis and treatment requires consideration of specific facts often unique to the individual. As such, the information contained in this podcast should not be used as a substitute for consultation with and/or treatment by a doctor or other medical professional. If you are experiencing any medical issue or have any medical concern, you should consult with a doctor or other medical professional. Further, due to the inherent limitations of a podcast such as this as well as ongoing scientific developments, we do not guarantee the completeness or accuracy of the information or analysis provided in this podcast, although, of course we always endeavor to provide comprehensive information and analysis. In no event may Unbiased Science or any of the participants in this podcast be held liable to the listener or anyone else for any decision allegedly made or action allegedly taken or not taken allegedly in reliance on the discussion or information in this podcast or for any damages allegedly resulting from such reliance. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices