STEM-Talk

Episode 200: From rogue AI agents to factchecking AI, Ken Ford responds to more listener AI questions In today’s third of a three-part series of Ask Me Anything episodes, Dr. Ken Ford responds to more listener questions and concerns about artificial intelligence. In AMA episode 198, Ken answered a wide-range of questions about chatbots and data centers and the future of AI, which prompted a new round of listener questions about AI that Ken will be answering today. Ken has been working in AI since the 1980s and is well-positioned to help listeners sort genuine advances in AI from exaggerated claims. The Association for the Advancement of Artificial Intelligence elected Ford a Fellow in 2000 for his “leadership in exploring and explaining foundational issues and in establishing large-scale AI research programs and institutions.” In today’s episode, Ken tackles listener questions about: — A team leader at Anthropic, the developer of the chatbot Claude, who shared a post that someday “AI could kill all humans.” — the Hugging Face incident in July where OpenAI’s AI agents, operating in a testing environment, broke out, got online, and compromised parts of Hugging Face’s systems. — How to factcheck AI systems that confabulate nonexistent facts. — And that’s just for starters. If you have questions for Ken and Dawn after listening to today’s episode, or any episode of STEM-Talk, email your questions to STEM-Talk producer Randy Hammer at [email protected]. Show notes: [00:04:55] Dawn opens the AMA with a listener question about Evan Hubinger, a team lead at Anthropic who shared his thoughts in a post that someday “AI could kill all humans.” Anthropic is the developer of the chatbot Claude. Hubinger went on to say in his post, which has been viewed tens of millions of times, that he believes there’s more than a 10 percent chance that AI could wipe out humanity within the next decade. The listener asks if we should indeed be terrified that AI is going to one day kill all humans. [00:14:19] A listener asks Ken if he were appointed AI Czar, with broad powers to create and implement regulation of AI, what would he do? The listeners also adds that declining this burden is not one of Ken’s options for an answer. [00:22:59] Ken responds to a listener who asks about the widely reported Hugging Face incident in July where OpenAI’s agents escaped their testing environment and hacked into Hugging Face’s systems, creating significant security breaches. The listener is particularly interested in Ken’s thoughts about a comment that the podcaster Dwarkesh Patel made that the incident represented the rise and fall of three secret AI civilizations. The listeners asks if Ken could share some light on what really happened in the Hugging Face incident and whether referring to AI systems as civilizations gives people a misleading picture of what these AI agents were really doing? [00:32:12] Dawn mentions that she hears a lot of people wondering about the possibility of AI consciousness. Some people believe it has already happened because of reports about AI systems taking independent actions and deceiving their developers. There are even reports about AI systems contacting philosophers to ask questions about consciousness. Dawn shares that a listener has asked if these behaviors are indeed evidence of AI consciousness. The listener goes on to ask what evidence would we actually need before concluding that an AI system is conscious? [00:46:06] Dawn reads a question from a listener who asks, “I’ve seen reports that OpenAI’s new GPT-6 Astra is harder to monitor than earlier models, and some of the coverage makes it sound as though humans are beginning to lose oversight of these systems. What does ‘less monitorable’ actually mean? Is GPT-6 being supervised less, or is the issue that it is becoming harder to understand what the model is doing internally? How concerned should we be?” asks the listener. [00:56:49] Ken responds to question from a long-time computer scientist who is puzzled by the current use of terms like “AI agent” and “agentic AI.” The scientist writes, “Traditionally, an agent in computer science meant a system that perceived an environment and acted within it in pursuit of goals. Today, many so-called agents seem to be little more than large language models placed inside prompt loops: Ask the model what to do next, execute the result, feed the outcome back in, and repeat. Have we changed the technical meaning of ‘agent,’ or is some of this terminology simply anthropomorphizing fairly conventional software architectures?” [01:01:58] Dawn shares another question about the threat of AI, but one that’s different than the doomsday scenarios of rogue AI agents exterminating humanity. Dawn shares a listener’s concern that by relying increasingly on AI to write prose, solve problems, and make decisions for us, AI could gradually degrade us as human beings. The listener points out that since purposeful effort, struggle, and overcoming challenges are important components of human happiness and fulfillment, that an increasingly AI-dependent society could ultimately make humans feel less fulfilled. The listener wonders how seriously people should take this concern? [01:13:37] Dawn shares a listener’s question that reads, “Sam Altman and Dario Amodei have both recently called for the AI industry to deliberately slow the pace of development, citing risks that they say are advancing faster than our ability to control them. Should we take these warnings at face value, or is there a more mundane explanation—like diminishing returns on scaling—that’s being dressed up in more dramatic language?” [01:19:54] Ken responds to a question about AI systems that confabulate nonexistent facts. The listener wonders why there isn’t a simple solution to these factual confabulations, such as assigning a separate AI agent to review output and confirm that asserted facts do indeed exist in some data base? [01:29:39] Dawn wraps up the interview by pointing out that she often notices users saying “please” and “thank you” when talking to ChatGPT and Claude and other AI systems. Dawn questions why so many people talk to these systems as though they’re people and wonders if there’s any reason that people should? Links: Learn more about IHMC STEM-Talk homepage Ken Ford bio Ken Ford Wikipedia page Dawn Kernagis bio              

Today we have the second of a two-part AMA. In part one, episode 198, we covered a multitude of listener questions about AI, which lately seems to dominate the news cycle. Other than one AI question that managed to sneak in, today’s AMA features a wide range of questions on a number of topics other than artificial intelligence. Today, Ken and Dawn respond to listener questions that range from: — Whether there’s a critical difference between whey protein powders and ready-to-drink protein shakes? — Is there a sweat spot for how much time a person should spend on resistance training during a week? — Ken’s thoughts on a paper that looked at whether higher meat consumption could be associated with a lower risk of dementia among people carrying the APOE ε4 gene variant. — What kind of Pandora’s box will we open if parents start doing genetic tests on their infants to see if their children have, say, the APOE ε4 gene variant? — Will NASA will be able to meet its target date of sending astronauts back to the Moon by 2028? — And a lot more. Show notes; [00:03:05] A listener asks Ken about the 2019 Trim study by Gregory Fahy and colleagues in Aging Cell, which reported reversal of epigenetic aging and signs of thymic regeneration in nine healthy men treated with the growth hormone, DHEA, and metformin. [00:06:56] Ken responds to a question about the market being flooded with protein supplements. The listener asks if whether there’s a critical difference between whey protein and ready-to-drink protein shakes, and if there are any specific products he recommends. [00:10:50] A listener asks Ken about a recent article in Nature Reviews Neuroscience titled: [00:15:26] A listener asks Ken about a Chinese company called Moonshot AI and its open-weight model, Kimi K3. The listener references Gary Marcus who anticipates that the power of this model paired with the open-weight design will have immense implications. The listener asks for Ken’s take. [00:25:56] A listener mentions that they’ve heard that Ken likes to tell graduate students a fable about a rabbit pursuing their Ph.D. A listener asks Ken if he would share the fable. [00:30:15] A listener asks Ken about a study published in Jama Network Open by Norgren and company which suggests that higher meat consumption may be associated with lower Alzheimer’s risk for people carrying the APOE 4 gene variant, the strongest common genetic risk factor for late onset Alzheimer’s. [00:38:24] A listener mentions in their question for Ken that the Department of Health and Human Services recommends at least 150 minutes of moderate exercise per week, but this recommendation does not break down how much of that time should be spent on aerobic versus strength training. The listener goes on to mention a study in the that looked at identifying this sweet spot for resistance exercise, finding that between 90-119 minutes per week of weightlifting was associated with a 13 perent lower risk of premature death and a 27 percent reduction in neurological disease mortality, particularly Alzheimer’s. The listener also mentions that they are aware of IHMC’s ongoing clinical trial looking at the ability of exercise to mitigate the hallmarks of aging in people over 60 years old. The listener asks if this study is similarly trying to identify a sweet spot for resistance exercise, and if Ken has any recommendations on this topic. [00:46:32] Another listener mentions that they really enjoyed our interview with Doug Cooke on the Artimis II mission (episode 195), as well as our interview with Mike Griffin and Lisa Porter about NASA’s plan to return to the moon (episode 189). The listener goes on to mention that since then a Blue Origin rocket, one of the companies responsible for building a lunar lander, exploded on the launch pad in Florida. The listener asks if Ken is he’ still skeptical about the Artemis III mission architecture and timeframe in light of the recent news. [00:54:37] A listener asks Ken for his thoughts on the growing research efforts to investigate the feasibility of doing genetic testing on infants to identify their predisposition to specific diseases such as Alzheimer’s. [01:01:57] A listener asks for Kens thoughts on a study of creatine’s effects on physically active vegans. The study reported that 4 weeks of creatine supplementation improved lower-body power, especially jump height and flight time. But they did not find improvements in strength tests. [01:08:10] A listener asks for Ken’s thoughts on a recent White House report “Science: A New Golden Age”, which argues that the American scientific enterprise needs to be reformed and that agencies like NSF have become overly bureaucratic, slow, and risk averse. Links: Learn more about IHMC STEM-Talk homepage Ken Ford bio Ken Ford Wikipedia page

Today we have an Ask Me Anything episode that focuses on artificial intelligence. For the past year, AI has dominated the headlines. Perhaps because there’s so much media and public interest, as well as paranoia, about AI, listeners have been flooding our mailbox with AI-related questions. So, today’s AMA is an exclusive focused on artificial intelligence. For our listeners who have been sending questions about ketamine; NASA’s Artemis mission to the Moon; or whether high meat consumption leads to dementia; fear not, because we will follow up today’s episode in a few weeks with a second round of AMA. Dr. Ken Ford will be answering today’s AI questions. He has been working in AI since the 1980s and is a Fellow of the Association for the Advancement of Artificial Intelligence. As a result, he is well-positioned to help us today to separate real advances in AI from hype, panic and science fiction. If you have questions for Ken and Dawn after listening to today’s episode, or any episode of STEM-Talk, email your questions to STEM-Talk producer Randy Hammer at rhammer.ihmc.org. Show notes: [00:03:15] Dawn opens our AMA episode on AI with a listener question for Ken on whether AI companies should be protected under section 230 of the U.S. Communications Decency Act. [00:08:03] Following up on the previous question, a listener asks if Ken foresees a day where laws and courts will designate AI as a judicial person, in the same way that corporations have rights under the legal doctrine of corporate personhood. [00:10:55] A listener asks Ken for his thoughts on a recent article published in the Atlantic titled “The Data-Center Panic is Overblown: Critics are Inflating the Costs.” [00:16:09] A listener asks Ken a question regarding episode 171 of STEM-Talk, in which Ken discussed a June 2024 report by Leopold Aschenbrenner which predicted rates of growth in both compute resources and power requirements for AI data centers. The listener asks how well these predictions have held up in the following year. [00:22:19] Another listener question about data centers asks Ken what his thoughts are on the notion of solving the electricity costs and cooling requirements for data centers by building them in orbit and powering them via solar energy. [00:30:07] Moving on to the applications of AI, Peter Attia recently wrote about a study out of Harvard that suggests that today’s large language models perform extremely well on medical licensing exams and often arrive at the correct diagnosis yet still struggle with differential diagnosis. The listener asks what this means about the use of AI in medicine. [00:36:53] A listener asks Ken about repeated public statements by Anthropic’s CEO that their AI models, and those expected in the future, are already powerful and dangerous enough to justify concern, while at the same time Anthropic and other leading AI companies are continuing to employ these systems and cautioning governments against regulation that could slow down innovation. The listener asks Ken how to resolve this contradiction. [00:45:18] A listener writes that in a previous AMA, STEM-Talk episode 184, Ken objected to the use of the word hallucination to describe errors made by large-language models and asks Ken to expound on this. [00:53:28] A listener asks Ken whether current AI models are evolving from being fundamentally prediction engines to being able to truly understand and reason, or if they are just becoming better and more convincing prediction engines. [00:59:37] A listener writes to Ken, mentioning that a few years ago, a thousand technology experts and researchers signed a letter urging AI labs and executives to pause the development of highly advanced AI systems and tools. This letter, drafted through the not-for-profit Future of Life Institute, warned that AI developers were locked in an out-of-control race to develop and deploy ever more powerful digital minds that no one, not even their creators, can understand, predict or reliably control. The listener also states that they learned recently that ChatGPT 5 was programmed using an earlier version of ChatGPT. If the concerns of tech leaders are to be taken seriously, the listener wonders if it is a good idea to have earlier versions of ChatGPT programing later versions of ChatGPT? [01:07:45] A listener asks Ken about the process of training smaller AI models from larger models, a process called distillation. The listener asks how this process works and if this is a way for the cost of training large models to benefit everyone. [01:14:56] A listener asks Ken what it means for China’s Open Weight GLM 5.2 to be reported to have achieved near parity with Anthropic’s Mythos. On several cyber security and vulnerability discovery benchmarks, it seems alarming that GLM 5.2 is operating at roughly 1/6th the cost and remaining openly available for download and deployment. [01:22:34] A listener writes that they recently heard a story about someone who asked an AI whether they should walk or drive to a car wash in order to get their car washed when the car wash was close by their starting location. The AI in this condition recommended that they walk instead of drive. The listener asks why the AI was unable to give the obviously correct answer to a simple common-sense question. [01:29:05] For our final question in this AMA, a listener writes that, recently, nearly 200 researchers and economists signed a statement warning that as AI becomes more powerful it could take over a large share of human work and lead to widespread joblessness. The listener wants to know if Ken would have signed the statement and what he thinks of the statement’s three points: One: AI may become radically more powerful over the next 10 years. Two: This could drive an unprecedented transformation of our economy larger than the industrial revolution and over a vastly shorter timeframe, with large scale job displacement. Three: Economists, policy makers, and tech leaders must act now in order to understand the economic impacts of transformative AI and to build the incentives guardrails and institutions need to steer AI in a direction that compliments humans and benefits society. Links: Learn more about IHMC STEM-Talk homepage Ken Ford bio Ken Ford Wikipedia page Dawn Kernagis bio    

Today we have Dr. Scott Sherr, an internal medicine physician who specializes in Hyperbaric Oxygen Therapy. Scott is the director of Integrative Hyperbaric Medicine and Heath Optimization at Hyperbaric Medical Solutions. It is a division of Hyperbaric Medical Solutions, an independent, hyperbaric oxygen therapy provider that aims to educate people about the benefits of hyperbaric oxygen therapy via telemedicine consulting. He also is COO of Troscriptions, which provides physician-formulated products including popular methylene blue products. In today’s interview, Scott talks about how he uses Hyperbaric Oxygen Therapy (HBOT) to treat a number of health conditions. He also shares how he incorporates methylene blue into some of his treatment strategies and explains how HBOT is now being used as a complementary treatment for autoimmune diseases by helping reduce inflammation, improve blood flow and support immune function. Show notes: [00:03:29] Dawn tells Scott that she heard a story that Scott had his spine adjusted when he was just five minutes old.  She asks Scott if he can share what happened. [00:04:15] Dawn mentions that Scott grew up in New York on Long Island and that as a child he spent a lot of time at his father’s chiropractic office. Dawn asks Scott about his father and his practice. [00:05:38] Ken notes that Scott was into sports as a kid and asks him to talk about his childhood and what he was like as a kid. [00:07:09] Dawn notes that after high school, Scott left New York for the West Coast, landing at UCLA. Dawn asks Scott to talk about what led him there. [00:08:00] Dawn explains that Scott initially started to major in biology but quickly changed majors. Scott explains why he changed majors. [00:08:41] Dawn asks Scott why he chose to attend the University of Maryland for medical school after graduating from UCLA. [00:09:26] Dawn asks Scott about the story of how he met his wife at the University of Maryland. [00:09:50] Dawn pivots back to Scott’s love of music, mentioning that Scott and three other medical school students at Maryland formed a band called The Airport Rocking Chairs. Scott describes how the band came together and how they performed at gigs around the Baltimore/D.C. area. [00:11:16] Ken asks Scott to talk about how his early ambition upon entering medical school was to find a way to bridge the gap between conventional and alternative/chiropractic medicine. [00:12:54] Ken explains that in Scott’s third year of medical school, he did rotations at the University Shock and Trauma Facility. Ken asks Scott to talk about why this was such an important experience for Scott. [00:14:32] Dawn explains that hyperbaric chambers are used to treat injuries like necrotizing fasciitis and severe wounds. Dawn asks Scott to talk about finding a hyperbaric chamber in the basement of the University Shock and Trauma Facility and how that led to his fascination with the potential for hyperbaric oxygen therapy. [00:15:51] Dawn asks Scott to talk about how his initial research on hyperbaric therapies led him to conclude that they were being vastly underutilized in conventional medicine. [00:16:31] Dawn mentions that people are likely familiar with hyperbaric oxygen therapy (HBOT) in terms of treating divers suffering from decompression sickness. She asks Scott to give a primer on the mechanisms by which HBOT affects the body and why it has potential to treat other conditions besides decompression sickness. [00:19:38] Ken asks Scott to talk more about other conditions, both acute and chronic, that HBOT might be helpful in treating. [00:22:51] Dawn asks about Scott’s experience as a hospitalist, which is an internal medicine physician who acts as a primary care physician in a hospital, and how this experience gave him a unique perspective on the strengths and limitations of modern medicine. [00:25:13] Ken asks Scott if it’s fair to say that his experience as a hospitalist was foundational in developing his understanding of patient care and healthspan. [00:26:51] Dawn explains that when Scott’s wife received a fellowship at Stanford University, Scott eventually left his career as a hospitalist to serve as the medical director for a hyperbaric medicine facility in the San Francisco Bay area. Dawn asks Scott to talk about how this experience deepened his understanding and expertise in hyperbaric oxygen therapy. [00:28:26] Ken asks Scott to talk about his relationship with Dominic D’Agostino, who was our recent guest on STEM-Talk episode 196, and who is very active in the field of hyperbaric oxygen therapy. [00:30:48] Dawn mentions that during Scott’s work as a hospitalist, he began to develop a more integrated approach to hyperbaric medicine, taking nutritional status, sleep patterns, mitochondrial function, and a number of other factors into consideration. Doing this work, Scott noticed that a number of patients would require weeks or months of preparation before beginning HBOT, contrary to the status quo of the time. Dawn asks Scott to talk about his insights and how this experience changed his views on medicine. [00:33:19] Dawn asks Scott to talk about the evolution of his work in developing an integrative hyperbaric medicine model and how he caught the attention of HBOT practitioners around the world. [00:35:21] Ken notes that interest in hyperbaric oxygen therapy has grown substantially in the last 20 years and goes on to mention that a particularly promising application of HBOT is as a complementary treatment for autoimmune diseases, being shown to reduce inflammation, improve blood flow and support immune function. Ken asks Scott to talk in depth about HBOT in the context of autoimmune disease treatment. [00:39:13] Following up on Scott’s mention of epigenetic changes following HBOT, Ken asks if this has been directly measured and if so, how long are these changes sustained. [00:41:14] Dawn asks Scott about the potential for HBOT to be used for athletes looking to speed up their recovery times from injuries. [00:43:19] Dawn asks Scott if there are certain populations who should avoid HBOT. [00:46:27] In order to optimize HBOT, Dawn explains that Scott works with people to tailor their treatment to their individual needs and asks Scott to walk listeners through how this process works in practice. [00:50:00] Ken notes that most HBOT studies describe dosages of HBOT in terms of oxygen concentration, oxygen pressure and number of sessions. He asks Scott how he defines a “dose” biologically and what metrics he uses to tell whether a patient has received enough treatment to induce durable change? [00:53:40] Ken asks Scott if his experience treating patients has informed him on different characteristics that can predict whether a patient will have a robust response to HBOT. [00:56:01] Dawn mentions that the benefits of HBOT are often explained in terms of either improved oxygen delivery or improved mitochondrial signaling and neuroplasticity. Dawn asks Scott what mechanisms are most important in the context of chronic neurological disease. [00:58:04] Dawn asks Scott for his thoughts on the hyperoxic-hypoxic paradox (HHP) as an explanation of HBOT-induced adaptation. [01:00:28] Ken asks Scott if he could only measure three variables before and after HBOT treatment, what would they be. [01:03:43] Ken goes on to asks Scott what he sees as the most important unanswered question in HBOT today. [01:06:22] Dawn mentions that in 2017 Scott met Dr. Ted Achacoso, who is the founder of Health Optimization Medicine. Dawn asks Scott to explain how Ted introduced him to a fundamentally different framework for understanding health. [01:10:08] Circling back to the topic of bridging the gap between conventional and alternative medicine, Dawn mentions that Scott has become part of a practice that isn’t afraid to tap into therapies that break from conventional medicine. As an example, Dawn explains that Scott sometimes integrates psychedelic therapy with HBOT. Dawn asks Scott to talk about the framework he uses, combining HBOT with psychedelic therapy. [01:13:56] Ken mentions that Scott also incorporates methylene blue into some of his treatment strategies, Ken directs listeners interested in learning more about how methylene blue can improve cognitive function and energy production to listen to STEM-Talk episode 191 with Francisco Gonzalez-Lima. Ken asks Scott to talk about his use of methylene blue in his practice. [01:20:15] Dawn asks Scott where people can go to learn more about him and his practice. [01:22:33] Ken asks Scott if he has any new projects looming on the horizon. [01:23:54] Dawn closes our interview with Scott by asking if he still plays guitar and if his old band The Airport Rocking Chairs have any plans for a reunion. Links: Scott Sherr bio Learn more about IHMC STEM-Talk homepage Ken Ford bio Ken Ford Wikipedia page Dawn Kernagis bio  

Today we have Dr. Dominic D’Agostino, who over the past 10 years has been a frequent guest on STEM-Talk. Today Dom joins us to give us an update on his recent research into ketogenic metabolic therapies, ketone supplements as well as hyperbaric oxygen therapy for traumatic brain injuries. Dom and his lab at the University of South Florida have published more than 20 papers since his last appearance on STEM-Talk in 2023. Dom is an Associate Professor in the Department of Molecular Pharmacology and Physiology at South Florida’s Morsani College of Medicine. Dom has a background in neuroscience, molecular pharmacology, nutrition and physiology. In addition to developing and testing metabolic-based therapies, Dom’s lab also investigates seizure disorders, brain cancer, neurodegenerative diseases and rare genetic-metabolic disorders. Show notes: [00:03:28] Dawn welcomes Dom back to the show and explaining that he has been quite busy since his last appearance, authoring or co-authoring more than 20 papers. Over the past several years, Dom has been helping to advance the science and application of ketogenic metabolic therapy (KMT) with colleagues at Moffitt Cancer Center, particularly focusing on using KMT to enhance immune-based therapies for certain types of cancers. Dawn asks Dom about this collaboration. [00:05:04] Dawn explains that ketogenic metabolic therapy is a dietary approach that focuses on a high-fat/low-carb diet to reduce glucose availability for cancer cells, potentially slowing their growth and improving treatment outcomes. It has been explored as a complimentary treatment for a variety of cancers including gliomas by shifting the metabolism of tumor cells away from glucose. Dawn asks Dom to explain what is involved in KMT. [00:06:58] Dawn clarifies that KMT requires less than 20-25 grams of carbohydrates per day, and that ketosis is a metabolic state in which the body switches from glucose metabolism to metabolizing fats in the form of ketones. Dawn goes on to explain that cancer cells typically consume glucose at a higher rate than normal cells. However, cancer cells are also very adaptable, and Dawn asks Dom to talk about this feature of cancer cells. [00:09:14] Ken explains that KMT has shown the most promise in treating high-grade gliomas, or brain cancers, such as glioblastoma, which is the most aggressive primary brain tumor in adults. Ken explains that Dom was part of a massive review titled “Clinical research framework proposal for ketogenic metabolic therapy in glioblastoma,” which proposed guidelines for the management of glioblastoma based on an understanding of cancer as a metabolic disease, particularly involving mitochondria. Ken asks Dom to talk about this review. [00:11:21] From a patient advocacy perspective, Ken notes that the review recommends that there should be an aggressive education campaign that can arm patients with knowledge about KMT and other novel therapies. Ken asks Dom to talk about that recommendation. [00:13:15] Ken asks about the process of cutting the review from upwards of 200 pages down to around 50 pages with 49 authors. [00:15:04] Dawn mentions that Dom was part of another paper in 2024 titled “Targeting the mitochondrial stem cell connection in cancer treatment – a hybrid orthomolecular protocol.” Dawn explains that this paper looked at the mitochondrial stem cell connection theory (MSCC), which argues that cancer originates from chronic oxidative phosphorylation insufficiency in stem cells. This insufficiency leads to the formation of cancer stem cells and abnormal energy metabolism ultimately resulting in malignancy. There were 16 research centers and organizations involved in this paper which introduced a hybrid orthomolecular protocol to target the mitochondrial stem-cell connection. Dawn asks Dom to give an overview of MSCC. [00:18:26] Dawn explains that in this paper Dom and his co-authors propose a protocol that would enhance oxidative phosphorylation and inhibit the primary fuels of cancer, glucose and glutamine. This would target both cancer stem cells and metastasis. Dawn asks Dom to explain why this concept is attracting so much interest as a potential therapeutic approach for cancer. [00:20:48] Dawn asks if Dom could discuss the orthomolecular protocol, which is an approach that focuses on preventing and treating diseases by correcting nutritional balances in the body. [00:24:41] Ken asks if the proposed dietary intervention in the orthomolecular approach is different from a standard or typical ketogenic diet. [00:26:48] Ken shifts the discussion to talk about ketone supplements, explaining that Dom recently published a paper titled “Divergent hepatic outcomes of chronic ketone supplementation.” Ken goes on to explain that ketone salts preserve liver health, while some ketone esters and precursors appear to drive inflammation and steatosis. There is a lot of interest in ketone supplementation because they substantially elevate circulating ketones without having to restrict carbohydrates as strictly. The problem, as Ken explains, is that the long-term hepatic safety of ketone supplements remains unclear. In the aforementioned paper, Dom’s rodent study evaluated the formulation-dependent impact of chronic ketone supplementation on liver histopathology, inflammatory signaling and systemic biomarkers. Ken asks Dom to discuss this paper and its findings and to give an overview of the various ketone supplements currently available. [00:30:49] Dawn asks Dom to dive into the methods and findings of the rodent study. [00:34:36] Ken asks Dom what his confidence is in the rodent model used in this study, and what are the next step for further research. [00:37:47] Regarding the two different doses given to rats in the study, Ken asks Dom how these doses correlate to doses in humans [00:40:23] Ken mentions that Ben Bikman, who was our guest on episode 143, published a study in February which Dom helped co-author. It examined the effects of ketone supplements on liver function. Ken asks Dom to discuss this study. [00:44:38] Dawn pivots to ask about a joint paper that Dom did with Andrew Koutnik, who was our guest on episode 185, on carbohydrates and physical performance titled “Carbohydrate ingestion on exercise metabolism and physical performance.” Dawn asks Dom to talk about this paper, which showed that a small amount of carbohydrates is sufficient to fuel athletic performance, and how additional carbohydrate intake showed diminishing returns. [00:49:18] Ken follows up on the finding that endurance athletes who rely on carb loading can tend toward pre-diabetes. [00:51:39] Ken asks Dom about the University of South Florida trial that Dom is an advisor for on traumatic brain injury and hyperbaric oxygen therapy. [00:54:41] Dawn mentions that Dom recently had an editorial in Frontiers that gave an overview of the emerging applications of hyperbaric/hyperbaric-oxygen therapy in the treatment of different neurological disorders. Dawn asks Dom what the key points in that editorial were. [00:59:06] Dawn explains that Dom recently gave a lecture at IHMC (available to view on IHMC’s YouTube page), on traumatic brain injury and the populations at greatest risk in that context. Dawn asks Dom to give an overview of how an injury to the brain can result in neurometabolic crisis. [01:02:53] Ken asks Dom, excluding occupation demographics, what demographic is most at risk for traumatic brain injury (TBI) and why. [01:04:45] Ken mentions that it is understandable the risk that young people face with TBI due to the activities that young people engage in. Older people, however, have increased risk of TBI from falling as well as an additional age-related biological component that young people are not subject to. Ken asks Dom to elaborate on this. [01:07:12] Dawn mentions that several years ago, Dom and his wife bought some acreage in the countryside and started farming and asks Dom how the farm life is going. [01:07:57] Dawn closes the interview asking how Dom’s wife is doing.