0:00

Science Friday is supported by Progressive

0:02

Insurance. Whether you love true crime

0:04

or comedy, celebrity interviews or news,

0:07

you call the shots of what's

0:09

in your podcast queue, right? And

0:11

guess what? Now you can call them

0:14

on your auto insurance too, with

0:16

the name your price tool from

0:19

Progressive. It works just the

0:21

way it sounds. You tell Progressive how

0:23

much you want to pay for car

0:25

insurance, and they'll show you coverage options

0:28

that fit your budget. Get your

0:30

quote today at progressive.com to

0:32

join the over 28 million

0:34

drivers who trust Progressive, Progressive

0:37

Casualty Insurance Company and affiliates,

0:39

price and coverage match limited

0:41

by state law. Listener

0:47

supported, WNYC Studios.

0:55

Could a new treatment help our four-legged

0:58

friends live longer? A number of dogs

1:00

have lived two, three or four years

1:03

after receiving our therapy. It's Friday,

1:05

June 21st, better known as Science

1:07

Friday. I'm

1:11

Sci-Fi producer, Dee Peter Schmidt. Cancer

1:13

is the leading cause of death in

1:15

dogs. The numbers are staggering. Half

1:18

of dogs over 10 years old will pass from the

1:20

disease, but luckily there's a

1:22

new promising treatment being tested. We'll

1:24

talk about that story in just a bit, but first

1:26

here's Kathleen Davis with the biggest science stories of the

1:28

week. You

1:32

don't need me to tell you

1:34

that it is hot outside. People

1:37

along the East Coast and deep

1:39

into the Midwest have been enduring

1:41

a heat wave, sticky, sweaty and

1:44

gross. And while you

1:46

can look at your trusty thermometer or check

1:48

the heat index, is there a better way

1:50

to keep track of summertime heat stress? Well,

1:53

joining me now to talk about it

1:55

is Umer Irfan, a senior correspondent at

1:58

Vox in Washington, DC. Welcome

2:00

back, Umayr. Hello, Kathleen. So

2:02

tell us about this other temperature measurement

2:04

that we could be using. Is this

2:06

a better heat index? Well,

2:08

according to a lot of people that use

2:11

it, yes, this is probably the most effective

2:13

way of assessing heat damage to the body.

2:15

And this was actually a measurement developed by

2:17

the US military in the 1950s. It's

2:20

known as the wet bulb globe temperature.

2:23

And what it does is it accounts,

2:26

one, for air temperature, but also for

2:28

humidity and how well sweat evaporates from

2:30

the body, as well as sunlight exposure.

2:32

So it incorporates three or four different

2:35

measurements into one number and

2:37

tells you more accurately

2:39

the threshold at which the

2:42

human body starts to experience danger. The danger

2:44

limit under the wet bulb globe temperature is

2:46

usually considered to be about 95 degrees

2:49

Fahrenheit. And after six hours or

2:51

so, that's considered to be extremely

2:53

dangerous. I have to say,

2:55

wet bulb globe temperature doesn't really roll off

2:58

the tongue, but I digress.

3:00

Is this something that I can measure

3:03

myself? Or do I need a special

3:05

thermometer for this? Well, the

3:07

measurement devices actually incorporate these three

3:09

or four different measurements together. So

3:12

one, it is a conventional thermometer,

3:14

but it also has a thermometer

3:16

inside a black globe, essentially, to

3:20

serve as a proxy for exposure to

3:22

sunlight. That's the globe. And then the

3:24

wet bulb is a thermometer that's wrapped

3:26

in a wet cloth. And

3:28

what that does is it shows, basically, as long

3:30

as the cloth is wet, it means that sweat

3:32

or it means that water is not evaporating. And

3:34

if that gets way too hot, then that

3:36

means that your body cannot sweat effectively. It

3:38

takes in more energy from the surroundings than

3:41

it can dissipate. And that can lead to

3:43

complications like heat exhaustion and then later heat

3:45

stroke. Is this being used

3:48

by anyone right now? It's

3:50

used by a lot of sporting teams. There's

3:52

a lot of high school and college athletics

3:54

associations that use the wet bulb globe temperature

3:56

as a threshold for whether or not they're

3:58

going to have outdoor activities, the military. uses

4:00

this as well. They usually consider wet bulb

4:02

globe temperatures above 90 degrees to be considered

4:04

black flag temperatures, but this is not something

4:07

that's widely reported. It's also not something that's

4:09

talked about in the news and a lot

4:11

of employers don't really pay attention to this

4:13

like you know farm workers and other kinds

4:16

of job sites where you have people being

4:18

outside. They typically rely on just the temperature,

4:20

the heat index, which doesn't tell

4:22

the full story about the risks that the

4:24

people working outside will face. Right,

4:26

like if I'm going out expecting it to be 80

4:29

degrees but then it feels a lot more like 95, I

4:32

mean that's gonna put a stress on my body that

4:34

I wasn't expecting. Yeah, that's right

4:36

and part of the challenge here is that while

4:39

any individual metric is going to be

4:41

covering over a wide

4:43

area, the way we individually experience stresses from

4:45

heat can vary a lot person to person.

4:48

So your threshold for heat exposure can be

4:50

very different from mine even under the same

4:52

conditions especially if you're taking other some kinds

4:54

of medicines, if you're an older adult, if

4:56

you're a very young child and other kinds

4:59

of factors, how much cumulative exposure you've had,

5:01

all of these other factors also play a

5:03

risk in how quickly you can succumb to

5:05

the heat. Okay, let's talk

5:08

about some other weather news. This

5:10

has been a really busy season for

5:12

tornadoes. Do we know why this is?

5:15

There appear to be a few different

5:17

factors at work. You know tornadoes are

5:19

very mercurial, they spool up very quickly

5:21

and from an atmosphere's perspective you know

5:23

they're very small but it appears that

5:25

there are some other factors globally that

5:27

are playing a role in the current

5:29

round of tornadoes including the rash

5:31

of tornadoes we saw over Memorial Day weekend.

5:34

One big factor that appears to be at

5:36

work is this switch from El Nino to

5:38

La Nina in the Pacific Ocean. This is

5:40

the warming pattern at the surface of the

5:42

Pacific Ocean and it starts to shift the

5:44

jet stream over the United States and

5:47

it starts to lead to atmospheric instability

5:49

that allows tornadoes to form a little

5:51

bit more readily. There are other kinds

5:53

of ocean patterns that are emerging from

5:55

the Indian Ocean. This is a pattern

5:57

known as the Madden-Julian oscillation that's sending

6:00

waves of disruption over to the United

6:02

States that's also leading to increased tornado

6:05

activity. Plus it's been really hot in

6:07

Central America and over Mexico and that's

6:09

led to more moisture in the atmosphere

6:12

and that moisture helps fuel thunderstorms

6:14

that can then spawn tornadoes. Is

6:16

there anything that we can do to better

6:19

predict tornadoes? Well scientists

6:21

say that they've actually been making a lot of

6:23

progress in getting ahead of tornadoes. Right now most

6:25

tornado warnings you get them on the order of

6:27

minutes maybe 10 minutes sometimes

6:29

even less but there are

6:31

warning signs that clusters of tornadoes might

6:34

be emerging you know days in advance

6:36

and scientists have started to pick up

6:38

on them one by studying historical data

6:40

but also by using machine learning models

6:42

that can actually detect trends

6:44

and patterns that scientists previously could not

6:46

pick up on and in fact they're

6:48

using these forecasting models and testing them

6:50

out right now at the Storm Prediction Center

6:52

at the National Weather Service. These

6:54

machine learning models can actually anticipate storms

6:56

that could lead to tornadoes up to

6:59

a week in advance you know it

7:01

can't really tell you whether your house

7:03

is in danger but it can help

7:05

airlines reroute traffic it can help emergency

7:07

responders make sure they have line crews

7:09

ready to do repairs and

7:11

also muster resources to deal with the aftermath

7:13

and so there's a lot of ways you

7:15

can make that useful. Yeah it sounds like

7:17

that could be a big deal. So let's

7:19

shift gears here to some positive

7:22

environmental news. It turns

7:24

out some of the land near the

7:26

Chernobyl nuclear site might actually be getting

7:28

safer is that right? Right

7:31

the scientists who have been studying this

7:33

area for a long time in Ukraine

7:35

this week they've reported that the radiation

7:37

levels around the further reaches of the

7:39

exclusion zone or some of the areas

7:41

that were contaminated after the 1986 Chernobyl

7:44

nuclear disaster have fallen below the dangerous

7:46

thresholds that basically it's now within the

7:48

safe limits for farming and this is

7:50

a huge bit of progress for the

7:52

people who live in the region who

7:55

rely on this land but it just

7:57

shows though also how long it can

7:59

take for this kind of contamination to fade away that

8:01

this has been a nearly 40

8:03

year long process waiting. Now there are

8:05

other complications that have emerged around this

8:08

as well. Basically there's still the stigma

8:10

of food that's grown in these radiation

8:12

zones. And people here want to export

8:14

that food, particularly since Ukraine lost

8:16

a lot of farmland during Russia's invasion of

8:19

Ukraine. They want to use this to compensate

8:21

that and to bolster their export capacity. But

8:24

they want to also convince their customers that this

8:26

food that they're growing on this land is safe.

8:29

Yeah, that seems like a big hurdle. So

8:31

let's get back a little bit closer to

8:33

home. So we've all heard a lot over

8:35

the past few years about weight loss drugs

8:38

and their use in adults. But

8:40

there are other interventions that are now

8:42

being recommended for kids. Can you kind of

8:44

walk me through what's being discussed here?

8:47

Right. So roughly between one in five and one

8:49

in six children in the U.S. are classified as

8:51

obese and that's considered being in the 95th percentile

8:54

or above for their body

8:56

mass index given their age and sex.

8:59

The U.S. Preventative Services Task Force.

9:01

This is an independent body of

9:03

experts that analyzes research and advises

9:05

the government. They're now recommending that

9:07

intensive behavioral intervention should be used

9:09

for kids who are six years

9:11

age and older. Basically the idea

9:13

is that kids should be receiving

9:15

things like counseling, education and

9:18

supervised exercise as a way to deal

9:20

with obesity. And they found that the

9:22

evidence shows that this does bear out

9:24

that basically roughly around 26 hours

9:27

of counseling and supervision leads to

9:29

measurable and sustained weight loss. So

9:32

before this, was there any sort

9:34

of counseling intervention being done? There

9:37

was on an ad hoc basis, but it

9:40

was not a recommendation. This group basically was

9:42

looking at what the evidence shows of what

9:44

actually works. Now they say that there is

9:46

actually a body of evidence that shows that

9:48

counseling can be very effective for children. And

9:51

this sounds like this would be a lot less invasive

9:53

than maybe some of these weight loss drugs that are

9:55

being used in adults, right? Right. And that

9:57

is part of the advantage Task

10:00

force says that they did look into using

10:03

these GLP-1 agonists like Ozempic and their

10:05

effects on children, but said that the

10:07

evidence wasn't quite there yet and there

10:09

isn't enough research to issue any kind

10:11

of recommendation one way or another. But

10:14

counseling seems to be a very low stakes

10:16

way of creating some meaningful gains here. And

10:18

now that's why it's the new default. So

10:21

let's shift gears again and head

10:23

to space actually. So over the

10:26

past few weeks, we've talked about

10:28

the challenges of getting Boeing's Starliner

10:30

spacecraft off the ground. And

10:33

now that it's at the International

10:35

Space Station, there may be another

10:37

glitch. Right. So the

10:39

two astronauts who arrived at the International Space Station

10:41

on the Boeing Starliner, they arrived on June 6th

10:43

and they were only supposed to stay for about

10:46

a week. But this week, NASA

10:48

says that they'll be there at least until June 26th. And

10:51

that's because they want to try to

10:53

figure out what went wrong during the

10:55

trip there. Basically on the

10:57

way to the spacecraft, they experienced helium leaks

10:59

and they saw thrusters malfunction. And

11:02

the engineers are trying to troubleshoot and figure

11:04

out what went wrong in order to make

11:06

sure that the next trips there go safely.

11:09

Now they say that the spacecraft is safe, that

11:11

it's perfectly capable of taking the

11:13

astronauts home. It's just that the parts

11:15

that were malfunctioning are on

11:17

parts of the spacecraft that are considered

11:19

disposable, or parts that would be damaged

11:22

or destroyed during reentry by design. And

11:24

so this is their last chance to try to

11:26

figure out and examine these parts and see if

11:29

they can figure out what went wrong. Well,

11:31

that sounds like my personal nightmare. So I

11:34

hope that they figure that out and get

11:36

them back home safely. Finally

11:38

we have one last story that I'm

11:40

very excited to talk about. There is

11:42

a new flashy dinosaur in town, it

11:44

sounds like. Right. It's

11:47

just this week I've declared that there's

11:49

a new dinosaur called Loki Saratops. It's

11:51

a herbivore, it lived in the swamps

11:53

and flood plains of Montana about 78

11:55

million years ago. It's

11:58

a cousin of the Triceratops. it's

12:00

really big. This is the biggest dinosaur of this

12:02

family that they found so far, 22 feet

12:05

long, weighing about 11,000 pounds. It's

12:07

also the most flamboyant. That's kind of

12:10

the description that the scientists... Is that

12:12

a scientific term? It's not a scientific

12:14

term, but I mean they talk about

12:16

a lot about how many horns and

12:18

how ornate its crest was. This is

12:20

a dinosaur that had two asymmetrical horns

12:22

on the side of its frill and

12:24

more than 20 littler horns around the

12:26

side of its head. It's very

12:28

big and it also indicates though that there was

12:30

a lot more diversity of

12:32

this family of dinosaurs in the United States

12:34

in this region millions of years ago and

12:36

also that many of these dinosaurs were living

12:38

alongside each other. These fossils were originally discovered

12:41

in 2019 but only recently

12:44

did they finally do enough

12:46

analysis piecing the parts together

12:48

to realize that this is actually a new

12:50

species. So what did

12:52

they think that it was? Like a mutant

12:54

triceratops or something? I mean that's a possibility.

12:56

When you're looking at fossils you're looking at

12:59

fragments and so tend to try to see

13:01

if they fit into any existing categories before

13:03

deciding that they're in a new category. And

13:06

so it required a little bit more searching

13:08

and figuring out is this just simply a

13:10

really really big triceratops or is this actually

13:12

a different species entirely? And that's a process

13:14

that takes a lot of time and they

13:16

finally came to the conclusion this week that

13:18

this is in fact something new. Well that's

13:20

all the time that we have for now.

13:23

Thank you for being with me. My pleasure Kathleen. Thanks

13:25

for having me. This

13:53

has been a very briefly illustrated sea creatures

13:55

which we'll post on our site along with

13:57

your first name and city. raise

14:00

$8,000 here folks which will go to

14:02

support all the great work we do

14:04

at SciFry. So we do hope you'll

14:07

consquitter making a gift. Sorry

14:09

for all the puns, we're cracking up over here.

14:12

Just head to sciencefriday.com/Sea of Support

14:14

to join us and help us

14:16

reach our $8,000 goal. Again

14:19

that's sciencefriday.com/Sea of

14:21

Support. I'm Ira

14:24

Flato, squitting you farewell. And

14:26

thanks. Support

14:30

for Science Friday comes from the

14:33

Rita Allen Foundation. More at ritaallen.org.

14:40

Dogs are by far the most

14:42

popular pet in the United States.

14:45

62 million households in the country

14:47

have at least one dog. And

14:50

that's not too surprising. They are humans

14:52

best friends after all. Sadly,

14:54

cancer is the leading cause of

14:56

death in dogs. When a pet

14:58

gets sick, it can be devastating

15:00

for the whole family. So

15:02

lucky for us, there's been a

15:04

new breakthrough in treating canine cancer.

15:06

And this could lead to benefits

15:08

for us humans too. Joining

15:11

me to talk about this new

15:13

vaccine treatment is my guest, Dr.

15:15

Mark Mamula, Professor of Medicine at

15:17

the Yale School of Medicine in

15:19

New Haven, Connecticut. Welcome to ScienceFriday.

15:21

Thank you very much for having

15:23

me. Happy to be here and

15:25

happy to discuss our companion animals

15:27

and more importantly, how

15:29

to keep them potentially healthier even

15:32

with diseases like cancer. Yeah, so

15:34

let's get right into it. How

15:37

common is canine cancer? Remarkably,

15:40

about one in four dogs

15:43

in their lifetime will

15:45

get cancer at some point

15:47

in their life. If the

15:50

dog or a dog is

15:52

lucky enough to live to 10 years of

15:54

age, the overall incidence

15:56

of cancer goes up to

15:59

about one and two, about

16:01

half of all dogs will get cancer.

16:03

I kind of can't believe how staggering

16:06

that number is. Why is that so

16:08

high? It really is

16:10

a staggering number and of course it

16:13

is far higher than

16:15

incidence of cancers in

16:17

adult humans. The

16:20

incidence in dogs has

16:22

several explanations. Among them

16:25

are cancer genes

16:27

that are predisposed to

16:29

various breeds that

16:32

may get vertically or transmitted

16:34

through interbreeding of

16:36

dogs. That's one

16:38

popular and in fact

16:41

scientifically proven notion. It's

16:44

been postulated that

16:46

the use of herbicides and

16:48

pesticides on lawns, for example,

16:50

where dogs continuously have

16:52

their nose to, literally their nose to

16:55

the ground, may

16:57

enhance the prevalence of cancers as

16:59

well. Okay, so walk me through

17:01

how this treatment works. It's a

17:04

vaccine, right? Well,

17:06

it's an immunotherapy. Yes,

17:08

it's two injections of

17:10

a portion of a protein

17:12

that is found on the

17:14

surface of cancer cells. The

17:18

protein family that is the target

17:20

of our therapy is known as

17:22

EGFR or HER2. We have

17:25

learned through effective human cancer

17:32

therapies that these are important

17:34

proteins on the

17:36

surface of tumors that activate tumor

17:39

cells, get them to grow,

17:41

get them to multiply, and get

17:44

them to metastasize. So all

17:47

to the benefit of cancer, of course,

17:49

but to the detriment of the dog

17:51

or the human. So

17:53

our therapy targets immune

17:56

responses to these surface proteins

17:59

that hopefully find the

18:01

tumors and

18:04

attach to the tumor cell and

18:07

block their growth or block

18:09

their metastasis and

18:11

help kill the tumor cell. So

18:14

you're giving this to dogs that already

18:16

have a cancer diagnosis versus it being

18:19

a preventative treatment, right? That's

18:21

correct. This is a therapeutic

18:23

immunotherapy that once dogs are

18:26

diagnosed with certain types of

18:28

cancers that they would get

18:30

this therapy that activates immune

18:33

responses in a manner somewhat

18:36

similar to other vaccine

18:39

responses. For example, humans

18:41

get vaccinated to a number of pathogens.

18:44

This is much like that

18:46

and with the

18:48

difference being that the immune

18:51

response targets the tumor or proteins

18:53

on the tumor. So what kind

18:55

of cancer is this meant for?

18:57

This is meant for

19:00

a wide variety actually

19:02

of tumors in dogs

19:05

that express these EGFR and

19:07

HER2 proteins and they include

19:10

the more common cancers in

19:12

dogs including osteosarcoma and

19:14

hemangiosarcoma. Other cancers

19:17

are included as well that express

19:19

these proteins and those can be

19:22

anal sac carcinoma, certain

19:24

types of bladder cancers, certain types

19:27

of lung cancers, soft

19:29

tissue sarcomas, of

19:31

course breast cancer which is

19:34

found in dogs as well as

19:36

well as colon cancer. So

19:38

really a large number of solid tumors

19:41

that are found in dogs do express

19:43

these tumor proteins. What kind

19:45

of efficacy rates are you finding in the trials

19:47

that you've done so far? Well

19:50

we've had recent trials ongoing

19:53

for about the past year and a

19:55

half and those were

19:57

preceded by an open label trial.

20:00

three or four years ago now actually. And

20:03

we found interestingly that dogs

20:06

that get osteosarcoma and

20:09

receive our therapy actually have

20:12

a increased survival

20:14

rate compared to standard

20:16

of care. Typical standard of

20:18

care for dogs with osteosarcoma, which

20:21

is a bone cancer primarily

20:23

in the large bones of the

20:25

leg. Typical therapy for dogs that

20:27

have this kind of cancer is

20:30

amputation of the infected limb.

20:33

Sometimes radiation can

20:35

be used on the affected limb,

20:37

but most often it's amputation

20:41

as a surgical intervention along

20:43

with chemotherapy. And

20:46

when we add our immunotherapy

20:48

to that regimen, it

20:51

almost doubles the 12 month

20:54

survival of dogs

20:56

with osteosarcoma. So

20:58

with standard of care, the

21:01

survival of dogs with osteosarcoma

21:03

is fairly disappointing. Only

21:05

about 35 or 40% of dogs will survive 12 months. And

21:10

as I mentioned, if one adds

21:12

our immunotherapy to

21:14

that classical treatment

21:16

protocol, we get

21:18

almost 60, 65% of survival after 12

21:20

months and

21:24

a number of dogs that have lived two,

21:27

three, or four years after

21:30

receiving our therapy. So that's

21:32

a huge benefit. That's really

21:34

significant. Significant, yes, significant advances,

21:36

particularly when of course

21:40

the longevity of dogs, which

21:43

is anywhere from eight

21:45

to 12 or 15 years, the

21:48

fact that their lives are so short to

21:50

begin with, getting a benefit of

21:52

one or two or three years is

21:54

a very significant benefit to the total

21:57

lifetime in a dog, of course.

22:00

So I'm sure that there are people who

22:03

are listening to this who are really interested

22:05

in getting this treatment for their dogs. Is

22:08

that even possible for people to get their hands on

22:10

this at this point? I mean is there a timeline

22:12

for that? Well we

22:15

have clinical trials ongoing

22:17

and the sites that

22:19

are utilizing

22:21

our therapy or performing our clinical

22:24

trials there are 10 probably

22:28

soon to be 11 sites in this

22:30

country, one in Canada,

22:32

one can find the sites

22:35

that are performing this therapy

22:38

and that can be found on

22:40

a website called therajan.com. In

22:46

full disclosure this is a company

22:48

that will ultimately manage this

22:51

therapy for canine cancers.

22:55

Nonetheless it will list all of the sites

22:58

that one can find this therapy

23:00

you can contact the clinics directly

23:02

for details about qualifying

23:04

for the clinical trial. At the

23:06

moment the clinical trial is for

23:09

use in osteosarachoma,

23:13

hemangiosarachoma, and bladder

23:15

cancer or what's

23:17

known as transitional cell carcinoma.

23:21

So again call the clinics directly and they'll

23:23

try and get you in and give you

23:25

all the qualification details and it

23:27

should be just as easy as that. So

23:30

obviously this has been really promising

23:32

for canine cancer but could

23:34

this eventually make the jump to a better

23:37

treatment for human cancer? Another

23:39

great question. Yes we actually designed

23:42

the study with translational

23:46

applications in mind and of

23:48

course the translational application to

23:50

treating human cancers. We

23:53

have not yet started clinical

23:55

trials in human cancers but

23:58

hopefully in the coming. a

24:01

few years, I would guess we

24:03

would initiate similar trials in

24:05

humans. And for the

24:07

same types of cancer, bone cancer, bladder

24:09

cancer? Yes, humans get

24:12

slightly different types

24:14

of cancers that express the proteins

24:17

that we target. But

24:19

notably, EGFR and HER2 on

24:21

human cancers include gastrointestinal cancers

24:24

and some breast cancers, again,

24:26

some lung cancers. Using

24:30

the canine therapy, we

24:32

are seeking USDA approval

24:35

for conditional licensing that

24:37

will allow us, hopefully,

24:40

widespread distribution of this therapy

24:42

to locations all around the

24:46

country. We'll probably start with

24:48

veterinary oncology offices, but at

24:52

the moment, the availability is

24:54

restricted to the clinical trial

24:56

sites. So one

24:58

thing that I've gleaned from talking

25:01

to you today is that you

25:03

clearly love dogs. So removing yourself

25:05

from your role as a researcher

25:07

on this, I mean, how exciting

25:09

is this for the dog lovers out there? Oh

25:12

my gosh. Well, you're talking to one dog lover.

25:16

I have two golden retrievers, one

25:18

that's 11 and a

25:21

half years old. So cancer

25:23

is not far from my thought

25:25

process with my own dogs.

25:28

In fact, one motivation for our study

25:30

and studies in treating dog

25:32

cancers was, in

25:34

fact, from my own family, we had a Labrador

25:37

retriever that passed away from an inoperable

25:39

cancer about 11 or 12 years or

25:41

so ago. So

25:45

I do know how important

25:47

dogs are as companion animals

25:49

and families, and many

25:51

or most families, of course, treat

25:54

their dogs like they are family,

25:56

as we did. And

25:58

I actually was... on

26:01

the side of the family with a dog

26:03

with cancer, as well as

26:05

now on the treatment side of cancers

26:08

in our dogs. Well, we wish you the best

26:10

of luck with this work. That is all the

26:12

time that we have for now. I'd like to

26:15

thank my guest, Dr. Mark Mamula,

26:17

Professor of Medicine at the Yale School of

26:19

Medicine in New Haven, Connecticut. Thank you so

26:21

much for joining us. Thank you for having

26:23

me. It was a pleasure. That's

26:26

all the time we have for now. A

26:28

lot of folks helped make the show happen

26:30

this week, including... Louis Sommers. Annie Nero. Jordan

26:33

Smudgick. Charles Bergquist. And many more. On

26:35

Monday, we'll talk about what happens when cities fail

26:37

on their climate goals. But for

26:40

now, I'm Sci-fi producer Dee Peter Schmidt. We'll

26:42

see you next week. ["The

26:44

Star-Spangled Banner"] Douglas

26:53

is one of many who found a new

26:55

life through Seattle's Union Gospel Mission. I was

26:57

living on the streets when I heard this

27:00

guy talk about how he got clean and

27:02

sober at the mission. So I decided to

27:04

give it a try. I could feel something

27:07

working inside of me and I knew I

27:09

was getting better. Today, my number one goal

27:11

is to stay clean and sober. And

27:14

grace will lead me

27:16

home. To hear more,

27:19

volunteer, or donate, visit

27:21

ugm.org. ["The

27:24

Star-Spangled Banner"] I'm David Ramnik, host of

27:27

the New Yorker Radio Hour. There's

27:29

nothing like finding a story you can really

27:31

sink into that lets you tune

27:34

out the noise and focus on what matters.

27:36

In print or here on the podcast, the

27:38

New Yorker brings you thoughtfulness and depth and

27:41

even humor that you can't find anywhere else.

27:44

So please join me every week for the New Yorker

27:46

Radio Hour wherever you listen to

27:48

podcasts. ["The

27:50

Star-Spangled Banner"]