This year I finished my MD/PhD and started residency, but the thing I am proudest of is having brought this little human into this beautiful world.
Her name is Lyra Louisa and she is the light of our lives.
Listen wherever you get your podcasts!
Apple: podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/b...
Spotify: open.spotify.com/episode/5ojA...
@biounethical.bsky.social website: biounethical.com/episodes/epi...
And huge thanks to @jbcarmody.bsky.social. Check out his amazing blog/vids here: thesheriffofsodium.com
New episode of Bio(un)ethical is out now, with @jbcarmody.bsky.social!
Bryan Carmody: Are doctor shortages real?
We discuss:
- Why people think there aren't enough doctors
- Why many access problems reflect misallocation (vs shortages)
- What models projecting shortages miss
- AI (the 🐘 in the 🏥)
Here are links to the guidance:
WHO page:
who.int/publications...
PDF:
iris.who.int/bitstream/ha...
A huge thanks to everyone involved in writing this and giving feedback! I hope this guidance will improve priority setting and lead to even more socially valuable research.
4) How should the ethical principles be implemented?
At each stage of priority setting—preparation, prioritization, and follow-up—the four principles can be applied. See page 30 (in PDF) for practical guidance on implementing them.
3) What key ethical principles should guide the priority-setting process?
These four:
2) Who is the guidance for?
Anyone who sets research priorities, including funders, policymakers, research institutions, researchers, advocacy groups, and so on.
All should undertake some form of priority setting, but in proportion to the resources available and the stakes of the decisions.
In short:
"Decisions about what research to conduct, promote or support should be made explicitly, in a systematic way, and guided by ethical principles."
The guidance aims to help research actors set priorities in an explicit, systematic, and ethical way.
1) Why is ethical guidance on research priority setting necessary?
Decisions about what research we prioritize influence the distribution of health and illness. At present, there are large and unjustifiable disparities in research funding. The guidance aims to help address this.
The WHO guidance on the ethics of health research priority setting is out today!
It was a privilege to be a part of the expert writing group (led by Joe Millum) over the past two years.
I think the guidance is practical and important, especially now.
Short thread + link below!
Friends of Cornwall
Proud to have graduated from Harvard’s MD/PhD program, and to join the physicians and researchers committed to building a brighter future.
"It is high time that the default question shift from 'is this payment too much?' to 'is this enough?' in clinical trials."
A new call to bring sense to IRB approaches to paying research participants. @1daysooner.bsky.social
www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10....
The US government recently flagged my scientific grant in its "woke DEI database". Many people have asked me what I will do.
My answer today in Nature.
We will not be cowed. We will keep using AI to build a fairer, healthier world.
www.nature.com/articles/d41...
This is amazing!! Congrats!
3) Academic researchers have good outside options, and many can/will leave if they can't do their research.
4) Our next generation of scientists is watching opportunities vanish, mentors grow disillusioned, and funding streams dry up; many may permanently pivot.
1) A pause is harmful even if it's temporary: any day a lab is closed is an additional day without research, an additional day without a cure.
2) Restarting research isn't trivial because, e.g., participants lose trust, experts leave, lab animals have lifecycles, etc.
"Pausing" scientific research is like "pausing" a car in the middle of the highway—it's liable to have catastrophic, long-term effects that restarting it won't fix.
Every episode of Season 2 is now available wherever you get your podcasts!
We're taking a short break before making further episodes, so now is a great time to submit feedback or requests (e.g., guests or topics) at biounethical.com.
Also, we heard you: transcripts are coming!
Hi Bluesky!
We're Bio(un)ethical, the podcast questioning existing norms in medicine, science, and public health via long-form interviews with philosophers, policymakers, physicians, and other experts.
Seasons 1 + 2 are available on all platforms and our website: www.biounethical.com
Thank you!!!
Thank you!!!! Very excited. :)
Thank you!!!!
Have been dreaming about this day for 7 years!!!
#Match2025
The final episode of Biounethical season 2 is out now!
Rachel Fraser: How your social world shapes what you know
We discuss whether experiences of oppression give people special insight, whether this insight can be shared, and what policy implications this might have.
Links ⬇️
Spotify: open.spotify.com/episode/6ll9...
Apple: podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/b...
Our website: biounethical.com/episodes/epi...
Or wherever you get your podcasts.
The final episode of Biounethical season 2 is out now!
Rachel Fraser: How your social world shapes what you know
We discuss whether experiences of oppression give people special insight, whether this insight can be shared, and what policy implications this might have.
Links ⬇️
My point is that it doesn't seem reasonable.
The two most recent episodes of #BioUnethical with
David Thorstad, Emily Largent, and @govindpersad.bsky.social were very (very!) good.
Hosts @leahpierson.bsky.social and Sophie Gibert may be doing reflective discussion better than anyone — outstanding stage setting, questioning, improvising, etc.
New blog post!
The $500,000 Gap Year
In honor of #Match2025, I wrote about whether the fourth year of medical school needs to exist.
www.leahpierson.com/blog/the-500...
If you have feedback, I'm eager to hear it, and good luck to everyone matching next week!
