FULL PODCAST: The Journal of Life Sciences (.MP3,17.27 Mb)
On this edition, the Journal’s editor-in-chief William Patrick is joined by New Republic Assistant Editor Bradford Plumer, law professor Lori Andrews, and TJOLS Publisher and California Healthcare Institute CEO David Gollaher. They discuss Congress’ legislative agenda, patent issues surrounding nanotechnology, and the challenges that lie in getting doctors to practice evidenced-based medicine.


Nurturing our Nerds (.MP3,1.73 Mb)
The Journal's Editor-in-Chief William Patrick talks about the importance of nurturing our nerds.

Untethering Innovation (.MP3,5.02 Mb)
The expectation is that Congress will be relatively quiet in this election year, but not completely. Patent reform legislation, and bills creating a pathway for follow-on biologics will likely come up for votes in the months ahead. Congressional drug-safety hearing could affect the way the FDA does business, while scores of smaller bills—from genetic non-discrimination rules to small-business grants—could have significant effects on medical innovation. While trade groups and lobbyists may be looking ahead to 2009 and the possibility of a democrat in the white house, Bradford Plumer reports in the February issue of the Journal of life sciences that there’s still plenty to focus on in this session.

Thinking Small (.MP3,5.02 Mb)
As the emerging science of nanotechnology converges with biopharmaceutical sciences, the blurring boundary lines threaten to create a nightmare for regulators. As Lori Andrews reports in the February issue of the Journal of Life Sciences, both the U.S. Food and Drug Administration and the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office are bring criticized for their approaches as they attempt both to encourage and to impose order on the field.

A Healthcare GPS for Doctors (.MP3,3.95 Mb)
Evidence-based medicine could help physicians navigate the complexities of patient care by collecting, interpreting and disseminating data on outcomes. At first, it would seem to be nothing more than common sense. After all, who wants medicine based on mere opinion? If outcomes data confirm a treatments benefits, doctors should use it: if it’s harmful they shouldn’t, but as David Gollaher writes in the February 2008 issue of The Journal of Life Sciences, while evidenced-based medicine can improve quality and cut costs in the U.S. Healthcare system there are obstacles, not the least of which are doctors.

The Last Word (.MP3,2.82 Mb)
The Journal's Web Editor Daniel S. Levine shares a letter to his wife, the doctor.