Dr. Marty Makary

If it's truly a foreshortened tongue, they believe there could be a benefit. It's never been proven, but they do believe there's clinical benefit. But then they say going to the upper lip and the side is crazy. They also say we need a good study on it. Well, there's a group of people out there that are calling every kid tongue tied, doing it routinely.

Who's gonna, this desperately needs a randomized controlled trial. Who's gonna fund it? Pharma? No way. NIH? Not in one of their silos. American Academy of Pediatrics? Unlikely. And so this practice will go on.

Who's gonna, this desperately needs a randomized controlled trial. Who's gonna fund it? Pharma? No way. NIH? Not in one of their silos. American Academy of Pediatrics? Unlikely. And so this practice will go on.

Who's gonna, this desperately needs a randomized controlled trial. Who's gonna fund it? Pharma? No way. NIH? Not in one of their silos. American Academy of Pediatrics? Unlikely. And so this practice will go on.

Maybe. Sometimes it is the advocacy groups, the philanthropists that fund research. Most of our research at Johns Hopkins on my team, which is – we call it the redesign of healthcare. It's on all the major topics in medicine that we are not talking about that we should be talking about. And we are a rapid response team. When the opioid epidemic hits, we go to work in days.

Maybe. Sometimes it is the advocacy groups, the philanthropists that fund research. Most of our research at Johns Hopkins on my team, which is – we call it the redesign of healthcare. It's on all the major topics in medicine that we are not talking about that we should be talking about. And we are a rapid response team. When the opioid epidemic hits, we go to work in days.

Maybe. Sometimes it is the advocacy groups, the philanthropists that fund research. Most of our research at Johns Hopkins on my team, which is – we call it the redesign of healthcare. It's on all the major topics in medicine that we are not talking about that we should be talking about. And we are a rapid response team. When the opioid epidemic hits, we go to work in days.

When COVID hits, we go to work in days. The old NIH, you know, take a couple years, work on formatting a grant. They're funding these tiny incremental little projects. I don't even call them discoveries, like findings.

When COVID hits, we go to work in days. The old NIH, you know, take a couple years, work on formatting a grant. They're funding these tiny incremental little projects. I don't even call them discoveries, like findings.

When COVID hits, we go to work in days. The old NIH, you know, take a couple years, work on formatting a grant. They're funding these tiny incremental little projects. I don't even call them discoveries, like findings.

Like, is it interesting what the average size of stones are on the street? No. Is it research? I guess.

Like, is it interesting what the average size of stones are on the street? No. Is it research? I guess.

Like, is it interesting what the average size of stones are on the street? No. Is it research? I guess.

But we're funding these little dumb things, and then the big questions go unfunded. So we think the solution is philanthropic funding, reorganizing the NIH, term limits at the NIH, and a small- You mean for the director of the NIH, or- For all- all people who are in decision-making leadership power over grants at the NIH.

But we're funding these little dumb things, and then the big questions go unfunded. So we think the solution is philanthropic funding, reorganizing the NIH, term limits at the NIH, and a small- You mean for the director of the NIH, or- For all- all people who are in decision-making leadership power over grants at the NIH.

But we're funding these little dumb things, and then the big questions go unfunded. So we think the solution is philanthropic funding, reorganizing the NIH, term limits at the NIH, and a small- You mean for the director of the NIH, or- For all- all people who are in decision-making leadership power over grants at the NIH.

And grants, in my opinion, when I say we, these are my opinions, the grant should be funded when one reviewer loves the idea, and then it goes into a pool, and you could... give out the grants randomly to when one person thinks that's a big idea, that could be interesting. Why do you have to have a consensus among the old guard establishment that yes, we're going to fund another study on stents?

And grants, in my opinion, when I say we, these are my opinions, the grant should be funded when one reviewer loves the idea, and then it goes into a pool, and you could... give out the grants randomly to when one person thinks that's a big idea, that could be interesting. Why do you have to have a consensus among the old guard establishment that yes, we're going to fund another study on stents?

And grants, in my opinion, when I say we, these are my opinions, the grant should be funded when one reviewer loves the idea, and then it goes into a pool, and you could... give out the grants randomly to when one person thinks that's a big idea, that could be interesting. Why do you have to have a consensus among the old guard establishment that yes, we're going to fund another study on stents?

Yeah, it's a big blind spot, energy and mitochondria. I mean, it's the central connected sort of universal theory behind health is that there are these basic principles of mitochondrial health, inflammation, nutrients. We have such a nutrient-poor diet, all the stuff you've been working on. But next time you see Francis Collins, you can remind him that the H in NIH stands for health.