Logo
    Search

    The Abortion Pill: How Dangerous Is It Really?

    enMay 23, 2024

    Podcast Summary

    • Clarifying the Abortion Pill: Separating Facts from PoliticsThe abortion pill is a common method for terminating pregnancies, under scrutiny and misunderstood. It's crucial to separate politics from facts, ensure access to accurate information, and promote open dialogue for better understanding.

      The abortion pill, a common method for terminating pregnancies in the US, is under scrutiny and misunderstood by many. The Supreme Court is set to decide on its accessibility, with some states pushing for stricter regulations. Despite its prevalence, there's a lack of knowledge among even healthcare professionals about its safety and efficacy. This can leave individuals like Heather Witten, who had an abortion in 2019, feeling unprepared and uncertain. Heather's experience highlights the need for open dialogue and education about the abortion pill. It's important to separate politics from facts and understand that hundreds of thousands of people use this method every year. In the following discussion, we will clarify the process of taking the abortion pill, address safety concerns, and dispel common misconceptions.

    • Dietary choices and medication abortionReducing meat intake can help the environment, while medication abortion ends pregnancy by stopping hormonal support.

      Making dietary choices, such as consuming less meat, can contribute to reducing the environmental impact of animal agriculture. Meanwhile, in the medical field, the abortion pill, also known as medication abortion, works by stopping the production of progesterone, a hormone that supports pregnancy, leading the nutrient-rich lining of the uterus to shed, effectively ending the pregnancy. This method is approved for use up to 10 weeks of pregnancy in the US. It's important to note that these topics are complex and have various aspects, but the key takeaway is the potential impact of individual actions on the environment and reproductive health. For more information on Impossible Foods and their plant-based meat alternatives, visit impossiblefoods.com. For more on the Volvo EX90's advanced safety features, visit volvocars.com/us. And for comprehensive information on medication abortion, consult healthcare professionals.

    • Medical abortion process and symptomsTaking mifepristone and misoprostol ends pregnancy by blocking hormone and triggering uterus contractions. Symptoms include cramps, back pain, and diarrhea, varying for each person. Support from loved ones or medical professionals helps.

      A medical abortion involves taking two types of pills, mifepristone and misoprostol, to end a pregnancy. The first pill, mifepristone, blocks the hormone progesterone, causing the body to shed the pregnancy. The second pill, misoprostol, triggers the uterus to contract and expel the pregnancy tissue. The process is similar to a natural period and is complete in about 97-98% of cases. Heather's experience, as shared in the discussion, highlights the varying levels of discomfort and pain, including cramps, back pain, and diarrhea, that can occur during the process. It's important to note that everyone's experience is unique, and having support from loved ones or medical professionals can make a significant difference.

    • Experiencing pain and heavy bleeding during abortion pill processWhile most women experience minimal complications during the abortion pill process, some may experience significant pain and heavy bleeding, which can be concerning but are relatively rare.

      The abortion pill process can involve significant pain and heavy bleeding, which may be worse than a typical period. About half of those who take the pills report moderate to extreme pain, and some experience nausea and vomiting. The bleeding is due to the thickened uterine lining and the expulsion of the embryo and placenta. While most women's heavy bleeding subsides within 24 hours, large clots or excessive bleeding can be concerning and may require medical attention. It's important to note that these complications are relatively rare. A study led by Finnish professor Oskari Haikkinen, who has worked with mifepristone for 40 years, found that the overall risk of serious complications is low. However, the stigma and fear surrounding these potential complications have been used to restrict access to the abortion pill, with some arguing that it's dangerous and leading to emergency room visits. The ongoing Supreme Court case in the US regarding the legality of the abortion pill could have significant implications for access to this method of abortion nationwide.

    • Study Finds 16% of Women Diagnosed with Hemorrhage after Abortion Pill, but Most Were Minimal CasesWhile a small percentage of women may experience bleeding after taking the abortion pill, most cases are minor and do not require hospitalization.

      While a study conducted by Oskari Heikinheimo involving 42,000 women in Finland found that 16% of them were diagnosed with hemorrhage after taking the abortion pill, this diagnosis included women with minimal bleeding who were concerned and sought medical attention. Oskari cautioned against misinterpreting his data to suggest that a large number of women face severe bleeding risks when using the abortion pill. More recent research by Ushma Upadhyay involving over 6,000 individuals who received the abortion pill by mail showed that serious complications were rare. The communication between these individuals and their healthcare providers was primarily through video chats or text messages.

    • Effectiveness and safety of telemedicine for medication abortionsTelemedicine for medication abortions is effective and safe for most patients, with a low risk of serious side effects. Clear communication between patients and healthcare providers is crucial to ensure proper care in case of heavy bleeding or pain.

      Telemedicine, including virtual consultations for medication abortions, is effective and safe for most patients, with a very low risk of serious side effects. A quarter of 1% of patients may experience a serious adverse event, which is similar to the risk in traditional in-person consultations. However, it's important to note that there can be challenges in determining normal bleeding during the process, and guidelines based on maxi pads as a unit of measurement may not be precise. Despite this, clear communication between patients and healthcare providers about what to do in case of heavy bleeding or pain can help ensure proper care and prevent unnecessary hospitalizations or transfusions.

    • The psychological risks of taking the abortion pill are not common, especially in early pregnanciesWhile physical risks like cramping and bleeding are present, psychological risks such as trauma and PTSD are rare in early abortions. Individual reactions to seeing the remains vary widely.

      While there are physical risks associated with taking the abortion pill, such as cramping and bleeding, the evidence suggests that the psychological risks, including trauma and PTSD, are not common, especially when the procedure is performed in early pregnancies. The size of the embryo at this stage is small, and research indicates that reactions to seeing the remains vary widely, with some women experiencing negative emotions and others feeling neutral, curious, or even positive. A woman named Heather shared her experience, describing the embryo as looking like a "crusty booger" and feeling a sense of curiosity upon seeing it. The placenta, which is expelled before the embryo, looks like a light pink sponge. Overall, the psychological impact of an abortion is complex and highly individual, and it's important for women to have accurate information and support as they make this decision.

    • Individual experiences with abortion and emotional responsesOn average, abortions do not negatively impact mental health, and most people report feeling confident and no regret. Preferences for medication or surgical options depend on cost, privacy, and convenience.

      People's experiences with abortion and their emotional responses to it vary greatly. While some may feel detached or indifferent, others may have strong reactions, including emotional distress or even feelings of forgiveness towards the embryo. However, research suggests that on average, abortions do not negatively impact mental health, including medication abortions. The vast majority of people report feeling confident about their decision and no regret. Additionally, many women prefer medication abortions over surgical options due to cost, privacy, and convenience. Regardless of individual experiences, it's important to remember that everyone's experience is valid, and there is no one-size-fits-all response to abortion.

    • Discussing the safety of medication abortions with Professor Oskari HaikinhimoMedication abortions, used in over 90% of Nordic country abortions, have minimal psychological or physical harm for most people, according to Professor Oskari Haikinhimo. Listeners can access resources and support through the show notes.

      According to Professor Oskari Haikinhimo, who has assisted in over a thousand medication abortions, there is a lack of evidence suggesting that the abortion pill poses significant psychological or physical harm to a large number of people. Medication abortion is the method used in over 90% of all abortions in the Nordic countries, indicating its safety. The episode, which includes discussions on this topic, has received an impressive 108 citations for further reading. For those interested in the topic, the show notes provide links to transcripts and resources. The episode tackles heavy subjects and encourages listeners to reach out for support if needed. Science Versus is produced by Meryl Horne and Wendy Zuckerman, and new episodes can be found on Spotify or wherever podcasts are available. Listeners are encouraged to rate and review the show.

    Recent Episodes from Science Vs

    Mind-Blowing Orgasms: Does the Male G-Spot Exist?

    Mind-Blowing Orgasms: Does the Male G-Spot Exist?
    We’re hearing stories of people having amazing, cosmic orgasms. So what buttons are they pressing to do this?? Well, it's just one. The “male G spot,” also called the “P spot,” because that P stands for prostate. Word on the street is that if you touch your prostate in just the right way — BAM — one helluva orgasm. But is that really true? And if you don't have a prostate (ahem, me): are you stuck with your garden variety orgasms? To get to the bottom of this, Science Vs surveyed almost 16,000 people about anal sex and masturbation! We also speak with Dr Dan Dickstein, Dr Tom Gaither and Neuroscientist Dr Nan Wise. Have an idea for a Science Vs episode? Let us know! On Instagram we're Science_Vs, Wendy's Tiktok is @wendyzukerman and our email is sciencevs@gimletmedia.com Find our transcript here: https://bit.ly/ScienceVsMind-BlowingOrgasms In this episode, we cover: (00:00) Absolutely cosmic orgasms (04:47) Anal sex is big right now (08:52) What makes the prostate special (12:02) The hole story. The butthole story. (20:19) How to get a cosmic orgasm (29:19) Tips and tricks for great anal sex (34:54) The real G spot This episode was produced by Wendy Zukerman, with help from Meryl Horn, Rose Rimler, and Michelle Dang. We’re edited by Blythe Terrell. Fact checking by Diane Kelly. Mix and sound design by Bobby Lord. Music written by Bobby Lord, Emma Munger, Bumi Hidaka and Peter Leonard. A huge thank you to Sam Levang for her help analyzing our data. And Professor Caroline Pukall and Dan Dickstein for your help with our survey questions. Thanks to the researchers we spoke to including Dr Devon Hensel. Thanks to Jack Weinstein, Hunter, the Zukerman Family and Joseph Lavelle Wilson. Science Vs is a Spotify Studios Original. Listen for free on Spotify or wherever you get your podcasts. Follow us and tap the bell for episode notifications. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices
    Science Vs
    enJune 20, 2024

    Protein: Are You Getting Enough?

    Protein: Are You Getting Enough?
    Protein influencers are big right now, telling us that we're probably missing out on the protein we need — and giving us a bunch of hacks for getting it. Why? They say that eating extra protein helps us build muscle, feel full, and lose weight. So is that true? We talk to kinesiology professor Stuart Phillips and nutrition professor Faidon Magkos.  Find our transcript here: bit.ly/ScienceVsPROTEIN In this episode, we cover: (00:00) Protein is all the rage right now (02:53) Why protein matters (05:32) How much protein is enough? (11:33) Do you need more protein if you’re working out? (15:06) Is it risky to eat a LOT of protein? (18:46) Should you pound protein right after a workout? (23:09) Protein and weight loss This episode was produced by Rose Rimler and Michelle Dang, with help from Wendy Zukerman and Meryl Horn. We’re edited by Blythe Terrell. Fact checking by Erica Akiko Howard. Mix and sound design by Bobby Lord. Music written by Bobby Lord and Bumi Hidaka. Thanks so much to all the researchers we spoke with for this episode, including Prof. Brad Schoenfeld and Dr. Nicholas Burd. And special thanks to the Zukerman Family and Joseph Lavelle Wilson. Science Vs is a Spotify Studios Original. Listen for free on Spotify or wherever you get your podcasts. Follow us and tap the bell for episode notifications.  Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices
    Science Vs
    enJune 13, 2024

    Introducing The Journal: Trillion Dollar Shot

    Introducing The Journal: Trillion Dollar Shot
    Today we’re presenting Trillion Dollar Shot, a new series that explores the business story behind the rise of Ozempic and other blockbuster drugs being used for weight loss. The first episode focuses on the Novo Nordisk scientist who invented the compound that paved the way for Ozempic. You can find every episode on The Journal’s show feed. Trillion Dollar Shot is part of The Journal, which is a co-production of Spotify and the Wall Street Journal. This episode was hosted by Jessica Mendoza, with Bradley Olson. It was produced by Matt Kwong, with help from Jeevika Verma. Additional production from Adrienne Murray Nielsen. The series is edited by Katherine Brewer. Sound design and mixing by Peter Leonard. Mixing for Science Vs by Bobby Lord. Music in this episode by Peter Leonard and Bobby Lord. Theme music by So Wylie, remixed for this series by Peter Leonard. Special thanks to Maria Byrne, Stefanie Ilgenfritz, Kate Linebaugh, Peter Loftus, Sara O’Brien, Enrique Perez De La Rosa, Sarah Platt, Sune Rasumssen, Jonathan Sanders, Nathan Singhapok, Leying Tang, Rolfe Winkler, Liz Essley Whyte, and Tatiana Zamis. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices
    Science Vs
    enJune 11, 2024

    Trans Kids’ Healthcare: Are We Getting It Wrong?

    Trans Kids’ Healthcare: Are We Getting It Wrong?
    Health care for trans kids has been in the spotlight, with battles over what the science says and tons of U.S. states restricting the care that children can get. And then there’s a new report out of the UK, called the Cass Review, saying that a bunch of the evidence that doctors have been relying on to treat trans kids is “remarkably weak.” So what’s going on here? What is the best health care for trans kids? We sort through the science with Professor Stephen Russell, Dr. Cal Horton, and Dr. Ada Cheung. UPDATE 6/6/24: In a previous version of this episode, we said a study was published this year, when it was actually published last year. The episode has been updated. Mental health resources, including suicide lifelines, for around the world: spotify.com/resources Trans Lifeline: A Trans peer support hotline: 1-877-565-8860 Trevor Project: crisis support services to LGBTQ young people: Call 1-866-488-7386 or Text ‘START’ to 678-678 Find our transcript here: bit.ly/ScienceVsTransKidsCassReviewTranscript  Here are links to our previous episodes about the science of being transgender and misinformation about care for trans kids. In this episode, we cover: (00:00) The battle over care for trans kids (02:45) What to do when a kid wants to change their name and pronouns (13:44) Do puberty blockers help trans kids’ mental health? (20:44) Does hormone therapy help trans people’s mental health? (25:25) How often are people "retransitioning"? This episode was produced by Meryl Horn and Wendy Zukerman, with help from Michelle Dang and Rose Rimler. We’re edited by Blythe Terrell. Fact checking by Eva Dasher. Consulting by Rebecca Kling. Mix and sound design by Bobby Lord. Music written by Bobby Lord, Bumi Hidaka and Peter Leonard. Thanks so much to all the researchers we spoke with for this episode, including Blake Cavve, Dr. Doug VanderLaan, and Dr. Quinnehtukqut McLamore. And a very special thanks to the trans folks and their families we talked to, Christopher Suter, the Zukerman Family and Joseph Lavelle Wilson. Science Vs is a Spotify Studios Original. Listen for free on Spotify or wherever you get your podcasts. Follow us and tap the bell for episode notifications. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices
    Science Vs
    enJune 06, 2024

    The Great Dinosaur Smashup

    The Great Dinosaur Smashup
    More than 150 years ago, just before dino-mania struck, New York City was supposed to get a majestic dinosaur museum full of amazing models of dinos. There would have been nothing like it in the world. Until a bunch of thugs showed up with sledgehammers and smashed every bit of the models to smithereens — and buried it all in Central Park. Today we’re finding out what happened — and WHY. We speak with doctoral researcher Vicky Coules and paleontologist Carl Mehling. SURVEY!! HELP US SCIENCE!! WE NEED YOUR HELP TO UNCOVER THE LAST MYSTERIES OF SEX https://bit.ly/ScienceVsSurvey Find our transcript here: https://bit.ly/ScienceVsTheGreatDinosaurSmashup In this episode, we cover: (00:00) ​​The amazing dino museum we didn’t get to have (03:15) What we knew about dinos in the 1800s (04:57) The famous Crystal Palace dinosaurs (06:48) The plan for the Paleozoic Museum is born (10:40) The Great Dinosaur Smashup of 1871 (12:52) Suspect No. 1: Boss Tweed (17:58) Vicky cracks the case! (26:17) One final mystery — where are the dino pieces?? This episode was produced by Blythe Terrell with help from Wendy Zukerman, R.E. Natowicz, Michelle Dang, Meryl Horn, Rose Rimler and Joel Werner. Editing by Wendy Zukerman. Fact checking by Erica Akiko Howard. Mix and sound design by Bobby Lord. Music written by Bobby Lord, Emma Munger, So Wylie, Bumi Hidaka and Peter Leonard. Thanks so much to everyone we spoke to about this episode, including Gowan Dawson, Robert Peck, Wendy Anthony and Jessica M. Lydon. Also thanks to Jack Weinstein, the Zukerman Family and Joseph Lavelle Wilson. Science Vs is a Spotify Studios Original. Listen for free on Spotify or wherever you get your podcasts. Follow us and tap the bell for episode notifications.  Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices
    Science Vs
    enMay 30, 2024

    The Abortion Pill: How Dangerous Is It Really?

    The Abortion Pill: How Dangerous Is It Really?
    The Abortion Pill is now the most common way to have an abortion in the US. Yet what exactly happens when you take these pills is shrouded in mystery. Even many doctors don't know how well they work! Today, we're letting the sun shine on the abortion pill. We'll walk you through what happens when you take these pills: what they do to your body, and how safe are they for your physical and mental health? To explore all this - and more - we speak to Dr Sara Whitburn, Professor Oskari Heikinheimo, and Professor Ushma Upadhyay. Find our transcript here: https://bit.ly/ScienceVsTheAbortionPiill The Abortion Project's Instagram @theabortionproject Science Vs's Instagram @science_vs If you want to talk to someone - there's some great resources in here: spotify.com/resources In this episode, we cover: (00:00) The battle over the abortion pill  (04:28) How does the abortion pill work?  (09:05) How it feels to take the abortion pill (14:34) How often do people hemorrhage? (21:22) What's "normal" bleeding?  (24:11) Does taking the abortion pill affect your mental health?  (32:02) Why some people prefer the abortion pill This episode was produced by Meryl Horn and Wendy Zukerman, with help from Rose Rimler, and Michelle Dang. We’re edited by Blythe Terrell. Fact checking by Diane Kelly. Mix and sound design by Bobby Lord. Music written by Bobby Lord, Emma Munger, So Wylie, Bumi Hidaka and Peter Leonard. Thanks to all the researchers we spoke to including Dr. Tiffany Green, Dr. Ned Calonge, Professor Jenny Higgins, Dr. Daniel Aaron, Dr. Beverly Winikoff, and Dr. Abigail Aiken. Also thanks to Lauren Silverman, the Zukerman Family and Joseph Lavelle Wilson. Science Vs is a Spotify Studios Original. Listen for free on Spotify or wherever you get your podcasts. Follow us and tap the bell for episode notifications.  Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices
    Science Vs
    enMay 23, 2024

    What the Hell Is at the Edge of Space?

    What the Hell Is at the Edge of Space?
    With the powers of the James Webb Space Telescope, scientists discovered some super weird things in the early Universe, and it's making some nerds question our theory of everything.  This story comes to us from our friends at Unexplainable at Vox Media. Find Unexplainable’s transcript here: https://bit.ly/ScienceVsUnexplainable In this episode, we cover: (0:00) Liftoff (01:10) The James Webb Space Telescope  (04:57) Party of the early universe  (08:39) Mysteries of the early galaxies  (15:23) How do we figure it out? This episode was produced by Brian Resnick, with help from Noam Hassenfeld and Meradith Hoddinott, who also manages the Unexplainable team. Editing from Jorge Just, music from Noam, and mixing and sound design from Cristian Ayala. Fact checking from Kelsey Lannin. Mandy Nguyen is searching for new forms of life. Science Vs is a Spotify Studios Original. Listen for free on Spotify or wherever you get your podcasts. Follow us and tap the bell for episode notifications.  Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices
    Science Vs
    enMay 16, 2024

    Heartbreak: Why It Feels So Achy Breaky

    Heartbreak: Why It Feels So Achy Breaky
    Getting your heart broken sucks — and for some of us, it even feels physically painful. So why does it hurt so bad? And what can science tell us about how to get over it? We dive into all of this with neuroscientist Prof. Lucy Brown.  Find our transcript here: https://bit.ly/ScienceVsHeartbreak In this episode, we cover: (00:00) Heartbreak sucks (07:17) What heartbreak does in the brain (12:14) What heartbreak does in the body (15:07) How to get over heartbreak  The episode does mention abuse. Here are some resources if you’re struggling to move on from abuse:  https://resources.byspotify.com/ https://www.loveisrespect.org/resources/why-am-i-struggling-to-move-on-after-abuse/ This episode was produced by Michelle Dang, with help from Wendy Zukerman, Rose Rimler, Meryl Horn, Kaitlyn Sawrey and Lexi Krupp. Editing by Caitlin Kenney and Blythe Terrell. Fact checking by Diane Kelly and Erica Akiko Howard. Mix and sound design by Peter Leonard and Bobby Lord. Music written by Peter Leonard, Bumi Hidaka, Emma Munger, and Bobby Lord. A huge thanks to all the scientists we got in touch with for this episode, including Professor Larry Young, Professor Tiffany Field, Professor Ethan Kross, Professor Sandra Langeslag, and Professor Naomi Eisenberger. Thanks to Lori Segal. A special thanks to the Zukerman family and Joseph Lavelle Wilson.  Science Vs is a Spotify Studios Original. Listen for free on Spotify or wherever you get your podcasts. Follow us and tap the bell for episode notifications.  Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

    Tig Notaro Shares Her Favorite Jokes

    Tig Notaro Shares Her Favorite Jokes
    Comedian Tig Notaro, who just released her fifth comedy special, "Hello Again," joins us for a chat about the science of her comedy: telling us how she builds jokes, and of course sharing a bunch of dumb and fabulous jokes. Enjoy!  Here's our Funniest Joke in the World Episode!!  Find our transcript here: https://bit.ly/ScienceVsTigNotaro In this episode, we cover: (00:00) We're interviewing Tig!  (01:22) I could be a comedian?  (02:47) How Tig creates a joke  (08:59) The element of surprise (12:27) The world's funniest joke? (13:55) Tig's favorite jokes This episode was produced by Wendy Zukerman, with help from Michelle Dang, Rose Rimler and Meryl Horn. We’re edited by Blythe Terrell. Mix and sound design by Bobby Lord. Music written by Bobby Lord and Bumi Hidaka.  Science Vs is a Spotify Studios Original. Listen for free on Spotify or wherever you get your podcasts. Follow us and tap the bell for episode notifications. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

    The Funniest Joke in the World

    The Funniest Joke in the World
    If you Google "The Funniest Joke in the World," you'll be very disappointed. The internet might serve you something like, "What has many keys but can't open a single lock??” (Answer: A piano). Screw that. That's not funny. Enter Science Vs. We’re going on a romp to find out once and for all: What is the funniest joke in the world. According to science. And for this quest we've interviewed a bunch of amazing comics including Tig Notaro, Adam Conover, Dr Jason Leong, Loni Love, as well as special guest Latif Nasser of Radiolab and, of course, some scientists: Neuroscientist Professor Sophie Scott and Psychologist Professor Richard Wiseman. Which Joke Will Win???    Find our transcript here: https://bit.ly/ScienceVsFunniestJoke In this episode, we cover: (00:00) The Quest Begins (08:40) Why laughing matters (13:13) The scientific search for the world's funniest joke (17:40) Woof, quack or moo? (21:33) The comedy K (26:30) Do different cultures have different senses of humour? (28:27) The winner! (32:15) Scientific theories of humour (lol) (38:28) Why the winning joke isn't funny (40:26) How do you stop a dog from humping your leg?  (44:43) Meet the comedy gods This episode was produced by Wendy Zukerman, with help from Michelle Dang, Joel Werner, Rose Rimler and Meryl Horn. We’re edited by Blythe Terrell. Fact checking by Sarah Baum. Mix and sound design by Bobby Lord. Music written by Peter Leonard, Bumi Hidaka, Emma Munger, So Wylie, and Bobby Lord. Thanks to all the researchers we spoke to including Dr Andrew Farkas, Professor Penny MacDonald, Dr Maggie Prenger and a huge thank you to Professor Chris Westbury for sharing your amazing spreadsheet!! Thanks to all the comedians we interviewed in this episode including Tig Notaro, Adam Conover, Loni Love, Takashi Wakasugi, Urooj Ashfaq, Dr Jason Leong, Penny Greenhalgh and Mohammed Magdi. Another big thanks to Lindsay Farber, Roland Campos, Lauren LoGiudice, Andrea Jones-Rooy and the other comics at The Joke Lab; and all the comics that we spoke to and couldn't fit into the episode, we really really appreciate you and your time! Thanks to Ben Milam, the Melbourne International Comedy Festival, Stupid Old Studios, Paige Ransbury, the Zukerman Family and Joseph Lavelle Wilson. Science Vs is a Spotify Studios Original. Listen for free on Spotify or wherever you get your podcasts. Follow us and tap the bell for episode notifications.  Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices