Loading summary
Transcript71 lines
- [00:01]
Dr. Gregory Hampikian
You say you'll never join the Navy.
- [00:03]
Dr. Samantha Amin
That you'd never track storms brewing in.
- [00:05]
Dr. Gregory Hampikian
The Atlantic, and skydiving could never be part of your commute. You'd never climb Mount Fuji on a port visit, or fly so fast you break the sound barrier. Joining the Navy sounds crazy.
- [00:23]
Dr. Samantha Amin
Saying never actually is.
- [00:25]
Dr. Gregory Hampikian
Start your journey@navy.com, america's Navy. Forged by the sea, life is a workout, and Smoothie King is here to help you power through. Whether you're crushing morning miles or sprinting through back to back meetings. Give your body the energy, protein and power it needs to help you conquer your goals. Only at Smoothie King. ACAST powers the World's Best Podcasts.
- [00:52]
Dr. Samantha Amin
Here's a show that we recommend hey.
- [00:57]
Dr. Gregory Hampikian
Folks, looking for a whole new thing to be into? Well, check this then. Check it out. We're the Sloppy Boys, and we're basically like, pretty much the new classic guys. We were in a comedy group called the Birthday Boys with Bob Odenkirk, and now we're an indie band and we have a podcast about the drinks of the summer like the Gator Bite or the Grape Gorilla. And we have guests that are music people like Jeff Rosenstock or Stefan from the Band Pup or comedy people like Tom Sharply or Mitch from Doughboys. Yeah, dude, we talk about TV and mov music like Turn Style or King Giz and it's completely kind of cool. Ooh. Give it a listen and check it out to see what you think. Don't forget that we're the new Classic guys.
- [01:41]
Dr. Samantha Amin
ACAST helps creators launch, grow, and monetize their podcasts everywhere.
- [01:47]
Dr. Gregory Hampikian
Acast.com.
- [01:53]
Dr. Samantha Amin
We'Re told DNA has all the answers. It can tell us about our health, connect us with lost relics, relatives, and could make all the difference in a court case. But when it comes to forensic science, you're not always getting samples from ideal conditions, so things get a bit more complicated.
- [02:10]
Dr. Gregory Hampikian
AI is better than humans at many things, and it fails at several things. You can't use the speedometer on your car to measure the speed of an inchworm. It's a perfect instrument, but it has limits.
- [02:29]
Dr. Samantha Amin
That's Dr. Gregory Hempikian talking about DNA and AI in forensics. And here's the big when someone's life is on the line in a legal case, how do we know what evidence we can really trust? If you're a crime enthusiast or not, this is a must. Listen, I'm Dr. Samantha Amin, and this is Curiosity Weekly from Discovery. In this episode, Curiosity's senior producer Teresa Carey sits down with Dr. Gregory Hampikian to dig into the use of and misuse of DNA and AI in criminal investigations. And later, we'll take a closer look at Rice, not the food. We covered that in episode 23. But the classic treatment for sports injuries. Rest, ice, compression, elevation. It turns out it might not be the best approach after all. And if you're interested in exploring extreme weather and its impact, catch season two of in the Eye of the Storm. It premieres July 27th on Discovery and HBO Max. But first, let's talk about the effort paradox. You know the phrase work smarter, not harder? It's everywhere. But then there's also the sage advice of hard work pays off. So which one is it? Historically, psychological models would have predicted that if offered two pathways to a reward, many people and animals would choose the path that requires the least amount of effort. The path of least resistance, if you will. And that seems to make sense. But again, then why would people run marathons? Why do people climb Mount Everest? Enter the psychological idea called the effort Paradox. The Effort Paradox asks, if effort feels kind of bad, why does it also sometimes feel good? University of Toronto professor Michael Inslicht coined the term effort paradox in 2018 alongside his colleagues at Brown and Carnegie Mellon. They pulled on a lot of psychological concepts to build their theory, but they generally fell into two categories. The first maybe people just like the results enough to make up for the cost of the effort. Or at least we tell ourselves we do. The second standout explanation is that sometimes people like the effort itself. Maybe it is really all about the journey. So in a new study, Inslicht and colleagues put these different theories to the test under six different scenarios. Through all of them, they came to a simple effort. Even just imagining putting in effort or knowing someone else did begets feelings of meaning. It's more than just justifying the time and energy. It's giving people a sense of satisfaction that outweighs the cost of the effort. Checking boxes off a to do list all day isn't enough for our well being. We want to feel that it was all worth something.
- [05:15]
Dr. Gregory Hampikian
Sometimes an identity threat is a ring of professional hackers. And sometimes it's an overworked accountant who forgot to encrypt their connection while sending bank details. I need a coffee. And you need Lifelock. Because your info is in endless places. It only takes one mistake to expose you to identity theft. LifeLock monitors hundreds of millions of data points a second. If your identity is stolen, we'll fix it, guaranteed, or your money back. Save up to 40%. Your first year@lifelock.com special offer terms apply. If you're shopping while working, eating or even listening to this podcast, then you know and love the thrill of a deal. But are you getting the deal and cash back? Rakuten shoppers? Do they get the brands they love? Savings and cash back and you can get it too. Start getting cash back at your favorite stores like Levi's, Plow and Hearth, Adidas, Sephora and Neiman Marcus. Stack savings sales on top of cash back and feel what it's like to know you're maximizing the savings. And it's easy to use and you get your cash back sent to you through PayPal or check. The idea is simple. Stores pay Rakuten for sending them shoppers and Rakuten shares the money with you as cash back. Download the free Rakuten app or go to rakuten.com to start saving today. It's the most rewarding way to shop. That's R A K U T e n r rakuten.com.
- [06:43]
Dr. Samantha Amin
Thanks for selling your car to Carvana. Here's your check.
- [06:46]
Dr. Gregory Hampikian
Whoa, when did I get here?
- [06:47]
Dr. Samantha Amin
What do you mean?
- [06:48]
Dr. Gregory Hampikian
I swear it was just moments ago that I accepted a great offer from Carvana online. I must have time traveled to the future.
- [06:54]
Dr. Samantha Amin
It was just moments ago. We do same day pickup. Here's your check for that great offer.
- [06:58]
Dr. Gregory Hampikian
It is the future.
- [07:00]
Dr. Samantha Amin
It's it's the present and just the convenience of Carvana. Sorry to blow your mind.
- [07:05]
Dr. Gregory Hampikian
It's all good. Happens all the time.
- [07:07]
Dr. Samantha Amin
Sell your car the convenient way to Carvana. Pickup times may vary and fees may apply. Picture this There's a high profile murder trial unfolding on live television. Dramatic cross examinations, last minute reveals, witness testimony and of course DNA evidence. The stakes couldn't be higher. Remember O.J. simpson and Amanda Knox and Scott Peterson? Or Bear Brook, one of the most influential podcasts about forensics? Or that little podcast called Serial? These trials and investigations keep us all on the edge of our seats. And even after the final verdict, the court of public opinion is divided. Did science bring us closer to the truth, or did it leave room for doubt? Teresa Carey talks with Dr. Gregory Hempikian about the power and pitfalls of forensic science. Dr. Hampikian is a professor of biological sciences and criminal justice at Boise State University, co director of the Idaho Innocence Project, and a forensic DNA analyst. He's one of the go to experts and a trusted source in the field, so you've probably heard his voice before. Dr. Hampikian, I'm so glad to have this conversation with you. It's actually meaningful for me on several levels, not just as someone that's interested in science.
- [08:26]
Dr. Gregory Hampikian
I hope you're not accused of a crime. That would be.
- [08:28]
Dr. Samantha Amin
No, but it's. It's a way to honor my father who was a lawyer and dedicated to fighting wrongful convictions.
- [08:34]
Dr. Gregory Hampikian
Wait a minute, you gotta tell me about that.
- [08:36]
Dr. Samantha Amin
He was a small town attorney, but he did defend a man accused of murder who was found guilty despite DNA evidence. It became my father's life's work to free him, but he's a free man now. And now though, as I'm working in science journalism, I can see how law and science and journalism all have like a common purpose, which would be discovering and revealing the truth and often in service of a better society. So your work is kind of at the intersection of all of these.
- [09:07]
Dr. Gregory Hampikian
Yeah, I mean, you're educating, you know, the emperors, I mean, the emperor of wrongful or rightful conviction is a jury in our country. And the juries are the people who listen to your show, who took my classes, who come to a talk, who read a book. I mean, you just get this lottery and now you have to decide someone's life. Anyway. I have great respect for juries.
- [09:33]
Dr. Samantha Amin
So in your view, what does justice mean from a scientific perspective? Is there like a way to measure or define justice using scientific principles, or is it just inherently subjective?
- [09:45]
Dr. Gregory Hampikian
Forensic science at its best is like all science and it's mostly keeping your mouth shut. Don't give an opinion, do the work, and try to get to a dispassionate understanding of facts. And that's really what forensic science does. Forensic science is not about justice. Give the triers of fact, the jury or judge, the best measurements so they can weigh the evidence so that those scales of justice can weigh properly. My job, though, is about numbers.
- [10:24]
Dr. Samantha Amin
DNA is often seen as the gold standard for forensic science, but your research actually has highlighted some of the limitations and potentials for misuse. What are some of the most common misconceptions about DNA evidence in the courtroom? And how can science help prevent these errors?
- [10:41]
Dr. Gregory Hampikian
I love this conversation, but the implication that I would like to examine is that the more precise something is, the better it is, the more we know about its error. We know with DNA by, by studying it that where the testing fails, right? If, if the lab has done proper validations, they know that they can interpret a single person's DNA profile that matches the evidence, right? That match has a single contributor to the evidence. That also means that with that precision, there is A place where it fails. Right. All science is about determining where your measurements fail because that's where other people can invent new science. Right. So where does it fail? It fails when we have too many contributors to a sample. At some point, you have all of the alleles in the population. So everybody cannot be excluded. Everybody's included. Does that happen? Yes. Do sometimes experts testify that they can interpret things beyond what is reasonable? In my view, absolutely. In review, experts look at the DNA, and in Christopher Tapp's case, they said that the absence of evidence is not the evidence of absence. So we just tested everything and we showed not only is Chris not on anything at the crime scene, there's one guy and he's on everything. So the absence of evidence starts adding up as you do more tests. Right. As you sample more things. Eventually, if you sample the entire space, it's pretty convincing that the absence of a particular type of evidence is confirming. So there's one mistake. The new thing that's happening is what we call activity level propositions. So I find your DNA on the trigger of a gun at a crime scene, and it's a perfect match. And there's only one person. What do we conclude?
- [12:59]
Dr. Samantha Amin
That at some point I touched the trigger.
- [13:01]
Dr. Gregory Hampikian
Does it prove you touched it? What does touch mean? So there's this term touch DNA that really came out of the JonBenet Ramsey case a bunch of years ago. Anyway, we're all using this term because we have the noble goal of trying to find the right guy, the noble goal of trying to find who did this. And the problem is, touch DNA starts being used, and you used it just now to implicate yourself in a crime, that if your DNA is found on a trigger, it means you touch the trigger. Well, I would say, if an analyst testified that way, I would say, really? Can I borrow your toothbrush? To people in my field, I think it's a funny joke. The point is, if I had your toothbrush, I have thousands of cells, but with that toothbrush I can just, Gosh, I don't want to tell people how to do crime.
- [13:53]
Dr. Samantha Amin
But, you know, I know what you're going to tell me.
- [13:56]
Dr. Gregory Hampikian
There's enough.
- [13:57]
Dr. Samantha Amin
You can plant those cells in other places.
- [13:59]
Dr. Gregory Hampikian
Of course, unfortunately, that touch DNA is mentioned at trial and it implies an activity. It implies that you touched the trigger. Do I know by the DNA that you touched the trigger? No DNA. You know, I don't want to advertise how to commit crimes, but it's very easy to move DNA around. That's the Wonderful thing about DNA. Very different than a traditional latent print. A fingerprint. I think it's not wrong to call fingerprints touch fingerprint, right? Oh, that's a touch fingerprint. Because there's really no other way. Your gym clothes have your fingerprints on them, but they're not likely to transfer it to a gun. If somebody's storing a gun with your gym clothes, let's say your DNA absolutely gonna transfer. We know this in the laundry. You're doing laundry with somebody. We know DNA can transfer in the laundry, especially if there's stain material. DNA has nothing to do with touch. There's no. We don't know if it's touch. Cough, gym clothes, toothbrush, planted spilt in the lab.
- [15:07]
Dr. Samantha Amin
So almost the term touch DNA is implying something that it shouldn't. And maybe we shouldn't be using the term.
- [15:13]
Dr. Gregory Hampikian
We should not be using it except in the context of hypothesis testing for investigation. As a DNA scientist, all I can help you with is who. Who the who the initial source of these cells likely was or who's definitely not the initial. The source of any of this DNA. The how. That's for the jury. The other thing we do that's different than latent Prince. I take that swab from your mouth or from the trigger or whatever. I bring it into the lab. First thing I do is make a billion copies of it, or hundreds of millions through a technique called polymerase chain reaction that won a Nobel Prize. So now it's a visible amount of DNA if I need to. And each of those copies can implicate you in a crime? If I accidentally drop a few molecules of that mixture somewhere. And does this happen? Yes. And as a friend told me once when I was looking for a job, your strengths are your weaknesses. That's true of DNA. It's persistence. Is it strength for crime. It's also the weakness because it's still there 10 years later, 30 years later. And its strength is I can just go in and swab it and take it. I don't have to do latent prints and all this. I just take my wet Q tip and my dry Q tip, and that's how easy it is. That's one of its strengths. It's also one of its weaknesses because that means it can transfer if they're 2q tips or 2 pieces of clothing or whatever. And so that doesn't mean the evidence is bad. It means it's very good at identifying. It means the jury has to apply its own reasoning.
- [16:59]
Dr. Samantha Amin
Well, let me see if I can sum this up then, because this all came from a question about what are the misconceptions of what I called the gold standard in forensic science, which was DNA evidence. And so it sounds like while we can take a DNA sample and very accurately identify it to a person, the challenge comes from understanding and being very accurate about how did that DNA get there? Why is it there? What does it mean being there? There's where all the mistakes can happen.
- [17:28]
Dr. Gregory Hampikian
Yes. And basically what I'm saying is the scientists, the forensic DNA scientists can't help you.
- [17:33]
Dr. Samantha Amin
You've done some work on nullomers. Am I saying that correctly?
- [17:37]
Dr. Gregory Hampikian
Well, thanks for bringing up nullimers. Yeah, I made up the word, you know, one of my babies.
- [17:43]
Dr. Samantha Amin
So my understanding, nullomers are DNA sequences that are not found in nature. And this work that you've done has led to some new forensic tools. So could you explain to me how this nullomer technology works and how it could transform the way we handle evidence or contamination in forensic labs like we just spoke about?
- [18:03]
Dr. Gregory Hampikian
Great. So a nullomer is the smallest, a pattern that is not seen in some. In some data, using DNA that doesn't exist. We found the smallest units. They were 15 bases long at the time. And so we strung them together in concatenate, several of them, one after another, and we were using them as markers. So when you give the police a swab from your cheek, we'd put this tag in there, the nullamer tag, and it would mean this was a reference sample. If you find this on evidence, you guys messed it up. You contaminated stuff. Because I'd get calls from people all the time in prison. They'd be like, I gave them a swab for my mouth, and now they're saying my DNA's on the gun. How do I know they didn't spill it? Or I was like, there's no way. We can't tell.
- [18:49]
Dr. Samantha Amin
So you mix these nullomers in with the sample, the swab that they gave, so that if the nullomer then is on the gun, you can say this is a contamination.
- [18:59]
Dr. Gregory Hampikian
Yes. And we made them very small so they copy better than the human DNA. And so even if we diluted it a million times, the spotted DNA worked. Nobody picked up our patent. We published. We showed that it works. We diluted it on a knife.
- [19:15]
Dr. Samantha Amin
So nobody's using. Nobody's using this?
- [19:17]
Dr. Gregory Hampikian
No. Because they don't have to. I think it's a reasonable control. I think anybody who's giving a swab to the police would pay an extra dollar. Do you Want the nullamer tag in there? Yes, please. Because if they spill one molecule, it could be a billion molecules in 90 minutes.
- [19:34]
Dr. Samantha Amin
I want to also ask you about false confessions. I know your expertise is in DNA, but you've also been involved in some cases where confessions played a significant role. And research shows that false confessions are surprisingly common, and they're a common contributor to wrongful convictions. So from your experience, is there like a scientific fingerprint, perhaps, to a coerced confession?
- [19:59]
Dr. Gregory Hampikian
Do you think the general public believes confessions or doesn't believe confessions?
- [20:03]
Dr. Samantha Amin
I think the general public would probably say, why would someone confess to murder if they didn't do it?
- [20:07]
Dr. Gregory Hampikian
Right. And so what I would say are all confession suspect. And I think you can study it by science. But the more important thing is to teach people how this happens. And what I'd say is, have you ever been with a bully? Have you ever been with somebody who controlled you and you just wanted to shut them up? Yeah. Okay, I did it. I mean, remember, we've all said that, right? Okay, I did it. Your mom, your dad, somebody thinks you broke something or whatever, and, you know, it's just not worth fighting anymore. And that's what, you know, 13 hours, 26 hours of interrogation is like. Or in Chris Tapp's case, they offer him a deal to implicate his friend. All he has to do is say, he was there. He won't do any prison time. The other guy raped and killed her. You just stabbed her once or something, Chris, you won't do any time. And so he's like, well, I want to help the police solve this. I want to get the hell out of here. After 30 hours of interrogation. And then when the DNA didn't match his friend, they then turned to Chris and said, you're lying to us. And he's like, I told you what you wanted me to say. You told me. And they tried him for rape and murder. And so how a false confession happens, Someone's vulnerable, or you're with a bully, somebody is threatening you. You will not see your children for 15 years. Tell us this thing. You go home, we'll deal with it. How can a person make a rational decision if the authority figure speaking to them, the person who knows the law, is lying to them, you cannot possibly come to a rational decision. Here's another example I gave. If I told you there was a confession from someone, and you watched the video, and they're confessing, and I said, what you don't see is they're pulling the guy's Fingers off, under the table. Do you think that's a valid confession? And people would say, no, that's not a valid. That's under duress, that's under torture. And I say, well, these guys were told they wouldn't see their kids for 20 years unless they said something about the crime and implicated someone that ends up implicating themselves. Or they cut a deal for 10 years less so they'll see their kids 10 years sooner. And you know what? It's worse than having your fingers removed. If the power of the state is such that you give them this answer, we will give you 10 years of life. That's a hard deal to turn down. Those are rational decisions. Just because they're not truthful doesn't mean they're not rational. There's a case of a guy in Las Vegas, his lawyer tells him, you match the DNA, they're going to go to trial. You'll do 25 years. If you admit it, I think the judge will have mercy. The prosecutor says he'll support a 10 year sentence or 12 year sentence. The guy took the deal, did four years in prison. And then California's crime lab called. Turns out somebody swapped the tubes by accident. It happens when a person, a rational person, is told the DNA matches you. You're going to do 25 years. You say you did it, you'll do 10 years. A rational person who loves their children.
- [23:14]
Dr. Samantha Amin
Would take the 10 years.
- [23:16]
Dr. Gregory Hampikian
Take the 10 years.
- [23:17]
Dr. Samantha Amin
I want to talk about AI.
- [23:19]
Dr. Gregory Hampikian
How do you know I'm not AI? How do I know you're not AI? I can't tell anymore.
- [23:26]
Dr. Samantha Amin
No, no, I know. I mean, I think you're real. So I'm looking at you and I'm going to believe that you're real. And if not, it's still a good interview.
- [23:36]
Dr. Gregory Hampikian
I am real. But anyway, go ahead. What's your question about AI?
- [23:40]
Dr. Samantha Amin
Now, you've been an advocate for bringing AI and these computational methods into the criminal justice system. And I think it's an exciting prospect, but at the same time, I'm a little skeptical because humans are inherently biased, even when we try our best to be objective. And AI is only as unbiased as the data and content it's trained on. So we've already seen examples in other fields where algorithms can reinforce or amplify existing prejudices. So with these concerns, what role do you think AI plays realistically plays in forensic science and criminal justice? And how do we balance the promise of these technologies with this risk of introducing new forms of bias or error?
- [24:24]
Dr. Gregory Hampikian
Yep. I think you're. You. You've got all the good questions. So this goes back to what we initially talked about. Science is about determining the appropriate instrument and measurement. And the only way to know that is to define its limits. The limits at detection and at discrimination, because they all fail. You can't use the speedometer on your car to measure the speed of an inchworm. Right? It's a perfect instrument, but it has limits. AI is better than humans at many things, and it fails at several things, right? Drawing hands correctly, right. Until they fix. So, yeah, but that's what's important to know, right? If you're an artist using AI, you know where the limits are and you hide the hands or you correct the hands or whatever it is. And so I don't have any problem with, with AI being, you know, as it is. But just define like you would for a speedometer. The failure points, what is the range of 99.99% accuracy? And then where does it fall off? But you can't just say it's 99.99% accurate. That's garbage. Where does it fail? You have to show where your test fails, and that's what's missing. And AI is very good at taking lots and lots of data, lots and lots of studies. And so within. Within the limits of its accuracy, whatever that's determined to be, the methodology is better than me getting on the stand and giving an opinion theoretically. But remember, you need empirical results because you have to find a failure point.
- [26:20]
Dr. Samantha Amin
Thank you so much for talking with me. I think this is great.
- [26:23]
Dr. Gregory Hampikian
Thanks for like, like super great questions. You're doing a great job.
- [26:27]
Dr. Samantha Amin
You obviously have passion for some great true crime podcasts. Check out ID Discovery, Sister Network.
- [26:40]
Dr. Gregory Hampikian
The McDonald's snack wrap is back. You brought it back. Ranch snack wrap. Spicy snack wrap. You broke the Internet for a snack? Snack wrap is back.
- [27:00]
Dr. Samantha Amin
I grew up playing soccer and now train the combat sport, Muay Thai pretty intensely. So I'm no stranger to sport injuries. Okay. But when I sprained my ankle playing soccer back in the day, my coach would always say rice. You know, the acronym for rest, ice, compression and elevation. It's been the go to for amateur and pro athletes alike when it comes to soft tissue injuries like sprains since 1978. In 2015, the author of the original rice method, Dr. Merkin, published a statement saying he no longer recommends rice as the preferred approach. He took it back, but it's still so pervasive in sports culture. So let's dive into why it's no longer the way to go. And what works instead? We gotta start with understanding injury. When you get injured, your body immediately responds with inflammation. Now, inflammation gets a bad rep, but it's the first and very essential phase of healing. Your body sends specialized immune cells to clear out the damage and signal that it's time to start repairing. That starts the repair phase, which can last a few weeks as your body builds new tissue. Then comes remodeling, which can take months as that tissue's reorganized and strengthened. But it's the rest and ice part of rice that are the most problematic. First, the rest. When you get injured, your body creates a lot of cellular junk, like dead cells and fragments, fluid and byproducts from metabolism. Your lymphatic system clears all that out, but it doesn't have its own pump. Lymphatic drainage relies on muscle movement. If you stay completely still, that waste can build up and slow down healing. It delays inflammation. And the repair and remodeling that come after ice is even trickier. It can help relieve pain in the first moments after an injury because the cold numbs the area. But overdoing it, especially beyond the first few hours, can reduce blood flow. It limits how many immune cells reach the injury site and delays the release of important healing factors. Ice might ease swelling in the short term, but it can slow down recovery, increase scarring and lead to worse long term outcomes. Now the C and E compression and elevation. Compression is when you wrap the injury and elevation is raising it to allegedly reduce swelling and drain fluids. Now, there isn't a ton of evidence showing that they help, but it's admittedly hard to study in controlled clinical trials. And most agree compression and elevation won't hurt as long as you're not elevating so often that you're not getting in any movement. The general consensus amongst experts is to prioritize pain free movement through a full range of motion as early as you can and then gradually increase intensity and complexity of your movements. Injuries suck if you're dealing with one right now. I've been there. But at least we can follow the science to help us recover faster. For Warner Bros. Discovery. Curiosity Weekly is produced by the team at Wheelhouse DNA. The senior producer and editorial correspondent is Theresa Carey. Our producer is Chiara Noni. Our audio engineer is Nick Karisimi. And head of Production for Wheelhouse DNA is Cassie Berman. And I'm Dr. Samantha Youen. Thanks for listening. Gas, groceries, eating out. It all adds up fast. With the Verizon Visa card, you get rewarded every time you spend. Get 4% in rewards on gas, dining and at grocery stores, and you can put those rewards toward your Verizon bill or on new tech like a smartwatch and earbuds. Apply today at Verizon. Application required. Subject to credit approval. Must be a Verizon Mobile account owner or manager or FIOS account owner. See verizon.com Verizon Visa card for terms and restrictions. The Verizon Visa Signature Card is issued by Synchrony bank pursuant to a license from Visa USA Inc. Starting a business can be overwhelming. You're juggling multiple roles designer, marketer, logistics manager all while bringing your vision to life. But for millions of businesses, Shopify is the ultimate partner. Shopify is the commerce platform behind millions of businesses around the world and 10% of all e commerce in the US from household names like Mattel and Gymshark to brands just getting started. Build a stunning online store with Shopify's ready to use templates, boost content with AI powered product descriptions, page headlines, and enhance photography. Marketing is easy with built in tools for email and social media campaigns. Plus, Shopify simplifies everything from inventory to shipping and returns. If you're ready to sell, you're ready for Shopify. Turn your big business idea into With Shopify on your side, sign up for your $1 per month trial today at shopify.com try go to shopify.com try shopify.com try.
- [32:11]
Dr. Gregory Hampikian
Life is a workout and Smoothie King is here to help you power through. Whether you're grinding out bicep curls or muscling the couc across the living room, crushing morning miles or sprinting through back to back meetings, Smoothie King has fuel to help you maximize your workouts, own your recovery and elevate your game. Give your body the energy, protein and power it needs with a lineup of delicious smoothies made to help you conquer your goals. Only at Smoothie King, ACAST powers the world's best podcasts.
- [32:47]
Dr. Samantha Amin
Here's a show that we recommend went.
- [32:51]
Dr. Gregory Hampikian
Hey folks, looking for a whole new thing to be into? Well, check this then. Check it out. We're the Sloppy Boys and we're basically like pretty much the new classic guys. We were in a comedy group called the Birthday Boys with Bob Odenkirk and now we're an indie band and we have a podcast about the drinks of the summer like the Gator Bite or the Grape Gorilla. And we have guests that are music people like Jeff Rosenstock or Stefan from the Band Pup or comedy people like Tom Sharply or Mitch from Doughboys. Yeah dude. We talk about TV and movies and music like Turnstile or King Giz, and it's completely kind of cool. Ooh. Give it a listen and check it out to see what you think. But don't forget that we're the new classic guys.
- [33:36]
Dr. Samantha Amin
ACAST helps creators launch, grow, and monetize their podcasts everywhere.
- [33:42]
Dr. Gregory Hampikian
Acast.com.