Hot Topic: Magnetic Brain Pulses & Autism — Breakthrough or Ethical Concern?

Summary

---

The Neurodivergent Experience

Hot Topic: Magnetic Brain Pulses & Autism — Breakthrough or Ethical Concern?

Hosts: Jordan James & Simon Scott
Date: May 21, 2026

---

Episode Overview

In this “Hot Topic” episode, Jordan and Simon dive into recent news about the use of magnetic brain pulses (specifically, theta burst magnetic stimulation) as a potential intervention to help autistic children — particularly those with intellectual disabilities — improve communication skills. The hosts critically examine the science, ethical implications, and broader societal context. They juxtapose optimism for scientific progress with skepticism regarding motivations, access, and the lived realities of autistic individuals.

---

Key Discussion Points & Insights

1. Background of the Study & Medical Context

• The featured news discusses a study using “non-invasive brain stimulation” — brief, targeted magnetic pulses on children with autism and intellectual disabilities, aiming to enhance social and communication skills.
• This technology (theta burst stimulation) is not new — it’s been utilized for depression treatment and is now being tested for autism.

[02:15] Simon:

“I can't decide if this is a good thing or a bad thing. It's a weird one, this one.”

2. Medical Access and Systemic Barriers

Both hosts contextualize the study within ongoing barriers for families, especially in the US healthcare system:

• Many children with intellectual disabilities receive little to no treatment due to patchy insurance and overburdened systems.
• UK’s National Health Service (NHS) has its faults, but the US system is described as especially cruel for those without wealth.

[04:47] Simon:

“America, my freaking ass, is the greatest country in the world. It's a third world westernized country at best when it comes to medicine and education... if you're not wealthy, you're screwed.”

[05:41] Jordan:

“Somebody was explaining the whole American medical insurance system... that’s fucking criminal.”

3. What Is Theta Burst Magnetic Stimulation?

• Non-surgical, no anesthetic, no drugs.
• Device creates a magnetic field to “stimulate” neurons in the brain.
• Sessions are very short (few minutes over five days), making it more feasible for younger children.

[08:34] Simon:

“Right, okay, so when anyone hears electromagnetic pulses on children... there is no discomfort, there is no pain. Maybe these kids don't want this thing put on their head... but they seem to be going out of their way to be trying to make these kids comfortable.”

4. Comparisons to Other Interventions

• Simon compares the skepticism around magnetic stimulation to historic suspicion of other medical technology (like MRIs):

“In the past, people would have gone, oh, that's dangerous, that might hurt you. Yeah, witchcraft. The fact is, is that technologies come and that if the right reason is the right reason, then I think that we should at least... be open minded to them.” [09:20]

• Draws a parallel to controversial/abused therapies like ABA, and raises the issue of personal choice or consent:

“If... I lose my ability to be able to think in the way that I think ... and then someone said, right, there's these electromagnetic pulses... and you might actually have a better life. I'd do it, I'd make that decision of being like, yes, please.” [10:31]

5. The Study Design & Initial Outcomes

• 194 children, average age 6.5, about half with IQ < 70 (considered 'low functioning’ by researchers, though the hosts challenge this metric).
• Placebo-controlled design.
• Parents surveyed before, after, and one month later — improvements were still present at the 1-month follow-up.
• No serious side effects reported, but minor side effects are not detailed.

[14:57] Simon:

“I don't think this is snake oil salesman. I think this is people who are genuinely trying to help.”

• Both hosts note that while promising, details are missing (e.g., what were the minor side effects? How long do the effects really last? Is this scalable/accessible for real families?).

6. Skepticism & Ethical Concerns

a) On IQ and Early Intervention

• Hosts are concerned about reliance on IQ as a determiner for intervention, especially in very young children.
• The importance of “synaptic pruning” — a key developmental process often overlooked — is stressed. They worry the study may interfere with natural brain development.

[19:44] Simon:

“Somebody who appears to have a low IQ doesn't necessarily mean they have a low IQ... You can't measure the IQ of a six year old.”

b) Issues with Study Metrics

• Critique of subjective outcome measurement (“parents filled out questionnaires” instead of concrete brain scans or objective behavioral data).
• Risks of unintended, long-term side effects due to “experimenting” on still-developing children.

[22:54] Simon:

“They’re just like magnetic pulses into a kid's head and going, well, they improved. How did they improve? Did you do brain scans before and after? No... That's not good enough. Brain scans, that's what they should have done. And this is Cambridge, and I can see the holes in this, so why can’t they?”

c) Lack of Lived Experience Input

• The hosts express frustration that research often treats autistic individuals as “test subjects” rather than engaging them (and their families) in the research design.

[23:59] Jordan:

“They're not coming from a lived experience lens or talking to the community or, or trying to understand us as people. It's the test subject thing again.”

7. Technology, Accessibility, and the Future

• Discussion on how breakthrough technologies are initially expensive, but could future advances make interventions like these available to more people (e.g., envisioning a “hairbrush” brain stimulator)?
• Critical about ensuring these are “supportive” — not used to erase difference or suppress neurodivergent traits, but to genuinely assist.

[18:06] Jordan:

“I’m all for things that are to help us, not to, to hinder us or, or quieten us.”

8. Concluding Ethical Concerns & Research Directions

• More research is needed on synaptic pruning, brain development, and truly understanding long-term risks/benefits.
• Emphasis on not rushing to “fix” children without understanding what is being interfered with; research funding should focus on foundational understanding rather than just pursuing the next intervention.

[25:12] Simon:

“Way, way more understanding of why the synaptic pathways, you know, get pruned differently — that needs to be researched more. That's where the money needs to be spent.”

---

Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

• On healthcare inequality:
  “America is made for the wealthy. And then that's it. If you're not wealthy, you're screwed.”
  — Simon [05:27]

• On the ethics of medical innovation:
  “Everything medical there is a risk. But is it worth that risk? And what is the risk? Because I don't know if this has a big risk or not...”
  — Simon [11:23]

• On impact & accessibility:
  “Even modest and durable gains in a child's ability to communicate could matter enormously to them and their families and greatly improve their well being and quality of life.”
  — Jordan, quoting from the article [14:41]

• On skepticism and rigor:
  “Parents filled a form in from parents and then parents filled a Form in afterwards. That’s not good enough. Brain scans, that's what they should have done.”
  — Simon [22:54]

• On the philosophy of neurodiversity:
  “I'm all for things that are to help us, not to, to hinder us or, or quieten us.”
  — Jordan [18:06]

---

Timestamps for Key Segments

• [02:15] Introduction of magnetic brain stimulation study and host reactions
• [04:47] US healthcare vs. UK system; issues with access
• [08:34] Explanation of theta burst stimulation and public misperceptions
• [10:31] Philosophical consideration: “Would you try this yourself?”
• [12:14] Study methodology breakdown; first set of concerns
• [14:41] Quoting study findings and Cambridge involvement
• [19:44] Skepticism on IQ, early intervention, and synaptic pruning
• [22:54] Critique of study’s reliance on parent-reported outcomes
• [23:59] Lamenting lack of lived-experience or autistic input
• [25:12] Final thoughts: need for better foundational research

---

Tone & Takeaways

The hosts keep their conversation candid, critical, and grounded in lived autistic experience. They balance cautious openness to promising research with hard-hitting skepticism about incomplete data, ethical risks, and systemic injustice — especially where it intersects with disability, childhood development, and access. The episode ultimately urges thoughtful skepticism and puts the needs of neurodivergent people (and their families) at the center of any intervention.

---

Transcript

[A]

48 million people in the United States are adolescents between the ages of 14 and 24. They're working, parenting, leading, sometimes all at once. I'm balancing work and being a mom at the same time, and I'm still on track to graduate with my bachelor's next year. So what do today's young people need to truly thrive? Tune in to good things from Lemonada Media to hear the six part Thrive series.

[B]

The day begins at the Chase Sapphire lounge by the club at Boston Logan Airport. You get the clam chowder in San Diego, it's Tostadas New York. Espresso martini. It's 10am why not? It's the quiet before your next flight, the shower that resets your day, the menu that lets you know where you are. This is access to over 1300 airport lounges and every Sapphire lounge by the club. And one card that gets you in. Chase Sapphire Reserve now even more rewarding.

[C]

Learn [e-mail] Sapphire Reserve cards issued by

[A]

JPMorgan Chase bank and a member FDIC

[C]

subject to credit approval.

[A]

Do you ever find yourself scrolling through headlines and thinking, possibly screaming, at least on the inside, that can't be true. There's rising rates of vaccine preventable diseases and someone on the Internet saying that watermelon juice is a natural alternative to sunscreen. Just no. I'm Chelsea Clinton and that can't be true. It's back for season three. My guest and I cut through a lot of chaos to help all of us understand what is true, what is overblown and what's false.

[D]

Oh, hot, hot, hot, hot, hot, hot, hot, hot. Hello and welcome to the Neuro Spicy News. Hot topic.

[C]

Your hot topic this week. Super hot, super spicy. Magnetic brain pulses help kids with autism to communicate. A study finds this is a five day course of magnetic brain stimulation. Could it help autistic children communicate better?

[D]

Question mark, big question mark.

[C]

This is very interesting, isn't it? So this, this is an article that was on Science Alert, but it was originally posted by the Conversation, which is like a lot of university medical studies and things like that. And Jordan, you sent this to me and I can't decide if this is a good thing or a bad thing. It's a weird one, this one.

[D]

Yeah, yeah. Do you want to read it? Like let's, let's, let's, let's let the audience know and then, and then we can decide.

[C]

Here we are then. So, article reads, for children with autism Spectrum disorder and with an intellectual disability, the options for improving communication and social skills are limited. Ironic that I got the word wrong there. Talking therapies and behavioral programs can help some children develop these skills, but they depend on specialists who are in short supply even in wealthier countries. Around 30 to 35% of autistic children have an intellectual disability, according to research from the US Take with a pinch of salt.

[D]

Yeah. Disagree.

[C]

Yeah. They are less likely to get treatment than those with. Without one, in part because doctors lack confidence managing their needs. And insurance coverage for intellectual disability is patchy despite having greater needs and placing heavier demands on their families. It is a group that researchers often overlook.

[D]

Disagree. I'm so sick of this, of. Of especially parents of these kids, because before people like myself and. And the people that inspired me to. To speak out about being autistic, most of what I ever saw, especially through media, was autistic people with intellectual disabilities. That was. That was most of what I saw. Everybody, especially when I was growing up, everybody thought that's what that was, was Rain Man.

[C]

Yep.

[D]

And then suddenly we get Sheldon Cooper, which is equally as annoying, but obviously on a completely different scale. And then. And then everyone's like, oh, they could be completely overlooked. Absolute poppycock. They're not being overlooked by. If they are being overlooked by researchers. I don't know what people are researching, because all the research we've ever seen is mostly done on kids like this. But also they're not being overlooked by advocacy as much as parents think they are. What they are being overlooked by is the government.

[C]

Yeah.

[D]

As we all are governments. And the greatest country in the world. America, my freaking ass. Is the greatest country in the world. It's a third world westernized country at best when it comes to, like, medicine and education and people treating people, writing jobs, and disability awareness. It is a terrible country, state by state. Some states are obviously worse and some say is much better. But generally, the fact that there isn't coverage to help these people, and it always, always comes down to insurance.

[C]

Yep.

[D]

Because they don't have a proper medical system in place to help poorer families. They'll screw you. You know, And I swear, America is made for the wealthy. And then that's it. If you're not wealthy, you're screwed.

[C]

Oh. Somebody was explaining the. The whole American medical insurance system to me, and I was like, that's a. That's fucking criminal.

[D]

Housing is so messed up.

[C]

So scary. You know, the UK has its issues, but we definitely don't have that.

[D]

Dude, we are cogs in a rich man's machine. Yeah, we are. We are creating wealth for others, but getting none for us and they can't even give us proper medical help. And in America, I, I actually didn't even know this. I found out this recently. I thought if you work in America, a standard thing is if you have a job, you have insurance with that job for medical insurance. Apparently that's not. Not every job has medical insurance either.

[C]

Nope.

[D]

So you can actually be working for a company, but they don't have to provide medical insurance.

[C]

Oh, you have to pay. You have to pay for it like a subscription system. And then when you have anything that goes wrong, you've got to pay on top of that as well, because it doesn't cover like 90% of. Yeah, it's a mess.

[D]

So you're essentially in the US system, you're essentially fleecing people to be able to stay healthy. You are, you are using their health as a way of you making money, which is just so disgusting, it's scary. Anyway, it's not just money, it's exorbitant amounts of money now, because this is, this really is what it comes down to. Because if you go into the article a bit more like this might genuinely help people if they can afford it.

[C]

Yeah, well, let's. Let's go into it, shall we? So it says. This gap that researchers overlook has motivated the people that have written this study to test a different kind of intervention using brief targeted magnetic pulses to stimulate specific parts of the brain. The technique, known as non evasive brain stimulation or neuromodulation, involves no surgery, no anesthetic, and no drugs. A device held close to the scalp generates a rapidly changing magnetic field that passes harmlessly through the skull and stimulates the activity of neurons underneath. It has been used for years to treat depression, and researchers have increasingly been exploring whether it might also help with the social and communication difficulties that are a key symptom of autism. The version we tested uses a technique called theta burst stimulation, which delivers pulses in rapid clusters rather than one at a time. This makes each session much shorter than conventional approaches, which is a significant practical advantage when you are asking young children to sit still and cooperate.

[D]

Right, okay, so when anyone hears electromagnetic pulses on children, I get it that there is that part. You're like, oh, they're electrocute in children. That is not what is happening. There is no discomfort, there is no pain. Maybe these kids don't want this thing put on their head. I would hope that if a kid is struggling, they don't pin him down. I doubt that's happening, but they seem to be going out of their way to to be like trying to make these kids comfortable. If I hurt myself, I go for an MRI. Right. I've been through MRIs. I do not like MRI machines.

[C]

Yeah, I can imagine.

[D]

But I have to go through that to find out X rays, MRIs, all these things. In the past, people would have gone, oh, that's dangerous, that might hurt you. Yeah, witchcraft. The fact is, is that technologies come and that if the right reason is the right reason, then I think that we should at least, you know, be open minded to them. Because the fact is, is that I don't agree with aba. I, you know, I, I think that, know there are better ways of, of, of helping these kids. But I think that if it was me personally, and let's say one day I lose my ability to be able to think in the way that I think. Right. Because they do say these intellectual disabilities with IQs less than 70, I don't know really how they, they're still measuring people by IQs.

[C]

Yeah.

[D]

And it's, it's so out. And that kind of worries me. But essentially we do need something to measure it. And they're saying these kids have IQs less than 70. So that I can't argue with that. I don't know how they're measuring that, but that's what they're saying. If some took away 90 points of my IQ and then someone said, right, there's these electromagnetic pulses and that might help you and you can gain some abilities back and you might actually have a better life. I do it, I'd make that decision of being like, yes, please. Because if this was like, let's say this cured Alzheimer's. Imagine they were saying, look, this could actually cure Alzheimer's, Would you not sign up for it? Well, yeah, if, if you were started having early onset.

[C]

Oh, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah. Scary, scary. Yeah, definitely.

[D]

So you, and, and, and they've been using this treatment on people with depression. So it's not like, oh, we're experimenting on these kids with this brand new thing, used it, they're not the guinea pigs. They've used it on people with depression and it's worked. And someone said, maybe this will work for kids with communication difficulties as well. And to me that's just that science that's moving forward, that's experimenting, that is how you make things better. Because at the end of the day, there is a risk to everything that's medical. Everything medical there is a risk. But is it worth that risk? And what is the risk? Because I don't know if this has a Big risk or not, I would say then it's just down to the individuals.

[C]

Yeah. So let's see what actually takes place and the results that have come from it. So apparently each session lasts only a few minutes and the full course run over five days. One group of children received real stimulation and another received a sham version, like a placebo. In the sham treatment, the equipment was applied in the same way and delivered vibrations, but no active pulses were delivered that way. They say we could compare results with either without either group knowing what they'd received. Which helps the findings. Yeah. Science. 194 children took par with the average age of around six and a half years. Roughly half had IQ scores below 70, which is typically described as the low functioning range, though all scored above 50, the minimum needed to ensure a reliable diagnosis and meaningful participation in the study. Parents filled in a questionnaire about their child's social communication before the treatment, right after and again a month later. Accordingly, the improvements seen after five days were still there after a month and the size of the effect was large by the standard of clinical research. Children also showed gains in language ability. No serious side effects were reported and all minor side effects resolved without treatment. Doesn't say what those side effects are. So it says. In the early days, the children were recruited from multiple sites, by advertisements posted in outpatient clinics and through local clinical registries. All legal guardians gave written consent. Children with intellectual disability are so often left out of trials of this kind that the evidence for treating them has remained seriously lacking. That this trial included them at all and in significant numbers is itself noteworthy. But it is only the first step. It is still unclear how long the benefits last beyond a month, how many sessions would be needed to maintain them, or how the approach would work when moved from a research setting into an ordinary clinic. Brain stimulation is not a replacement for behavioral support and the equipment needed is not cheap or universally available. But conventional approaches where they exist at all, often require daily sessions over several weeks with a professional, which carries its own costs in time, money and specialist input. A five day course is a different proposition for families who are already stretched. Even modest and durable gains in a child's ability to to communicate could matter enormously to them and their families and greatly improve their well being and quality of life. And this is coming from the University of Cambridge. So it's happening in the UK and is probably the most prestigious university that we have.

[D]

It's the university that I was going to go to, to be honest. David Attenborough went there. It's a great University. I, again, I would say that I, I don't, I don't think this is snake oil salesman. I think this is people who are genuinely trying to help. Technology always starts off really, really expensive.

[C]

Yep.

[D]

And then starts getting cheaper. I mean, you look at this whole like Ozempic Mounjaro thing. It's injected.

[C]

Oh, it's crazy how easily readily available,

[D]

but it's got more and more expensive.

[C]

Yeah, yeah.

[D]

But now they're looking at. Because of refrigeration costs and, and, and distribution costs and, and, and travel cost. It's not travel courses, shipping and things like. Shipping and things like that and, and how that has to all be, you know, done because it's, it needs to be refrigerated. So the costs are going up and up and up because everything is going up and up and up. But now I think the company, the, the, one of the companies, they're bringing it in pill form. So literally and, and like there's literally going to be. I mean, obviously, I don't know the side effects or anything like this, but people are doing it. I know people who have been very, very overweight, had diabetes taking it and are now very slim and, and much, much healthier because of Manjaro. It has changed their life for the better.

[C]

I know a couple of people that have had really positive sort of experiences with it. Yeah.

[D]

But you see all the people bashing it and smashing it down or mocking

[C]

it, calling it cheating and.

[D]

Yeah, calling it cheating really annoys me. Really annoys me. People have no idea how difficult it is for some people, especially like, people who have, like, serious mental health issues where food is literally an addiction.

[C]

Oh, yeah.

[D]

And someone says, okay, I can help you with that addiction in the same way as if someone's addicted to alcohol or someone's addicted to a type of drug. You know, you don't, you don't put them down for it. You. You help them. I would say that, you know, people who are, you know, taking those sort of things also need help with therapy of why, why they're eating and the way they're eating. It's not just a magic, you know, drug. Um, but when it comes to things like this, I, I don't see it being any different. Because if, if it can, if it can help your child, if it was your child, and, and not in a selfish. I want my kid to be like all the other kids, but I want my child. I want Jeremy to have the best life he could possibly have. And this might actually stimulate his brain into doing That I, I would say that I think that's a good thing. But I, I, I guess time will tell, but I'm definitely not going to be one of those people that's like immediately, no, no, you shouldn't do anything.

[C]

Yeah. I mean, if it, if it helps in a way that you're seeking help and you feel like it's going to be of a good support to you in the same way that like, methylphenidate is a support to me, doesn't work for other people. You can imagine something like this almost like when I've seen the image of it in the article, it almost looks like, like a plate that's pressed across your head. You could imagine in the way that we shrink technology, Right. I mean, like the technology that got man on the Moon is, you know, it's like a tenth of what you've got in a smartphone now. And you could almost imagine them developing like a hairbrush that a parent could have at home and do this themselves in like many, many years. Like, what if, if it works and they develop the tech and it shrinks and becomes more affordable and readily available, there's no reason why this, if it helps and it develops support and it's affordable and it's accessible. I, I'm, I'm all for things that are to help us, not to, to hinder us or, or quiet and us. Like what Paul was saying the other week about medication to help him with Tourette's. It wasn't to help him, it was to shut him up.

[D]

Yeah, yeah, I'm, I, my, my, just come to my head. I, I do have one issue with. This is the age of the children.

[C]

Yeah.

[D]

Now I know that they're like, oh, this is the time where the brain's developing and we want to get in there early. That's why it's called early intervention. But once again, there is no mention of synaptic pruning in this.

[C]

Yeah, I was going to say this. Yeah.

[D]

And if they are doing these experiments without the knowledge or understanding of how the synaptic pruning process affects us and affecting these kids, then they are, they are basically saying we're not going to give them a chance to develop because it has been shown that. And this is why I don't like the whole IQ thing, because somebody who appears to have a low IQ doesn't necessarily mean they have a low iq. And how the hell could you know that if a child is 6 years old, you actually don't really measure IQ until someone is an adult. And their brain is fully developed. That's the, actually the way to measure iq. So you can't measure the IQ of a six year old. I don't know if you've done IQ tests, but you can't. Okay, so they're kind of using that as like an excuse for doing it. So these kids are intellectually challenged and it's like, but you don't know that. So you don't know if maybe, just maybe those kids could have gone through a second round of synaptic pruning in their teen years and actually made vast improvements. But using these electrical pulses might actually fuck that up. So you don't know what you're messing with because you aren't talking about the synaptic pruning. And this is what really bugs me with all of this. And I cannot fathom how a freaking photography advocate, yes, I'm smart, yes I'm, I'm motivated and yes, I have a wonderful understanding of how my brain works and how that relates to other people with neurodivergence. But can they really not see what is most likely causing this is an abundance of synaptic pathways. That's not me saying that. That is people researching it and saying this huge abundance of synaptic pathways actually can hinder us. It can make us who we are and we can end up being like we are. Which we're still disabled, but we have these wonderful abilities. Or it can literally cripple someone because their brain is so full. And to me, if these kids do have this intellectual disability in quotes, is it because of the synaptic pathways? Because they don't talk about anything like that. So this is why it always confuses me and they say, oh, research wasn't done on this group. It has been done lots of. And it shows about the synaptic pruning process and it shows an abundance of synaptic pathways where, you know, some have reduced, that shouldn't have been. And some are not reduced that should have been. And, and I, I just think. And it's like, well, unless these electrical pathway electrical pulses, sorry. Are somehow stimulating that process. So, so it actually helps them go through the synaptic pruning process in a more regular way. That would be great. But if they don't know why that what is causing it? They're just like mag. Magnetic pulses into a kid's head and going, well, they improved. How did they improve? Did you do brain scans before and after? No, they said they filled a form in from parents and then parents filled a Form in afterwards. That's not good enough. Brain scans, that's what they should have done. And this is Cambridge, and I can see the holes in this, so why can't they? And that's why I end up getting so frustrated with, with any research or, you know, possible things that might help us and things like that. Because fundamentally they just don't understand what they're doing.

[C]

Yeah. They're not coming from a lived experience lens or talking to the community or, or trying to understand us as people. It's the test subject thing again.

[D]

They're going, this is broken. Let us fix it.

[C]

Yeah, let's see why it's broken, how we can fix it.

[D]

Yeah, yeah. But you never gave those chance, those kids a chance to better themselves naturally. It was, let's stick something on their head. Like I said, it might be good, it might not. Was it worth it? Do they know what damage they might. Of course they go, but what about, you know, the, the, the, the side effects. How do you know what the side effects of doing that to a child are? In 10 years, 10 years, they might have side effects from that. You don't know because the risk isn't it. You don't know what you're doing. That's what experimenting is about. So it's a really hard thing. You know, it could be good, it could be bad. And I think that the one needs to be done is way, way more understanding of why the synaptic pathways, you know, get pruned differently. That needs to be researched more. That's where the money needs to be spent.

[C]

Well, that's been your hot topic for this week. There will be another one in your feed next week. And we'll be back with a episode of the New Diversion Experience on Thursday, so keep your eye out for that. This has been your news for this week. Take care of yourself. Be kind, be safe nightly.

[D]

Bye.

[C]

Thanks for tuning in to the neurodivergent Experience. We hope today's episode sparked something for you. Whether it's a new idea, a bit of validation, or just a moment of connection, remember, new episodes are every week, so be sure to join us for the next one for more conversations and insights into the neurodivergent experience. If you've enjoyed this podcast, help us grow. You can do that by rating and reviewing this show. Your support makes a huge difference in helping us reach more people who could benefit from these conversations. You can connect with us on social media, find us on Instagram, Facebook, TikTok, just search for the neurodivergent experience. Thank you again for listening. And until next time, take care of yourself. You're not alone in this journey.

[B]

This is the table, the one with the view. This is how you reserve exclusive tables with Chase Sapphire Reserve. This is your name on the list. This is the chef sending you something he didn't put on the menu. This is 3 times points on dining with Chase Sapphire reserve and a $300 dining credit that covered the citrus pavlova and drinks and the thing you didn't think you liked until you tasted it, Chase Sapphire Reserve now even more rewarding.

[C]

Learn [e-mail] Sapphire Reserve cards issued by

[A]

JPMorgan Chase bank and a member FDIC

[C]

subject to credit approval do you ever

[A]

find yourself scrolling through headlines and thinking, possibly screaming, at least on the inside, that can't be true. There's rising rates of vaccine preventable diseases and someone on the Internet saying that watermelon juice is a natural alternative to sunscreen. Just no. I'm Chelsea Clinton and that can't be true. It's back for season three. My guests and I cut through a lot of chaos to help all of us understand what is true, what is overblown and what's false. 48 million people in the United States are adolescents between the ages of 14 and 24. They're working, parenting, leading, sometimes all at once. I'm balancing work and being a mom at the same time, and I'm still on track to graduate with my bachelor's next year. So what do today's young people need to truly thrive? Tune in to good things from Lemonada Media to hear the six part Thrive series.