is burning down to my bones and welcome back
to the Bone Club. We are now live, sort of, from
New Orleans and the AAFS. Today we have Hannah
Carson and Thomas Delgado, as well as our wonderful
Stephanie, and we're going to talk about everything
that we saw at the American Academy of Forensic
Sciences conference that took place, actually
it was two weeks ago, in New Orleans. We all
needed to, you know, file back down after Mardi
Gras and stuff to get our lives back in order.
Mardi Gras was pretty epic. And I think we can
all agree for anybody who was there, it was a
hike. The entire conference was just one giant
hike. Yeah, I think I walk like five miles a
day. Got to work off all the good food. Oh, it
was good food. I say being from Louisiana, it
was definitely good to go back home. But I say,
well, Hannah and Thomas, if y 'all want to introduce
yourselves, you know, say a little bit about
yourself, maybe what got you into anthropology,
just so our audience knows a little bit about
your background while we chit chat. Yeah. Yeah,
so I'm Hannah. I'm a PhD student at the University
of Montana in Missoula. And yeah, I've been interested
in anthropology for a while now, even back into
high school. But my undergrad, I did more of
a general forensic science kind of trajectory
and then got into anthropology in my master's
and now my PhD. So yeah, I kind of just love
the combination of skeletal. anatomy with applying
it to the forensic sciences what's your dissertation
on so my dissertation is actually a bioarchaeological
project uh on a roman site in croatia so yeah
it's kind of exciting stuff we're trying to do
a multi -disciplinary project using both skeletal
analyses ideally genetics and and hopefully stable
isotopes as well so the isotopes yeah everyone
always has the like the coolest like topics for
their dissertations and stuff like don't get
me wrong i loved my thesis research but like
hearing everyone's like topics i'm like wow feels
so like sciencey when mine was just like oh we
need to be honest with ourselves but that's okay
Go ahead, Thomas. Speaking of stable isotopes.
That's true. I definitely have a love for stable
isotopes here. So I'm Thomas Delgado. I'm a PhD
student at the University of Utah in Salt Lake.
And what got me into anthropology is really how
we could further the identification of marginalized
decedents. So my thesis research was really focused
on how we could use or further use stable isotope
analysis to help. identify migrant remains using
some different machine learning and artificial
intelligence algorithms for classification of
isotope values across Mexico to Colombia. And
now I'm currently working on a few different
methods to possibly strengthen the interpretations
that are made for stable isotopes, specifically
for medical legal settings. So trying to kind
of formalize a bit stronger how we can make those
interpretations in accord a lot. fancy cool it's
something no it's awesome i mean we had uh someone
a couple episodes back come and talk about isotopes
so i think it's definitely something that the
field needs to get behind i mean not that the
field's not behind it but like i i definitely
know a lot of people don't know how to use it
necessarily so it's nice that it's becoming bigger
and more well -rounded of a topic within anthropology.
Yeah, I mean, I definitely agree. I think it's
important to understand how we use our methods.
So if we're going to do it, we might as well
do it as best as we can with as much background
of the actual mechanisms of isotopic variation
that we can, which I guess is also conveniently
why I'm not doing a PhD in anthropology. I'm
in a geology and geophysics department. do all
the isotope specific stuff and see how we can
kind of bridge the gap between anthropology and
like isotope geochemistry. Perfect. So let's
go ahead and get this started. I mean, there,
there was a lot going on. I think this week you
had had a lot going on with the business meeting
and the business side of stuff, which actually
does affect the field. You also had a wide variety
of papers, which was kind of broader than normal,
I thought. And then you had the fun stuff that
kept everyone out until 3 a .m. The Mardi Gras
part? The Mardi Gras part, because they really
picked the perfect time to hold. So going to
the scientific sessions. What were your favorites?
What were the highlights for you? For either,
for any of y 'all. The isotopes one was one of
my favorites. Start with Hannah. Yeah, yeah,
I agree. I mean, you know, Thomas actually started
out the isotope session right at 8am. Did a phenomenal
job. And actually, that was a really informational
session overall. Like I mentioned, I'm trying
to get more knowledgeable in stable isotope research
as I'm trying to use it for my own research.
So, yeah, it was super great to see, especially
applied to forensic settings, which you don't
always see. Obviously, there's so many papers
on it used in archaeological research, but to
see it in forensic is really interesting and
so knowledgeable. Yeah, I thought that was a
great start to all the podium talks. I say, didn't
y 'all do any workshops, actually, before we
go too far? Besides the forensic ants meeting
on Tuesday, I didn't do anything outside of the
primary conference, unfortunately. I did the,
it was a vicarious trauma talk on Monday that
Cat Pope helped put together. It was really nice.
It was one of those, like, it's a topic that
I think about a lot because I feel like so much
of our field tries to be so objective in what
we do. And which kind of ties back to my thesis,
but like not wanting to admit the subjectivity
and we're getting a little bit better about that
in our field. But I think that trying to like
pretend to be. so rigorous and pretending to
be objective and pretending that we can separate
ourselves from what we're doing just leads to
more vicarious trauma and so it was really like
it wasn't an anthro specific workshop but it
was very interesting to hear how kind of similar
things are happening in all of the forensic sciences
that like when we just sit there and pretend
it doesn't bother us and we pretend we can compartmentalize
and some of us can to a certain extent but like
It weighs on you. And I think it's, it was very
refreshing to be in a room of people just being
like, I love my job. But sometimes it hurts me.
And like, just being very honest about it was
really nice, because I feel like sometimes you
can't, I don't know, can't complain. Like, it
feels like you are like, well, I'm doing this
for a reason. And I want to, you know, help the
people that you know are my casework and all
of that can be true and doing the casework can
hurt you all at the same time and it was really
nice to just like be in a room where people were
just like so honest about how casework affects
them um felt like a very yeah just a comfortable
place and then learning like We talked about
a bunch of different like signs and symptoms
and PTSD and other things that like, you know,
we might talk about burnout a lot in the field,
but that's, you know, one step closer and closer
to potentially PTSD and things like that. And
it's just, it was, I don't know. It was a very
interesting talk. I don't, I don't know. I know
Kat ended up doing. her own presentation a little
bit about it too which i really really appreciated
um i don't know if any of y 'all got to i i did
go to that yeah that was a very good talk it
was one of my favorites of the entire session
and it was a topic that the academy as a whole
was really i don't want to say pushing but promoting
the entire uh conference this year that was the
plenary session this year yeah was on vicarious
and psychological trauma was so that that was
their keynote right on that as well so i thought
that was a good um focus particularly when you
think of the theme of back to basics as well
exactly exactly yeah yeah i also just feel like
that uh because i did hear about the workshop
as well i wasn't able to attend though but i
think it's just really timely i think in light
of the opening of these discussions like i definitely
feel like these conversations that kind of go
against the norm or i guess expectations that
we might have as forensic professionals can sometimes
be like buried for 10 15 20 years and you know
it takes a long time to expose those traumas
um so i'm sure we've been experiencing vicarious
trauma for a long time before just we started
talking about it a few years ago but at least
i feel like we went from we're talking about
it a few years ago now we're like actually openly
talking about it we're hosting workshops we're
getting the attention of like scientific leaders
and conference leadership to actually bring this
topic to more of the forefront of i think people's
attention and i really enjoyed kat's presentation
that she provided as well because it wasn't also
it wasn't limited to explicitly vicarious trauma
it also encapsulated like just routes of mental
health and the stresses on mental health within
forensic and ecological medical legal settings
that I think is just a nice extra added layer
that was really important to have in a session
that was really centered on ethics and best practices.
Yeah. And I think it's a topic that what I liked
about what something more Kat was trying to reach
at and I hope the workshop reached at it like
promise i couldn't couldn't attend i think some
just as a side note for any students that are
considering attending these conferences in the
future workshops are extra and they're expensive
they can be very extra yeah and that plus you
know changing flights can be a lot of extra so
They're really something that if your employer
or your school are willing to pay for, definitely
do while you have the chance. Yeah. But I hope
that that workshop also not just brought attention
to, but was able to bring remedy, bring a solution.
It was to a certain extent. And I think that's,
it's. it's what's hard right the it's it's much
easier to point out a problem than it is to have
a solution especially for something that is so
complex as it is case to case dependent and it
is person to person dependent and so there's
not going to be a one -size -fits -all problem
fix yeah and so they definitely they talked about
a lot of like personal things that you can keep
like keep track of and like knowing yourself,
having accountability buddies for like, you know,
your own mental health and having a therapist
to talk to, even if you aren't currently going
through anything, having a therapist to talk
to that way, they, you know, you know, your baseline,
like, you know, when you're okay, this is how
I'm feeling. And when something's going on, then
you have something to kind of compare it back
to. They also talked a lot about like, seeing
those signs in your coworkers and your friends
and being like having an environment to talk
to people and try to like, it's one of those
that like, you know, our field is so small. We're
all friends to a certain extent. And so then
you, you know, when you notice your friend going
through something. Don't just ignore it, you
know, and like talk to them about it and maybe
they're not ready to talk and that's okay too.
But like just being able to see those signs and
symptoms, because I think when I was listening
to it, there was a lot of things that I noticed
in myself that I was like, oh, I do that. Oh,
I do that. And independently, you don't necessarily
think of them as a problem where you, you know,
like something as simple as like, oh, when I
go home, I can't turn it off. I still think about
my job when I get home. And that's not necessarily
something a lot of fields go through. Like if
you work a normal office job where you're doing,
like my boyfriend does taxes, where you're like,
you're going to come home, you're not thinking
about taxes anymore. But I - You're sorry for
your boyfriend. Yeah, he doesn't love it, but
it's fine. It's a job. But it's one of those
things that like, if I have a particularly hard
case, and I come home that's all I think about
and I think about their families and what they
might be going through and because what we do
is so human focused you can't really separate
yourself from it and so like yeah and but like
I don't think in my head I before that talk was
I necessarily thinking of that as a a bad thing
and it's not bad like all bad obviously but like
the ability to not leave work at work is going
to weigh on you over time and I never even really
thought about it until like sometimes the answer
is so simple and yet you just like don't think
about it um we also talked about how a lot of
uh like traumas and other things also happen
because of poor management and so we had a couple
different um like managers that like gave presentations
that like talked about like what they try to
do to make their work environment easier to talk
about where like one person had brought up the
fact that like they have an in -house like not
therapist but like someone that they can go talk
to if they're having trouble with it like with
anything um work related and yet their office
is at the end of a hallway so you have to walk
down everyone's cubicle and everyone knows and
so then it's not really a safe space to go and
talk to them about it and so like when it's like
sometimes it's like you can have the quote -unquote
remedies and they're not really remedies either
because then everyone knows you're having a problem
and that's stigmatized and you know all of that
I don't know it was it was good though because
they I feel like I'm rambling a lot but they
They just like talked a lot about just like making
sure that you keep checking in on yourself and
also being able to say, I know, like, I can't
do this any longer. And that's okay too, of like,
maybe working on, you know, child cases didn't
bother you 10 years ago, but now you have a kid
of your own and they affect you much more. And
being able to say like, Those aren't the cases
I want to work anymore, actually. And being honest
with yourself and not pushing yourself past your
own limits is a lot of what we talked about,
which was really nice. That's good. Sorry, someone
else can talk. I was rambling a lot. I really
liked the topic. I think there's definitely a
lot to digest in it. It is a good topic. Another
one that I really liked. was the ethics one.
It was a little short, but I think there was
a withdrawn presentation in it, which made it
a little short. I was moderating that session,
so I got to sit there for the 15 minutes and
say, wow, this is short. I will say this. There
was one talk in there, it was Devon's, and I'm
the one who made the rule. that i did not know
that the medical the the forensic center here
had a skeletal collection had a backlog in memphis
that um steve sims had worked on and and started
to curate and they were talking about it during
that that session. I didn't realize that until
then. And it made me come home and say, hey,
maybe? I think I was confusing the two sessions
that you were talking about. There was a break
in between. Yes. It was the same session. It
was just there was a break in between the two
sets of moderators. But it was the one ethics
session. But both of them were really good. The
whole thing was really good. Ah, yes. I see the
other session. I had to pull the program up.
It's been two weeks. It's been two weeks. I pulled
the program up. I also really appreciated there
was one talk that it i mean it was good in the
sense that it like it fit really well with the
theme of like back to basics which i felt i was
i was kind of curious at how anthro was going
to try to go back to basics and so this one that
i really appreciated it was um they were talking
about like language use for items at the border
and instead of like yeah switching out the language
of what we're actually calling what we're finding
calling it an artifact instead of trash and like
being able to reframe what we're doing in a way
that like isn't dismissive of the people that
are you know putting their lives on the line
to you know try to make better for themselves
and how some how such an easy switch on our end
can really impact what the interpretation of
it is in the long run was really nice and I felt
fit really well with that back to basics because
like at first you're like okay cool I'll change
some words that I say but then you're like no
actually the words mattered like the words make
such a big difference in the overall intent behind
what we're doing and how people feel about the
words we're you know using and it was really
it was really nice to to hear something like
that because I think a lot of times people At
least some of the older folks in the forensic
generations are like, oh, what is the difference?
It's the same thing. And it's like, but it isn't.
Like, it really isn't. But it's not just us and
our report writing. It is all those who end up
using the report as well. I think that was very
important that they got across. Yeah, for sure.
Yeah, and honestly, that whole session, I think,
was really impactful. If we're thinking back
to basics, I mean, back to basics has always
been about, well, I shouldn't say that. I should
say it's always been about. When I think of back
to basics with forensic anthropology, I think
of what got me really interested in it, which
was humanitarian and human rights work. So it
was nice to see those continuing conversations.
I don't think there's ever been a lull. really
in those conversations that asked but it's nice
to see that we can that we are continuing to
have it i think some of those talks really got
about got to you know the basics of the foundation
of missingness and materiality and personal identity
like i victoria soto gave a really impactful
presentation just in the way in which that they
described the human centered purpose of identification.
And I guess to me, that is what I view as a basic
in what I do. So being able to stand there again
as an anthropologist, putting the anthropologists
and forensic anthropologists, and we say, these
are people we have worked with. These are their
names. These are their stories. This is why it
matters. I don't think there's any more clear
cut fundamental in my opinion. not just case
numbers bringing the anthropology back to forensic
anthropology which is important because at the
end of the day we are anthropologists first that
you know we are doing human work just with a
forensic lens and yeah so that was yeah I think
that's something with everything that we have
to try to do is bring that anthropology back
in. Yeah. Mm -hmm. Yeah, there's definitely some
tears shed at some of those talks, though, of
just, like, it's... The human side of it is emotional.
And I think that's why, like... Yeah, I, that
was just one thing that like throughout all of
the talks that like, I felt really impacted by
I was like, it was that emotional connection
of like, this is why we're doing what we're doing
and why what we're doing matters and we're not
studying bones because we're scientists it's
no like we're doing something with this that
is impactful and helpful and if it's not helpful
then why are we doing it. And I think that was
nice to. to hear a lot of talks kind of center
that back but i think i think that goes with
virtually any of the sciences or the exception
of mathematics you won't find most scientists
do what they do because there is a passion and
an emotion associated with what they're doing
they are um There's a sort of trying to help,
trying to solve a problem of some kind. And for
us, it is trying to return a loved one to their
family, whether it's their natural family or
their chosen family. We're trying to return them
to their loved ones. If it's in biology, you're
trying to either work with a species or a plant.
You're trying to figure something out with that,
save it in some kind of way, whatever. So there
is something there. And I think that is something
our field for a while has forgotten. And for
the past couple years. We're starting to get
back. We're starting to. Put that anthropology
back in. And I think it is this. Our group. Our
younger generation. Generation. We're young.
We're young. That is doing that. That is. Really
trying to fight for that. 100%. And I think that.
I think that fight is so in our generation that
like, I don't know, I don't necessarily want
to pass up any other talks if we want to talk
about those, but like the business meeting itself,
like that was one thing that we really fought
over was, you know, a lot of times for business
meetings, it's a lot of like, everyone agree.
Yeah, cool. Move on. Everyone agree. Yeah, cool.
Move on. And it was. Greg Berg and Christian
Crowder fighting over who gets to make the most.
Yeah, exactly. But this time, it hit us hard
and hit us in something that we thought mattered
in that with the current administration, we had
to change a lot of wording for guidelines in
order to get funding. And the fact that it wasn't
just a, okay, yeah, we'll do what we have to
do to get funding and move on. It was like, yes
fine we will and i do think that's how the vote
ended up going but it was like we wanted known
that like the intent's still there like sure
we might change words so that we don't immediately
get the boot for funding but the fun like the
intent behind it mattered and that's why we had
it worded the way we had it worded and so making
sure that it's clear to not only ourselves to
feel like ethically and morally okay with what
our decisions but to the students in the field
that like this is something that the field cares
deeply about and that was really nice i even
though i laughed i feel like we can't talk about
that business meeting without talking about the
drone bird that flew in yes i love the ass pigeon
oh it was the best there for the pigeon i did
too it was fabulous it was great For the audience
that doesn't know what we're talking about, during
the business meeting, in the time we were talking
about changing verbiage for some awards and stuff,
talking about DEI, there was a pigeon that flew
in through the door, flew over all of our heads,
and then back out the door, which is weird because
we were very much... on an inside building or
like an inside room on an inside building on
like the fourth floor or something yeah like
three escalators ridiculous how the bird got
in is very questionable but i immediately was
like ah it's the drones the pigeon drones they're
listening to us but there were there were two
things that came up in the business meeting that
was a that was a big one and we finally i think
the intent was Carried on. We let the intent
be known. Yes, agreed. The other one is what
is our field's stance on NamUs? Oh, yeah. I was
going to listen to this conversation. The fact
that funding for NamUs is shaky. And I was really,
I had invited our new section chair, Jamie Lee,
to attend. She couldn't make it. But one of the
things that I've heard, I brought it to her.
I know a couple others have as well. I think
there is a hope of trying to create some sort
of ad hoc committee that will. help express the
field or at least the section's interest in keeping
NamUs funded. I said, do you mind explaining
what NamUs is to our audience in case they don't
know what NamUs is? Yes. I thought we had this
in a past episode. I think it's in one of our
past episodes, but NamUs is, yes, NamUs is a
database for missing individuals in the United
States. Law enforcement inputs information regarding
missing individuals. Forensic scientists, particularly
forensic anthropologists and pathologists and
others, medical legal death investigators use
this database as well as other law enforcement
agencies. to compare decedents to try to help
as well as missing persons to try to find missing
persons the funding for that database lasts till
september and then there is no funding after
that who knows what happens after september um
the The sort of confusion that existed in the
business meeting is one individual had mentioned
that the funding lasts for at least a year and
there's no worry about it, and another who is
also very knowledgeable in the subject noted
that its funding is running out very shortly.
It runs out in September. I looked up the legislation.
It runs in September. So we as a field have to
try to convince Congress to fund further. That's
the issue. And they don't like to fund it. Even
though we don't have any other nationalized missing
persons or identified names? databases like it's
already existing infrastructure that'll be a
real that'll be a real hit so our involvement
in policy is becoming more and more necessary
yes there was a talk about that too about like
making sure that you know the policies that are
affecting our work and not just like oh it can
pass and then maybe you know about it but the
other people in the fields that are putting this
on don't know about it because there was it was
one talk about um i think it was in that same
session actually but there was talking about
um oh why my brain blanked on the name um but
like repatriation um and like policy change and
like what's required Yeah, it was NAGPRA and
then there was another name was the one I was
trying to think of, but it's fine regardless.
But like knowing the policies and how they affect
what you're doing and policy changes, you know,
all the time necessarily without people being
aware and then you're not following correct protocol
and the protocol is there for a reason. And so,
yeah, be just always being aware of what's going
on. Well, and it's not just being aware. One
of my many crusades, many with an I, not many
with a Y, is we as anthropologists, we in the
field have to start engaging in policy, not just
as a consumer, but as an influencer. No, 100%.
lobbyists. And as part of the conference, there
was a smaller forensic anthropology meeting that
was held on the Tuesday. We were all in attendance.
I want to hear about it. Oh, you weren't there.
No, yeah, I ended up doing the crime lab tour,
so I'm curious to hear what it was about. One
of the... It was on... Mr. Hanna, can you help
me out? It was on participation. Participatory
anthropology. It was like the proactive, not...
Proactive anthropology. Proactive anthropology.
Started bringing up, when it came to questions
and answers, having to be engaged in advocacy
of some kind. And that brought up this back and
forth on, yes, you can be in advocacy, or no,
you can't because it causes bias. But they were
talking about a form of advocacy, all of them
in an – Proving way, which is through policy
and being engaged as an effect, a lobbyist almost
advocating for policy change. And I think that's
where the term gets muddled in our field is when
we hear. Advocacy, advocacy and activism. We
think of out in the streets with the signs picketing.
But it can also be writing letters as a lab group
or going to your state house or to your city
council or even to D .C. and meeting with representatives,
meeting with senators and trying to affect. And
saying, this is why we need NamUs. Here's what
it does for us. You need to fund it. Here's the
benefits. That is advocacy. And that, I think,
is what our field needs to start working towards.
Because we haven't done that, really. We leave
it to others. But we need to be the ones doing
it. Yeah, I think a lot of times. we're uh we're
a little quirky of a group that don't necessarily
like public speaking uh some people i say full
knowing i love public speaking so like i'm i'm
probably the weird one in the group but uh it's
definitely not the norm but like being able to
correctly and adequately explain your science
and explain what you need and advocate for those
needs is important yeah i 100 agree And I think
an interesting aspect of that larger discussion
was like the expanding role of a forensic anthropologist,
not in terms of like casework, but in terms of
like employment placements. And this is something
that I've kind of been thinking about, I think,
over the last year or so is what. Is the role
of, like, a forensic expert or forensic anthropologist
outside of your really traditional academic or
semi -less traditional medical legal coroner
office position. Like, they had Paul Sledzik.
Sledzik, yeah. Sledzik, sorry, that was a terrible
between of a name. For the National Transportation
Safety Board. Yeah. So having these foundational
placements and possibly governmental or federal
level leadership or even local state level leadership
on different committees and boards, this idea
of how we could occupy leadership and management
spaces where we're actually making the decisions
on the policies. And I thought that was really
interesting. And it takes this decoupling, I
think, in a person's mindset. I'm still a forensic
anthropologist. I just don't do a lot of casework
anymore. I don't do maybe any casework anymore.
But you can still be a forensic anthropologist
and still maintain that mindset. Getting access
to casework is really hard. And only limited
situations are going to get you that type of
access. So we can still continue to be active
in the field and advocate for our policy needs
and work with, you know, varying stakeholders
that don't understand what we might need to make
our job work. I think there's a lot of strength
in that, especially if we are able to do it from
like positions of authority that are intrinsic
to the system. I'm not saying we should obviously
do a lot of work from outside too, because that's
super important. But I think there's definitely
kind of an opening of a conversation where we
can start considering these higher level management
inside jobs, I think is really an interesting
spot to think about. So what I'm hearing is that
you're going to do that. You're going to become
the head of... and I'm all for it. No, wait,
but I like the casework. Listen, I also have
it decoupled in my brain that I want to do a
lot of casework, all right? I still want to do
a lot of casework. No, I get it. But it's hard.
It's hard to get access. It is. But maybe, I
mean, maybe I won't be president, but maybe I
could be a leader for... a federal branch. I
don't know. I don't know. It sounds hard. I don't
know. Look who's in charge. Well, we'll move
past that, actually. Are there any other presentations
or posters that y 'all really enjoyed? I really
liked the Tefonomy one as well. Did anybody go
to that one? Was it just me? No, I missed the
session, but I hit a lot of the TAF PMI posters.
How were the posters? I didn't see the TAF ones.
Posters were pretty good. A lot of Andy Yim's
students in their lab out of George Mason had
some really interesting PMI DK posters. I think
one that I saw that was particularly interesting
was the use of 3d scanning to estimate post -mortem
interval i thought that was really sick you know
i think there's some limitations to the technology
that was shown in the poster that the individual
who presented it and we had a pretty honest conversation
about that but i think the promise of the technique
could definitely be interesting You know, I was
at the Salt Lake Crime Lab last year, and they
had a very similar 3D scanning, like crime scene
total station setup that they had used at George
Mason. They just use a smaller handheld unit
as a difference. And the resolution and crime
scene reconstruction on that thing that the crime
lab had was really inaccurate. So I'd be really
interested in seeing how maybe we could develop.
those types of techniques using higher resolution
3D scanning devices, because I think that could
be really good. Like Theron? Sorry, I'm not familiar.
Just call Eugene Lishio. He'll come and do all
your stuff. I will say this about the post, and
maybe... You all might have seen it as well.
There were quite a few, particularly of young
– like master's level students. And I don't know
– I don't recall it being this bad even when
I was a master's level student. But you walk
through and you say, that's been done. And it's
not that's been done on a different population.
It's that's been done and you left out the people
who did it. And I saw that quite a few. I saw
quite a few that were like that. I didn't want
to mention Nank, but yeah. I mean, did you, this
is something that I've been talking about with
another group of people of like how to essentially
mentor and stuff when oh yeah i did that i was
i talked to him i talked to him for a long time
about it and gave them hints on where to to look
yeah and yeah because i feel like a lot of times
sometimes like when it might seem like oh we've
already done this or whatever uh You could only
put so much on a poster, I guess is my point.
Yeah, you could only put so much on a poster.
But what I noticed about all of them is if the
publication came out before 2020, they didn't
look at it. And that's what bugged me. You have
to go a bit beyond that. I say when you talk
to them, I guess it's hard without giving specific
examples, and that's not necessarily what I think
we should do here. But yeah, that's interesting.
I didn't necessarily come across any like that,
but maybe I missed them because I didn't go to
every poster session. But I don't know. I think
it's hard as a student. It is hard as a student.
As much as you can. And, you know, you talk to
your professors, but also there's some universities
that don't necessarily have professors that are
in this field. You know, like, you know, you
might be in an anthro department, but not a forensic
anthro department or other things like that.
Even a bio -anth department. Right. So, you know.
And you don't know. I admit that. I mean, you
don't know and you. And also, I do admit, even
as a student. Because we do have a lot of students
out there. You sit there and, all right, I need
to come up with a new project no one's ever done
before. And you start looking through the catalog
and you end up real quickly going, well, shit,
everything's already been researched. Yeah. Well,
I think it might be something like because this
year's theme was back to basics, there probably
were a lot of people that were going. back to
basics. So maybe, you know, maybe one other author
had done something similar, but this was, you
know, maybe they had something slightly different
and that's why it was new. Yeah, I don't know.
But you cite them. You do cite that other author.
You say, hey, look, they did something similar.
We found similar results. We found different
results. That's science 101. Yeah. I guess I
tried my best to give a little leeway. And I
only say this because I know when I was doing
my thesis data collection, I had an experience
where, not that I'm saying you did this, you're
obviously very kind, so like this is not you,
but had someone come up to me and very crassly.
complain that i did not cite them essentially
oh no i did not do that i was just like well
i cited where i got it from it's not my fault
that they did something similar to you like it
was just like i don't know so i think i i might
be i'm biased in the hesitancy on saying that
they did it oh no and it's it's yeah it's not
that it is um Yeah, I think, like I said, it's
a couple things. When the publications don't
go beyond 2020. Sure. And this was a couple of
posters I saw. It wasn't one. It was a few posters.
It makes me wonder. And I don't know. Thomas,
you've taught. You teach. I teach. Hannah, you
teach. You sort of notice this, don't you? Well,
I think back to, like, my time in undergrad,
and obviously, like, I didn't do anything anthropology
before I got to grad school, but so, like, it
was very, like, all genetics classes, all chemistry
classes, and I remember when I was writing my,
like, senior, like, research project and and
some of the instructors they kind of tell you
when you're in those like i don't like use heavy
sciences but you know like the more like molecular
and chemistry and everything they're like don't
use any sources before the last five years and
i'm like uh because it's outdated and that's
not like everyone but you have those professors
because they're like this is you know not applicable
but in anthropology you have to reference And
I always did. I was like, okay, well, the thing
on my project, people did the same thing or a
very similar thing using different components
or whatever 10 years ago. So I'm going to sort
those 10, 15 -year -old papers because that's
the basis of what I'm doing. But some, maybe
there's just like a, you know, there's this thing
like, oh, you have to use the most. new new papers
new new sources because anything else could be
updated and not to say that's right but maybe
no that's no and you're right it could be because
thinking on it a lot of those i don't want to
say harder sciences but they are harder in the
sense of like chemistry and everything require
more math Well, it's the ones that require more
math. We require an awful lot of math. I do a
lot of math. They churn out papers. Thankfully,
I don't. You think about it, they churn out papers
every other month. And you're expected to. Whereas
in our field, you're lucky if you get maybe one
a year, sometimes two. That's really good. I
mean we have – when you hear – if you go to the
main business meeting, the academy business meeting,
and they're honoring somebody, a toxicologist
or some other sort of chemist, and they're going
through their publication record. Some of them
have – you know 800 900 publications there isn't
an anthropologist in the world's going to get
that number but that's because of our field difference
exactly so we use a much wider frame than five
years i also think though and i don't know obviously
because i don't know what the poster was and
i don't want to necessarily go too much further
into this but it also could be sometimes people
don't have access to those papers. Yeah. A lot
of our paperwork are behind a paywall that maybe
had they had access to, you know, the thing that
happened 10 years ago, they probably would have
cited it. But when they did their Google search
of things that are publicly available, didn't
find anything. And so they're like, oh, well,
this is a gap. And, you know, I, you know, I
can't. You can find faults in it, and there is
faults in it of not doing the due diligence and
whatever, but there's also when you do your due
diligence within what you have access to, no
one's perfect. You're going to potentially miss
some stuff. No one's perfect. I think for me,
I put those students in line with what my students
do a lot of times. Not so much. There's a lot
of students I have that, yeah, they'll do that.
They'll go with what they can and say, hey, we
have what we have. Instead of, let's dig a few
more layers. I don't know. It got me. I would
say, did you... but i talked to him i talked
to him for a while i i had a really good time
talking with him good okay i i think that i think
that's the thing is like i i try my best when
especially with students is like it's so it's
all right i mean it's scary for the adults in
the room or not that they're not adults i'm sorry
that's not the right way but the the old people
in the room the the 1900s people um in that like
it's scary enough for us to present and like
make sure that we did everything right. And that
like, we didn't miss stuff and whatever, but
like, it's even scarier for a student to go and
present a national stage. And it just like, I
always, obviously there's, you can, there's good
critique and you can always give critique and
that's not a bad thing. I just, I'm always so
nervous to like dismiss the effort when it's
like, oh, it's so, it's so scary as a student
to be in that position. Oh yeah. Especially because
– I remember my first – I don't know. I remember
my first time I ever presented a poster. It was
at the ABAs, the American Association of Biological
Anthropologists. It was on secular change and
the length and breadth of the arm, of the bones
of the arm. And at the ABAs, you have two times
you have to present, or you did then. This was
in Knoxville. You did then. The first time I
was supposed to be there, I didn't show up. I
was so scared. I didn't show up. I was just,
this is trash. I don't want to present it. I
don't want to be there. I hung it up, but I didn't
show up. I was terrified that anybody would come
up and speak to me during the second round. It
took a good two or three posters before I started
getting comfortable with that. And it took until
Seattle in 2022 when I was, it was when I got
promoted to being a fellow. that I got comfortable
being up there on stage doing a podium presentation.
And that was because I said to myself when I
got up there, I'm equal to everyone in this room.
And that's what it took. And so I do get it.
Trust me, I get it. So I try to, when I critique
with students, I don't try to be harsh. Yeah.
I don't want to be harsh. Right. A lot of times
I don't think they would even think I was critiquing.
Good. That's a good way to critique, though.
It's more trying to drag out, you know, ask them
questions to drag out and let them think. Right.
Think. Think. So that's kind of how I do it.
Yeah. No, that's, that's good. I, I just know
that's not. That's not how everybody does. Yeah.
And there are some people I know that it's just.
Yeah. It's rough sometimes, but. If I could be
physically abusive, I would. Okay. You are, you
are, you are being mean to these people. Slap.
Yeah. I say, well, we're coming up on that hour
mark. Does anyone have any? Oh, go, go, go. Yes.
I think it's really important that we highlight
the accomplishment of some of our wonderful committees
that we had this year. And then also I want to,
you know, I think every, all of the collaborators
and the organizers for the forensic anthropology
meeting, like that's a lot of work. It was a
great. Great time, good discussion, but we also
had a couple of good committee -level events.
The Outreach, Engagement, Recruitment, and Retention,
I might have split one of those ours, committee,
they hosted a historic black cemetery cleanup
in coordination with some of the community members
at Holt Cemetery. That was, I think, a real good
turnout. I'm not on that committee, but I was
there. I am on that committee. I was unable to
make it to that event, but it was well attended,
and I think it was an extremely important event.
It's one of the things that our committee is
trying to do. It's the first time we've done
this, and we're trying to do it. Going forward,
it's the outreach part. We believe strongly that
we need to give back to the cities and the communities
that host the American Academy of Forensic Sciences
conference. Yeah. No, I really wish I would have.
I had signed up for the 5K and I'd already paid
the dues. We were competing. We were competing
with the 5K. I passed everyone on my way out
of the hotel. But hey, we all got rained on.
So the 5Kers and us, we all got rained on. But
no, I really loved that event. I think it's really
impactful. And it was great to have a community
member or leader there to give us an introduction
to... the site, the history, what it means to
people, how it formed, why it's in its, you know,
current state, not only like disrepair, I don't
want to say stay, I mean, like it's to our context,
how then that context has changed over, you know,
even their generation. So I really, I really
loved that experience. And then the Community
Connections Committee that Ashley has served
her current final term. I know, but we love everything
that you did for us. And I'm sure Pam will put
in a nice little, I don't know, what is it? Ad
hoc position for people. I am sort of serving.
It's not a, not sort of as an ex officio. position
on the on the committee um that's that's what
i'm doing right now um and yeah just trying to
trying to stay involved as i can but i have served
my uh three years on that committee so we had
a very good turnout at our talk with the head
of the crime lab. Dr. Shamika Kelly came out
and gave us a... It was a very good talk on how
the crime lab has rebuilt and reconfigured after
Katrina. Yeah. And another great example of...
what strong and effective management gets you
in places. She was such a powerful leader and
you could tell from how she spoke about the staff
that, you know, work at the crime lab and how
they were also there to see her talk and how
engaged they were with her conversation and just
how much she built up her community and the whole
lab really from, you know. technician up. I just
thought that's really, I thought it was really
impactful. I thought it was really forward thinking.
And I think how better to talk about like a community
connections committee than by having someone
who recognizes that community exists and even
those like local job levels. And I really, I
really loved that talk. I thought it was super
great. And it was just a good little way to round
out a Tuesday evening. Even though they put us
completely in another building. They did. We
did get good nosh. We did get good nosh that
time. True. So with that, we all want to thank
everyone for listening. Our next episode will
release at the end of March. It will be with
Teba Brown from the Innocence Project. We'll
be discussing how forensic science can be used
in both evil ways as well as ways to exonerate
the wrongfully convicted. I appreciate y 'all
both being here to talk about AFS and everything.
Cause y 'all got to, you know, give me insight
on some of the talks that I missed. That's, that's
my, that's always my one complaint about apps
is I'm like, oh, but I want to go to both sessions
and I can't do everything. And that was, that
was, this was the first year in three years where
we had two sessions going on simultaneously.
Oh, one last question before all we, before we
all leave, where was the best food y 'all had
while down there? Oh, you know, honestly, it
was this taco joint in Algiers that I went to.
I got in on Sunday because I had a whole slew
of commitments the entire week. So I got in really
early and I had dinner. It's called Barracuda
Taco Stand in Algiers. It was a quick ride over
the Mississippi. I had some really great tacos
with a mezcal margarita. And then I just continued
to eat my way through Algiers. I think I also
had some cannoli, some arancinis, some bar snacks.
It was awesome. Not Cajun food, I know, but it
was a really good fish taco. I was going to say,
weirdly enough, I feel like I hardly ate down
there because there was no time for anything.
I went out with, well, one day for lunch, we
went to Mother's. That was really good. And then
I think it was Friday. Taylor and I went to brunch
at Two Chicks right near the convention center.
That was very good. The three dozen oysters I've
split with my advisor were also pretty good.
That's high on the list. I'm trying, I don't
remember the place, but. Thomas, you may remember,
it was the Taqueria place that we went to with
Amy Michael and Mari Issa and Taylor. That was
phenomenal Taquerias. Their food was good. They
were really good. And it was a pleasant night.
You couldn't have asked for a more pleasant night
that night. Nice. It was outside. I don't think
there was any indoor seating. Same as Periputa,
by the way. And it was just... Beautiful way
to spend an evening. The only drawback was the
benches were made of brick. And so I had to sit
like I was Caesar with my legs crossed. They
were a little uncomfortable. This is true. But
the food was phenomenal. I don't know, Stephanie,
where are your local insights? I'd say my favorite
place, there's a, it's a bar called Aaron Rose,
but in the, it's, like, a little hole -in -the
-wall bar, but in the back of the bar, there's
a po 'boy, like, restaurant that, like, you literally
get the po 'boy through a hole in the wall, and
it feels, this is gonna sound probably, like,
it feels questionable, but it is the best po
'boys, and that is, like, my go -to place. I
love. Love eating there. And then you get a beer
because you're at a bar too, which is nice. Yeah,
that's usually my go -to. I will say this. I
do think the entire anthropology section shut
down Ghost Bar. We drank everything out of Ghost
Bar that night. Probably true. From what I heard,
it's probably true. Real last question. Best
parade, which one? oh i was there till i actually
left on mardi gras i extended my trip a little
bit oh nice nice um so let's see maybe sauce
like yeah that was good or bacchus bacchus was
great yeah for the muses yeah yeah i wanted the
shoes so bad i didn't catch any shoes but muses
was pretty good I really enjoyed that. I don't
know how people can stand out there for a whole
parade the entire time. Just for them, I was
there for like an hour and I left. You just get
real drunk and then you don't notice. That's
the Louisiana way to do most things, if I'm honest.
I go off Louisiana. I sadly did not do the parades
this year. I did them last time. I did not do
them this time. I did get assaulted and mauled
by debutantes. Yeah. I left Ghost Bar that evening.
Everybody went to the parade. I went back to
the hotel and there was a debutante ball that
was just starting up and they had all the limos
pull up and buses pull up and all these either
late teen, early twenties, young Women come out
with their Swarovski crystal tiaras and furs.
And I just looked out of place in my near pajamas.
I want to dress like that every day of my life.
Say you got to do it. I would. I mean, not any
time recently since I have lived out of Louisiana
for 10 years, I guess now, but. You gotta do
the parades. I was a queen in a Mardi Gras pageant.
You gotta do it all. Go off. Alright, well, we
can wrap that up unless y 'all have any final
chit -chats about AFS. Shout out to the AFS pigeon.
Shout out to the AFS pigeon. Honestly, I want
to get a t -shirt with just the pigeon to just
be like, I care about the DEI award, actually.
We should make them and sell them. Next year.
All right. Ongoing Ass Pigeon merch. Let's go.
Next year, for any student or anyone who is listening
that is interested, the Academy will be in Orlando,
Florida at the Rosen Shingles Creek Resort. Yeah.
But still. Be prepared to walk because it is
a resort out in the middle of nowhere. Yeah,
it's far from all the grocery stores and stuff
for sure. I've heard it has decent restaurants,
so good luck with that. And the Mexican restaurant
does make the guacamole right there by your table.
It does. It does. But... We will say goodnight
to you all and I will see you all In Florida.
Yes. See y 'all next time. Bye, everyone.