My guest today is Dr. Narosha Murugan. Dr. Murugan
is a Canada Research Chair, Tissue Biophysics,
Faculty of Science Distinguished Research Chair,
Assistant Professor at Wilfrid Laurier University.
Dr. Murugan earned her PhD in Biomolecular Sciences.
As an applied biophysicist, her work explores
how structured physical signals such as light,
voltage, and magnetism govern cellular plasticity,
tissue regeneration, and the reversal of diseased
states. Her approach reframes biology not solely
as a molecular system, but as a dynamic network
governed by first principles in physics. Currently,
her lab bridges quantum biology with biomedical
engineering to decode how physical signals acting
as carriers of structured information sculpt
the body's energetic architecture. By mapping
out how these signals define energy landscapes
and reconfigure cellular signaling networks,
her work reveals new ways to understand cell
state transitions, disease emergence, therapeutic
responsiveness at both the individual and systems
level. Through technology, development, and interdisciplinary
collaboration, she aims to bring the biophysics
of life into real -world innovation that reprogram
disease states and support a more precise and
holistic and energetically informed model for
human health. Today's episode is all about quantum
physics and quantum biology. Dr. Murigan will
take us through a passionate work and upstream
in these biological processes that needs our
attention. And now, my conversation with Dr.
Narosha Murigan. I would like to take a moment
and mention a pressing issue we are seeing in
our modern world. and that is tech use and tech
light. The data are impressive and concerning
on isolated wavelengths of light, especially
shorter wavelengths, which is blue light. For
those that don't know, we have chromophores,
which are special proteins that absorbs specific
wavelengths of light. For blue light the light
that is LED light and tech light that protein
is called melanopsin Melanopsin is responsible
for our circadian biology physiology and cell
functioning hormone regulation and even a connection
to an area huge for mood a consideration we should
include is this protein was not even discovered
until 1998. It seems important for us to understand
how our biology uses the different wavelengths
of light for various aspects of our biology.
This blue light chromophore is our master controller,
our master clock. Remember, circadian rhythm
is a two -part process, two independent parts.
Light and dark. For a quick reference, see the
2017 Nobel Prize in Physiology and Medicine.
But for now, I have something exciting. I want
to introduce a product unlike any other product
available. A highlight is... The product from
Daylight Computer Company created their product
based on these factors. The Daylight Computer
is completely blue light free. It has no flicker.
Short wavelength flicker is extremely harmful
for our eyes and downstream biology. Light flicker
is constantly turning our central nervous system
on and off. Essentially it is like going to a
light switch and repeatedly turning it on and
off. The problem is blue light and LED light
does this and it is so rapid you cannot even
perceive this in real time. The daylight computer
is the lowest stimulation and foremost for sensory
sensitive users. It is no question that the alternative
product, especially when used at night, do not
address or consider this in their product. It
is so toxic to human biology. Big tech corporations
have patents on how their short wavelength implicate
the human nervous system. And a bonus. Despite
daylight computer not having backlight, it is
very functional for outdoor use. And of course,
increased sunlight is always preferred. I am
happy to offer a discount for the daylight computer.
You can use the code AUTISM for a $25 off coupon.
Again, use the code AUTISM and the discount code
for $25 off. See the link in the show notes to
Daylight Computer Company or just give it a quick
search in your internet browser. Use the code
AUTISM for $25 off. I would like to mention Chroma.
Lights designed for humans. Chroma, a Seattle
-based innovator, founded by ex -NASA and Air
Force engineer Michael Shapiro is on a mission
to enhance physical and mental health with purpose
-built devices, unlocking peak human health,
cognitive function, and performance. Shapiro
launched Chroma to restore the natural light
lost to screens in indoor living and delivers
faster recovery. sharper minds and better sleep.
Their products hit hard. The Iron Forge speeds
muscle repair with red and near -infrared light,
while the Skylight mimics sunlight to boost sleep
and energy. A standout, the Forge Lamp, is a
portable gem that fires 660 nanometer and 850
nanometer light. to energize mitochondria and
heal tissues on the go. Remember the four red
-light chromophores on cytochrome c -oxidase
frequently talked about in the podcast? This
is why. Their products are built with military
-grade durability that have lasting impact. Chroma's
tech fuses precision and power. Gallium titride
Power supplies smaller, cooler, and stronger
than silicone. Provide flicker -free light that's
easy on the eyes. High -powered LEDs target key
wavelengths for skin, tissue, and cellular health
with smart heat management for the lasting impact.
Every design decision Chroma makes serves a purpose
to create devices that are precise durable and
effective for improving human life. Remember,
humans use different wavelengths of light for
different functions of life. Remember when I
ask, what do you think light is? Chromindescience
was our biology in mind. From sleep aids and
wound healing to mitochondrial energy. full body
lights and blue light blocking glasses. They
are US made and chroma ships globally and accepts
FSA and HSA payments. Use autism at checkout
for a 10 % off discount. That's autism at checkout
for a 10 % off discount. You just want to start
with telling us a little bit about your journey
into quantum physics and learning about the bio
photons? For sure. So academically, my interest
has always been in trying to understand how biology
communicates with each other. And he starts in
school, in college, and in my undergraduate,
I was sitting in an immunology class and we were
trying to learn about antibodies and how they
work in the body and how do the white blood cells
know where to go, where to target. And we learned
about there are these things called receptors
and there's proteins that bind to the receptors
and that's how cells talk to each other. But
that didn't sit well with me. because if you
think about the size of the cell and how many
proteins there are, it just didn't make sense
that how can this one little protein that's sitting
off on one side of the cell, how does it find
its way in? So it was an incomplete story for
me. And I asked my professor, was there something
else? How does a cell know how to communicate
with each other? And he said that was it. It
was a lock and key model. That's what we knew.
And kind of going down this route, I realized
that there's more to the cell communication,
the cell talk, than just molecules and genes.
And that's kind of where this all started, is
looking at the physical dimensions of how cells
and tissue and biology communicate with each
other. So very long -winded answer, but. Yeah,
that's great. How was your experience with, now
correct me if I'm wrong, if I'm mistaken here,
but with Michael Levin? Levin? Yeah, yeah. How
was that experience? Wonderful. So I, when I
was finishing my PhD, and my PhD was really grounded
in electromagnetic biology and biophotons. We
could talk a little bit more about that later.
One thing that kept coming up when I was sharing
our work was how does this work? How does magnetic
fields affect biology, like the mechanism? That's
always what everyone wants to know. that the
answer took me to Mike Levin because he was the
leader in ion channels and bioelectricity. So
I thought that had to be the link. If we were
going to work with magnetism, we had to think
about electricity, bioelectricity. And so that
was a link to him. And then working in his lab
was the most freeing and one of the most rigorous
scientific training that I've gotten. And I'm
very grateful for this because it allowed it
with with Mike, you're able to think very out
of the box, very big picture, but grounded in
technique and scientific rigor that is required
to answer these questions. Yeah, okay. There's
there's three to five people that I think are
leading the way on this. Yeah, you two are definitely
part of that. Because I think this is the future
of medicine. It's already here. You guys are
already doing it. And medicine is catching up.
They're seeing that that molecular story is not
enough. Everyone's different. Everyone's molecular
signature is so different. How do we create treatments?
Right. There's more to this than just genes and
molecules. I think that's what's easy for us
to measure. The physical side of things is hard
to measure. It's hard to train people to think.
in this domain. I think that's where the challenge
is and I'm excited to see medicine actually shifting
this way. Yeah, it's obviously needed because
all the objective data are concerning. There
are some few conditions I want to get into later
because I think we're definitely in play here.
Can you, before we kind of get started, can you
explain photoreceptors across the body and especially
the opsins. Can you define opsin versus chromophore?
Sure. So photoreceptor or basically any protein
is light sensitive. Opsins are a class of proteins
that are light sensitive and that are able to
transduce that information in a signaling cascade.
So chromophores are a general category of proteins
that are light reactive and light sensitive.
So in response to specific wavelengths and intensities
of light, they change their conformational position.
So they change their shape. And when they change
their shape, that causes a change inside of the
cell or around the cell for them to kind of understand
what's happening. What does the cell do at that
point? Good question. Typically what happens
in signaling is when we think about cellular
signaling from a molecular perspective, there
are certain molecules that when they change their
conformation, they produce other byproducts that
kind of in a chain reaction will induce that
cascade. Usually this either causes a change
in the genome and the genetics that causes expression
of genes. They turn them on or turn them off
or switches or they change them with the metabolism
of a cell. So the cell responds to the accumulation
of certain proteins. So photoreceptors, for example,
when it gets stimulated by light, they change
their conformation and then inside of the cell,
there are proteins that also change their conformation
and continue that cascade that will then either
tell the cell, okay, we need to grow, we need
to stop growing, we need to make more of X protein.
That's sort of typical of the cascade. Yeah,
that makes a lot of good sense there. Can you
define unstimulated light? Unstimulated light,
is that what you said? Yeah. Yeah, unstimulated
light. Did I freeze? No. Okay, you froze. Unstimulated
light. where we call ultrafine photon emission
or bio photons without light getting into the
stimulating into the body. These are light that's
actually emerging from physics, from energy changes,
energy dynamics that exist within the cell. And
I can go into a little bit more detail if you
want to know. Yeah, please do. Just expand on
that as much as you want. Yeah. So usually, so
all proteins, everything that exists in biology,
we're all and surrounded by this beautiful sun.
So we're always in this bath of light. So proteins,
they respond to different wavelengths of light.
Biomolecules respond to different wavelengths
of light. So that's what we call excitation.
When light comes in, that's excitation. Let's
say 500 nanometers of light, and then they emit,
they'll change their energy states and they'll
emit in a different wavelength. We call that
emission. Now, some... processes, they generate
light. So if you take an electron and it's at
a certain energy state, when it gets to a high
energy and comes back down again, that energy
gets transformed into the form of light. So you
and I know energy can't be created or destroyed,
it just basically can be transformed. So this
transformation we see in the form of light. In
our bodies that are happening right now, the
energy transformation also happens in heat. Right?
You know, we call that dissipated heat. Now we're
seeing this, that that energy can be transformed
in the form of light. OK, that's that's like
the. The role, I think, of mitochondria is like
a dissipative structure. We want to get into
mitochondria. You want to go into the recent
paper from the spring and just tell us, tell
me about how. Like, what you found and the methods
of that and everything? The Brain Glow paper?
Yeah, that's a very exciting paper. It's built
on the shoulders and the research that's been
happening for the last 50 to 100 years. What
we have basically showed in our paper is that
the neurons, the brain cells... emit light. And
this is not new. People have shown that brain
cells do emit light, living cells do emit light.
What's exciting about our paper is that we can
measure this outside of a living human skull.
And that signal of light that comes out of someone's
head is actually in relation to or in proportion
to their brain activity. So as someone is thinking
or doing some cognitive task, that light emission
seems to track. And what's really exciting about
that is that this is, I think, the first time
that we're showing that the light that's coming
out of our heads and our bodies is not byproduct.
It's not just a random event. It may be instructive.
And I want to emphasize the maybe because we
need to kind of prove that a little bit more.
OK. Could you explain just briefly about the
photomultiplier? For sure. So the tool that the
ways to actually pick up. the photons, the photons,
the light is very weak in intensity. It's not
as you can't see it with the naked eye. So if
you take an LED and you turn it all the way down
to the lowest intensity, that's still too bright
from the type of light that we measure. So we
pick up individual single photons that we can't
really perceive and a photomultiplier tube does
that. So the word photomultiplier means it multiplies
the photons at the counts. So every time a photon
hits the detector it converts that signal into
an electrical count. So every time for every
one photon you get like one electrical count
and the counter will count every time that hits
that detector and we can multiply that to get
a signal. Well that's fascinating. It's pretty
cool. There's lots more cool detectors out there,
like CCD cameras, for example, can actually pick
up these photons. And there's a group in Japan,
Kobayashi, Jaipai Dai, they use the CCD cameras,
and you can actually see the biophotons. You
can see the changes in photon emissions across
people. The difference between what a PMT or
photomultiplier tube can do is that you can get
this signal over time. So the resolution may
not be that good, but we get really quick dynamics.
And that's why it's really good for brain activity,
where our CCD camera, you can kind of get that
spatial distribution. Is that the group that
released a paper around 15 years ago that showed
like the human inside the human body is just
lighting up? Yeah, they've done quite a lot of
the groundwork that's building off of other people
like Fritz Alba Pop, the Van Wicks, they've all
kind of shown this work that cells and tissue,
they've done a lot of this work in plants and
bean sprouts is another, like during the development
germination, there's a lot of these like... highly
metabolic activity that happened in plants, and
they're easy to kind of use and measure. So they've
kind of done a lot of this work that we're building
off of. I'm going to run an analogy across you
about germination and in comparison to autism.
And maybe I'll just do it now. Yeah. So I'm your
student right now, so I want you to be a tough
professor on me and to just correct me if I'm
wrong. So I want to lay out that down. So artificial
light came around, let's say, 1890s. Let's just
say 1890s. Autism first showed up in 1930s. Johns
Hopkins, Leo Kanner, and then in Vienna, Hans
Asperger. They were studying this at the same
time. This is like, One to maybe two generations
after artificial light So I'm thinking like if
as a comparison if I'm trying to grow a tomato
plant right and I have the seed seedling and
I put in the soil and I have to nurture that
up and eventually get it to sunlight If I don't
get the sunlight it's not going to develop Right,
it's going to be underdeveloped and that's what
neurodevelopment is. That's what autism is But
in comparison if I give it the proper environment,
it has a better chance of developing into an
adult plant So my question is Maybe I should
have started with the artificial light but What
How much of this energy coming in is responsible
for the development of, let's say, a fetal or
that plant? I mean, excellent question. And I've
been really trying to bring this to light, no
pun intended, about the role of the environmental
information. It's not just... you know, like
pollutants and things like this, the environment
itself carries information for our development.
The biggest myth is that our internal surfaces
are dark. They aren't. There are receptors in
places that are within deep brain region, you
know, within the fetus, for example, within the
womb that's supposed to be dark, but it is kind
of red shifted. There's a glow of red within
those areas. And these options are within the
brain, for example, there's other proteins and
pigments like neuromelanin that are also photosensitive
and photoreactive. So there's a big question
mark. Why are they there? Evolution doesn't like
to waste energy and it's pretty efficient. And
if it wasn't useful, we would have evolved out
of that, right? So to answer the first part of
your question, there's definitely some sort of
role in there. In terms of light, The light that
we absorb from our environment carries energy
and information, and the information is not just
in the intensity of light, it's not just in the
wavelength of light, but in the pattern in which
we get that light throughout the day. You know,
we see this often, for example, in shift workers.
In shift workers that have, it's not just circadian,
it's not just the fact that they're not going
away, it's not their metabolism, it's the exposure
to the light, the pattern of light that they're
getting. The receptors and the biology is reactive
to this. So we don't exactly know what's happening
on our internal structure in neurodevelopment,
but within plants, for example, we know that
plants need sunlight and they need light to grow.
And if you pulse the light in very different
patterns, you get all sorts of different shapes
and growth patterns of these plants. So you can
keep the source of the light the same, but if
you change the pattern, you get a different hokum.
And I think that's kind of similar to what you're
saying, is that it doesn't need to be... just
that you don't have the right wavelength of light.
That's one obvious source, right? I think artificial
light misses the spectrum that you need. It misses
the intensity of light, misses the wavelength.
That's one. The other big thing that's missing
is the dynamics of that light, you know? So I
think those are things that we need to think
about. OK, because the mothers of the Canter
kids and well, the mothers of the Canter kids.
were all professional workers. They were like
nurses, professors, school teachers. They worked
in these types of environments. Nine of the 11
were college graduates. And, you know, this is
20s to 30s as they're developing into a adult
and profession. And the fathers of the Kanner
kids were very successful people as well, lawyers
and doctors, professors, and so forth. So they
were all in this type of indoor environment.
And then the grandparents of the Canter kids,
the 11 Canter kids, they were the same. They
were successful. So I'm imagining that when electricity
and the artificial light came available, like
these families were on it. from the get -go.
They had the means to equip their house with
the so -called modern environment. And if we
zoom out now and over time to present day, we
can see a shift. And it's pretty similar to removing
ourselves from the natural environment and spending
more time indoors and with the various different
artificial types of light. because that has evolved
as well. The rates of autism kind of match that.
Can you say a little bit more? I'm interested
about that. The rates of autism match what? The
lack of light or the introduction of certain
artificial lights? Both. Okay. Yeah, yeah, yeah.
But people get hitched on this because autism
wasn't an official diagnosis until 1980. It's
kind of easy to compare the rates from like the
60s and 70s, but there wasn't a lot of attention
on it until kind of probably 1994 in the DSM
4. Yeah, DSM 4. And, you know, the definitions
have changed and I'm not discounting other factors
being involved, but with the changed definitions
of autism, it's kind of opened the floodgates,
and it's hard to pinpoint really the Kanner and
Asperger type of autism. Those two, people want
to discriminate between Kanner and Asperger autism,
but if you read the Asperger paper, there are
footnotes all across the bottom showing the similarities
of the two cases. And then regarding the type
of light, You know, like LED has obviously, and
the tech light from the 80s to current has really
accelerated and so has the rates. So there are
different things to normalize when comparing
rates. And I don't think we do a very good job
with that. But it follows. It follows so close.
I mean, there's I mean, we know when you think
about the role of light, sunlight, the first
place that people think about is vitamin D, right?
Vitamin D synthesis. And that's one big hormone.
But the transduction of pigment, like across
all human species, we have different pigments
on our skin. You know, I might have a little
bit more than the, you know, maybe you, but you
still and everyone still has this transduction
of pigments that transduce information and transduce
energy within within the cellular environment.
So I think the role of light and you know, we
kind of can talk about photobiomodulation where
people kind of have harnessed that they kind
of see that certain intensities and wavelengths
of light induce, you know, very specific effects
on cells. That's great. But again, those are
all artificial, right? You're picking a very
narrow bandwidth of wavelengths, like, you know,
with an IR and whatever, but I think environmental
light is very important. Yeah. And that's what
I kind of struggle with is like the lux and so
forth, the amount of energy from outside to inside.
I mean, like on a summer day, there's like 100
,000 to 120 ,000 lux, I believe. And indoor,
you're probably only getting a couple of hundred,
maybe a thousand. But from what I've checked,
it's hard to get a thousand lux even. When also
we think about inside the materials that we use,
like glass, quartz, we know they're filters,
right? They filter out certain wavelengths of
light. So you can be sitting out in your sunroom,
but you're going to be filtering out certain
wavelengths of light. So I think the more that
we understand the dynamics of and what the information
of each component of light holds for biology,
the better we'll understand its role in human
health. Yeah, okay. So going off of that tomato
analogy, like if, because plants have like life
stages as well, if you take a healthy adult plant,
tomato plant, let's say, and you block the sun
from it, it's going to die, it's going to accelerate,
it's not going to produce the tomatoes anymore,
and it's going to die. And I think that's what,
how we could look at dementia and Alzheimer's
things. Also, the rates of those are vastly concerning.
Do you see a comparison with that as well? Um
with the role of like applied light or internal
light because those are very different things.
Yeah, just the um the the loss of energy, the
loss of biological energy is the way I think
about dementia and Alzheimer's here. Yeah, I
mean, I'm with you. I think, you know, similar
to that, not so much the loss, but the shift
in energy and the patterning of energy. So one
study that was published by Jiapai Dai have shown
that the wavelength of light that comes from
these, it was done in rodent studies, in young
animals versus older animals, the light that's
being emitted is redshifted. in older animals.
So that tells us the energy within those biophotons
are different from that of the younger animals.
Same neural architecture. Yes, there might be
some neural loss, but overall same architecture,
but the intensity and the energy within that
light is different. So that's one. And then the
other thing that we see is that within EEG and
electrical patterns, for example, electroencephalography,
we can see that the types of electrical firing
changes with time. They lose their oscillations,
they're a bit more slower, they're a bit more
erratic. So the physical landscape, so we can
see that electrically they're different. We see
that the intensity and the energy within the
light that's being emitted is very different
from young versus the aged population. Sorry?
Whenever you say it's very different, is it decreased?
Decreased, yes. It goes from blue to red, so
lower energy. Lower energy, yeah. And then, so
yeah, so there's two there, energy and pattern,
both of them are different. Okay. So what is
it doing to the cell, the overall cell, whenever
it shifts from blue to red? How could you explain
the cell to me? So the first kind of stepping
backwards is first we kind of need to know where
that light is coming from. And that's been the
big question. There's a strong hypothesis that
the internal light, the unstimulated light, which
is what we call biophotons or UPEs, ultra -weak
photon emission, there's a strong suggestion
and strong hypothesis that they come from mitochondria.
for mitochondrial activity. So we call them reactive
oxygen species. So when cells flux the electrons,
they pull off the electrons from the food that
you eat into your mitochondria and they eventually
end up in oxygen. That's what helps create the
ATP that fuels our body. In that process, we
create these things called reactive oxygen species.
It's that. that produces the light. So when the
formation of ROS, you get this change from high
energy to low energy that produces these lights.
So a couple things happen. ROS are not so good
for our cells. They produce damage. They're highly
reactive. It's a reactive oxygen which is going
to want to pull electrons from all of your cells.
So that's what we know. In terms of what this
means for our cells, that's something that we're
trying to figure out. The big question, I think,
what we need to do is kind of blend in the biology
of molecules. How do they actually interact with
the light? And how does that affect the whole
cell as a whole? We see this in photobiomodulation.
We see that certain receptors are sensitive to
light based on the intensities and energies,
but we don't really understand that whole signaling
cascade at all. Well, that's fascinating, too,
right? melanin helps with the ROS situation and
melanin is obviously absorbing, especially neuromelanin,
with it being such a black substance, is absorbing
all of the frequency of light. Yes, absolutely.
There are other proteins within our body that
absorb light, right? Like I said, every protein
can be excited. with enough energy that it can
be excited, it can emit light. And that's kind
of what we hypothesize is happening in our brain.
The biophotons that are being generated from
the mitochondria aren't just random. They're
used in some form of stimulation or communication
with other proteins, but we need to figure out
how that happens. Is the ROS in this light being
created in the mitochondria or suspected to be
created? Is that the things like the FO head
spinning? And is it like the TCA cycle spinning
catabolic or maybe even anabolic? And well, that
brings up another question. Is there different
light emission from catabolic to anabolic? That's
clever. I don't know. I mean, we know that during
TCA, the whole point of TCA is to pull the electrons
from the carbon that's coming in, right? The
carbon source, the glucose in some cases, the
proteins in some cases. That's the goal of these
steps. Eventually they end up in the electron
transport chain where that electron kind of moves
through it to get to its eventual home of oxygen.
That oxygen... is what's going to help create
this reactive oxygen species. So I'm not sure
if within the TCA, there's going to be much light
generation. It's most likely going to be later
down the line in that process. With cytochrome
c -oxidase, because I want to talk about cytochrome
c -oxidase too with those red light chromophores.
From what I know about the mitochondria, there's
VDR, vitamin D receptors, which obviously is
absorbing drawn wavelengths of light, and then
the four red light chromophores and cytochrome
steoxidase. If I'm not mistaken, it's heme A,
heme A3, and copper A and copper B. I forget
the wavelengths of light, but can you say a little
bit more about that interaction? Yeah, so those
two domains are the most light -sensitive within
the mitochondria, and they're sensitive to red
wavelengths, which is why in photobiomodulation,
most of the light that you're using is red. Two
reasons, actually. It's because, one, they're
longer wavelengths, which means they can kind
of penetrate and get into the body. That's one.
Two is that, like you mentioned, cytochrome C
is heme -based and copper -based, which is reactive
within... I should say, receptive to red light
within those intensities. But those are things
where I'm actually in a collaboration right now
where we're trying to measure those things in
real time. OK, the red light in my country. What
is naturally coming out of mitochondria on their
own? Okay. Okay. Yeah. So if we know what's coming
out, then we kind of know what kind of energies
are there. And then then we can kind of manipulate
them and reprogram them as we put them back in.
Like reverse engineering. Exactly. We program
them. Yeah, I always think about the oxidative
phosphorylation as I want to reverse engineer
ATPase. And I think that that's a good way of
looking at it. Because you can just kind of find
out any deficiency there. And you can kind of
go backwards and kind of follow that electron
backwards. I mean, to me mitochondria are pretty
fascinating from an evolutionary and physics
point of view because, you know, they were bacteria
on their own and bacteria are magnetoreceptive.
Bacteria also respond to light in a very interesting
way. So the fact that they're within our cells,
you know, some of that information must have
been kept. Okay. Let me ask you about, are these
bio photons and I hope I didn't miss something.
Are the bio photons interacting with other parts
within us? For instance, leptin or the three
aromatic amino acids? I guess a better question
is, is the UPEs synthesizing proteins? Oh. Again,
very little evidence to support this, but theoretically,
my hypothesis would be that they wouldn't be
because UPEs are pretty low energy, like a single
photon that would be emitted from, or basically
a biop photon would be relatively low energy.
You either need a lot of them over time, Or you
need like a high -intensity light generation
to induce protein conformational change. It's
a lot of energy that's required to break these
bonds, right? To kind of break them and change
the shape of these proteins. So my guess would
be that I don't think they do. I think they might
have another signaling role. Maybe it could be
like there's a... work done by Carmen Mothersgill
from Hamilton, Ontario in Canada, who's shown
that biophotons can act as and induce what we
call the bystander effect, where one cell can
kind of communicate with each other, where one
cell emits the photons and that energy itself
can kind of induce another reaction or behavior
from a cell. So. they see this especially after
radiation exposure, where even after the radiation
is gone, cells are kind of reacting to each other.
And even though there's no information and there's
no proteins being shuttled around, they're still
light. So they kind of hypothesize that this
bystander effect is a communication modality.
So to answer your question about whether these
biophotons can induce protein changes, protein
level changes, I don't think so. But again, we
don't have much evidence for that. Okay. I've
heard that bacteria will synthesize tyrosine,
and it makes dopamine. But I also want to say,
because I wrestle with this, with the aromatic
amino acids, phenylalanine peaks at 260 nanometers,
and then tryptophan and tyrosine is close to
280. The tryptophan is really exciting, because
tryptophan And the interaction with tryptophan
and microtubules, for example. Yeah, I was going
to ask you about microtubules, for sure. Yeah.
So tubulin itself is also photosensitive, right?
It's photosensitive within the UV range, which
is similar to tryptophan, right? And so tryptophan
being also a precursor to melatonin, which is
also light sensitive. So there's like a lot of
these interactions happening. And goes back to
the mitochondria. Correct. Yeah, OK. Yeah, no,
no. So the thing to really think about that we
need evidence for is what is the wavelength of
light? Because that wavelength of light will
tell us the energy, the energetics of that photon.
Two, do we have enough intensity or energy to
influence biology? Perhaps it just takes one
photon to induce a signal, but we don't know.
We don't know if that is actually enough. Okay.
So I wrestled with now I get that TPH1 tryptophan
hydroxylase 1 is on the surface in keratinocytes
and I get how that would be synthesized for the
tryptophan but the the internal tryptophan entire
scene and how that is being synthesized because
I don't necessarily think it's just all from
food and maybe you can correct me but I'm learning
it's not. What's not from food? The energy conversions?
Yeah, for tyrosine and tryptophan. Hmm, yeah,
I'm not too sure. I haven't really looked into
too much of that, so I'm not sure. Again, if
the available energy in the system is not enough,
then nothing is going to happen, right? So if
we're going to say that light is the... Kind
of the conduit for this conversion there needs
to be enough energy within that light and I'm
not sure that the biophotons is that Okay. Well,
that's good information Can you talk about the
microtubules a little bit What I know I'll just
tell you what I know so The cytoskeleton is involved
and they're almost like a train track for the
cells But can you just expand on my lack of knowledge
there? Yeah. So the cytoskeleton, as you mentioned,
is made up of microtubules. There's actin as
well within the scaffold. But specifically within
microtubules, the tubulin proteins form these
dimers. They polymerize. And they basically create
a spiral shape, where what's really exciting
is that the tubulin creates these spirals that
kind of creates the rod, but inside of that rod
is water. There is what we call coherent water
or ordered water within that domain. And this
brings up a whole other conversation about the
types of energies that this water can hold. And
I kind of also want to mention that when we are
talking about photons, we're talking about photons,
bio photons, all that, but they're still within
the electromagnetic spectrum. Right? So you're
talking about electromagnetic energies at this
point. So microtubules and Stuart Hammeroff is
a strong expert here to have linked this to consciousness
and conscious awareness. But the tubulin dimers,
they create a form of energetic resonance in
terms of the type of light energies that can
interact with them. So they are tryptophan, like
as you mentioned, is UV -leaning. in terms of
the type of emissions that come out from these
proteins. So I think from 280 to like low 300
nanometers. So within the UV side of things.
Yeah, so there's... Lots of people have shown
that electromagnetic fields can interact with
these tubulin proteins and that so basically
polymerization is when you take each of these
tubulin and they kind of form like a little network
like little Lego blocks that can attach to each
other and when they depolymerize they kind of
loosen. So you can kind of imagine them as like
a tightrope walker. If the tightrope is too loose
the proteins on top can't actually move and they
kind of fall apart. If they're too tight, they
can there you risk of over polymerization or
damaging them. Okay, that's a great analogy.
This water that you just mentioned with the microtubules,
is that different than the cytochrome c oxidase?
Yeah, yeah. So cytochrome c oxidase is specific
to not always specific, but we typically in the
context of mitochondria. I'm not aware of them
being in my inside of skeleton are tubulin microtubules.
Yeah, it's just tubulin dimers within that space.
Okay. Yeah, I didn't know like, where that water
is coming from. Ah, it's coming from the environment.
So the cell itself, it's not dry, it's sitting
in water. So the water also, like a small percent
of that water is generated from the mitochondria.
Small percent? Yeah, about four percent. Every
time an ATP, an energy molecule is made... it
can only be made at the same time of water. So
when that electron gets to the oxygen, it pulls
in two hydrogens from the intermembrane space
and then generates water. So every time you create
energy, you are also creating water. And this
is why like going outside, I think, or going
outside, it's like much different energy. Absolutely.
Different intensities, different wavelengths,
all of that. It's so energizing outside. You
don't even feel like you have to eat as much
because you're stimulating and all that. Yeah.
There's some recent work that I've read that
is really exciting about oxygenation. Outside,
there's a lot more free oxygen. The breathing
rates change, and when we change the breathing
rates, you're able to change that electron flux,
right? Like how much is actually getting to the
cells and how much is actually fluxing through.
So yeah, it's a multi -dimensional process. I
have a PhD or MD PhD. He's like the leading researcher
on autism metabolism. He said that the whole
reason we breathe is so cytochrome oxidase can
function. And I'm thinking about like being outside,
especially in the woods, or around a lot of plants,
trees, and so forth because they're putting off
red light or near infrared light. They're admitting
that. And oxygen. right? They're definitely also
like absorbing the carbon dioxide that we're
expelling and have a more available oxygen for
us. So yeah, there was a paper that I put out
there, shared that our brain activities are very
different when we are exposed to nature. And
it's not just pictures of nature when you're
actually in nature, that you have lower oscillations,
less high frequency brain activity. So a lot
more calm, a lot more steady state then. And
I think anyone who's been to woods would feel
that way. So is it just ranging like at theta
or even like up to alpha or what? It was more
alpha activity produced within the frontal lobes.
And those who were walking outside, being outside,
being around nature, then I mean, there's also
studies that actually show the same thing in
running, running outside versus running on a
treadmill. You know, you are moving your body,
but there's something about being outside, having
that free flow of breathing, access to oxygen,
less stagnant air, light, all of this plays a
role. Yeah, I'm a big fan of running and there's
a huge difference. People get that runner's high
and it's pretty common. Yeah. I'm the exact opposite.
I can't run outside. This is, I think, a little
bit more cognitive. It's because I'm too relaxed
outside. I don't feel that urgency, that rush
outside. So there's something there. And that
maybe speaks to what you were saying though about,
you know, the alpha wave and just being calm.
Maybe that's differently. Yeah. I don't, I don't
feel that, you know, you know, when you're running,
you're that, that excitement to run that you
just want to get going. I don't feel that outside.
I see a treadmill and I'm ready to go, ready
to go. But I outside, I, I, I'm envious because
my friends who run marathons, they, they're outside
and they can go. And I don't have that urge or
energy. Hmm. It kind of makes me think about
locus aurelius and make the substantial nigra,
especially the compacta with that neuromelanin
that you mentioned earlier. Dopamine. Yeah, yeah,
yeah. And the norepinephrine, yeah. Like persisting
and getting going. Yeah, I mean, the substantial
nigra as... filled with melanin, neuromelanin,
for example, as you know, and that is also blue
shifted UV leaning in terms of absorption and
emission. So there's some structures that are
obviously light sensitive in those regions, super,
super deep brain structures, but there's still
light, light receptive in there. Yeah, the mesencephalon.
The mesencephalon holds key details into autism,
I believe. And I don't know why neuroepithel...
those four cell types, proencephalon, mesencephalon,
and rhombencephalon, and then the fourth one
that's responsible for the spine. The mesencephalon
is so small, but it isn't further subdivided.
Like, it's done. You're talking about the midbrain?
Like, midbrain pons? Yeah. Yeah, I mean, those
regions are, you know, evolutionary conserved.
Those are what kind of gives our basic or I should
say vital functions, right? The pons, the midbrain
kind of help regulate breathing, cardiac rhythms,
things like this. But I'm not too sure of any
light -specific receptors in those area. So I'm
not sure I can comment too much on that. Would
it be the... Oh, okay. Like the neuromelanin
is what I was thinking. Okay, yeah. Neuromelanin
is distributed everywhere. Yeah. Especially in
the midbrain is what I've learned. Yes. Yeah,
so the raffae nucleus which produces serotonin
is also red red light sensitive So there might
be some link again more research I don't want
to give conclusive statements but because the
raffae and because serotonin itself is very light
sensitive and you Sarah serotonin is a very exciting
neurotransmitter talk about because it's super
very important in neurodevelopment We see that
In early neurodevelopment, if you manipulate
bioelectrically these cells to kind of manipulate
serotonin 5 -HT receptors, you get all sorts
of brain development dysfunctions, optic nerve
dysfunctions. And again, serotonin, raffae nucleus,
5 -HT, all red light sensitive. So there might
be a link there to explore. Wow. I want to ask
you another analogy. Because we're talking about
nature a little bit too. The trees in the winter
will kind of represent how our bodies are, especially
at these higher latitudes in the winter. I mean,
they're not we're not doing the the bio photons
as much like we're not lit up inside as much.
I don't know. I the data doesn't support that.
So yeah, so we've done this. So the paper that
we have published, that study was done over a
two year period. And we haven't published this
just yet, but there is no difference in biophoton
emission of the same person that was recorded
over seasons. So the amount of light coming out
of a person, there's no different. So. So it's
not contingent on environment, something internal,
and we maybe think it's metabolism, maybe it's
mitochondria, we don't know yet, but there's
no difference between people. So the graduate
student that was on the study, we had her record
herself every month biophotonically over the
year, and there's no real differences. Did you
track a subjective mood during the season? So
we did do questionnaires related to mood. I would
have to look back on that data to kind of, but
nothing stands out. The one thing that we're
kind of getting ready to put out there is to
show that skin type. using the Fitzpatrick scale
is a strong correlate of how correlated the brain
activity is going to be to the brain activity
of light is going to be with the electrical activity.
So the more pigmentation, which means you're
higher on that Fitzpatrick scale, the more correlated
the light activity to the electrical activity.
What does this mean? This is something that we
need to think about. I have some ideas it could
suggest that that pigmentation across the surface
pigmentation that we see has something to do
with maybe reflecting that light back in or maybe
involved in kind of transduction, but these are
again speculations that we have to validate.
Autistic children are so pale. Yeah, they're
so pale. I hope people notice that now because
you can't see it. Oh, yeah. Yeah, I didn't know
that. Thank you for sharing. Yeah, and I think
it goes along with this, with that, like the
bioelectric and the development. Yeah, I mean,
I know there's like, I think this opens up the
door for people to look at cell types from these
kinds of signals, like even bioelectrically,
are the cells at a different resting membrane
potential than what we call a healthy counterpart?
I'm not sure. Okay. Is there a difference between
the amount of bio photons with somebody that's
suffering depression versus somebody that's not?
Or if it's the same subject, whenever they're
going through a depressive like episode versus
whenever their mood is good? Great question.
This is why we started this study. So our interest
was actually to look specifically in a population.
Have you heard of chemo brain? Yeah, so these
are individuals who are going through anticancer
therapies and you know, it's very toxic also
kills off their brain cells and they start to
develop some of these symptoms of aggressions
for some people, depression, lack of connection,
social empathy, things like this. But there's
no way of detecting who's going to get it. So
we developed the photoencephalography to pick
up those neural changes from before they start
chemo all the way to the end. And that's kind
of like why we developed it. And we're starting
that clinical trial right now, actually. We're
kind of halfway in. OK. Yeah. That's fascinating
stuff you have a The cancer treatment is part
of your background if I'm not mistaken in a motivation
Yeah, yeah, I mean this is kind of where it all
started working with cancer cells it the the
question that drives me and it still drives me
today is Why doesn't our body or our brains know
there's cancer in our body? Like when there's
an infection or when you break a bone, you kind
of can, you know, like, you know, something's
not well here or there, but why doesn't our brain
recognize that there's cancer? The obvious answer
that people go to is that, you know, cancer is
ourself, right? It's our own cells that are going
wrong. But I, and that's kind of what it motivated
is, is there like an electromagnetic communication
or some sort of biophysical communication that's
camouflaged? that the brain doesn't recognize
anymore. And that's what it was motivated. And
so my early work in my PhD, we recorded these
biophoton cell signals from cancer cells. And
we see that they have a very, very different
fingerprint from their healthy counterparts.
That's interesting. The amount of research now
on the photobiomodulation and helping so many
diverse conditions is very promising, I think.
I'm not saying that's related to cancer, but
I know of photobiomodulation studies on autism.
I can't wait for that data. So it's very powerful
stuff. I want to ask you, when people are in
an energetic discussion, like they're really
enjoying each other's company, are the biophotons
and even coherence increased? Oh, great question.
So we know this electrically. We know that when
people vibe, as they say, when people are vibing,
there is a coherent brain coherence between two
people. They do these studies of hyper scanning
to two different people at the same time in synced
ways. We do see that there's synced coherence
in brain activity by photons to be determined.
We just have started this this journey and recording
light emissions. But that's a great thing to
try. Yeah, it's very fascinating because it's
like out of our control whenever we meet like
let's say a stranger or somebody that we've just
kind of started meeting and You know, sometimes
there's a connection there like you can have
a legitimate Connection and other times this
is like nothing. So I always think about like
the quantum biology Aspects that could be in
play here What what are some things more recently
that you're excited about I'm very excited about
seeing how much of the molecular signals that
we know is actually downstream to the quantum
signals, to the electromagnetic and to the photonic.
That's kind of my big interest right now. something
that is very apparent, especially because I've
done a lot of work within the cancer domain.
There are proteins that may or may not be present
in certain cancers, but there are light signatures
and light frequencies that are apparent in all
of them. So to me, this dynamics of light electromagnetism
is more of a unifier and more of an easy way
to discriminate between healthy and non -healthy
cells. than proteins are, because proteins in
some people you might express them, some people
you may not. And then the other thing is you
need to have an accumulation of these proteins
to even measure them. So that's really exciting.
And then some of the things that we talked about
today is these very different experiences. Can
we classify these experiences using physics?
So one aspect that we're starting to look into
psychedelics. within the psychedelic community,
some subjective experiences that is often talked
about is that when they have a psychedelic experience,
they see light. It's something that everyone
talks about is that things are brighter, things
are clearer, they see light, they see color.
What is it about our brain that when we have
this altered states of consciousness that, you
know, light is the emergent front thing, front
and center, right? And then, you know, like you
mentioned, when we think about depression, we
think about anxiety, things are darker, things
are less vibrant. There's a change in the intensity
and the vibrancy of color. So, you know, those
are and I don't know if there's any kind of relationship
there to autism in terms of perception of color
and light. Those are things that we that I'm
very, very interested in looking into. Yeah,
but the whole artistic sensory processing may
have those heightened. event -related potentials,
especially like early on in the sensory processing.
Yeah, that's more on the, yeah, exactly on the
processing side, but I'm curious more on the
subjective experience side. Because I know like
light sensitivity can induce neural changes,
right? Like in the ERPs, like you're talking
about the potentials, but the actual subjective
experience of light, are they consistent across
people with autism? I'm not sure. Yeah, okay.
but as I wrote down to make a note here that
uh after I leave like hiking or spending time
in the woods it seems like my my visual clarity
is increased like I and I can see like things
are brighter I don't know if other people share
that from people I've talked to about this they
share it but I mean there could be a couple things
that go on I mean Typically with visual acuity,
what you're talking about is a sympathetic nervous
response. There could be some of that. Again,
breathing does this as well. I mean, breathwork
has become like, I'm starting to learn how really
strong it is into our physiology. Increasing
oxygenation, decreasing carbon dioxide or intake.
having less carbon dioxide in our body. Yeah,
I think that those are where those relationships
lie. I'm not sure how they relate so much to
light. Light can actually maybe support the bioconversion
of some of these molecules. But yeah, that would
be my guess. Yeah, that makes sense. Probably
within that mitochondria, maybe. And being the
so -called powerhouse of the cell, which I think
is a... I think they're much more than that.
Absolutely. We're starting to see it. We're starting
to measure it. We're starting to see that they're
not just powerhouses, that they actually respond
to information. They respond to magnetic fields.
They respond to light. What I would love to see
is if they can hold an information. That would
be very powerful, is if they're not just like
this filter, that they actually integrate that
information and kind of have some sort of decision
-making process. That would be wild. So I want
to follow up on that. Like each cell or each
mitochondria has like a brief summary or a brief
memory based off of the input. Yeah, yeah. Like
because I think maybe cells have a memory and
whenever, you know, whenever they're activated,
they're passing on through the axon or dendrites,
whatever. information and they're just kind of
each connection is building a story. So let me
ask you if you don't mind. I'm very curious about
this and this is kind of getting into the topic
here. What is information? So you talked about
information going into that axon. Where is it?
What is it? Is it? the electricity, is it the
pattern into it? And I think when we understand
that from what we know in neuroscience, it's
the pattern of firing. It's the pattern of electricity
that gets through down to the axon and onto the
next cell. And if we take that same analogy and
kind of apply it to mitochondria with that electron
flow in the electron transport chain, where's
the pattern? Is that the pattern that we should
be looking? I'm not sure if anyone's looked into
this. And I think those are the types of things
that people kind of should reframe in terms of
dynamics. So we're not just measuring the number
of ATP that may get made. We're not just measuring
how many cytochrome oxidase or NADH gets made.
I think we should be looking at the dynamics
of these flows. And if once we know the dynamics,
then we can actually see that over time. Is that
information stagnant or is that information or
dynamics changing over time. So okay, more efficient
things going on with especially the mitochondrial
matrix. All of these things that are feeding
into the mitochondrial matrix, there's less bottlenecks.
Is that what you're kind of saying? I'm saying
is like, I want to know where that information
is. So if we're saying that the mitos are able
to They need to remember something. What is the
information that they're remembering? Is it the
electron flow? Is it the light that's being made?
Is it the turnover of cytochrome C or cytochrome
oxidase? What is that information? Confirm or
correct this, whenever I was saying it passes
on information, I meant subjective memory. Like
last time I was in this situation, and then all
of these cells will start firing and connecting.
Is that what you're saying? Like that is in regard
or that is created with what you explained? Yeah,
I think so. That's kind of, I mean, this is a
hypothesis. I think so. That would be wild. I
think when we start to reframe of like what information
is, then we can kind of see if it can be stored,
right? And maybe in people with mitochondrial
diseases or people who have dysfunctional mitochondria
or even dysfunctional cells, those cells maybe
don't seem to remember that information or process
that information the right way. And that's what
we're calling pathology, right? So that's kind
of like a new way of looking at this. So that's
upstream of... the subjective like valence or
whatever that we attach to things. Correct. Absolutely.
Way upstream. Yeah. Yeah. As maybe as far upstream
as you can go. I think so. That's what I mean.
Exactly. That's what I think modern medicine
is like kind of downstream. We're looking at
the genes, the molecules, the endpoint, where
with this new idea of like cognitive framing
of like memory and learning is a little bit more
upstream. And I think way more upstream to that
is looking at information. And we can look at
that in terms of energetic information. Where
is that information? What is it? Can it be stored?
And then that kind of brings the next question.
That information. can we learn from it? Can we
make decisions from it? And then those decisions
lead to us, okay, this is the proteins associated
with them. So they kind of there's like a little
story here. And I'd like modern medicine to move
all the way up. Yeah. When the photon hits matter,
energy to information. Oh, yeah. Absolutely.
And we're starting to see this actually in computation.
If we kind of shift gears a bit to computer science.
And we start to build all these AI bots, and
we're trying to make these computers more efficient.
Our brains are pretty efficient at 12 watts of
energy. We can hold as much as information as
we possibly can. But now we're seeing like an
optical biocomputation. We're seeing that the
light itself can carry information. I mean, we
know this already. Fiber optic cables that run
across the ocean for telecommunication. That's
information. And I'd like to see that be applied
to our body, that there are potential biomaterials
that can also carry the optical information and
our cells use it in a meaningful way, integrate
it and use it. It seems like it's very similar.
What's next for you? What's the next thing that
as far as how to find you and just I know you
mentioned about the things more recently you're
excited about, but how can people find your work
and look out for these next things? Yeah, so
we have a website where we kind of publish these
things, but so the marooganlab .com, I also have
an X account where I kind of try to be active
on there. In terms of what we're interested in,
the big picture is I want to know where these,
or how much information our bodies can kind of
carry, our cells can carry, and where that information
is. So I look at biology as basically overlapping
signals. You have electrical, you have genes,
you have this whole stack. of signals. And when
you collapse them altogether, that's communication
to me. And we have the first layer of stack of
the genes and molecules, we have that dynamics,
we get electrical activity, we're missing the
top half of like magnetism and light. And I want
to see how that plays altogether. And I think
once we have that, we have a really cool way
of understanding our health. And then when shit
hits the fan, what we call disease. So that's
what really excites me. That's what really drives
me right now. And I hope we can make some progress
in that area. Well, this is the way forward.
I'm glad you're one of the leaders in that. Because
this isn't going to mess, I don't think. Yeah,
yeah, I think there's a two things that need
to happen is the cognitive framework from our
colleagues who are able to kind of integrate
what we're saying into their work because you
know it's not going to happen with just one person
right so the fact that Michael Hamlin has been
talking about photobiomodulation for many years
and now it's being accepted Biophotons being
talked about for centuries now, now being accepted.
I think we need, as a community, to do better
on looking at the data and integrating it into
biology. And then number two is tech. We need
tech. If we're going to measure light from very
different types of people, we need the tech that's
sensitive enough to do that. So working with
engineers that can kind of have that language.
between engineering and biology and physics.
That's the way to go. Yeah. Back to the Fritz
Pop mentioned. Yeah. He wanted that, I think.
Well, I appreciate you joining me, and I hope
you have a wonderful day. Thanks, Ryan. I have
a question for you, if you don't mind. Yeah,
you guys go ahead. I typically like to ask this
mainly to help connect and help me to understand
how we can bring this work forward. What motivates
you? What motivated you to think about these
very different non -conventional topics? So I
have many autoimmune problems, and the centralized
medical paradigm wasn't doing anything for me.
And I thought, well, there's got to be something
else. It's missing something. And then in April
2023, I listened to a podcast with Rick Rubin,
Andrew Huberman, and Jack Cruz. And Jack Cruz
has kind of changed my life with, you know, his
quantum biology. And it's worked. It has absolutely
worked. Have you like implemented this into your
life? Yeah, yeah, yeah. Yeah. And can I ask in
what sense? Increasing sunlight, especially in
the morning. I don't miss morning sunlight. And
I get UV light. So I have vitiligo. And I used
to have really pale skin and used to just wear
sunscreen. I haven't had to wear sunscreen since
that summer of 2023, and I'm outside all summer.
I don't need it, though. And then I've implemented
grounding, and grounding's removed two autoimmune
problems, rheumatoid arthritis, which was kind
of not very severe, but it was there, and restless
leg syndrome, which is kind of just like, I think,
downstream or sequelae of the type 1 diabetes,
which is another autoimmune problem. But it cleared
those out in no time. And the Hashimoto's. Hashimoto's
is an autoimmune version of hypothyroidism. And
of course, about 15 years ago, I was prescribed
the botyroxine. And just over time, my doses
increased because that's the only option. And
I learned about tyrosine being the aromatic amino
acid. and those benzene rings being UV light
absorption, and with the pi electrons, I think
with the increased sunlight, it rescued my thyroid.
I no longer need those, and it's verified twice
by different labs at different times. My thyroid
levels are perfectly fine without the legal thyroxine,
so I no longer need that. Interesting. Yeah,
I mean, I asked this because, you know, a lot
of people make these changes once it starts affecting
people. And when it affects people, the doctors
are willing to listen. So, you know, kind of
getting your story out and sharing this and how
quantum bio and physical principles can affect
the human life. Like, people need to hear that.
And so thank you for this platform. Yeah. And
I'll just mention that a centralized doctor,
my eye doctor, went in for an OCT scan and I
was telling him about biophotons and he basically
laughed me out of the room. Yep, all too familiar
with that. All too familiar, yeah. But the data
doesn't lie. If you do your science, the data
is there and it is what it is. Centralized medicine
is a powerful fortress. Yeah, and we just have
to be consistent. Yeah, you're working to bring
that down, and I appreciate your comment earlier
about connecting the silos. I don't like silos.
Yeah. I mean, it's in between things where you
get information, literally. Yeah, the sharing
of information. More information talk. Yeah.
Thanks.