One of the four pillars of good conversation is levity. You needn’t be a comedian, you can but have some funTetra Images, LLC/Alamy Conversation lies at the heart of our relationships – yet many of us find it surprisingly hard to talk to others. We may feel anxious at the thought of making small talk with strangers and struggle to connect with the people who are closest to us. If that sounds familiar, Alison Wood Brooks hopes to help. She is a professor at Harvard Business School, where she teaches an oversubscribed course called “TALK: How to talk gooder in business and life”, and the author of a new book, Talk: The science of conversation and the art of being ourselves. Both offer four key principles for more meaningful exchanges. Conversations are inherently unpredictable, says Wood Brooks, but they follow certain rules – and knowing their architecture makes us more comfortable with what is outside of our control. New Scientist asked her about the best ways to apply this research to our own chats. David Robson: Talking about talking feels quite meta. Do you ever find yourself critiquing your own performance? Alison Wood Brooks: There are so many levels of “meta-ness”. I have often felt like I’m floating over the room, watching conversations unfold, even as I’m involved in them myself. I teach a course at Harvard, and [my students] all get to experience this feeling as well. There can be an uncomfortable period of hypervigilance, but I hope that dissipates over time as they develop better habits. There is a famous quote from Charlie Parker, who was a jazz saxophonist. He said something like, “Practise, practise, practise, and then when you get on stage, let it all go and just wail.” I think that’s my approach to conversation. Even when you’re hyper-aware of conversation dynamics, you have to remember the true delight of being with another human mind, and never lose the magic of being together. Think ahead, but once you’re talking, let it all go and just wail. Reading your book, I learned that a good way to enliven a conversation is to ask someone why they are passionate about what they do. So, where does your passion for conversation come from? I have two answers to this question. One is professional. Early in my professorship at Harvard, I had been studying emotions by exploring how people talk about their feelings and the balance between what we feel inside and how we express that to others. And I realised I just had this deep, profound interest in figuring out how people talk to each other about everything, not just their feelings. We now have scientific tools that allow us to capture conversations and analyse them at large scale. Natural language processing, machine learning, the advent of AI – all this allows us to take huge swathes of transcript data and process it much more efficiently. Receive a weekly dose of discovery in your inbox. Sign up to newsletter The personal answer is that I’m an identical twin, and I spent my whole life, from the moment I opened my newborn eyes, existing next to a person who’s an exact copy of myself. It was like observing myself at very close range, interacting with the world, interacting with other people. I could see when she said and did things well, and I could try to do that myself. And I saw when her jokes failed, or she stumbled over her words – I tried to avoid those mistakes. It was a very fortunate form of feedback that not a lot of people get. And then, as a twin, you’ve got this person sharing a bedroom, sharing all your clothes, going to all the same parties and playing on the same sports teams, so we were just constantly in conversation with each other. You reached this level of shared reality that is so incredible, and I’ve spent the rest of my life trying to help other people get there in their relationships, too. “TALK” cleverly captures your framework for better conversations: topics, asking, levity and kindness. Let’s start at the beginning. How should we decide what to talk about? My first piece of advice is to prepare. Some people do this naturally. They already think about the things that they should talk about with somebody before they see them. They should lean into this habit. Some of my students, however, think it’s crazy. They think preparation will make the conversation seem rigid and forced and overly scripted. But just because you’ve thought ahead about what you might talk about doesn’t mean you have to talk about those things once the conversation is underway. It does mean, however, that you always have an idea waiting for you when you’re not sure what to talk about next. Having just one topic in your back pocket can help you in those anxiety-ridden moments. It makes things more fluent, which is important for establishing a connection. Choosing a topic is not only important at the start of a conversation. We’re constantly making decisions about whether we should stay on one subject, drift to something else or totally shift gears and go somewhere wildly different. Sometimes the topic of conversation is obvious. Even then, knowing when to switch to a new one can be trickyMartin Parr/Magnum Photos What’s your advice when making these decisions? There are three very clear signs that suggest that it’s time to switch topics. The first is longer mutual pauses. The second is more uncomfortable laughter, which we use to fill the space that we would usually fill excitedly with good content. And the third sign is redundancy. Once you start repeating things that have already been said on the topic, it’s a sign that you should move to something else. After an average conversation, most people feel like they’ve covered the right number of topics. But if you ask people after conversations that didn’t go well, they’ll more often say that they didn’t talk about enough things, rather than that they talked about too many things. This suggests that a common mistake is lingering too long on a topic after you’ve squeezed all the juice out of it. The second element of TALK is asking questions. I think a lot of us have heard the advice to ask more questions, yet many people don’t apply it. Why do you think that is? Many years of research have shown that the human mind is remarkably egocentric. Often, we are so focused on our own perspective that we forget to even ask someone else to share what’s in their mind. Another reason is fear. You’re interested in the other person, and you know you should ask them questions, but you’re afraid of being too intrusive, or that you will reveal your own incompetence, because you feel you should know the answer already. What kinds of questions should we be asking – and avoiding? In the book, I talk about the power of follow-up questions that build on anything that your partner has just said. It shows that you heard them, that you care and that you want to know more. Even one follow-up question can springboard us away from shallow talk into something deeper and more meaningful. There are, however, some bad patterns of question asking, such as “boomerasking”. Michael Yeomans [at Imperial College London] and I have a recent paper about this, and oh my gosh, it’s been such fun to study. It’s a play on the word boomerang: it comes back to the person who threw it. If I ask you what you had for breakfast, and you tell me you had Special K and banana, and then I say, “Well, let me tell you about my breakfast, because, boy, was it delicious” – that’s boomerasking. Sometimes it’s a thinly veiled way of bragging or complaining, but sometimes I think people are genuinely interested to hear from their partner, but then the partner’s answer reminds them so much of their own life that they can’t help but start sharing their perspective. In our research, we have found that this makes your partner feel like you weren’t interested in their perspective, so it seems very insincere. Sharing your own perspective is important. It’s okay at some point to bring the conversation back to yourself. But don’t do it so soon that it makes your partner feel like you didn’t hear their answer or care about it. Research by Alison Wood Brooks includes a recent study on “boomerasking”, a pitfall you should avoid to make conversations flowJanelle Bruno What are the benefits of levity? When we think of conversations that haven’t gone well, we often think of moments of hostility, anger or disagreement, but a quiet killer of conversation is boredom. Levity is the antidote. These small moments of sparkle or fizz can pull us back in and make us feel engaged with each other again. Our research has shown that we give status and respect to people who make us feel good, so much so that in a group of people, a person who can land even one appropriate joke is more likely to be voted as the leader. And the joke doesn’t even need to be very funny! It’s the fact that they were confident enough to try it and competent enough to read the room. Do you have any practical steps that people can apply to generate levity, even if they’re not a natural comedian? Levity is not just about being funny. In fact, aiming to be a comedian is not the right goal. When we watch stand-up on Netflix, comedians have rehearsed those jokes and honed them and practised them for a long time, and they’re delivering them in a monologue to an audience. It’s a completely different task from a live conversation. In real dialogue, what everybody is looking for is to feel engaged, and that doesn’t require particularly funny jokes or elaborate stories. When you see opportunities to make it fun or lighten the mood, that’s what you need to grab. It can come through a change to a new, fresh topic, or calling back to things that you talked about earlier in the conversation or earlier in your relationship. These callbacks – which sometimes do refer to something funny – are such a nice way of showing that you’ve listened and remembered. A levity move could also involve giving sincere compliments to other people. When you think nice things, when you admire someone, make sure you say it out loud. This brings us to the last element of TALK: kindness. Why do we so often fail to be as kind as we would like? Wobbles in kindness often come back to our egocentrism. Research shows that we underestimate how much other people’s perspectives differ from our own, and we forget that we have the tools to ask other people directly in conversation for their perspective. Being a kinder conversationalist is about trying to focus on your partner’s perspective and then figuring what they need and helping them to get it. Finally, what is your number one tip for readers to have a better conversation the next time they speak to someone? Every conversation is surprisingly tricky and complex. When things don’t go perfectly, give yourself and others more grace. There will be trips and stumbles and then a little grace can go very, very far. Topics:

House of the Future | 1956 Photograph Exhibited at the 1956 Ideal Home Exhibition in London, the House of the Future by Alison and Peter Smithson is a visionary prototype that challenges conventions of domesticity. Set within the context of post-war Britain, a period marked by austerity and emerging optimism, the project explored the intersection of technology, material innovation, and evolving social dynamics. The Smithsons, already recognized for their theoretical rigor and critical stance toward mainstream modernism, sought to push the boundaries of domestic architecture. In the House of the Future, they offered not merely a dwelling but a speculative environment that engaged with the promise and anxieties of the atomic age. House of the Future Technical Information Architects: Alison and Peter Smithson Location: Ideal Home Exhibition, London, United Kingdom Client: Daily Mail Ideal Home Exhibition  Gross Area: 90 m2 | 970 Sq. Ft. Construction Year: 1956 Photographs: Canadian Centre for Architecture and Unknown Photographer The House of the Future should be a serious attempt to visualize the future of our daily living in the light of modern knowledge and available materials. – Alison and Peter Smithson 1 House of the Future Photographs 1956 Photograph © Klaas Vermaas | 1956 Photograph 1956 Photograph 1956 Photograph 1956 Photograph 1956 Photograph 1956 Photograph 1956 Photograph Design Intent and Spatial Organization At the heart of the House of the Future lies a radical rethinking of spatial organization. Departing from conventional room hierarchies, the design promotes an open, fluid environment. Walls dissolve into curved partitions and adjustable elements, allowing for flexible reinterpretation of domestic spaces. Sleeping, dining, and social areas are loosely demarcated, creating a dynamic continuity that anticipates the contemporary concept of adaptable, multi-functional living. Circulation is conceived as an experiential sequence rather than a rigid path. Visitors enter through an air-lock-like vestibule, an explicit nod to the futuristic theme, and are drawn into an environment that eschews right angles and conventional thresholds. The Smithsons’ emphasis on flexibility and continuous movement within the house reflects their belief that domestic architecture must accommodate the evolving rhythms of life. Materiality, Technology, and the Future Materiality in the House of the Future embodies the optimism of the era. Plastics and synthetic finishes dominate the interior, forming seamless surfaces that evoke a sense of sterility and futility. Often associated with industrial production, these materials signaled a departure from traditional domestic textures. The smooth, malleable surfaces of the house reinforce the Smithsons’ embrace of prefabrication and modularity. Technological integration is a key theme. The design includes built-in appliances and concealed mechanical systems, hinting at a utopian and disquieting automated lifestyle. Bathrooms, kitchens, and sleeping pods are incorporated as interchangeable modules, underscoring the house as a system rather than a static structure. In doing so, the Smithsons prefigured later discourses on the “smart home” and the seamless integration of technology into daily life. This material and technological strategy reflects a critical understanding of domestic labor and convenience. The house’s self-contained gadgets and synthetic surfaces suggest a future in which maintenance and domestic chores are minimized, freeing inhabitants to engage with broader cultural and social pursuits. Legacy and Influence The House of the Future’s influence resonates far beyond its exhibition. It prefigured the radical experimentation of groups like Archigram and the metabolist visions of the 1960s. Its modular approach and embrace of technology also foreshadowed the high-tech movement’s fascination with flexibility and systems thinking. While the project was ephemeral, a temporary installation at a trade fair, its theoretical provocations endure. It questioned how architecture could not only house but also anticipate and shape new living forms. Moreover, it crystallized the Smithsons’ ongoing interrogation of architecture’s social role, from their later brutalist housing schemes to urban design theories. In retrospect, the House of the Future is less of a resolved design proposal and more of an architectural manifesto. It embodies a critical tension: the optimism of technological progress and the need for architecture to respond to human adaptability and social evolution. As we confront contemporary challenges like climate crisis, digital living, and shifting social paradigms, the Smithsons’ speculative experiment remains an evocative reminder that the architecture of tomorrow must be as thoughtful and provocative as the House of the Future. House of the Future Plans Axonometric View | © Alison and Peter Smithson via CCA Floor Plan | © Alison and Peter Smithson, via CCA Floor Plan | © Alison and Peter Smithson, via CCA Section | © Alison and Peter Smithson, via CCA Section | © Alison and Peter Smithson, via CCA Section | © Alison and Peter Smithson, via CCA Section | © Alison and Peter Smithson, via CCA Section | © Alison and Peter Smithson, via CCA House of the Future Image Gallery About Alison and Peter Smithson Alison and Peter Smithson were British architects and influential thinkers who emerged in the mid-20th century, celebrated for their critical reimagining of modern architecture. Their work, including projects like the House of the Future, the Robin Hood Gardens housing complex, and the Upper Lawn Solar Pavilion, consistently challenged conventional notions of domesticity, urbanism, and materiality. Central to their practice was a belief in architecture’s capacity to shape social life, emphasizing adaptability, flexibility, and the dynamic interactions between buildings and their users. They were pivotal in bridging the gap between post-war modernism and the experimental architectural movements of the 1960s and 1970s. Credits and Additional Notes Banham, Reyner. Theory and Design in the First Machine Age. MIT Press, 1960. Forty, Adrian. Words and Buildings: A Vocabulary of Modern Architecture. Thames & Hudson, 2000. Smithson, Alison, and Peter Smithson. The Charged Void: Architecture. Monacelli Press, 2001. OASE Journal. “Houses of the Future: 1956 and Beyond.” OASE 75, 2007. Vidler, Anthony. Histories of the Immediate Present: Inventing Architectural Modernism. MIT Press, 2008. Canadian Centre for Architecture (CCA). “House of the Future.”

Let’s start with one unambiguous fact: More children are diagnosed with autism today than in the early 1990s. According to a sweeping 2000 analysis by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, a range of 2–7 per 1,000, or roughly 0.5 percent of US children, were diagnosed with autism in the 1990s. That figure has risen to 1 in 35 kids, or roughly 3 percent.The apparent rapid increase caught the attention of people like Robert F. Kennedy Jr., who assumed that something had to be changing in the environment to drive it. In 2005, Kennedy, a lawyer and environmental activist at the time, authored an infamous essay in Rolling Stone that primarily placed the blame for the increased prevalence of autism on vaccines. (The article was retracted in 2011 as more studies debunked the vaccine-autism connection.) More recently, he has theorized that a mysterious toxin introduced in the late 1980s must be responsible. Now, as the nation’s top health official leading the Department of Health and Human Services, Kennedy has declared autism an “epidemic.” And, in April, he launched a massive federal effort to find the culprit for the rise in autism rates, calling for researchers to examine a range of suspects: chemicals, molds, vaccines, and perhaps even ultrasounds given to pregnant mothers. “Genes don’t cause epidemics. You need an environmental toxin,” Kennedy said in April when announcing his department’s new autism research project. He argued that too much money had been put into genetic research — “a dead end,” in his words — and his project would be a correction to focus on environmental causes. “That’s where we’re going to find an answer.”But according to many autism scientists I spoke to for this story, Kennedy is looking in exactly the wrong place. Three takeaways from this storyExperts say the increase in US autism rates is mostly explained by the expanding definitions of the condition, as well as more awareness and more screening for it.Scientists have identified hundreds of genes that are associated with autism, building a convincing case that genetics are the most important driver of autism’s development — not, as Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. has argued, a single environmental toxin.Researchers fear Kennedy’s fixation on outside toxins could distract from genetic research that has facilitated the development of exciting new therapies that could help those with profound autism.Autism is a complex disorder with a range of manifestations that has long defied simple explanations, and it’s unlikely that we will ever identify a single “cause” of autism.But scientists have learned a lot in the past 50 years, including identifying some of the most important risk factors. They are not, as Kennedy suggests, out in our environment. They are written into our genetics. What appeared to be a massive increase in autism was actually a byproduct of better screening and more awareness. “The way the HHS secretary has been walking about his plans, his goals, he starts out with this basic assumption that nothing worthwhile has been done,” Helen Tager-Flusberg, a psychologist at Boston University who has worked with and studied children with autism for years, said. “Genes play a significant role. We know now that autism runs in families… There is no single underlying factor. Looking for that holy grail is not the best approach.”Doctors who treat children with autism often talk about how they wish they could provide easy answers to the families. The answers being uncovered through genetics research may not be simple per se, but they are answers supported by science.Kennedy is muddying the story, pledging to find a silver-bullet answer where likely none exists. It’s a false promise — one that could cause more anxiety and confusion for the very families Kennedy says he wants to help. Robert F. Kennedy Jr. speaks during a news conference at the Department of Health and Human Services in mid-April to discuss this agency’s efforts to determine the cause of autism. Alex Wong/Getty ImagesThe autism “epidemic” that wasn’tAutism was first described in 1911, and for many decades, researchers and clinicians confused the social challenges and language development difficulties common among those with the condition for a psychological issue. Some child therapists even blamed the condition on bad parenting. But in 1977, a study discovered that identical twins, who share all of their DNA, were much more likely to both be autistic than fraternal twins, who share no more DNA than ordinary siblings. It marked a major breakthrough in autism research, and pushed scientists to begin coalescing around a different theory: There was a biological factor.At the time, this was just a theory — scientists lacked the technology to prove those suspicions at the genetic level. And clinicians were also still trying to work out an even more fundamental question: What exactly was autism? For a long time, the criteria for diagnosing a person with autism was strictly based on speech development. But clinicians were increasingly observing children who could acquire basic language skills but still struggled with social communication — things like misunderstanding nonverbal cues or taking figurative language literally. Psychologists gradually broadened their definition of autism from a strict and narrow focus on language, culminating in a 2013 criteria that included a wide range of social and emotional symptoms with three subtypes — the autism spectrum disorder we’re familiar with today.Along the way, autism had evolved from a niche diagnosis for the severely impaired to something that encompassed far more children. It makes sense then, that as the broad criteria for autism expanded, more and more children would meet it, and autism rates would rise. That’s precisely what happened. And it means that the “epidemic” that Kennedy and other activists have been fixated on is mostly a diagnostic mirage. Historical autism data is spotty and subject to these same historical biases, but if you look at the prevalence of profound autism alone — those who need the highest levels of support — a clearer picture emerges. (There is an ongoing debate in the autism community about whether to use the terminology of “profound autism” or “high support needs” for those who have the most severe form of the condition.) In the ’80s and ’90s, low-support needs individuals would have been less likely to receive an autism diagnosis given the more restrictive criteria and less overall awareness of the disorder, meaning that people with severe autism likely represented most of the roughly 0.5 percent of children diagnosed with autism in the 1990s. (One large analysis from Atlanta examining data from 1996 found that 68 percent of kids ages 3 to 10 diagnosed with autism had an IQ below 70, the typical cutoff for intellectual disability.)By 2025, when about 3 percent of children are being diagnosed with autism, about one in four of those diagnosed are considered to have high-support needs autism, those with most severe manifestation of the condition. That would equal about 0.8 percent of all US children — which would be a fairly marginal increase from autism rates 30 years ago. Or look at it another way: In 2000, as many as 60 percent of the people being diagnosed with autism had an intellectual disability, one of the best indicators of high-support needs autism. In 2022, that percentage was less than 40 percent.As a recently published CDC report on autism prevalence among young children concluded, the increase in autism rates can largely be accounted for by stronger surveillance and more awareness among providers and parents, rather than a novel toxin or some other external factor driving an increase in cases.Other known risk factors — like more people now having babies later in their life, given that parental age is linked to a higher likelihood of autism — are more likely to be a factor than anything Kennedy is pointing at, experts say. “It’s very clear it’s not going to be one environmental toxin,” said Alison Singer, founder of the Autism Science Foundation and parent of a child with profound autism. “If there were a smoking gun, I think they would have found it.”While Kennedy has fixated on vaccines and environmental influences, scientists have gained more precision in mapping human genetics and identifying the biological mechanisms that appear to be a primary cause of autism. And that not only helps us understand why autism develops, but potentially puts long-elusive therapies within reach. It began with an accident in the 1990s. Steven Scherer, now director of the Center for Applied Genomics at the Hospital for Sick Children in Toronto, began his career in the late 1980s trying to identify the gene that caused cystic fibrosis — in collaboration with Francis Collins, who went on to lead the Human Genome Project that successfully sequenced all of the DNA in the human genome in the early 2000s. Scherer and Collins’s teams focused on chromosome 7, identified as a likely target by the primitive genetic research available at the time, a coincidence that would reorient Scherer’s career just a few years later, putting him on the trail of autism’s genetic roots.After four years, the researchers concluded that one gene within chromosome 7 caused cystic fibrosis. Soon after Scherer helped crack the code on cystic fibrosis in the mid-1990s, two parents from California called him: He was the world’s leading expert on chromosome 7, and recent tests had revealed that their children with autism had a problem within that particular chromosome.That very same week, Scherer says, he read the findings of a study by a group at Oxford University, which had looked at the chromosomes of families with two or more kids with autism. They, too, had identified problems within chromosome 7.“So I said, ‘Okay, we’re going to work on autism,’” Scherer told me. He helped coordinate a global research project, uniting his Canadian lab with the Oxford team and groups in the US to run a database that became the Autism Genome Project, still the world’s largest repository of genetic information of people with autism.They had a starting point — one chromosome — but a given chromosome contains hundreds of genes. And humans have, of course, 45 other chromosomes, any of which conceivably might play a role. So over the years, they collected DNA samples from thousands upon thousands of people with autism, sequenced their genes, and then searched for patterns. If the same gene is mutated or missing across a high percentage of autistic people, it goes on the list as potentially associated with the condition. Scientists discovered that autism has not one genetic factor, but many — further evidence that this is a condition of complex origin, in which multiple variables likely play a role in its development, rather than one caused by a single genetic error like sickle-cell anemia.Here is one way to think about how far we have come: Joseph Buxbaum, the director of the Seaver Autism Center for Research and Treatment at the Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai in New York, entered autism genetics research 35 years ago. He recalls scientists being hopeful that they might identify a half dozen or so genes linked to autism.They have now found 500 genes — and Buxbaum told me he believed they might find a thousand before they are through. These genetic factors continue to prove their value in predicting the onset of autism: Scherer pointed to one recent study in which the researchers identified people who all shared a mutation in the SHANK3 gene, one of the first to be associated with autism, but who were otherwise unalike: They were not related and came from different demographic backgrounds. Nevertheless, they had all been diagnosed with autism.Researchers analyze the brain activity of a 14-year-old boy with autism as part of a University of California San Francisco study that involves intensive brain imaging of kids and their parents who have a rare chromosome disruption connected to autism. The study, the Simons Variation in Individuals Project, is a genetics-first approach to studying autism spectrum and related neurodevelopmental disorders. Michael Macor/San Francisco Chronicle via The Associated PressPrecisely how much genetics contributes to the development of autism remains the subject of ongoing study. By analyzing millions of children with autism and their parents for patterns in diagnoses, multiple studies have attributed about 80 percent of a person’s risk of developing autism to their inherited genetic factors. But of course 80 percent is not 100 percent. We don’t yet have the full picture of how or why autism develops. Among identical twins, for example, studies have found that in most cases, if one twin has high-support needs autism, the other does as well, affirming the genetic effect. But there are consistently a small minority of cases — 5 and 10 percent of twin pairs, Scherer told me — in which one twin has relatively low-support needs while the one requires a a high degree of support for their autism.Kennedy is not wholly incorrect to look at environmental factors — researchers theorize that autism may be the result of a complex interaction between a person’s genetics and something they experience in utero. Scientists in autism research are exploring the possible influence when, for example, a person’s mother develops maternal diabetes, high blood sugar that persists throughout pregnancy. And yet even if these other factors do play some role, the researchers I spoke to agree that genetics is, based on what we know now, far and away the most important driver.“We need to figure out how other types of genetics and also environmental factors affect autism’s development,” Scherer said. “There could be environmental changes…involved in some people, but it’s going to be based on their genetics and the pathways that lead them to be susceptible.”While the precise contours of Health Department’s new autism research project is still taking shape, Kennedy has that researchers at the National Institutes of Health will collect data from federal programs such as Medicare and Medicaid and somehow use that information to identify possible environmental exposures that lead to autism. He initially pledged results by September, a timeline that, as outside experts pointed out, may be too fast to allow for a thorough and thoughtful review of the research literature. Kennedy has since backed off on that deadline, promising some initial findings in the fall but with more to come next year.RFK Jr.’s autism commission research risks the accessibility of groundbreaking autism treatmentsIf Kennedy were serious about moving autism science forward, he would be talking more about genetics, not dismissing them. That’s because genetics is where all of the exciting drug development is currently happening.A biotech firm called Jaguar Gene Therapy has received FDA approval to conduct the first clinical trial of a gene therapy for autism, focused on SHANK3. The treatment, developed in part by one of Buxbaum’s colleagues, is a one-time injection that would replace a mutated or missing SHANK3 gene with a functional one. The hope is that the therapy would improve speech and other symptoms among people with high-needs autism who have also been diagnosed with a rare chromosomal deletion disorder called Phelan-McDermid syndrome; many people with this condition also have Autism spectrum disorder.The trial will begin this year with a few infant patients, 2 years old and younger, who have been diagnosed with autism. Jaguar eventually aims to test the therapy on adults over 18 with autism in the future. Patients are supposed to start enrolling this year in the trial, which is focused on first establishing the treatment’s safety; if it proves safe, another round of trials would start to rigorously evaluate its effectiveness.“This is the stuff that three or four years ago sounded like science fiction,” Singer said. “The conversation has really changed from Is this possible? to What are the best methods to do it? And that’s based on genetics.”Researchers at Mount Sinai have also experimented with delivering lithium to patients and seeing if it improves their SHANK3 function. Other gene therapies targeting other genes are in earlier stages of development. Some investigators are experimenting with CRISPR technology, the revolutionary new platform for gene editing, to target the problematic genes that correspond to the onset of autism.But these scientists fear that their work could be slowed by Kennedy’s insistence on hunting for environmental toxins, if federal dollars are instead shifted into his new project. They are already trying to subsist amid deep budget cuts across the many funding streams that support the institutions where they work. “Now we have this massive disruption where instead of doing really key experiments, people are worrying about paying their bills and laying off their staff and things,” Scherer said. “It’s horrible.” For the families of people with high-needs autism, Kennedy’s crusade has stirred conflicting emotions. Alison Singer, the leader of the Autism Science Foundation, is also the parent of a child with profound autism. When I spoke with her, I was struck by the bind that Kennedy’s rhetoric has put people like her and her family in. Singer told me profound autism has not received enough federal support in the past, as more emphasis was placed on individuals who have low support needs included in the expanding definitions of the disorder, and so she appreciates Kennedy giving voice to those families. She believes that he is sincerely empathetic toward their predicament and their feeling that the mainstream discussion about autism has for too long ignored their experiences in favor of patients with lower support needs. But she worries that his obsession with environmental factors will stymie the research that could yield breakthroughs for people like her child.“He feels for those families and genuinely wants to help them,” Singer said. “The problem is he is a data denier. You can’t be so entrenched in your beliefs that you can’t see the data right in front of you. That’s not science.”See More:

Memorial Day Sunday 200 mph for 500 miles: How IndyCar drivers prepare for the big race Andretti Global's Kyle Kirkwood and Marcus Ericsson talk to us about the Indy 500. Jonathan M. Gitlin – May 24, 2025 11:30 am | 8 #28, Marcus Ericsson, Andretti Global Honda prior to the NTT IndyCar Series 109th Running of the Indianapolis 500 at Indianapolis Motor Speedway on May 15, 2025 in Indianapolis, Indiana. Credit: Brandon Badraoui/Lumen via Getty Images #28, Marcus Ericsson, Andretti Global Honda prior to the NTT IndyCar Series 109th Running of the Indianapolis 500 at Indianapolis Motor Speedway on May 15, 2025 in Indianapolis, Indiana. Credit: Brandon Badraoui/Lumen via Getty Images Story text Size Small Standard Large Width * Standard Wide Links Standard Orange * Subscribers only   Learn more This coming weekend is a special one for most motorsport fans. There are Formula 1 races in Monaco and NASCAR races in Charlotte. And arguably towering over them both is the Indianapolis 500, being held this year for the 109th time. America's oldest race is also one of its toughest: The track may have just four turns, but the cars negotiate them going three times faster than you drive on the highway, inches from the wall. For hours. At least at Le Mans, you have more than one driver per car. This year's race promises to be an exciting one. The track is sold out for the first time since the centenary race in 2016. A rookie driver and a team new to the series took pole position. Two very fast cars are starting at the back thanks to another conflict-of-interest scandal involving Team Penske, the second in two years for a team whose owner also owns the track and the series. And the cars are trickier to drive than they have been for many years, thanks to a new supercapacitor-based hybrid system that has added more than 100 lbs to the rear of the car, shifting the weight distribution further back. Ahead of Sunday's race, I spoke with a couple of IndyCar drivers and some engineers to get a better sense of how they prepare and what to expect. This year, the cars are harder to drive thanks to a hybrid system that has altered the weight balance. Credit: Geoff MIller/Lumen via Getty Images Concentrate It all comes "from months of preparation," said Marcus Ericsson, winner of the race in 2022 and one of Andretti Global's drivers in this year's event. "When we get here to the month of May, it's just such a busy month. So you've got to be prepared mentally—and basically before you get to the month of May because if you start doing it now, it's too late," he told me. The drivers spend all month at the track, with a race on the road course earlier this month. Then there's testing on the historic oval, followed by qualifying last weekend and the race this coming Sunday. "So all those hours you put in in the winter, really, and leading up here to the month of May—it's what pays off now," Ericsson said. That work involved multiple sessions of physical training each week, and Ericsson says he also does weekly mental coaching sessions. "This is a mental challenge," Ericsson told me. "Doing those speeds with our cars, you can't really afford to have a split second of loss of concentration because then you might be in the wall and your day is over and you might hurt yourself." When drivers get tired or their focus slips, that's when mistakes happen, and a mistake at Indy often has consequences. Ericsson is sponsored by the antihistamine Allegra and its anti-drowsy-driving campaign. Fans can scan the QR codes on the back of his pit crew's shirts for a "gamified experience." Credit: Andretti Global/Allegra Simulate Being mentally and physically prepared is part of it. It also helps if you can roll the race car off the transporter and onto the track with a setup that works rather than spending the month chasing the right combination of dampers, springs, wing angles, and so on. And these days, that means a lot of simulation testing. The multi-axis driver in the loop simulators might look like just a very expensive video game, but these multimillion-dollar setups aren't about having fun. "Everything that you are feeling or changing in the sim is ultimately going to reflect directly to what happens on track," explained Kyle Kirkwood, teammate to Ericsson at Andretti Global and one of only two drivers to have won an Indycar race in 2025. Andretti, like the other teams using Honda engines, uses the new HRC simulator in Indiana. "And yes, it's a very expensive asset, but it's also likely cheaper than going to the track and doing the real thing," Kirkwood said. "And it's a much more controlled environment than being at the track because temperature changes or track conditions or wind direction play a huge factor with our car." A high degree of correlation between the simulation and the track is what makes it a powerful tool. "We run through a sim, and you only get so many opportunities, especially at a place like Indianapolis, where you go from one day to the next and the temperature swings, or the wind conditions, or whatever might change drastically," Kirkwood said. "You have to be able to sim it and be confident with the sim that you're running to go out there and have a similar balance or a similar performance." Andretti Global's Kyle Kirkwood is the only driver other than Álex Palou to have won an IndyCar race in 2025. Credit: Alison Arena/Andretti Global "So you have to make adjustments, whether it's a spring rate, whether it's keel ballast or just overall, maybe center of pressure, something like that," Kirkwood said. "You have to be able to adjust to it. And that's where the sim tool comes in play. You move the weight balance back, and you're like, OK, now what happens with the balance? How do I tune that back in? And you run that all through the sim, and for us, it's been mirror-perfect going to the track when we do that." More impressively, a lot of that work was done months ago. "I would say most of it, we got through it before the start of this season," Kirkwood said. "Once we get into the season, we only get a select few days because every Honda team has to run on the same simulator. Of course, it's different with the engineering sim; those are running nonstop." Sims are for engineers, too An IndyCar team is more than just its drivers—"the spacer between the seat and the wheel," according to Kirkwood—and the engineers rely heavily on sim work now that real-world testing is so highly restricted. And they use a lot more than just driver-in-the-loop (DiL). "Digital simulation probably goes to a higher level," explained Scott Graves, engineering manager at Andretti Global. "A lot of the models we develop work in the DiL as well as our other digital tools. We try to develop universal models, whether that's tire models, engine models, or transmission models." "Once you get into to a fully digital model, then I think your optimization process starts kicking in," Graves said. "You're not just changing the setting and running a pretend lap with a driver holding a wheel. You're able to run through numerous settings and optimization routines and step through a massive number of permutations on a car. Obviously, you're looking for better lap times, but you're also looking for fuel efficiency and a lot of other parameters that go into crossing the finish line first." Parts like this anti-roll bar are simulated thousands of times. Credit: Siemens/Andretti Global As an example, Graves points to the dampers. "The shock absorber is a perfect example where that's a highly sophisticated piece of equipment on the car and it's very open for team development. So our cars have fully customized designs there that are optimized for how we run the car, and they may not be good on another team's car because we're so honed in on what we're doing with the car," he said. "The more accurate a digital twin is, the more we are able to use that digital twin to predict the performance of the car," said David Taylor, VP of industry strategy at Siemens DISW, which has partnered with Andretti for some years now. "It will never be as complete and accurate as we want it to be. So it's a continuous pursuit, and we keep adding technology to our portfolio and acquiring companies to try to provide more and more tools to people like Scott so they can more accurately predict that performance." What to expect on Sunday? Kirkwood was bullish about his chances despite starting relatively deep in the field, qualifying in 23rd place. "We've been phenomenal in race trim and qualifying," he said. "We had a bit of a head-scratcher if I'm being honest—I thought we would definitely be a top-six contender, if not a front row contender, and it just didn't pan out that way on Saturday qualifying." "But we rolled back out on Monday—the car was phenomenal. Once again, we feel very, very racy in traffic, which is a completely different animal than running qualifying," Kirkwood said. "So I'm happy with it. I think our chances are good. We're starting deep in the field, but so are a lot of other drivers. So you can expect a handful of us to move forward." The more nervous hybrid IndyCars with their more rearward weight bias will probably result in more cautions, according to Ericsson, who will line up sixth for the start of the race on Sunday. "Whereas in previous years you could have a bit of a moment and it would scare you, you usually get away with it," he said. "This year, if you have a moment, it usually ends up with you being in the fence. I think that's why we've seen so many crashes this year—because a pendulum effect from the rear of the car that when you start losing it, this is very, very difficult or almost impossible to catch." "I think it's going to mean that the race is going to be quite a few incidents with people making mistakes," Ericsson said. "In practice, if your car is not behaving well, you bring it to the pit lane, right? You can do adjustments, whereas in the race, you have to just tough it out until the next pit stop and then make some small adjustments. So if you have a bad car at the start a race, it's going to be a tough one. So I think it's going to be a very dramatic and entertaining race." Jonathan M. Gitlin Automotive Editor Jonathan M. Gitlin Automotive Editor Jonathan is the Automotive Editor at Ars Technica. He has a BSc and PhD in Pharmacology. In 2014 he decided to indulge his lifelong passion for the car by leaving the National Human Genome Research Institute and launching Ars Technica's automotive coverage. He lives in Washington, DC. 8 Comments

You lied.I once interviewed someone who completely falsified their skillset. I asked them to do a drawing test, and it turned out that they didn’t have the skills they purported to have. You can only fake it for so long. Never pretend you’re someone you ’re not. —Jeff DeGraw, DeGraw and DeHaan ArchitectsAnd During the ChatYou’re too detail-oriented.The biggest mistake I’ve witnessed repeatedly: candidates who spend way too much time walking us through every tiny detail of their portfolios. It feels like it goes on forever. —Lauren Buxbaum Gordon, Nate Berkus AssociatesYou didn’t ask questions.At the end of every interview I ask candidates if they have any questions and appreciate when someone has insightful ones, not just what time they can take lunch. —Elizabeth Lawrence, Williams LawrenceYou forgot the basic rules of human interaction.Eye contact is essential. I always prefer someone who appears calm and confident. —Alex Papachristidis, Alex Papachristidis InteriorsHow to Create a Portfolio When You’re Just Starting OutFresh out of design school? In the middle of a career change? We quiz industry insiders on how to best present yourselfI pay attention to the small stuff—it tends to amplify on a day-to-day level. It could be a handshake or a perfume [choice]. I don’t want to say that it breaks getting a job in my office, but it [could be] a signifier for compatibility—and if we are compatible, chances are we are going to work well together. —Miles Redd, Redd KaihoiYou missed the memo.There is always a technical aptitude I am looking for a candidate to possess, but beyond that, and perhaps even more importantly, I very much pay attention to communication skills and a candidate’s ability to quickly think on his/her feet. A large part of what we do as designers is problem-solve, so I really want to understand a candidate’s agility. —Maureen Ursino, Ursino InteriorsYou’re just copycatting.We look for individuality that will become a great addition to our team. We receive so many inquiries where the prospective hire says they want to “be me.” Although flattering, it’s uninspiring. —Alison Rose, Alison Rose New YorkYou kept yourself under wraps.I get really excited when a portfolio has photos of the person’s own home or something they had helped work on for a friend or family member. It doesn’t have to be completely finished or professional photos. It’s a nice insight into what they are doing and thinking about for themselves. As a result, you usually learn a lot about them, and sometimes it is just the thing that puts that person ahead of others. —Elizabeth Lawrence, Williams LawrenceEverything You Need to Know About Interior Design Jobs and Their SalariesLooking to start or advance your interior design career? Here’s your guide to the interior design jobs to look out for—and what they payYou’re not a team player.We look for a certain kind of character in candidates that fits with the distinctive spirit of our studio. Exhibiting basic skills and clear communication are, of course, essential; however, of even greater value is finding talent innately capable of positive contribution to Yabu Pushelberg’s culture of working collaboratively within and between teams, fostering an environment of both learning and teaching. —George Yabu and Glenn Pushelberg, Yabu PushelbergYour focus is too narrow.It’s important for a candidate to be dedicated to design, even obsessed with it. I am impressed when candidates have clearly researched historical furniture designers and have a sense of the various design periods. I want my team to be functional and successful with a project regardless of what style a client desires. —Margaret Naeve Parker, M.NaeveYou didn’t sell yourself.I once interviewed a candidate whose portfolio wasn’t the strongest—the work samples they provided weren’t what we were used to seeing. On paper, they might not have stood out, but as soon as the interview began, their personality took center stage. They were engaging and warm, with a genuine enthusiasm for the role. They didn’t try to overcompensate for their portfolio; instead, they openly acknowledged where they were in their career and shared stories about their journey. We decided to give them a chance, and they ended up exceeding expectations, quickly growing into a strong contributor who brought a fresh perspective and energy to our culture. —Caroll Conway, Hoerr SchaudtAPPLY NOWGrow your business with the AD PRO DirectoryArrow

"We use a lot of what I call ‘muddy colors,’ ” Alison Giese says of her namesake design firm’s signature palette. To establish a tailored but cozy interior scheme for a young family’s newly constructed ranch-style residence in San Antonio, Giese once more relied on “color that’s not colorful.” The way she sees it, “If it’s blues and pinks and greens that have a lot of brown in them, they become more of a neutral.” FAST FACTSAlison Giese, of Designer: Alison Giese InteriorsLocation:The Space: Four bedroom, three-and-a-half bathroom houseWe just lavished it with color. If it’s fun and feels collected, then let’s go for it. GREAT ROOMA multi-functional space that lives large—and feels cozy. Yanglin CaiSectional: Vanguard, in Kravet fabric. Armchairs: Lee Industries, in Lake August fabric. Lounge chair: Design Within Reach. Rug: Dash & Albert by Annie Selke.The four-bedroom, three-and-a-half-bathroom house is laid out in a “boomerang shape,” Giese says, and is poised to be the family’s “legacy home,” a place to be enjoyed by many generations. Giese, working with Smithdish Architecture, filled the 5,000-square-foot interior with natural materials, botanical patterns, and personal touches.In the great room, eight-foot-long pendants from The Urban Electric Co. bring the vaulted ceiling down to “human height,” Giese says.LIBRARYDeep teal paint fuels the moody setting.Yanglin Cai Paint: Salamander, Benjamin Moore. Lamp: Currey & Company. Sconce: Visual Comfort & Co. Chair: clients’ own.In place of a home office, the family requested a library complete with a Putnam rolling ladder.KITCHENThe fresh cookspace isn't all it seems. Yanglin CaiPendants: The Urban Electric Co. Counter stools (with backs): Summer Studio. Cabinetry paint: Natural Choice, Sherwin-WilliamsThe most unassuming room is the open-concept kitchen with “a melody of colors and finishes,” Giese says. “At first glance, it may appear to be a white kitchen, but it is anything but! We have three paint colors and one stain in the cabinetry mix. We just kept all the color on the bottom half of the sight line.”Yanglin CaiThe 12-foot-long island boasts a custom brass footrail reminiscent of a restaurant bar.BREAKFAST NOOKCafé curtains level up the coziness.Yanglin CaiPendant: RTO Lighting. Banquette fabrics: Schumacher (back) and Nassimi (vinyl seat). Banquette paint: Mulberry Silk by Sherwin-Williams. Drapery fabric: Anna FrenchThe heirloom table on casters rolls out so people can easily slip in and out of the custom banquette. The family's livestock brand, E7, is engraved on the base of the banquette.LIVING ROOMA cozy hangout in a separate house on the grounds.Yanglin CaiPaint: Alabaster, Sherwin-Williams (wall); Mizzle, Farrow & Ball (trim). Shade: Custom, in Namay Samay fabric. Rug: Serena & Lily.The homeowners filled what they call “the garden cottage” with secondhand finds.GUEST BEDROOMA private retreat that boasts all the charm of a boutique inn.Yanglin CaiYanglin CaiInside the garden cottage, visitors can unwind in a cheery oasis wrapped in a meadow-inspired Morris & Co. wallpaper. An antique chair found at an estate sale and a floating desk turn a niche into a cozy workstation. Paint: Sudbury Yellow, Farrow & Ball. Bed: Serena & Lily. Table: vintage, Uncommon Objects. Rug: Pottery Barn. Art: clients’ own. Quilt: GreenRow.PRIMARY BEDROOMEarthy shades provide a serene place to unwind.Yanglin CaiBed: Woodbridge Furniture, in Schumacher fabric. Lamp: clients’ own. Chaise longue: Lee Industries, in Jasper Textiles fabric.To evoke the feel of a luxe hotel, Giese relied on a soothing palette with subtle pops of print. “We chose warm colors and a balance of masculine and feminine patterns,” she adds.DAUGHTER'S ROOMThe cottagecore style is playful yet elevated.Yanglin CaiYanglin CaiWhile the effect is subtle but stunning, bold colors shine in pockets of the house. In Giese’s favorite space, the daughter’s room, a floral Liberty of London wallpaper was the jumping-off point to cottagecore style. “We went all in on layering pattern and color,” Giese says, including covering the custom millwork in Dix Blue paint by Farrow & Ball. Beds: Bramble. Quilts: Etsy. Sheets and table lamp: Pottery Barn Kids. Carpet: Prestige Mills.PRIMARY BATHROOMThe epitome of quiet luxury. Yanglin CaiMirrors: RH. Sconces: Arel Lighting. Faucets: Rohl. Hardware: Classic Brass. Rug: Vintage.Textural cement tiles from Arto offer a nonslip surface, while an Arrabescato Corchia marble countertop adds a sleek touch and stunning focal point.LAUNDRYA charming place to check-off daily to-dos. Yanglin CaiPaint: Blustery Sky, Sherwin-Williams. Faucet: Moen. Roman shade: Custom, in Virginia Kraft Textiles fabric.“This quartzite is one of the prettiest I’ve seen,” Giese says of the Brilliant Grey stone countertops in the ultra-functional laundry room. MUDROOMWhere there's a place for everything.Yanglin CaiFlooring: Limestone, Material Bespoke Stone + Tile. Mirror: Schwung. Hooks: Clients’ own.In this corridor-style space, custom cubbies were designed to fit around the vintage chest. COAT VESTIBULEWarm wood envelopes the multifunctional space. Yanglin CaiBench fabric: Schumacher. Pillow and throw: Thompson + Hanson. Hooks: Etsy. Sconce: Huey Lightshop.This stow-away zone doubles as a privacy buffer between the foyer and adjoining powder room.FOYERIt's all in the textures.Yanglin CaiTable: Arhaus. Mirror: Arteriors. Lamp: Currey & Company. Rug: Passerine. Vessels: African gourd baskets, Alison Giese InteriorsA floor-to-ceiling limestone wall, which doubles as the backside of a fireplace, brings texture and warmth to the entry.EXTERIOR The grounds are vast.Yanglin CaiDespite its location just minutes from the airport, the property feels tucked away into the countryside, thanks in large part to the surrounding landscape, where the owners combined their several-acre property with an adjacent lot. With a one-bedroom guest cottage, greenhouse, barn, and “zen zone” with a cold plunge pool on the grounds, the home is both a family estate and an escape from the stresses of life outside its doors.About the DesignerAlison Giese founded the San Antonio–based design firm Alison Giese Interiors under the belief that "every room should have character and interest over perfection." Inspired by her travels and experiences, Giese loves to blend her clients’ existing treasures with carefully selected pieces to create harmony between old and new. AGI takes on projects from coast to coast, working closely with clients to develop interiors that reflect their story. SHOP THE SPACEWebster Bed$2,698 at Serena and LilyMeadow Sweet Wallpaper$312 at wmorrisandco.comNord Counter Stool$1,028 at summerstudiodesign.comSalamander Paint$6 at Benjamin Moore

How the Grand Ole Opry Put Uniquely American Music at Center Stage Through daring business decisions and an eye for talent, the vaunted country radio program still stands as a tastemaker for the fastest-growing genre in popular music Lindsay Kusiak June 2025 The Grand Ole Opry’s famous six-foot circle of wood was carefully carved from the previous stage at the Ryman Auditorium. The Grand Ole Opry On December 10, 1927, radio host George D. Hay announced the end of an hourlong opera program on Nashville’s WSM radio. Next up was the much more down-home Barn Dance. “For the past hour, we have been listening to the music taken largely from the Grand Opera,” Hay ad-libbed, “but from now on we will present the Grand Ole Opry.” It was an inadvertent and fateful christening for what would become a cultural institution and eventually the longest-running radio program in the country, introducing tens of millions of listeners to a distinctly American-born genre of music. As Hay playfully commented, the Opry offered a stark contrast to other highbrow programs populating the airwaves, swapping symphonies and arias for jaunty renditions of old Anglo-Celtic, European and African-American ballads played on the fiddle, banjo and guitar. It was hoedown music, or, as Hay lovingly called it, “hillbilly music,” and with a radio boom well underway, Hay had chosen an exceptionally propitious time to share it. Commercial radio fever swept the nation beginning in 1920, with more than 600 new stations emerging by the time the Opry premiered. But it was not the only barn dance on air, and Hay sought a way to make the show unique. He was known for his theatrical on-air persona, a mordant prude called “the Solemn Old Judge,” and he encouraged each new Opry band to adopt a comical homespun identity that would charm working-class listeners. In the process, he transformed bands like Dr. Humphrey Bate’s Augmented String Orchestra into the overall-clad Possum Hunters, and other groups into old-timey miners or clumsy farmhands. As the Great Depression began, Hay’s salt-of-the-earth approach charmed the audience, while WSM made several ingenious business decisions that shaped popular music forever. First, WSM did the unthinkable amid a hemorrhaging economy, investing a quarter of a million dollars—$5.8 million today—to build a new radio tower. It was the tallest in the country and one of only three 50,000-watt clear-channel towers in the United States. It allowed WSM’s broadcast to reach the whole nation. To bolster musicians, whose record sales were plummeting (down from $100 million in 1927 to a meager $6 million in 1932), WSM began sending bands on regional tours during the week, creating one of the country’s first talent agencies, the Artists Service Bureau. Soon, Opry stars were performing for as many as 12,000 people a day at schools or picnics Sunday through Friday, before hustling back to the Opry for their Saturday night radio gig.  In 1939, the Grand Ole Opry joined NBC’s radio network, transmitting the show to 125 stations. It wasn’t long before the Opry’s successes gained a big-time sponsor, R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company, maker of Camel cigarettes, which sponsored a USO-style tour starring several Opry stars. Called the Grand Ole Opry Camel Caravan, the troupe appeared exclusively for military members at bases throughout the U.S. and Central America during the summer of 1941, charming soldiers with toe-tapping hillbilly music and comedy from Minnie Pearl. A few months later, following Japan’s attack on Pearl Harbor, millions of those same soldiers were now crooning the Opry’s songs on troopships and in overseas barracks as they deployed in World War II.  Dolly Parton, a member of the Grand Ole Opry for 56 years, first performed on its legendary stage at age 10. Courtesy of Grand Ole Opry Archives The show’s new popularity among soldiers spurred the Armed Forces Radio Service (AFRS) to add the Grand Ole Opry to its overseas broadcast in 1943, transmitting the Opry’s weekly show to 306 outlets in 47 countries. By 1945, an AFRS station in Munich reported that Opry superstar Roy Acuff was more popular among its listeners than Frank Sinatra. The show even triumphed in the Pacific Theater, where famed war correspondent Ernie Pyle reported that during the Battle of Okinawa, Japanese troops were chanting, “To hell with Roosevelt, to hell with Babe Ruth, and to hell with Roy Acuff!”  In 1943, the Opry moved into the Ryman Auditorium, the city’s largest venue at the time. And still, the Saturday night showcase—featuring up-and-coming stars like Hank Williams and, later, Patsy Cline, Willie Nelson and Loretta Lynn—sold out each week. It wasn’t until 1974 that the Opry finally moved into its current home, the 4,440-seat Grand Ole Opry House.  Today, the Grand Ole Opry has spent nearly 100 years as a country tastemaker, elevating stars like George Jones, Garth Brooks, Johnny Cash and hundreds more. Thanks to this hardy institution, and contributions by crossover artists like Beyoncé, country music continues to dominate the streaming charts and in 2023 was declared the fastest-growing genre in popular music. As country singer and Opry member Brad Paisley put it, “Pilgrims travel to Jerusalem to see the Holy Land and the foundations of their faith. People go to Washington, D.C. to see the workings of government and the foundation of our country. And fans flock to Nashville to see the foundation of country music, the Grand Ole Opry.” Subscribe to Smithsonian magazine now for just $19.99 This article is a selection from the June 2025 issue of Smithsonian magazine A Family Affair The Opry thrives on a network of stars invited to join its ranks. Here are four of the longest-serving members By Teddy BrokawBill Monroe — Member for 56 years Courtesy of Grand Ole Opry Archives It’s often been said that if there were a Mount Rushmore of the Opry, Bill Monroe’s face would be featured. In 1938, the mandolinist formed the Blue Grass Boys, a group so essential in the development of the style that it would ultimately give the genre its name. So popular was the group’s music on the weekly radio program that the show’s manager once told Monroe, “If you ever leave the Opry, you’ll have to fire yourself!” Monroe, who died in 1996, helped launch the careers of other Opry legends like Flatt and Scruggs, and also inspired trailblazers far beyond the country music world: Elvis covered his “Blue Moon of Kentucky”; and Jerry Garcia traveled with Monroe’s tour before forming the Grateful Dead. Jeannie Seely — Member for 57 years Courtesy of Grand Ole Opry Archives From the time she was tall enough to reach the dial of the family radio, Jeannie Seely had dreams of the Grand Ole Opry. After a series of hits in her signature “country soul” style, Seely was inducted into the Opry at age 27. She pushed its boundaries from the outset, helping to bring down the “gingham curtain”—the show’s requirement that female performers wear long dresses—by refusing to comply unless the rules were enforced on the audience as well. Seely repaid the Opry with a devotion that persists today, holding the record for appearances with over 5,000. When the Opry House flooded and waters destroyed Seely’s home in 2010, she still performed—in borrowed clothes. Loretta Lynn — Member for 60 years Courtesy of Grand Ole Opry Archives For six decades, Loretta Lynn, the “Coal Miner’s Daughter,” constantly propelled the genre forward. Her hardscrabble upbringing in Kentucky, immortalized in her autobiography and its film version (starring Sissy Spacek as Lynn in an Oscar-winning role), seemed to drive her unapologetic approach to music. Hits like “The Pill,” which in 1975 stood as one of the first songs to tackle the use of birth control, nearly caused her to be banned from the Opry. A defiant Lynn played “The Pill” three times during one Opry show and told media, “If they hadn’t let me sing the song, I’d have told them to shove the Grand Ole Opry!” Lynn died in 2022. Bill Anderson — Member for 63 years Courtesy of Grand Ole Opry Archives The longest-tenured member of the Opry, “Whispering Bill” Anderson began his adult life on an entirely different path, turning down an offer to attend the Chicago Cubs training camp as a pitching prospect to attend the University of Georgia. As a journalism student there, Anderson availed himself of a half-built college television studio to record “City Lights,” which quickly became a smash hit for country star Ray Price in 1958. Anderson followed that success with tracks of his own. Now in his seventh decade with the show, he still performs at the Opry and continues to release music. Lately, his biggest hits have come from collaborations with other artists, as with “Whiskey Lullaby,” a 2003 double-platinum hit co-written with Jon Randall for Brad Paisley and Alison Krauss.  Get the latest Travel & Culture stories in your inbox.

A famous character of the stage once remarked there are more things in heaven and earth than are dreamt of in your philosophy. It’s a truism which holds for our world, as well as that of Hawkins, Indiana. Sure, Lucas, Dustin, Eleven, and the rest of the gang might have faced the Demogorgon in the Upside-Down, and the Mind Flayer and Vecna too, but there are so many other horrors the writers have dreamed up for this poor town that no single TV show can contain them. These days even Broadway appears to be straining to its technical limit in assisting the effort, as gleaned during the opening prologue of Stranger Things: The First Shadow, a new original play written by Kate Trefry, a veteran of Stranger Things’ writers’ room since season 2 and a co-author of the story for First Shadow alongside series creators Matt and Ross Duffer, and The Cursed Child’s Jack Thorne. Their story, like so much else of Stranger Things, also begins with a mind-bending spectacle: an American battleship during World War II vanishing before a live audience’s eyes and being transported into hell. Into the Upside-Down. “It’s something that we had been floating around in the writers’ room for a long time in Stranger Things,” Trefry admits with a wry smile a few weeks after The First Shadow’s premiere at the Marquis Theatre on Broadway. “The Philadelphia Experiment is like the Montauk Project and MKUltra, one of those touchstones of American conspiracy theory heavy hitters.” First Shadow’s theatrical cold open is indeed informed by the supposed real-life cover up of an American naval ship that is said to have accidentally discovered teleportation, much to the physical and mental horror of its crew. Trefry muses that this old story plays out a little like Charlie and the Chocolate Factory, albeit if Mike Teavee’s atoms were reassembled with his brain stuck between a wall. It’s a concept she and the Duffers always wanted to work into the show, and it became the first thing Trefry wrote down when asked to pen the Stranger Things “They challenged me to write whatever I want, and they’d figure out how to make it into a play,” Trefry recalls. “So I was like, ‘Okay, let me just throw down this gauntlet.’ I was kind of testing to see what the limits of the stage were, because it seemed so impossible what I wanted to do. But they went crazy for it because it was so audacious.” Audacity might be the guiding star for every aspect of The First Shadow. Obviously co-directors Stephen Daldry and Justin Mark immediately warmed to the idea of doing a riff on the Philadelphia Experiment, complete with the familiar silhouette of the Mind Flayer, yet everything about this production is massive, with stars of the production comparing it to doing an Olympic marathon on stage every night. This ranges from the massive ensemble cast of 34 players to a veritable village of costumers, stagehands, techies, and various other crew members always scrambling behind the scenes. “Physically, what this show requires of us, does not feel like a normal play,” says Alison Jaye, who stars in the show as a young Joyce Maldonado (later Byers). “If anything it feels closer to a musical, but even then, like a steroid version of anything you’re seeing on stage.” It is in fact one of the most spectacular theatrical experiences this writer has viewed in terms of stagecraft and visual illusion. As writer Trefry surmises, “The images, if they were strong enough, would catch on like a disease. And once everyone was infected, every department couldn’t help but get obsessed with trying to make it work.” Yet what might be more impressive is that for as much obvious visual panache as a Stranger Things production must sport, there is a similar narrative ambition at work in First Shadow as well. Not only is the play an original story set in 1950s Hawkins—back before Eleven, Max, and Steve the Babysitter—but it is one suffused with as much emotional pathos and dread as the series. It even centers its narrative on the most monstrous creation from Season 4, if not the whole series: young Henry Creel, the boy who would grow up to be Vecna, played on stage by the now Tony-nominated Louis McCartney. “Knowing where the TV show goes, it was fun to conceive a play that is in its heart a tragedy, which is so different tonally from the show,” Trefry says of her Vecna protagonist. It’s a subtle but profound aesthetic detour, and one which invites even the staunchest Stranger Things into the truly unknown. Here the shadows are deep—and perhaps revealing about the still developing season 5. At the beginning of The First Shadow’s second act, a young man and woman share a flirtation and daydream anyone who was ever young might recognize: two kids imagining what it would be like to leave their small town and escape to a better life. Most audience members will understand the yearning to be free, but in the show it comes with the bitterest of bittersweet edges. If you’ve watched Stranger Things the TV series, you know the destinies of this would-be couple, a slouching high school cool guy named Hopper (Burke Swanson) and a boundlessly optimistic go-getter they call Joyce. And that future’s a million miles away from their fantasy life in sunny Mexico. Join our mailing list Get the best of Den of Geek delivered right to your inbox! “That scene feels as serious to me and honest in terms of what their love is as anything you see in season 4,” says Joyce performer Jaye of the moment. “A lot of people can connect to the love of your life; a single person following you through the world, or in your head and in your body, never being able to let go of that person, whether or not you’re able to live the story with them.” It’s a scene that also was developed in tech only days and weeks before Stranger Things: The First Shadow’s earliest bow in New York City. While the play opened last year in London’s West End, Trefry and directors Martin and Daldry have been tinkering with and perfecting the hitherto unknown backstories of Joyce and Hop ever since, as well as other fan favorite characters like Bob Newby (Juan Carlos) and Dr. Brenner (Alex Breaux). “We did about a month of workshops in London in November before we came over to America in January,” explains Trefry, “Almost every page has had some tweak to it. We strengthened storylines; we made things better; we cut 20 minutes; it was actually an amazing opportunity to get another crack at it.” It heightened the inherent opportunity in The First Shadow which always appealed to Trefry: digging into the lives of the many adult characters in Stranger Things, and perhaps tweak our very understanding of who they are—from an innocent like Bob (Sean Astin’s character from season 2 who Trefry half-jokes “we did pretty dirty”) to the play’s central protagonist: Henry Creel. Despite being the seemingly most irredeemably evil character in the TV series (#JusticeForMax), Henry is introduced here as a scared adolescent haunted by horrible images in his head that he cannot control. “His story is very personal to me, being somebody who’s struggled a lot with bad thoughts,” Trefry says. “I have very hardcore OCD, so the life of Henry Creel being inundated with dark imagery is close to my heart.” The playwright admits that when they first developed Vecna for season 4, they imagined him as a “Michael Myers” type. Someone born bad. But she and the Duffers saw the chance to go beyond a bad seed backstory when legendary theater director Daldry first approached about doing a Stranger Things play. Hence the stage’s story of young Henry moving to Hawkins with his ill-fated family, and genuinely hoping to start a better life at a new school. In fact, one of the many complex scenes of the play is how the production uses three rotating turntables to introduce an entire cast of ‘50s high school archetypes in the show. It’s a marvel of stagecraft that Bob actor Juan Carlos reveals is so complex that if audiences applaud or laugh too long, or on an odd beat, it can throw the entire watchlike timing off. This technical feat can also prove illuminating for the whole Stranger Things universe. For example, we discover that Joyce and Bob knew each other in the drama club, which surprise, surprise, Joyce is the president of. “There’s a couple of off the cuff references to Joyce being a communist [in the TV series],” muses Trefrey. “To me [that means] she’s a champion for the underdog. And who other than the theater kids are bigger underdogs?” Her Broadway performer certainly thinks it makes sense. “Oh my God, I feel like she’s such an obvious theater kid!” Jaye enthuses. “I feel like there is a kind of a cool girl, tough exterior that then underneath it all is like, ‘no, no, no. She is as weird as everybody else.’” It also allows Stranger Things the play to tap into some of the same meta joys of Stranger Things the TV series. “I think one of the lovely things about the series is how it pays homage to the movies of the ‘80s,” Carlos acknowledges of the setup. “We’re kind of paying homage to theater in a very similar sense and I think it fits right in.” Whereas the TV show centers on the type of nerd who obsessed over Dungeons & Dragons and Ghostbusters in the ‘80s, it is likely a theatrical audience of young people can relate to a Bob Newby who seems to be at least initially excited about doing Oklahoma! at his school. “We [theater kids] are kind of outcasts,” Carlos says, “especially in high school and middle school when it’s like, ‘Oh there goes the drama geek.’” Or as their writer observes, “A little inside baseball isn’t necessarily a bad thing.” Hence there are quite a few laughs about a play within a play at Hawkins’ high school. Hopper actor Swanson even ruefully concedes he can relate a bit since like Hawkins, his school put on Oklahoma! back in the day where he played Curly and did “a pretty spot on impersonation of Hugh Jackman’s version.” Yet so much of the humor and pleasure of this side of the play is derived from the familiar characters we think we know in suddenly new contexts. “There’s this really beautiful balance that we’re all trying to play in,” Swanson notes. “These characters are so iconic and they’re so beloved by so many that to ignore completely what’s been done before would be, I think, a disservice to the fans and to those who are hoping to see a taste and new version of those people. But at that same exact point, it is a new version… Jaye, for instance, drew as much inspiration from watching Winona Ryder in her 1988 breakout film, Heathers, as Stranger Things, citing the unlikely angst of Ryder’s popular (and arguably murderous) high schooler in that dark comedy as informative. Nonetheless, the actor believes “the way to do justice to that is to tell the story, be truthful, and people will give you endless flowers for that because they believe you.” Ultimately they are trying to get you to believe these characters in a different context that takes on shadings of a ‘50s adventure story, particularly as Hopper, Bob, and Joyce eventually investigate the darker side of the play like a veritable Nancy Drew novel. But no matter the setting, their seemingly innocent adventure still exists in the emotionally mercurial world of Stranger Things. Says Swanson, “This sort of Scooby-Doo element of our story in First Shadow, with Bob, Joyce, and Hopper trying to investigate something that they really don’t fully understand and won’t fully understand for 30-plus years, adds to this level of tragedy that Stranger Things does so well—in the most painful, beautiful sense of the word.” Going into Stranger Things 5 When we catch up over Zoom with Trefry, the writer says she is in her “floating” stage after completion of production on an extremely anticipated season of television. She has just come back from checking in with the Duffers in the edit bay for Stranger Things 5. In one sense, it’s a million miles away from the 1950s setting she and those same brothers settled on for the play. (Mind you, one reason the setting worked in Trefry’s mind is that, like the 1980s, the ‘50s were hotbed for science fiction cinema and literature, plus the cynical paranoia that breeds conspiracy theories.) Nevertheless, the two creative endeavors are interwoven. While the playwright strongly insists First Shadow is intended to stand on its own for newcomers, and is not meant to be a preview of Stranger Things Season 5, overlap becomes inevitable when one realizes it is exploring what Hopper and Joyce might remember of a boy named Henry Creel. “It’s interesting because Joyce and Hopper are sequestered all of season 4 in Russia,” Trefry says. “We did talk about what the implication is. If Henry Creel lived in Hawkins during this time, then ostensibly they would have encountered him. But because they were sequestered, it gave us an opportunity to have the teenagers [of the TV show] discover all of this information and not just have it be told to them by the adults.” It also invites tantalizing possibilities for season 5. For instance, might Hopper and Joyce tell Eleven or Will about that kid they knew in their drama club with a strange shine about him? As signaled by the writer’s tight smile toward the question, no one is going to directly answer the question. However, there would appear to be some intersection. “Knowing some of the gifts that will go on for the audience in season 5, [Trefry] lines it up perfectly,” Jaye teases. Her co-star Swanson would agree. “I really don’t think folks who have come to see the show, and who will see the show, realize how integral and irrevocably linked it is to season 5 and to the show itself,” Swanson says. “We get to plant the seeds that we see starting to sprout and come to fruition within the TV show. And from a sense of season 5, it is my opinion that you will not be able to see season 5 without seeing this show, and I think that when people do see season 5, they’re going to come back to this show in droves because they’re going to realize how laid out it was actually for you.” Still, for the play’s writer who has lived with these characters for nearly a decade, and can relate to all her beloved outsiders, from Eleven to the boy who became Vecna, it is about more than lore and all that visual razzle dazzle. “The spectacle is amazing,” Trefrey considers, “but selfishly from a personal angle I hope that there is emotional resonance. I have put a lot of emotion into the play, and I hope that that reads past all the incredible illusion work. That there’s a real story at the core of it that people can connect to and feel seen by.” Audiences can see for themselves right now at the Marquis Theatre in New York, as well as the Phoenix Theatre in London.

14 winning schemes include a retrofitted telephone exchange, Passivhaus almshouses and a converted barn Source: Jack HobhouseYoungs Court Development at Emmanuel College by Stanton Williams An infill development for Emmanuel College, Cambridge by Stanton Williams has been named RIBA East Building of the Year 2025. The scheme includes new accommodation and communal facilities for students. The Young’s Court Development was praised by the jury for how it “sits comfortably and effortlessly on site” and “subtly elevates the experience of student life”. The panel also described it as a “model for how to conserve and enhance a historic place for future generations”. Source: Jack HobhouseThe Entopia Building, Cambridge, designed by Architype with Feilden and Mawson and Eve Waldron Design Among the 14 winning projects is The Entopia Building, also in Cambridge, designed by Architype with Feilden and Mawson and Eve Waldron Design. The project involved the reuse of a 1930s telephone exchange as a new home for the Cambridge Institute for Sustainability Leadership. It was also recognised with the Sustainability and Project Architect of the Year awards. Source: Valentin LynchJankes Barn by Lynch Architects Jankes Barn by Lynch Architects was awarded both a regional award and the Conservation Award. The project involved the conversion of a disused barn in Essex into a contemporary rural home. Source: David ButlerDovehouse Court Almshouses by Mole Architects Dovehouse Court Almshouses by Mole Architects, a new Passivhaus development in Cambridge for residents over 55, also featured among the winners. The project delivered energy-efficient later-life living within a setting designed to promote social interaction. RIBA Central Regional Director Matt Blakeley said: “Congratulations to all the Award winners in the East region. This year, the breadth of schemes recognised is a remarkable statement to the ambition and vision of the region. “These projects exemplify not only admirable excellence in design and beauty, but a bold commitment to architecture’s vital role in our environmental goals and social impact.” The Discovery Centre (DISC) by Herzog & de Meuron with BDPSource: Hufton+Crow Sunspot by HAT ProjectsSource: Jim Stephenson Cast Corbel House by GraftedSource: French+Tye Knights Park by Pollard Thomas Edwards and Alison Brooks ArchitectsSource: Paul Riddle Knights Park by Pollard Thomas Edwards and Alison Brooks ArchitectsSource: Alison Brooks Architects Harpenden House by Emil Eve ArchitectsSource: Taran Wilkhu Housestead by Sanei Hopkins ArchitectsSource: Peter Landers Photography North Sea East Wood by Hayhurst & CoSource: Kilian O’Sullivan Mill Hide by Poulson ArchitectureSource: Nick Guttridge Clayworth by ArkleBoyce ArchitectsSource: Jim Stephenson Clayworth by ArkleBoyce ArchitectsSource: Jim Stephenson Amento by James Gorst ArchitectsSource: James Retief 1/12 show caption The other winning projects were: The Discovery Centre (DISC) by Herzog & de Meuron with BDP, a medical research facility for AstraZeneca in Cambridge Sunspot by HAT Projects, a coastal community hub in Essex with flexible units, a café and market hall Cast Corbel House by Grafted, an extension to a Norwich home Knights Park by Pollard Thomas Edwards and Alison Brooks Architects, a large-scale housing scheme in Eddington delivering 249 net-zero homes Harpenden House by Emil Eve Architects, the renovation and extension of a Victorian villa previously used as a nursery Housestead by Sanei Hopkins Architects, a coastal home in Suffolk North Sea East Wood by Hayhurst & Co, a reworking of a 1980s bungalow in Norfolk, also named Small Project of the Year Mill Hide by Poulson Architecture, a low-energy single-storey villa designed to meet future accessibility needs Clayworth by ArkleBoyce Architects, a contemporary family home Amento by James Gorst Architects, a single-storey rural dwelling Regional award winners will now be considered for a RIBA National Award, which will be announced on 10 July.  The shortlist for the RIBA Stirling Prize for the UK’s building of the year will be drawn from the RIBA National Award-winning projects later in the year.

A bill that allows medical clinics to sell unproven treatments has been passed in Montana.  Under the legislation, doctors can apply for a license to open an experimental treatment clinic and recommend and sell therapies not approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to their patients. Once it’s signed by the governor, the law will be the most expansive in the country in allowing access to drugs that have not been fully tested.  The bill allows for any drug produced in the state to be sold in it, providing it has been through phase I clinical trials—the initial, generally small, first-in-human studies that are designed to check that a new treatment is not harmful. These trials do not determine if the drug is effective. The bill, which was passed by the state legislature on April 29 and is expected to be signed by Governor Greg Gianforte, essentially expands on existing Right to Try legislation in the state. But while that law was originally designed to allow terminally ill people to access experimental drugs, the new bill was drafted and lobbied for by people interested in extending human lifespans—a group of longevity enthusiasts that includes scientists, libertarians, and influencers.   These longevity enthusiasts are hoping Montana will serve as a test bed for opening up access to experimental drugs. “I see no reason why it couldn’t be adopted by most of the other states,” said Todd White, speaking to an audience of policymakers and others interested in longevity at an event late last month in Washington, DC. White, who helped develop the bill and directs a research organization focused on aging, added that “there are some things that can be done at the federal level to allow Right to Try laws to proliferate more readily.”  Supporters of the bill say it gives individuals the freedom to make choices about their own bodies. At the same event, bioethicist Jessica Flanigan of the University of Richmond said she was “optimistic” about the measure, because “it’s great any time anybody is trying to give people back their medical autonomy.”  Ultimately, they hope that the new law will enable people to try unproven drugs that might help them live longer, make it easier for Americans to try experimental treatments without having to travel abroad, and potentially turn Montana into a medical tourism hub. But ethicists and legal scholars aren’t as optimistic. “I hate it,” bioethicist Alison Bateman-House of New York University says of the bill. She and others are worried about the ethics of promoting and selling unproven treatments—and the risks of harm should something go wrong. Easy access? No drugs have been approved to treat human aging. Some in the longevity field believe that regulation has held back the development of such drugs. In the US, federal law requires that drugs be shown to be both safe and effective before they can be sold. That requirement was made law in the 1960s following the thalidomide tragedy, in which women who took the drug for morning sickness had babies with sometimes severe disabilities. Since then, the FDA has been responsible for the approval of new drugs.   Typically, new drugs are put through a series of human trials. Phase I trials generally involve between 20 and 100 volunteers and are designed to check that the drug is safe for humans. If it is, the drug is then tested in larger groups of hundreds, and then thousands, of volunteers to assess the dose and whether it actually works. Once a drug is approved, people who are prescribed it are monitored for side effects. The entire process is slow, and it can last more than a decade—a particular pain point for people who are acutely aware of their own aging.  But some exceptions have been made for people who are terminally ill under Right to Try laws. Those laws allow certain individuals to apply for access to experimental treatments that have been through phase I clinical trials but have not received FDA approval. Montana first passed a Right to Try law in 2015 (a federal law was passed around three years later). Then in 2023, the state expanded the law to include all patients there, not just those with terminal illnesses—meaning that any person in Montana could, in theory, take a drug that had been through only a phase I trial. At the time, this was cheered by many longevity enthusiasts—some of whom had helped craft the expanded measure. But practically, the change hasn’t worked out as they envisioned. “There was no licensing, no processing, no registration” for clinics that might want to offer those drugs, says White. “There needed to be another bill that provided regulatory clarity for service providers.”  So the new legislation addresses “how clinics can set up shop in Montana,” says Dylan Livingston, founder and CEO of the Alliance for Longevity Initiatives, which hosted the DC event. Livingston built A4LI, as it’s known, a few years ago, as a lobbying group for the science of human aging and longevity. Livingston, who is exploring multiple approaches to improve both funding for scientific research and to change drug regulation, helped develop and push the 2023 bill in Montana with the support of State Senator Kenneth Bogner, he says. “I gave [Bogner] a menu of things that could be done at the state level … and he loved the idea” of turning Montana into a medical tourism hub, he says.  After all, as things stand, plenty of Americans travel abroad to receive experimental treatments that cannot legally be sold in the US, including expensive, unproven stem cell and gene therapies, says Livingston.  “If you’re going to go and get an experimental gene therapy, you might as well keep it in the country,” he says. Livingston has suggested that others might be interested in trying a novel drug designed to clear aged “senescent” cells from the body, which is currently entering phase II trials for an eye condition caused by diabetes. “One: let’s keep the money in the country, and two: if I was a millionaire getting an experimental gene therapy, I’d rather be in Montana than Honduras.” “Los Alamos for longevity” Honduras, in particular, has become something of a home base for longevity experiments. The island of Roatán is home to the Global Alliance for Regenerative Medicine clinic, which, along with various stem cell products, sells a controversial unproven “anti-aging” gene therapy for around $20,000 to customers including wealthy longevity influencer Bryan Johnson.  Tech entrepreneur and longevity enthusiast Niklas Anzinger has also founded the city of Infinita in the region’s special economic zone of Próspera, a private city where residents are able to make their own suggestions for medical regulations. It’s the second time he’s built a community there as part of his effort to build a “Los Alamos for longevity” on the island, a place where biotech companies can develop therapies that slow or reverse human aging “at warp speed,” and where individuals are free to take those experimental treatments. (The first community, Vitalia, featured a biohacking lab, but came to an end following a disagreement between the two founders.)  Anzinger collaborated with White, the longevity enthusiast who spoke at the A4LI event (and is an advisor to Infinita VC, Anzinger’s investment company), to help put together the new Montana bill. “He asked if I would help him try to advance the new bill, so that’s what we did for the last few months,” says White, who trained as an electrical engineer but left his career in telecommunications to work with an organization that uses blockchain to fund research into extending human lifespans.  “Right to Try has always been this thing [for people] who are terminal[ly ill] and trying a Hail Mary approach to solving these things; now Right to Try laws are being used to allow you to access treatments earlier,” White told the audience at the A4LI event. “Making it so that people can use longevity medicines earlier is, I think, a very important thing.” The new bill largely sets out the “infrastructure” for clinics that want to sell experimental treatments, says White. It states that clinics will need to have a license, for example, and that this must be renewed on an annual basis.  “Now somebody who actually wants to deliver drugs under the Right to Try law will be able to do so,” he says. The new legislation also protects prescribing doctors from disciplinary action. And it sets out requirements for informed consent that go further than those of existing Right to Try laws. Before a person takes an experimental drug under the new law, they will be required to provide a written consent that includes a list of approved alternative drugs and a description of the worst potential outcome. On the safe side “In the Montana law, we explicitly enhanced the requirements for informed consent,” Anzinger told an audience at the same A4LI event. This, along with the fact that the treatments will have been through phase I clinical trials, will help to keep people safe, he argued. “We have to treat this with a very large degree of responsibility,” he added. “We obviously don’t want to be killing people,” says Livingston.  But he also adds that he, personally, won’t be signing up for any experimental treatments. “I want to be the 10 millionth, or even the 50 millionth, person to get the gene therapy,” he says. “I’m not that adventurous … I’ll let other people go first.” Others are indeed concerned that, for the “adventurous” people, these experimental treatments won’t necessarily be safe. Phase I trials are typically tiny, and they often involve less than 50 people, all of whom are typically in good health. A trial like that won’t tell you much about side effects that only show up in 5% of people, for example, or about interactions the drug might have with other medicines. Around 90% of drug candidates in clinical trials fail. And around 17% of drugs fail late-stage clinical trials because of safety concerns. Even those that make it all the way through clinical trials and get approved by the FDA can still end up being withdrawn from the market when rare but serious side effects show up. Between 1992 and 2023, 23 drugs that were given accelerated approval for cancer indications were later withdrawn from the market. And between 1950 and 2013, the reason for the withdrawal of 95 drugs was “death.” “It’s disturbing that they want to make drugs available after phase I testing,” says Sharona Hoffman, professor of law and bioethics at Case Western Reserve University in Cleveland, Ohio. “This could endanger patients.” “Famously, the doctor’s first obligation is to first do no harm,” says Bateman-House. “If [a drug] has not been through clinical trials, how do you have any standing on which to think it isn’t going to do any harm?” But supporters of the bill argue that individuals can make their own decisions about risk. When speaking at the A4LI event, Flanigan introduced herself as a bioethicist before adding “but don’t hold it against me; we’re not all so bad.” She argued that current drug regulations impose a “massive amount of restrictions on your bodily rights and your medical freedom.” Why should public officials be the ones making decisions about what’s safe for people? Individuals, she argued, should be empowered to make those judgments themselves. Other ethicists counter that this isn’t an issue of people’s rights. There are lots of generally accepted laws about when we can access drugs, says Hoffman; people aren’t allowed to drink and drive because they might kill someone. “So, no, you don’t have a right to ingest everything you want if there are risks associated with it.” The idea that individuals have a right to access experimental treatments has in fact failed in US courts in the past, says Carl Coleman, a bioethicist and legal scholar at Seton Hall in New Jersey.  He points to a case from 20 years ago: In the early 2000s, Frank Burroughs founded the Abigail Alliance for Better Access to Developmental Drugs. His daughter, Abigail Burroughs, had head and neck cancer, and she had tried and failed to access experimental drugs. In 2003, about two years after Abigail’s death, the group sued the FDA, arguing that people with terminal cancer have a constitutionally protected right to access experimental, unapproved treatments, once those treatments have been through phase I trials. In 2007, however, a court rejected that argument, determining  that terminally ill individuals do not have a constitutional right to experimental drugs. Bateman-House also questions a provision in the Montana bill that claims to make treatments more equitable. It states that “experimental treatment centers” should allocate 2% of their net annual profits “to support access to experimental treatments and healthcare for qualifying Montana residents.” Bateman-House says she’s never seen that kind of language in a bill before. It may sound positive, but it could in practice introduce even more risk to the local community. “On the one hand, I like equity,” she says. “On the other hand, I don’t like equity to snake oil.” After all, the doctors prescribing these drugs won’t know if they will work. It is never ethical to make somebody pay for a treatment when you don’t have any idea whether it will work, Bateman-House adds. “That’s how the US system has been structured: There’s no profit without evidence of safety and efficacy.” The clinics are coming Any clinics that offer experimental treatments in Montana will only be allowed to sell drugs that have been made within the state, says Coleman. “Federal law requires any drug that is going to be distributed in interstate commerce to have FDA approval,” he says. White isn’t too worried about that. Montana already has manufacturing facilities for biotech and pharmaceutical companies, including Pfizer. “That was one of the specific advantages [of focusing] on Montana, because everything can be done in state,” he says. He also believes that the current administration is “predisposed” to change federal laws around interstate drug manufacturing. (FDA commissioner Marty Makary has been a vocal critic of the agency and the pace at which it approves new drugs.) At any rate, the clinics are coming to Montana, says Livingston. “We have half a dozen that are interested, and maybe two or three that are definitively going to set up shop out there.” He won’t name names, but he says some of the interested clinicians already have clinics in the US, while others are abroad.  Mac Davis—founder and CEO of Minicircle, the company that developed the controversial “anti-aging” gene therapy—told MIT Technology Review he was “looking into it.” “I think this can be an opportunity for America and Montana to really kind of corner the market when it comes to medical tourism,” says Livingston. “There is no other place in the world with this sort of regulatory environment.”