Science From the Fringe

Latest Episodes:

Dana Parish - The Lyme Roundtable: Historic Reckoning or Optics? Dec 30, 2025

Show notes

In this episode of Science From the Fringe, host Bryce Nickels speaks with Dana Parish—an award-winning songwriter, patient-rights advocate, advisory board member of the Bay Area Lyme Foundation, co-author of Chronic, and host of The Dana Parish Podcast—about her personal experience with Lyme disease, the broader scientific, medical, and political controversies surrounding tick-borne illness, and the historical significance of the Lyme Disease Roundtable hosted by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) on Monday, December 15, 2025.

The conversation begins with Dana’s personal Lyme story: a tick bite that abruptly derailed her music career and led to severe multisystem illness, including heart failure, after early treatment failed. She describes a long and difficult journey to diagnosis, the discovery of co-infections such as Bartonella, and her eventual recovery through extended antibiotic treatment under Dr. Steven Phillips. That experience ultimately led her to co-author Chronic, a project shaped by striking parallels between Lyme disease politics and the public response to COVID-19.

Dana discusses her advocacy work with organizations such as the Bay Area Lyme Foundation and the Lyme Disease Biobank, emphasizing the urgent need for improved diagnostics, increased research funding, insurance coverage, and formal recognition of chronic Lyme disease. The episode also explores the recent HHS Chronic Lyme Disease Roundtable, featuring figures such as RFK Jr., Dr. Oz, Dr. Steven Phillips, and Dr. Bob Bransfield. The discussion highlights growing acknowledgment of chronic Lyme’s reality, the severe neuropsychiatric consequences many patients face—including rage, psychosis, and suicide risk—and calls for systemic reforms in testing, treatment, and coverage.

Interwoven with humor and banter—including jokes about exterminating ticks, “limited hangouts,” and mutual suspicions of being “spooks”—the episode confronts deeper issues: institutional denial, media bias, insurance barriers, failed vaccine efforts, and the enormous personal and economic toll of untreated chronic illness. Dana and Bryce also explore links between Lyme disease, toxic mold exposure, reactivated infections, and long COVID, underscoring the complexity of chronic inflammatory conditions.

The episode closes with cautious optimism about potential reforms under new HHS leadership, stressing both the urgency of alleviating patient suffering and the need for skepticism and follow-through to ensure that recent developments amount to real change rather than symbolic optics.

(recorded December 19, 2025)

Get full access to Science From the Fringe at sciencefromthefringe.substack.com/subscribe

Jenner Furst - Thank You, Dr. Fauci Dec 21, 2025

Show notes

In this episode of Science From the Fringe, host Bryce Nickels speaks with documentary filmmaker Jenner Furst, the Director of Thank You, Dr. Fauci, which examines the career and controversies surrounding Dr. Anthony Fauci.

The conversation explores Jenner’s motivation for making the film, which began when independent financiers approached him to investigate Fauci’s record during the COVID-19 pandemic. Jenner describes his deep dive into Fauci’s involvement in gain-of-function research, the lab-origin hypothesis for SARS-CoV-2, and what he characterizes as a vast scientific cover-up, reconstructed through emails, publications, and whistleblower testimony.

They discuss interviews featured in the film with figures such as Fauci’s long time nemesis Richard Ebright, former CDC Director Dr. Robert Redfield, and current FDA Commissioner Dr. Marty Makary, while critically examining institutional incentives, possible intelligence-community entanglements, and how crises can be leveraged for power, profit, and political advantage.

Interspersed with humor—ranging from bad Christmas songs and Ghostbusters metaphors to behind-the-scenes filming anecdotes—the discussion also confronts darker themes: suppressed dissent, fraud in science, failures of transparency, and the structural weaknesses of modern biosafety and public-health oversight.

The episode asks how ambition, distorted incentives, and institutional corruption may have contributed to a global catastrophe—and whether meaningful accountability or reform is possible under new leadership. Listeners are encouraged to watch the film for a fuller reckoning.

(Recorded December 13, 2025)

Get full access to Science From the Fringe at sciencefromthefringe.substack.com/subscribe

Clean Out the Freezers (In Defense of Virology - Episode 4) Dec 09, 2025

Show notes

In the fourth episode of In Defense of Virology, Rutgers Professor and Science From the Fringe host Bryce Nickels and distinguished virologist Simon Wain-Hobson argue that labs should destroy frozen stocks of dangerous, nonessential pathogens produced through gain-of-function research or historical resurrection—simple to do, high-impact for reducing global risk.

Simon highlights precedent—from post-eradication smallpox and rinderpest—and cites a recent Newcastle disease virus re-emergence in China strongly suggestive of a freezer escape. Given that even top labs leak, he argues, destruction of unnecessary stocks is common-sense risk reduction.

The episode concludes with an overlooked puzzle: despite SARS-CoV-2’s devastating impact, fewer than 100 related genomes have been disclosed, compared to more than 240 for SARS-1. Whether due to undersampling or undisclosed sequences, Simon contends the gap is a public-health failure—surveillance is essential, but must not be confused with the risky manipulation that helped create today’s biosafety crisis. Virology must decide between continued high-risk work and responsibly “cleaning house.”

(recorded November 22, 2025)

Get full access to Science From the Fringe at sciencefromthefringe.substack.com/subscribe

Dr. Meryl Nass - A Historic Chance to Rein in Bioweapons Dec 02, 2025

Show notes

In this episode of Science from the Fringe, host Bryce Nickels speaks with Dr. Meryl Nass—medical adviser to Robert F. Kennedy Jr., biological warfare expert, publisher of Meryl’s CHAOS letter, and founder of DoorToFreedom.org—about the urgent need to strengthen the 1972 Biological Weapons Convention (BWC).

The conversation examines the escalating risks posed by bioweapons research, and why the current political moment—with HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and President Trump openly calling for an end to bioweapons development—may offer the strongest opportunity in decades to close the gaps in the Biological Weapons Convention.

Dr. Nass recounts that President Nixon’s 1969–70 decision to renounce U.S. offensive bioweapons work led to the 1972 Biological Weapons Convention—now joined by nearly 200 nations—but one deliberately drafted without verification, inspections, or penalties in order to secure rapid international agreement. She explains that in 2001 the Bush administration abruptly dismantled a nearly completed verification protocol, fracturing international trust and leaving the treaty effectively unenforceable.

Dr. Nass further notes that, since 2001, the surge in biodefense and “pandemic preparedness” funding has actively encouraged dangerous gain-of-function research—and that this research enterprise has itself become a significant source of global public-safety risk.

Still, she sees a historic opportunity to reduce this danger by finally fixing the BWC. President Trump’s May 2025 executive order restricting gain-of-function research, his September 23, 2025 UN speech urging all nations to end biological weapons development, and RFK Jr.’s continued focus on the issue at HHS together create an unprecedented chance to add the verification, inspection, and enforcement mechanisms the treaty has lacked for more than fifty years.

The episode offers a stark warning: today’s gravest biological threat is not nature but dangerous gain-of-function research. Dr. Nass argues that this moment must be seized—before the next accident or deliberate release makes COVID-19 look modest by comparison.

(Recorded November 24, 2025)

Timestamps

00:30 — Introduction of Dr. Meryl Nass02:37 — Discovering Pentagon-funded bioweapons work at UMass (1989)07:43 — Joining the Council for Responsible Genetics; early BWC history09:50 — Nixon’s renunciation and the intentional omission of verification11:49 — Failures of five-year review conferences; Bush’s 2001 sabotage14:10 — Context of the 2001 walkout: 9/11 and the anthrax attacks15:20 — Why the U.S. abruptly killed the verification protocol17:35 — Trump’s 2025 UN speech and executive order on GOF19:55 — The global boom in “pandemic preparedness” funding22:23 — USAID’s $44B budget and dangerous research abroad24:15 — Why narrow GOF definitions are misleading26:56 — The number of lab incidents that occur each year30:37 — Risks of basic research on natural Ebola-level pathogens31:24 — The 2018–19 Ebola vaccine rollout: unresolved issues35:06 — Rand Paul’s oversight bill vs. the broader Trump/RFK Jr. strategy36:03 — Financial incentives behind the global biodefense system40:45 — Rebuilding trust and addressing entrenched interests41:45 — The opportunity created by RFK Jr. at HHS46:22 — Concrete steps that signal real progress48:55 — AI, synthetic biology, and the future of bioweapons oversight52:33 — Why public understanding of biowarfare risks remains limited01:00:14 — Closing remarks

intro and outro by Tess Parks

Get full access to Science From the Fringe at sciencefromthefringe.substack.com/subscribe

David Zweig - How We Failed America’s Children Nov 14, 2025

Show notes

In this episode of Science From the Fringe, host Bryce Nickels, speaks with David Zweig—a New York City–based journalist, author, and contributor to The Atlantic, The New York Times, and The Free Press—about his new book, An Abundance of Caution: American Schools, the Virus, and the Story of Bad Decisions.

Their conversation traces David’s motivation for writing the book, beginning with his early recognition of the devastating effects of remote learning on children during the COVID-19 pandemic. David explains how a mix of action bias, politicization, and institutional inertia led to catastrophic decisions on school closures and mitigation measures such as masking, distancing, and barriers.

David critiques the reliance on flawed models, the role of teachers’ unions, and the class divides that deepened the harms, while highlighting how real-time evidence from Europe and elsewhere was ignored. The discussion also explores the erosion of public trust, the suppression of dissent, and the moral grandstanding that replaced evidence-based reasoning.

At its core, this episode examines how “good” intentions and systemic dysfunction combined to produce policies that harmed children with little to no public health benefit, and what it will take to ensure more intellectually honest, transparent, and evidence-driven decision-making in future crises.

(recorded November 10, 2025)

Get full access to Science From the Fringe at sciencefromthefringe.substack.com/subscribe

Aaron Siri - Vaccine Safety: Science or Dogma? Nov 02, 2025

Show notes

In this episode of Science from the Fringe, host Bryce Nickels, Professor of Genetics at Rutgers University, speaks with Aaron Siri—civil rights attorney, managing partner at Siri & Glimstad LLP, and author of Vaccines Amen: The Religion of Vaccines. Together, they discuss the corrupting influence of commercial interests on scientific integrity and public policy, and how, in the case of vaccines, appeals to authority are sold to the public as unassailable fact.

The conversation begins with the historical inflection point of the little known 1986 National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act, which established legal immunity for vaccine manufacturers and reshaped the incentives that underpin vaccine development and public health policy. The discussion then turns to how this unprecedented legal structure has contributed to shortcuts in scientific oversight, particularly in “placebo” trial design, post-licensure safety evaluation, and mechanisms for compensating vaccine injuries.

Aaron argues that many vaccine claims are rooted in dogma rather than evidence, critiques the role of figures like Dr. Stanley Plotkin in shaping vaccine policy, and highlights cases of coercion, censorship, and inadequate safety oversight. He emphasizes the importance of informed consent, individual rights, and persuading the public on merits rather than mandates, while touching on potential unintended consequences of vaccination programs, including the potential disruption of humanity’s ecological relationship with certain pathogens.

At its core, this “scientist meets lawyer” conversation probes how scientific integrity can be distorted by profit-driven systems, what happens when healthy skepticism becomes verboten, and the human cost of trading transparency for expedience.

(Recorded October 29th, 2025)

Timestamps

00:30 — Introduction of Aaron Siri01:17 — Aaron’s definition of a vaccine03:03 — Aaron shares his personal opinion on vaccine policy08:32 — Dr. Stanley Plotkin: a central figure in vaccinology12:04 — Aaron’s 2018 deposition of Plotkin in a custody case15:28 — The 1986 National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act19:57 — How the 1986 Act inverted market incentives for vaccine safety22:24 — Design defect claims and the Supreme Court’s ruling on vaccine liability 26:19 — Lucrativeness of vaccines for pharmaceutical companies28:26 — The Mandate for Safer Childhood Vaccines and HHS’s failure to fulfill it32:36 — Potential for HHS under RFK Jr. to enforce vaccine safety mandates35:55 — Mistreatment of vaccine injured: the case of Maddie de Garay42:20 — Broader societal treatment of vaccine-injured and unvaccinated44:14 — GSK’s 2017 pertussis vaccine ad and litigation over misleading claims48:19 — Exchange with Dr. Paul Offit on placebo trials57:26 — Humanity’s ecological relationship with infectious diseases01:08:35 — Measles mortality decline pre-vaccine and potential long-term effects of eradication01:11:50 — Aaron describes his vision for a world without mandates

intro and outro by Tess Parks

Get full access to Science From the Fringe at sciencefromthefringe.substack.com/subscribe

Do No Harm (In Defense of Virology - Episode 3) Oct 31, 2025

Show notes

In the third episode of In Defense of Virology, Rutgers Professor and Science From the Fringe host Bryce Nickels and distinguished virologist Simon Wain-Hobson discuss two striking examples of reckless virology research—one well known and the other largely forgotten—and issue a call to change the culture of modern science.

The first example revisits the controversial resurrection of the 1918 Spanish flu, a virus that killed tens of millions worldwide. Simon explains how NIH-funded researchers extracted genetic fragments from frozen cadavers, used PCR to reconstruct the viral genome, and then revived the virus in 2005, publishing the full sequence in Science. Despite claims that the work would aid vaccine development, he argues that no public-health benefit ever materialized, while the potential for misuse dramatically increased.

The second example, less known but equally concerning, involves retroviruses resurrected from fragments within the human genome. In work published in 2006 and 2007, researchers in France and New York chemically synthesized what they believed to be defunct human viruses—naming one “Phoenix.” Although performed with NIH and national-science-foundation support, there was no transparency about biosafety levels or prior ethical review. Simon argues that such experiments, however clever, violate the moral boundary between curiosity and recklessness.

From these examples, Simon and Bryce turn to solutions—chief among them a Hippocratic Oath for scientists. Just as physicians swear to “do no harm,” they propose that life-science researchers and funding agencies adopt a similar pledge to avoid work that makes the world more dangerous. Simon envisions a three-part reform: NIH and major foundations embedding the principle into grants, universities incorporating it into graduation ceremonies, and scientific culture embracing it as a moral baseline.

The conversation closes with a call to action for listeners: write to local universities or newspapers to support a research culture grounded in humility, safety, and moral responsibility.

(recorded October 23, 2025)

Get full access to Science From the Fringe at sciencefromthefringe.substack.com/subscribe

No Upside (In Defense of Virology - Episode 2) Oct 23, 2025

Show notes

In the second episode of In Defense of Virology, Genetics Professor and Science From the Fringe host Bryce Nickels engages virologist Simon Wain-Hobson in a nuanced discussion on how recent advances in biotechnology have amplified both the promise and the perils of modern virology research.

Building on Episode 1, Simon delves deeper into the dangers of gain-of-function (GOF) research, this time focusing on how today’s biotechnology makes it possible to build entire viruses from digital genetic sequences—blueprints that can be transmitted and replicated worldwide in seconds.

Simon is blunt in his assessment: there are no redeeming benefits to dangerous gain-of-function experiments. To better describe the risk, he introduces the concept of “single-use research of concern” (SURC), a term for studies that generate genuine hazards without any plausible public good. This contrasts with the more familiar idea of “dual-use research of concern” (DURC), which acknowledges that some experiments carry risks but may also advance valuable scientific or medical progress.

Reflecting on his career during the HIV/AIDS era, Simon recounts helping organize a landmark 2000 Royal Society meeting that addressed verboten questions about whether the oral polio vaccine played a role in HIV’s origins. That experience, he says, underscored the value of humility, transparency, and open communication between scientists and the public. From past vaccine mishaps to the careless publication of viral genome data, Simon warns that the real threat to virology isn’t skepticism from outside—it’s hubris and secrecy from within.

(recorded October 20, 2025)

Get full access to Science From the Fringe at sciencefromthefringe.substack.com/subscribe

Sigrid Bratlie - Unraveling 'The Wuhan Mystery': The Hunt for the Origin of COVID Oct 19, 2025

Show notes

In this episode of Science from the Fringe, host Bryce Nickels speaks with Sigrid Bratlie, Norwegian molecular biologist and science communicator, about her comprehensive new book The Wuhan Mystery: The Hunt for the Origins of COVID.

The conversation delves into the evidence supporting a lab-related origin of COVID-19, the politicization of science, and the personal backlash Bratlie has faced from prominent scientists. She describes how public debate and media coverage of COVID origins in Europe trail behind the U.S., as well as how trust in science and transparency have been eroded across the pond, as well.

Bratlie walks listeners down her path from reflexive skeptic to one of Norway’s leading advocates for an open, evidence-based discussion of the lab leak hypothesis. She candidly describes the personal and professional costs associated with her advocacy, including harassment and intimidation within the scientific community, and underscores the importance of courage, accountability, and intellectual openness in the face of institutional pressure.

(Recorded October 16, 2025)

Timestamps

00:31 — Introduction of Sigrid Bratlie

01:48 — Sigrid discusses her new book: The Wuhan Mystery: The Hunt for the Origins of COVID

03:13 — Conclusions on lab leak evidence and the scientific cover-up

06:45 — Reception the book has received in Norway

08:34 — Bratlie’s role as one of Norway’s leading voice on lab-origin discussions

10:36 — How Europe trails behind the U.S. in the origins debate

12:07 — Strongest evidence for a lab origin

13:27 — Kristian Andersen’s involvement in shaping the origins narrative

22:29 — Bratlie discusses Andersen’s trip to Norway last year and possible motives

28:52 — Other critics of Bratlie

34:28 — Scientific intimidation and silencing tactics

39:52 — Bratlie discusses Ralph Baric’s role

44:45 — Lessons learned: misplaced priorities, risks ignored, and the erosion of public trust

intro and outro by Tess Parks

Get full access to Science From the Fringe at sciencefromthefringe.substack.com/subscribe

Why Virology Needs Defending (In Defense of Virology - Episode 1) Oct 17, 2025

Show notes

In the inaugural episode of In Defense of Virology, Rutgers Professor and Science From the Fringe host, Bryce Nickels joins forces with distinguished virologist Simon Wain-Hobson for a new series that aims to defend virology from bad actors within.

Introducing this new segment, Wain-Hobson explains that the real threat to virology isn’t public skepticism, but the recklessness of insiders who promote dangerous gain-of-function (GOF) research and attempt to silence debate.

Drawing from his popular series of essays written for the Biosafety Now Substack newsletter, Simon dissects how flawed GOF studies, perverse incentives, and bureaucratic groupthink have compromised public support for virology, and by extension, science itself.

Bryce and Simon call for virology to reclaim its integrity—returning to an open, truth-driven discipline centered on understanding viral biology and advancing modern medicine.

(recorded October 14, 2025)

Get full access to Science From the Fringe at sciencefromthefringe.substack.com/subscribe

Our TOPPODCAST Picks

Follow Us

Stay Connected

Related Podcasts

Links

Stay Connected