Good morning, everyone, and welcome to day three of SOCAP 2021. My name is Chris Herman, and I am a Senior Vice President with Enterprise Community Partners, where I'm responsible for our real estate equity business. Enterprise's mission is to make home and community places of pride, power, and belonging, and platforms for resilience and upward mobility for all. At Enterprise, we really have three focused goals, and that is first to increase the supply of rental housing because the current supply is inadequate relative to need. The second is to advance racial equity after decades of systematic racism in housing, and third to build resilience and upward mobility so that residents and communities can be more resilient to the unpredictable. My role at Enterprise is to imagine, create, and invest equity funds that align with these strategic priorities, and I'm really looking forward to an action-packed 45-minute conversation about how commercial real estate investing can be reimagined to be more inclusive. Under the current system, the wealth generated by commercial real estate tends to pass through communities and ultimately benefit already wealthy investors who often have no ties to that local community, and local residents, whether they be small businesses or renters of apartment homes or homeowners, are ultimately driving the value created by paying their rent and being active citizens in their community, but they're often shut out from the profits that they help to create. So today we're really focused on exploring some models that could allow for the local community to be a beneficiary of that wealth-building opportunity, and more specifically why that's so important as we collectively pursue a more just and equitable society. So I'm going to let the panelists introduce themselves as we go in the interest of time, but I'm really glad to be joined by practitioners, funders, and impact investors, and really just more generally a very thoughtful group of people to present to you all today. And with that, I'd like to welcome John Haynes to share a bit about the work Mercy Corpse has been doing with its community investment trust model and what they have learned about the positive outcomes of making local residents stakeholders in their communities. So John, welcome. Can you hear us, John? Okay, wow. There you go. I need to upgrade my computer, I think. The community investment trust was started by Mercy Corps. Mercy Corps is an NGO based in Portland. This is the first national project we do. We're otherwise focused on 40-plus countries around the world in crisis, conflict, and economic collapse. This surface, if I can go back to how it started, I had a, you know, the data was there that renters sort of the people that are kind of overarching group that were where poverty and and lack of upward mobility happens. Under that subsets of BIPOC, single mothers, disabled, etc. So I went out with some grad students who spoke a few languages and went to affordable housing projects in this one particular high rental area and also the lowest income or highest poverty census tract in Oregon. And I asked them, you know, what's changing in the neighborhood? What do you want in the neighborhood? Do you feel a part of it? And then I asked, do you save everybody to a person who said, now and then sometimes, but you know, not really, a little bit. And then do you invest? No. Why not? What do you do with 10 to 100 bucks a month? We don't understand investing. Woman said, oh, that's for other people. So then I postulated a couple of buildings that were in the neighborhood, not the one we bought, but a couple others. So if you could own this, and their eyes lit up, and they said, how? And I had no idea, of course, at that point. So I went back and we developed the community investment trust based on their needs and desires. Our chief goal is is well-filling and inclusion, family and community well-filling together. The key aspects to the CIT that are different is division commercial retail real estate. The neighbors come from four zip codes. So it's approximate investment. Again, 10, 25, 50 and 100 no more. They get a short-term annual dividend, ours is average 9% for four years. And the long-term share price return from debt repayment and then calculation on the change of value. And that's gone from $10 to $1,705. So we feel good about the performance. But the key thing, and we offer a class in moving from owning to owning, trying to get an owner's mindset and the owner's an upward path of understanding. The key aspect to this kind of the magic dust is we couldn't offer a C-corporation stock offering unless we provided immediate liquidity for investors and downside risk protection. And we did that through direct pay letter credit. So that really is a tough aspect to replicate. But it's it's one that's essential to do this is we have reworked in a dozen or so cities now around the country to help them help them replicate. So some of the outcomes and then I'll wrap it up. The we're touching who we wanted to touch. 68% that never invested in anything before. 54% make less than $40,000 on a family level. 49% were born outside the US. And beyond the financial performance, which is frankly essential, the the thing we do a deep survey and we've expanded it to say, you know, among things, are you more engaged in the community and how we ask do you vote when they're when they first sign up and have to be a vote afterwards, have to become an investor and two thirds vote and are more active in the neighborhood than they were becoming an owner. So ownership really matters. Okay, Chris. Thanks, John. I appreciate that. And, you know, I admire that you were sort of an early mover at Mercy Corps and creating ways for community people in communities to invest in their communities. And you've got a model where, you know, people are doing that and you're seeing sort of the real results of that. So kudos to you all on that great work. Kimberly, I know Robert Wood Johnson Foundation has been a big supporter of housing and many different initiatives over the years. And recently, you guys have started really deeply digging into the ownership concept and what it means for people to sort of have that pride of ownership, if you will, that stake in their own communities. So we'd love to hear how Robert Wood Johnson Foundation is approaching the space as well. Thanks, Chris. And John, thanks for that overview of the CIT model. I am hearing kind of your commentary about kind of the lack of investment options, reminded me of something I heard on NPR last night that 10% of the top earning Americans own 89% of the equities that are traded on the stock market. So a really powerful data point and kudos to you and Mercy Corps for trying to open up some new possibilities. As Chris said, I'm Kimberly Cornette. I am on the impact investing team at the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation. We are a relatively new team for the foundation, which is America's largest foundation exclusively focused on health and health equity. Our job is to use the tools of investment to accelerate the foundation's programmatic work. And while I think many of you will know RWJ from a very exclusive lens around health, in the short term time that I've been with the foundation, like many organizations, we've really started to take a different lens on health and really think about can we as a society really achieve health equity, which is the foundation school without addressing structural racism. And so the way that we are thinking about the work today is that really addressing structural racism really almost is a prerequisite to getting to health equity. And so my team has been thinking about how we use investment tools to move us closer to that goal. We have a $200 million allocation. It has three strategies. I'll touch on them briefly. One is around the community development finance system. So working with partners like Enterprise, CDFIs, housing finance agencies, minority depository institutions to ensure that that system has a ample supply of long term risk bearing capital so that they can deliver their products into low income communities. We have a set of investment, two investment areas of investment that we call program directed. So these are areas specifically coming out of our programmatic work. One of them is on ownership, which I'll go into more deeply, and one of them is on water. And then we have a body of work around racial equity, which is both kind of a cross cutting through everything else we do, but also a standalone effort that includes housing, quality jobs, and then some place-based effort. So that's just a quick encapsulation of the directions that the foundation is going. But I think what brings us to ownership actually is maybe something a little bit different than shelter and even wealth building. It really is born out of a programmatic interest that we have really around individual agency and community members really being in a position of power within their communities to drive decisions around community conditions and investment. I think the data around home ownership is well known. It's well-documented in history that home ownership has been actively denied to communities of color and there are significant barriers for those folks with low incomes. And so really our work is around not necessarily one house, one family, but it's really around a spectrum of appropriate ownership opportunities, which gives people more power in their communities and hopefully contributes to their opportunity to build wealth for themselves and also for their families. So we think about ownership from the power standpoint, but also because, you know, along with that comes other attendant benefits. Megan Sandel, who will be known to many of you, a physician at Boston Medical Center has kind of coined the phrase that safe and affordable housing is a vaccine in itself. So we know that there is a body of evidence that people are healthier both physically and mentally when they are safely and securely housed and we think that an ownership opportunity, you know, maybe is the booster shot to that vaccine that Megan talks about. There are greater educational advancements for children who are growing up in both safe and affordable housing, but also in, again, that ownership context. There's the wealth building opportunity and then there's this engagement, you know, owners, you know, have a voice in their community and we think that that's really important. So the way that we are approaching ownership is by looking across the spectrum of opportunities and thinking about who's already doing that work that we can invest in and then what are the enabling conditions that would better position individuals to be in a position to take an ownership opportunity. You know, startlingly, the Urban Institute says that 50% of white households have a FICO score of over 700 and only 21% of black households have the same. That's a significant barrier if you're getting into almost any kind of ownership opportunity. So that's one of those enabling conditions that we want to work on. I'll profile a couple of opportunities that we are in diligence on. I want to be clear that we haven't closed on these. One is, but they're illustrative of the types of opportunities that we're considering. One is with Rock USA, which is a CDFI, which finances manufactured housing communities, more crassly known as trailer parks, but gives residents of those communities the opportunity to finance the park and to own and operate it as a cooperative. We think it's a super powerful example of, again, that kind of individual agency and moving people out of a really exploitive set of housing conditions. And we're really excited to partner with them as a guarantor. And we're in that deal with Prudential, who is bringing that capital to it. Another entity that we're working alongside of is Fahi, again, a CDFI who has been offering a second mortgage product. So 100% of financing to low and moderate income homeowners, again, trying to get over one of those barriers that keeps ownership away from families, which is down payment assistance. And then finally, a transaction that some of our peers have already closed into, because it's really interesting, is a fund that is particularly focused on a very exploitive type of mortgage that gives the appearance that you are an owner, but also essentially doesn't give you any of the equity building opportunities of ownership. And we think that kind of very exploitive mortgage structure is something that, one, we should do everything that we can to reposition mortgages that are in that position, but also using grant funds to accelerate some policy efforts to try to eliminate that product completely. So I want to be clear that ownership for the foundation right now is still an area of exploration, but I think is very consistent with our goals around structural racism, health equity, and really utilize as well our investment tools. So I'll pause there and thanks for the opportunity and answering questions. Great. Thanks, Kimberly. So we're going to shift to Roy Swan of the Ford Foundation next. Roy, thanks for joining us. You know, the Ford Foundation brings a unique perspective as a grant maker, as a PRI provider, and ultimately as a mission related investor in the housing space as well as other areas. And certainly know at your core, your goal is to address the root causes and consequences of inequality in all its form. So we'd love to hear kind of how you're thinking of this space and approaching the different challenges we're wrestling with here today. Yes. Thanks, Chris. Can you hear me okay? Thumbs up? Yeah, great. Okay. So Chris, you've covered a part of my commercial and just to provide a little more. So the Mission Investments program was launched in 2017 and we have three capital tools. We have a $1 billion endowment to make market rate impact investments along our five investment themes, $350 million PRI fund to make catalytic debt and equity investments, and a significantly smaller grant pool to support the global impact investing ecosystem. And our footprint includes the U.S. and global south, which for us is Africa, China, India, Indonesia, and other parts of Southeast Asia, Latin America, and the Middle East. So shifting, you know, multi-family affordable rental housing is one of our investment themes in the U.S. And we think about wealth building for renters in a simplistic way. There's a roughly 10 million unit shortage of affordable housing in the U.S. So renters are paying more than they should pay for housing because of that shortage. If there was a greater supply of affordable units, we believe it stands to reason that that means renters would pay less. And if renters paid less in rent, they could potentially save more money. So we allocate our endowment capital to support the increase in the number of units through affordable housing units, through preservation, new construction, and or conversion. But we also think about it from a capital supply perspective, and I just want to spend a minute on that. Given the shortage, I think, again, we think it stands to reason that the shortage of affordable housing units, if there was more capital available and dedicated to that asset class, there might be more units to lower the demand-supply-ness match. And so when you think about what affordable housing as a affordable rental housing as an asset class brings, you know, you're talking about a three to five percent, you know, cash on cash returns, long-term appreciation of call it five to ten percent, depending on the types of units, inflation, interest rates, geography, etc. All that delivered with very low relative risk. And some people think that multifamily affordable rental housing generates excess financial returns compared to the risk taken. We fall into that class. So for us, it seems like that risk return set of characteristics would be perfect for big pension funds, university endowments, foundations that need steady predictable cash flows. And for us, and we even believe it could be interesting for retail investors, our belief is that multifamily affordable rental housing that provides quality, you know, services for the residents can enhance quality of life. So I'll stop there, but right now our focus has been on multifamily affordable rental housing. And we believe that savings or wealth can be generated if there was a largest supply of lower cost rental housing. Thank you, Roy. So I'm going to share a little bit about kind of things enterprises thinking about next and how we're sort of approaching the space. You know, first as an organization focused on rental housing, we've been really focused on ways that we could address the wealth gap between renters and homeowners. We recognize that not all renters are destined to be homeowners. Yet, you know, there is a significant gap in wealth between renters and homeowners. And specifically, according to a recent survey of consumer finances, a typical renter has 40 times less wealth than a homeowner, about $6,200, compared to $255,000. And this is an inequity that we must address if our goal as a society is to have a more just and equitable distribution of wealth. To Roy's point, you know, we for decades as an industry have been really focused on producing quality homes that are affordable. And this is really important work that has to continue. Because I wholeheartedly agree, Roy, with your point that the supply-demand imbalance is what causes rents to rise, to become unaffordable, and for people to have less discretionary income to save and to create wealth. So that has to really anchor our work. It always has and will continue to. And at the same time, you know, we're thinking, we also think it's critical that we start leaning into this renter wealth issue for the people who ultimately live in these homes and ensure, you know, to this point, keeping rents affordable helps people, right? It helps them build wealth in that indirect way. And the more affordable we can keep rents, the more they will have to save. But we also think we can do more as a sector to accelerate their wealth creation. And that's kind of the question we're asking ourselves. How can we do that? How can we lean into this issue and be really proactive in our pursuit of closing that wealth gap? And we're exploring models, you know, that will allow residents of multifamily rental properties or apartment communities to have a greater stake in their community by making them a beneficiary, if you will, of some of the profits generated at their community. And so that's the kind of thing we're thinking about at Enterprise. And we've really kind of anchored this work in what we think is a three pronged approach to a successful shared equity model in multifamily housing. And it starts with resident services. We have been a supporter and advocate for resident services as an organization for many decades. And we believe they work, though they've been historically provided somewhat inconsistently at apartment communities. It's based on available funding or based on surplus cash flow. But we really think it's critical to our goal of building upward mobility for low and moderate income people to ensure that there is funding for resident services at apartment communities for low and moderate income people around the country. The second thing we're looking at doing in certain funds and properties is providing residents with an ability to participate in cash flow of their community when it exceeds a certain amount, you know, a certain amount required, of course, to pay operating expenses, to pay debt payments, and to pay required investor returns and, of course, maintain the communities at a good standard. But after that point, we're looking at ways where residents can participate in the success of their communities and specifically through rebates of their rents, you know, back to them on an annual basis proportionately to the profits that they, to the profit of the community or of the rent they paid from the profits of the community. And the third thing we're looking at, and we think this is one of the bolder goals of our vision, is actually providing long-term residents of the community with a housing-based wealth creation opportunity that's really historically been only afforded to homeowners. And our vision here is that residents, long-term residents of the community would participate in the value created in that community over time, thereby really starting to meaningfully close the wealth gap between renters and homeowners, excuse me. And specifically, not by making renters homeowners necessarily, well, that's a great goal, just kind of recognizing that that might not be for everyone. And instead by providing renters with indirect participation in the equity appreciation of their communities over time, much like what a passive investor experiences, but you know, without the requirement to contribute capital or pay a higher rent to get that. And you know, as I kind of started this session at the beginning, you know, our mission is to make home and community places of pride, power and belonging and platforms for resilience and upward mobility for all. And we really expect that by making renters stakeholders in their community, they will really achieve this greater sense of pride, power and belonging. And as a result, we'd expect renters to stay longer, to have a greater sense of responsibility in their community, and that this will ultimately translate into greater stability and cohesiveness of the community itself over time. And as great as this, as we believe this can and will be for low and moderate income renters, you know, I'd be remiss if I didn't acknowledge the capital market side of this, right, that this that that an idea of this magnitude really, you know, requires a special type of investor to back it and be willing to lean into the unique social return that this offers in recognition that the financial return, you know, by definition would have to be less than other traditional investment alternatives, because you're talking about sharing it with the residents who live in these communities. And we believe that investors in this type of shared equity model can and will receive a fair and reasonable rate of return, but certainly that they have to be willing to leave some of the upside on the table to ultimately benefit the low and moderate income people who helped the community succeed in the first place. And, you know, frankly, an idea this unique probably wouldn't have gotten traction in investment communities five years ago. But we believe we're at a bit of a moment in time an inflection point in the industry, if you will, where many investors are willing to consider such a trade off. And we hope to harness that into, you know, real radical change in who the ultimate beneficiaries are of multifamily housing communities and investing. And so that's that's kind of how enterprise is approaching the space. And, you know, we're we've got about 15 minutes left in the session to address questions. So I'm going to take a look at the chat box here and see if we have any, you know, what one question I see is from Mark. The question is, do these wealth building models work in other sectors? For example, can residents earn equity in a community facility? While they are a resident, can they earn equity in a school while their children are attending? It doesn't solve the home ownership issue, but can create wealth and community ownership? You know, John, I might direct this question to you, since you kind of have worked in this space through the lens of commercial facilities. Okay, I'm having trouble with my connections.  We see in cities, we have old schools with community space and, you know, subsidized space. It's a matter of how each project is capitalized. It can make that happen. So, you know, the answer is yes. A tricky part with some of the schools or something like that is, you know, this is put, you're putting a school which is publicly kind of, you know, a private, you know, a C corporation in your state, which I think goes at odds with the stability of the school, potentially the risk profile. We lost John there. He must have an unstable connection. So, you know, I'll sort of take on the opportunity to finish that question, Mark, but I think that, you know, I think that this concept, this kind of broader concept of shared equity can apply in multiple forms of real estate. You know, certainly there are challenges, right? We have to navigate our own challenges in apartment communities, you know, in terms of various subsidies that those communities benefit from and things like that. But what we found is, you know, the subject is worth the effort. The goal is ultimately worth sort of breaking those reasons not to do something down and dismantling them into something actionable. So, you know, John has a model where they've brought in community investors into retail in the community. We're looking at it through housing. I certainly don't see any reason why you couldn't look at it through private schools or community facilities. We've talked to residents in communities of Atlanta trying to join together to buy community facilities that they want to jointly use and operate. So, I think this is an emerging trend that's cross real estate asset. And we're going to see more and more of it in the coming years. Kimberly, Roy, anything to add to that question? I only note that, you know, I heard about an important public policy moved by the district of Columbia, which was announced this week, offering baby bonds. So $1,000 annual payments to children born between 2021 and 2025. You know, again, I think all sectors have a role to play in wealth building. And I think this is an interesting example of, you know, public policy shift. Those funds accrue to a child until their 18th birthday and then can be used for college home purchase or a small business startup. So, you know, right to the right problem.  But just to say that there's other important public policy opportunities. Thanks, Kimberly. There was another question from Kristen. And the question was, are you aware of good ways to address affordable housing issues through public equities? Curious, Roy, if you have any experience with this in the MRI portfolio, if you're aware of any publicly traded real estate companies or businesses that you guys have found that you consider to be, you know, interesting investees or just generally if there are opportunities to invest in public equities, you know, for the affordable housing space? Yeah, so at the moment, we are exclusively invested in the private markets. So private equity and venture capital. However, there are, so I don't know if there are any specific funds, but I see no reason why there couldn't be a REIT structure or other publicly traded structure that could open the door to greater capital flows. So that's an opportunity that I think is available. I mean, just to do some quick math. I mean, it's not a huge market, but if there's a, if you assume a 10 million unit shortage and, you know, very conservative $100,000 cost per unit, that's a trillion dollar market. And if you assume the equity component of that is roughly, that's roughly 30%, that's $300 billion. So that's a fairly, that could be a fairly liquid market for the equity required to build more affordable housing. So I think that's an area that has not been explored closely enough. Multi-family affordable rental housing private equity business has not been around that long. I think the largest fund is may have just crossed a billion dollars, but five years ago, the largest fund was maybe 250 million dollars. So it's a sector that's really ripe for growth. And I think, you know, enterprise is very well positioned from a number of different perspectives to take advantage of the opportunity, particularly given that the primary stakeholder for enterprise is the resident as opposed to some, you know, that's one of the advantages of being a non-profit. I'll stop there. Thanks, Ryan. Of course. I just, to build on Roy's comments, just put into the chat, community capital management, which is a fixed income manager, put together a fund with impact shares last summer that is focused on home ownership. And so that I just put a link to it for folks who might be interesting. Great. Thank you, Kimberly. Just going back to the chat. Adam asked, given the overall shortage of housing, Roy mentioned, what are the other main barriers to just building more housing in total? You see that need to be addressed. That's a great question. I think that, you know, there's multiple ways to answer it. I think that cost is, you know, we'd be remiss if we didn't acknowledge the cost barrier, which is really why new development of housing either has to be subsidized or target more of a luxury tendency and therefore be at the highest level of rent. And there are lots of innovators in the space really trying to tackle this question of cost and how can we bring down the cost of construction? You know, at least the controllables, you know, land is going to cost what it costs, but can we find new ways to build that ultimately brings down the cost? And, you know, I think we're sort of well on our way in that space, but haven't quite figured it out yet, right? If, you know, sometimes it's more expensive in the beginning to figure those things out because they're new and innovative. But long term, they pay dividends. And, you know, I think of, you know, 3D printing, right, or whatever that's called, the building houses, we're seeing that happen at a small scale. We're seeing containers used to build housing, right? There's innovation happening modular, of course, has been around for many years and is starting to really kind of get traction. So I think that's a big portion of it. The other side is the subsidy side and enterprises and advocate from a policy standpoint, both federally and at the state and local level, to bring new resources to bear. And certainly there's a lot going on in Congress right now that could result in more housing resources being produced or generated so that housing can be produced at a greater scale for people who need it the most at the lower level of the income spectrum. So those are the things I observe. Kimberly Roy, anything to add to that? I'll just add that. I think with a growing awareness of the risk reward profile of affordable housing, if you go back to the global financial crisis, I think the total default delinquency rate for affordable housing rental was in the... Fortunately, I think we might have lost Roy. So we'll let him come back and finish that thought. I guess I can just jump in, Chris, and say, I mean, I think to state the obvious, there's no silver bullet, right? It's any number of interventions. We've been talking internally recently about the recent guidance from Fannie Mae about counting rental payment history as part of a credit builder. I think you mentioned that there's any several really path-breaking opportunities within the reconciliation bill that could come forward. So I think it's a combination of new capital solutions, new technology solutions on the modular product types, and wedging affordability in whether it is home ownership or rental into little crannies across America. I think we've seen some really interesting work come out of Austin, their public housing authority, which I think is really on the leading front of trying to kind of, again, wedge that affordability in. But the housing crisis in America is just at untold proportions. And from an RWJ standpoint, we think that that translates actually out into health impact because of the financial stress and the mental stress that that puts on families. So for us, that's what kind of brings us to this issue is really what the physical implications are both at the family level and then at the community level. Yeah, thanks, Kimberly. And to add where I think Roy was going with his statement when he got cut off was the more private sector investors that find this space interesting from an impact standpoint and also a risk-adjusted return standpoint, the more resources exist to support more production and preservation. So I think you've got cost, you've got support from government and then private sector capital sort of all interacting with each other as barriers. The more of those things, the lower the cost can be, the better. And I think that's sort of the path forward here. There was a question about blockchain technology. I was curious if there's any scope of leveraging blockchain technology, perhaps platforms like Real T to tokenize properties and distribute the NFTs of it to the resident for the percentage of rent they pay. Super interesting question. And this is a kind of innovation that I think happens at these kinds of forums because a lot of us, myself included, are sort of probably know enough to be dangerous with NFTs and blockchain. But what I do know is that it creates a market. It has created sort of an interesting market for investment that's outside the public equity space or the private equity space. And so I think that it's a way to reach investors in a unique way. And I think to Roy's earlier point, the more investors kind of interested in this space, the more we're going to be able to bring that capital to do good in the communities around the country. And that I think is something that we should dig a little harder on as a follow-up. And it has been suggested to me, actually, in the concept that we talked about, what we're calling the Renter Wealth Creation Fund, where we're inviting residents to participate, that maybe that participation should be in a blockchain structure. And that that might be a way to, frankly, navigate through some regulatory hurdles around making individuals, investors. And blockchain has a little different dynamic to it in that regard. I also see a question from Matt about the subsidy going disproportionately to homeowners, more so than renters. Couldn't agree more. This is something Enterprise has been focused on for a long time in our federal advocacy efforts. Just the homeowner's mortgage interest deduction has been a tremendous vehicle for inducing homeownership and creating wealth of homeowners. And the same type of credit does not exist for renters. And while there have been sort of changes in that tax benefit that have limited it and leveled the playing field, if you will, as it relates to the standard interest deduction rising, which renters can take advantage of. I just want to point that out. There is still a lot of disproportionate tax subsidy going to homeownership. And there is a lot of research Enterprise has done that you can find on our website about the mortgage interest deduction and the amount of tax resources that go to rental housing versus homeownership. So Enterprise advocates for this. There is sort of a cross organization group that called the action campaign that advocates for expansion of low income housing tax credit and other resources. So I would encourage you all to check that out because that advocacy is happening and we'd love to have you join it so that the voice becomes louder and more powerful. Well, I think we're a minute out. I think John answered Lynn's question in the chat or directed some resources to her. And I think we've addressed all the questions. So I just want to thank all of the attendees for joining us today and listening to us share what we're doing and what we think is to come. I want to thank Kimberly, Roy and John for agreeing to participate here today. Your participation is invaluable and we really appreciate the perspective of all these different organizations. So thanks everyone and thanks Kimberly.


In 1822, a Polish physician was the first to publish that sunlight could cure the vitamin D deficiency disease, rickets. His work was ignored by mainstream medicine for a century, not coming into widespread use until the 20th century, when wire cages were fixed to tenement buildings so babies could benefit from the sun. Are we in a similar situation now where the medical profession is just not caught up with the science? Researchers have documented correlations between all sorts of good things to higher vitamin D levels, even to the point of seeing whether vitamin D supplementation might reduce the adverse effects of earthquakes. Seems to help with everything else, so why not? It's actually not as silly as it sounds. Traumatic events like natural disasters can have a significant psychological impact, which may be affected by vitamin D status. When researchers put supplements to the test, the purported links often didn't pan out. This lack of effect may exist in part because low vitamin D levels may just be a marker for things like aging, obesity, smoking, and inactivity. Or maybe low vitamin D didn't lead to disease, but maybe disease led to low vitamin D. Inflammation can drop D levels within the body. So just because low D levels and disease seem to be correlated doesn't mean that vitamin D deficiency is the cause. While the majority of observational studies may show a link where you just measure vitamin D levels and disease rates, in only a handful of conditions have interventional studies proven vitamin D to be effective, where you give people D supplements or placebo and see what happens. But one of those conditions for which vitamin D supplements appear to genuinely work is helping to prevent mortality. 56 randomized clinical trials involving nearly 100,000 people between the ages of 18 and 107, mostly women, randomized to four years of vitamin D supplements or sugar pills, put all the studies together, and those given vitamin D supplements lived longer. Also specifically lowering the risk of dying from cancer. Note this effect appeared limited to vitamin D3, though, the type derived from plants and animals, not D2, the type derived from yeast and mushrooms. How large an effect was it? It would take 150 people taking vitamin D supplements for five years to save one life. And so if we were talking about a drug, you'd have to weigh that against the cost and side effects of dosing so many people. But when we're talking about something as safe and cheap as vitamin D supplements, it seems like a bargain to me. Similar analysis pegged the benefit at 11% in terms of reduction of total mortality, which is pretty substantial, potentially offering a life extension benefit on par with exercize. Though no, it does not seem to reduce the adverse effects of earthquakes. The only concern that was raised is that it may give people a license to order an extra donut or something. We still have to eat healthy. Any longevity benefit from vitamin D would just be a small adjunct to a healthy lifestyle. But for those of us who want all the help they can get, the question then becomes, OK, how much should we take? Randomized controlled clinical trials have found that vitamin D supplements extend one's lifespan. What is the optimal dose? What blood levels associated with living longest? In my nine-part video series on vitamin D back in 2011, I noted that the relationship between vitamin D levels and mortality appeared to be a U-shaped curve, meaning low vitamin D levels were associated with increased mortality, but so were levels that were too high with the apparent sweet spot around 75 or 80 nanomoles per liter, based on individual studies like this one. Why might higher D levels be associated with higher risk? Well, this was a population study, so you can't be sure which came first. Maybe the vitamin D led to higher risk, or maybe higher risk led to the vitamin D, meaning maybe those who weren't doing as well were prescribed vitamin D. Maybe it's because these were Scandinavian studies where they tend to take a lot of cod liver oil as the vitamin D supplement. One spoonful of which could exceed the tolerable upper daily limit of intake for vitamin A, which could have negative consequences, even if you don't inject it into your penis. I was surprised to see cod liver oil listed among the long list of things men have tried to inject into themselves, because they felt they were coming up short, though may have ended up even shorter after all the reconstructive surgery. Anyways, the U-shaped curve is old data. An updated meta-analysis has shown that as population vitamin D levels go up, mortality appears to go down and stay down, which is good, because then we don't have to test to see if we're hitting just the right level. Routine testing of vitamin D levels is not recommended. Why? Well, it costs money, and in most people levels come right up to where you want them with sufficient sun or supplementation, so they figure what's the point. But also, because the test is not very good, results can be all over the place. What happens when you send a single sample to a thousand different labs around the world? You may be expect a little variation, but not this. Results from the same sample range to anywhere from less than 20 to over 100. So, depending on what lab your doctor sent your blood sample to, the results could have placed you here or here. So, not necessarily very helpful. So, what's a safe dose that will likely get us to the purported optimal level? A thousand units a day should get most people up to the target 75 nanomoles per liter, which is 30 nanograms per milliliter. But by most people, they mean 50%. To get around 85% of the population up to 75 would crowd 2,000 a day. 2,000 international units a day would shift the curve from here to here. That way, we can take the average person into the desired range without fear of toxicity. You can take too much vitamin D, but you don't tend to see problems until blood levels get up around 250, which would take consistent daily doses in excess of 10,000. Note that if you're overweight, you may want to take 3,000, or if obese, even more than that. If you're over age 70 and not getting enough sun, it may take 3,500 units to get that same 85% chance of bumping your levels past the target. Again, no need for the average person to test and retest, since a few thousand a day should bring almost everyone up without risking toxicity. Okay, but then why did the Institute of Medicine set the recommended daily allowance at 6 to 800 units? In fact, official recommendations are all over the map, ranging from just 200 a day all the way up to 10,000 a day. I'll try to cut through the confusion next.


South African former president Jacob Zuma, who's jailing earlier this month triggered some of the worst unrest of the post-apartheid era, appeared by video link in court on Monday to seek a further delay in his arms deal corruption trial. While the government has largely restored order in the streets, there are fears Zuma's latest court appearance could gain trigger protests or could again rather trigger protests from his support base efforts to persecute the ex-president for allegedly receiving kickbacks over a $2 billion weapons deal in the late 1990s are seen as a test of South Africa's ability to hold powerful politicians through account. Zuma has pleaded not guilty to the charges, including corruption, fraud and money laundering. He has cast himself as a victim of a politically motivated witch hunt in his attempts to evade persecution of a more than a decade.


Alright guys and we're trying out something new today. I got this scrub daddy right here and one of my favorite colors of green. So what I'm going to do is I'm going to hit this spot on the floor. We have sedimented dog feces and cat feces that will not come up. So let's see how well the scrub daddy holds up to these tough stains. Look at that. I was using a scraper and this just gets it right up no problem. I'm using my hospital gray disinfectant to rehydrate this right here and I'm actually pretty impressed with this thing. It's coming up like I'm using sandpaper but it's not hurting my floor at all. Shipping away at it. The spots that I couldn't get off were coming off pretty well actually.  I actually legitimately couldn't get that up before so that's pretty cool.


Without having mastery over time, nobody can determine the nature of their destiny in their lives. So the only way you can take charge of time is by mastering your energies, how they function. If you are functioning like a steam engine, it's a long time. If you're functioning like a jet engine, boom! And one who's taken charge of time for him, the entire universe is a sweetness of compassion. Once you came here as a human being, life got a little complicated. If you came here like any other creature on this planet, stomach full, life settled. Once you come here as a human being, stomach empty, only one problem. Stomach full, one hundred problems. So what we're calling as life here is just a certain combination of time and energy. This combo of time and energy, unfortunately, majority of the people never learn to handle it seamlessly and wonderfully. Hitch after hitch, everything is a problem. If you're a toddler, you have diaper problems. If you become an adolescent, you have hormonal problems. If you become middle age, there is a crisis. Old age is horrible. Every face of life, people are seeing it as some kind of a problem. Of course, death is a serious problem. So this combination of time and energy, we must understand the nature of what we're handling. Time by its own nature is such, you do something, it rolls. If you don't do something, it rolls. You don't have to push it, I'm saying. Hello? As you're sitting here, it's rolling away. You're doing a lot of things, it's rolling away. You do nothing, it rolls away. You're awake, it rolls away. You're asleep, it rolls away. But without having mastery over time, nobody can determine the nature of their destiny in their lives. How to grab time? People are talking about time management. Have you ever managed time? As you sit here, it's ticking away. And what's ticking away is not a clock. What's ticking away is our life itself. Hello? Since I walked in, you're two minutes closer to your grave. Yes, you are, me too. This is the nature of time. Whatever you do, do not do, do anything you want. But you're not able to roll it back. It is only rolling forward. It is just that, if you're happy, it seems to tick away very fast. If you're miserable, it goes very slowly for you. Have you noticed this? On a particular day, you're very happy. Twenty-four hours chup. Now you're depressed. Twenty-four hours feel like a yawn for you. Yes or no? So only miserable people have a long life.  If you're an ecstatic person, it's just a moment. Poof, it's gone before you know what's happening. Life has gone so fast that even my body has not realized time has gone by. And it's still... I have not realized time has gone by. This is the thirtieth year of Isha. It's thirtieth anniversary of Isha Foundation. And I can't believe thirty years, it feels like three days in my experience. And in these three days or thirty years, my schedules are... Singapore is a holiday for me. I just come to golf and... Otherwise, my schedules are insane, okay? Every day, twenty hours minimum we are on. I have never been... I have never missed a single airplane till now. In a day, sometimes I've been in six airports, but I've never missed an airplane. I've never missed an appointment. I've never been late to an appointment in thirty years. But I don't manage time. I manage myself. Time, how to manage? It's too big a thing to manage. Not in your hands, but you like it or not, it's sticking away, isn't it? Yes?  If you jump around, it'll take away. Do whatever you want. It'll take away, isn't it? But what you can do with yourself, that you can manage, there's nothing to do with the time. So self-management, not time management. Just a few days ago, I was flying in from India. Normally it used to be thirteen and a half, fourteen hours, but now there is some issue that Pakistan is not allowing airplanes to fly over their airspace. So it's taking sixteen hours. Because I know all the pilots and I'm a licensed pilot myself, so they let me sit in the cockpit and I'm interested in what's happening there.  I said, no, Satguru, sixteen hours, it's so long. Then I said, see, I'm not complaining. Because just a century ago, if I had to go to United States, it was sixty days. Sixteen hours, I'm not complaining. I'm okay. I'll sit down, lie down, read something, do something or talk to you. But I'm not complaining about sixteen hours. How did sixty days become sixteen hours? Simply because from a chugging steam engine to a jet engine. Hello? Suddenly sixty days became sixteen hours. So the only way you can take charge of time is by mastering your energies, how they function. If you are functioning like a steam engine, it's a long time. If you're functioning like a jet engine, boom. Right now they're saying that Chinese have developed an airplane where Beijing to New York, you can do it in two hours. They're saying by twenty twenty-eight, they'll have it commercially ready. Two hours. So this is not mastery of time, but consequently it is mastery of time. If what somebody does in ten years, if you can do it in one year, if both of you live for hundred years in terms of impact and exp... profoundness of experience, you live for a thousand years. Hello? That is the only way you can take charge of time. And one who's taken charge of time for him, the entire universe is a sweetness of compassion. That will be his experience of life once he's taken charge of time.


like to welcome you to my first session, we will start the first session with NFHS-5 data which has just come out recently. This is to understand the problem of undinutrition in India ok. So, let us understand what data shows us, this is NFHS-5 data national family health survey ok. And basically here in the first slide what you are seeing is the age wise distribution of nutrition indicators ok. So, age wise in a sense that what we have done whatever data that NFHS-5 had we have kind of distributed among the different age groups ok. So, here in you have months 0 to 2 months, 3 months, 4 to 5 months of baby, 6 months ok. And here you have a percentage on a y axis. So, here we have taken 3 indicators for example, blue is your wasting, your yellow line yellow bar is your underweight and red one is your stunting ok. So, we want to kind of show that what NFHS-5 showed is basically between 0 to 2 months of age you have almost 30 percent children who are wasted ok, almost 30 percent. 30 percent children are underweight and about say 28 percent are stunting. That means, right at births and then in first 2 months almost your 1 third children are not doing well ok, 1 third children that is a huge lot of number.  That means, our mothers are not getting enough nutritious rich food. So, babies are of course, grown low birth weight and also even if they are probably growing well, but because probably the latching on the milk transfer is not good from mothers to babies ok. And that is why you know you need to have a good amount of catch up growth and maximum occurs in first 2-3 months of age you know and that is not occurring ok. So, not only there is a tremendous amount of growth faltering occurring in first couple of months, but also growth catch up is not occurring ok. So, this is very very important to understand that first 2 first 0 to 2 months of age a lot of these babies are you know not not doing well. Looking at 3 month age data again if you look at your wasting, wasting from say around 29 percent has gone down to maybe 26 percent not much decrease in wasting ok and your underweight pretty much stays same ok. There is little bit of stunting decreasing which is good, but then let us go back to again 4 to 5 months of age and then look at again the wasting has not decreased much, underweight has not decreased much and stunting stays as it is ok and that is the same trend that you see in 6 months of age babies also. So, what we are saying is that in first 6 months of age where there should be tremendous amount of growth catch up occurring, there should be almost 0 growth faltering occurring should be occurring, but probably we are getting lot of growth faltering very poor growth catch up ok. Now, this again up to 6 months is all breastfeeding ok nothing as so, of course, milk transfer is a problem, problem many mothers are giving cow's milk and babies are getting diarrhea ok. So, we have to also consider that starting from 7 to 12 months of age now this age group if this is where there is introduction of complementary feeding and mother is learning how to introduce complementary feeding and how to increase dietary diversity and how to increase the frequency and the quantity ok. So, if you look at it there is little bit of improvement in wasting, but look at the underweight and stunting going up ok. This means that babies who are already malnourished in first 6 months they are becoming much more malnourished because there is no proper support of complementary feeding in this age group ok. So, now, you can see how all your underweight as well as your stunting going up ok, very very crucial stage we have seen many babies who grow beautifully on mother's milk till 6 months of age, but if mother is not supported on how to give complementary food they become thin you know they lose lot of weight and they become thin ok. And then let us go to 1 to 2 years of age now in 1 to 2 years of age what you see is basically now look at the stunting literally from 0 to 2 months you had about 28 percent now it is almost reaching to 40 percent ok. But significantly high number of stunting at between 1 to 2 years of age this means that completely the failure of first year of life when it comes to IYCF ok.  So, it is basically ongoing chronic condition and that is when you see remarkable increase in stunting as a baby is getting stunted obviously, baby's bones are small. So, now you have underweight also you know short baby is always kind of way underweight unless child puts on lot of fat ok. So, this is important that you know there is significant reduction or I would say significant increase in stunting and underweight ok. As stunting increases you can see wasting decreases ok. Now, this in my opinion is that as baby is becoming shorter and shorter you know your wasting is getting masked ok, because that shorter baby does not need to have that much weight to not come under wasting graph ok. So, that is why this is paradox as the stunting goes up the wasting comes down, but this is masking of wasting ok. Then comes your 2 to 3 years of age, in 2 to 3 years of age you can again see not much decrease in stunting look at the underweight going up you know it has gone up now from 30 to 31 percent to almost 34 percent ok. And again not much decrease in wasting similarly in this graph you can see that you know from 3 to 6 years of age actually 5 years of age 3 to 5 years of age you can see pretty much the same graph again stunting and underweight pretty high and then your wasting is kind of you know lingering around 16 to 17 percent ok. So, this age wise change in your underweight wasting and stunting is very important to understand, because once you understand the data you will understand the root cause and then you will be able to give the good solution ok. So, I am going to come to another bar graph this is under nutrition in India according to residents, residents in a sent urban or rural area ok. So, here if you look at stunting data obviously, stunting in you know your rural area is much higher than your urban area ok, pretty much same thing for underweight also wasting not much difference. So, in wasting your urban or rural area has equal number of wasted children underweight and stunting yes, because of course, as child is stunted child is going to vendor weight because bones are small ok. This is as per gender so, as per gender you can see that males are little bit higher when it comes to stunting and underweight wasting is not much difference, but little bit of just minor difference, but again you know males are at disadvantage you know normally what you would see that you know in India especially you will see girl children being more you know underweight and of course, wasted and stunted, but it is nature is protecting this girl child, because eventually she is going to bear a baby you know so, she is protected not that I am saying too much of protection, but it is probably nature's way of protecting a girl child ok. We need to work on all these indicators understand the root cause understand the issue and then we can definitely kind of understand the you know solution and we will come with excellent results. Now, this is another very good pie chart again under nutrition prevalence among children below 5 years of age ok. So, see out of 100 percent about 47.8 percent are absolutely normal when it comes to wasting, stunting and underweight ok. So, that is pretty low number actually you want almost 96 percent children to be in this category all normal, but you have only 47.8 percent which is almost half ok. Here what we have what we have done is basically we have seen we have taken data of babies children under 5 years of age who are only stunted ok, only stunted no underweight and no wasting also you. So, you have about 15 percent children who are only stunted, only wasted children children who are only thin wasting was thin you know child is thin right. So, only wasted children about 6.5 percent only underweight children are 2.3. So, that is a very low number generally underweight is usually associated with either wasting or stunting very rare to have you know underweight and this other children probably you know might have just had one or the two acute infection and suddenly weight has gone down, but not gone down as much that it shows up on wasting graph ok. About there is 0 percent babies who are only stunted and wasted ok. So, 0 percent in that and when it comes to stunting and underweight the reason you have only 0 percent stunting and wasting because stunting and wasting is always associated with underweight ok. So, you want to remember that that whenever you have a stunted child and wasted child child has to be underweight and that is why showing 0 percent not if you do not include underweight ok. When you have a stunted child and underweight child about 15 percent children are stunted and underweight ok.  Now you have underweight and wasted. So, you have about 7.5 percent children who are underweight as well as wasted ok.  So, it become underweight also. So, about 7.5 percent children are wasted and underweight ok. And if you look at all the three indicators which includes your stunting, wasting, underweight you have about 5.2 percent children who have all three indicators and this are the children who are at very high risk of a lot of complications ok because you have this chronically malnourished child who is stunted now is becoming wasted ok. So, of course, mortality also increases in this children ok who are stunted and you are wasted ok. So, this is another very important graph which is important to understand ok. Now, let us talk about the prevalence of stunting ok.  So, this is again you have the graph of India in front of you this is Bihar. So, you can see that in Bihar you have very high stunting rate almost you can look over here. This is your India stunting level which is about 36 percent, 36 percent children are stunted in India. And if you look at last few states you can see Meghalaya, Bihar, Uttar Pradesh, Kharkhand, you know Dadara, Nagar, Haveli. This are some of the states which are kind of doing even Gujarat in fact if you look at Gujarat Gujarat is doing worse when it comes to stunting level ok. And here again this are all the states that we have shown here is your Meghalaya, this is your Bihar you know and this are data which is showing more than 40 percent ok. And then between 30 to 39 percent it is all your red zone. So, basically pretty much the whole of India has more than 30 percent you know stunting rate which is significantly high. As I mentioned to you we want only maybe 2 to 2.5 percent children who are who should be or who may be less than minus to standard deviation. But instead of having 2.4 to 2.5 percent children being stunted we have significantly you can see the whole of India is pretty much 30 percent and about ok. Let us talk about Underweight. Underweight is also average underweight in India is about 32 percent. But if you look at all the states you know again pretty much the same states that you know I mentioned for stunting which is your Bihar, Gujarat, Jharkhand, Dadara, Nagar, Haveli, Damandu you know Maharashtra many many states are not doing good compared to India. Of course, India by itself is not doing well when you have 32 percent underweight that is pretty significantly high actually ok. States which are doing reasonably well I would say reasonably well compared to India standard not necessarily for world standard you have a couple of states you know few states from northeast your Mizoram, Sikkim, Manipur. Puducherry is doing pretty good compared to India and also Arunachal Pradesh and Punjab. Here you can see again pretty much same you know states you can see red all the red areas are all underweight about 30 percent ok. Not that we want 20 to 29 percent children underweight but you know just compares into to India standard ok. Now this is wasting wasting waste acute malnutrition so your Sam, Ma'am comes under wasting ok your thin like Asper height what is the weight of the child ok so again if you look at it average wasting in India it's about 19 percent you know so there are many states which are worse than India standard ok and that's you again see pretty much you know your Maharashtra, Gujarat, Bihar, Jharkhand, Assam, Tilangana, you know Dhadar, Nagarhavilli, Damanandu so this all basically not doing well here is your you know again your red areas wasting is pretty significant. Now suppose if child is doing very well if child is growing well in terms of height and if suppose child for couple of days or few days hasn't eaten because of some diarrhea pneumonia you definitely want to treat those infection but they come out pretty fast ok if the metabolism is very good you know they come out of infection very fast but what I saw in my program the children who were stunted already they were not growing well you know they were chronically malnourished when they got diarrhea it got very difficult to bring the child out of wasting ok so you want to make sure that you're just you know that longitudinal data is more important than the cross sectional data in wasting ok so cross sectional means you know you just measure weight for height even say once once and tell you know tell that oh this child is wasted generally I prefer that we have a longitudinal check up so child is growing well you know height child height wise child is growing well over period of time sometime when they have again infection they would get thin they would lose weight but again those shouldn't come out very fast when you treat infections ok so that's important you can see some of the economically advanced state are quite red in color so Maharashtra Gujarat you know some of those states are not I mean you know we did not expect this children to be wasted but again just looking at the wasting data I you know I won't comment you know we have to also look at stunting stunting in the states and stunting is also kind of high in both the states so both the states are not doing well as when it comes to child and child malnutrition ok now let's look at anemia this is your urban area rural area total anemia any anemia so you have different kinds of anemia so any anemia almost 65 percent children are anemic ok total of course higher in rural areas when you look at mild moderate and severe anemia again you know you have basically almost 30 percent children who come into mild category moderate category you have about you know about 35 percent children in rural areas and about 32 percent children in urban areas and severe anemia almost 2 to 3 percent children are severely anemic ok and total any anemia means mild moderate severe so if you calculate all three of them together you know just randomly take any child who is you know anemic that number is significantly high ok and unfortunately what happens when you are diagnosed with anemia and say nine months to one year of age those babies are already kind of have poor IQ because once you diagnose that means anemia has already kind of caused impact on their brain because you need good amount of oxygen going to child's brain because brain is growing very fast so this one is really crucial that we prevent anemia ok not of course we have to treat this anemia children also but again mother's milk and complementary food which is high in iron the counseling is very very important for mothers ok here you are looking at anemia among children in India according to gender so if you look at gender again you know in young children up to five years of age there is not much difference ok this of course girls children are not menstruating so they are not losing blood so this is all basically diet related anemias ok and here you can see both boy and a girl child almost 65 percent children are anemic ok not much difference gender wise when you look at you know the graph of India this is again you can see almost 60 percent children are anemic ok so we want to make sure that you know we we give again nutrition counseling is very very important six almost look at the 65 percent children anemic the dark is almost reaching 90 to 92 percent so the dark you know we need to kind of really intervene in the dark Gujarat also lord the states again same the other are going to really demand you you know this all states you know that we can basically work on to improve anemia ok this is status of key breastfeeding practices and if I just five so if you look at what are your breastfeeding indicators ok breastfeeding indicators is early initiation of breastfeeding and your exclusive breastfeeding rate ok so you look at early initiation of breastfeeding now we know that institution delivery has gone really high up you know on more than 90 percent deliveries occur in institution institution but look at the number of children who are given breast milk in the hospital within one hour ok very poor 40 percent only ok urban maybe around 40 to 43 percent but rural areas 40 the total comes out to be 41 42 percent not more than that ok so here we can really improve this any early initiation of breastfeeding you will see in one of my session that how that why early initiation is so important and what happens when you don't give breast milk within one hour that colostrum is extremely important to develop good immunity gut microbiome ok to prime that baby it's like you know when we take vaccine so when you when you vaccine with the baby you're basically priming that baby for infections in the future right similarly when you give breast milk first thing immediately as soon as baby is born that colostrum has you know good bacteria of the mother colostrum has human milk oligosaccharide and that's going to stimulate baby's immunity and it's going to fight infections not only immediately but lifelong ok so very very crucial that you work on this early initiation of breastfeeding another thing is ever breastfed child who receive prelactal feed means babies who get say something other than breast milk ok so very significant number of children they get prelactal feeds you know you can see it almost 20 percent children are getting prelactal feeds which is something other than breast milk ok what is the status of breastfeeding practices again if you look at the region wise so all these areas you can see all this red zone only early initiation of breastfeeding is only between 12 to 40 percent which is which is significantly poor you can see in India on only 42 42 percent of children are getting early initiation of breastfeeding many areas they are have early initiation of breastfeeding your Meghalaya has good amount of early initiation of breastfeeding Lakshwadeep, Odisha, you know Kerala right some of these areas like Jharkhand, Uttar Pradesh, Damandu, Tadarnagar, Availi, Bihar these are the areas that we saw they are not doing well when it comes to nutrition indicators and they are not even getting breast milk in first five first half an hour or so you know half an hour to one hour ok so you want to improve though in those states you definitely want to improve your early initiation of breastfeeding if you look at exclusive breastfeeding look at the exclusive breastfeeding rate in India is about 63 to 64 percent many mothers around 75 percent of the mothers they start exclusive breastfeeding they want they they start with exclusive breastfeeding but there is a there is a breastfeeding failure so you can see the failure that as child is growing up you know the exclusive breastfeeding rate going down this mothers means they are not getting support from healthcare workers on how to breastfeed so there is poor milk transfer weight gain is not happening and then probably pediatricians are starting formulas many pediatricians they do start formulas right away we have to also understand that this is absolutely not needed so this is also for pediatrician to please kind of start a breastfeeding exclusive breastfeeding at both as well as up till six months of age ok and again not much difference when it comes to urban rule a rule exclusive breastfeeding rate is a little bit higher than urban area again if you look at exclusive breastfeeding rate in India you know many states which are giving exclusive breastfeeding rate I mean exclusive breastfeeding to babies but they are not doing well when it comes to nutrition indicators ok. So, you Chhattisgarh, Dadar, Nagarhaveli, Damandu, Jharkhand you know a MP although they are giving good amount of exclusive breastfeeding rate but your nutrition indicators are not good that means milk transfer is not occurring ok. So, in my opinion only looking at exclusive breastfeeding rate is not enough you have to look at early effective and exclusive. So, I strongly believe in triply early effective and exclusive breastfeeding rate ok. Now, so other feeds like what are the other feeds that children are getting you know so many of this so your blue is your plain water so many babies almost 4 to 5 percent babies are getting plain water literally under two months of age they are also getting non milk liquid so they are getting either honey, good tea or any of those and other milk which is probably a cow milk formula and your complementary food. So, many babies are being given complementary feeding in by less than two months of age ok. You do not want all this thing because there is a high risk of infection and children will not grow well and as you can see as child is growing older you know your plain water intake is increasing complementary feeding rate is also increasing your other milk intake is also increasing ok. So, this particular graph is very very important ok status of complementary feeding 6 to 8 months as per resident. So, again you know around 52 percent children in urban areas are getting you know complementary feeding by 6 to 8 months of age and rule as is much less ok. This is about complementary feeding at 6 to 8 month again lot of the states in red zone are not getting complementary feeding by 6 to 8 months of age. So, the states need to improve remarkably again your UP Rajasthan, Jharkhand, Bihar you know this the states you know states in the middle are not doing very well ok. This is minimum acceptable diet.  So, again in India breastfed babies and even non breastfed babies only 10 to 11 percent babies are getting minimum adequate diet that means, enough frequency and enough dietary diversity ok. So, can you imagine only 10 percent to 12 percent babies are getting proper complementary food under you know 2 years of age. If this children do not get proper complementary food believe me they are going to become wasted they are going to become under weight stunted ok. So, this is important again this is age wise category of your minimum adequate diet, MAD I will focus on MAD which is a minimum adequate diet which includes your frequency as well as your dietary diversity ok. So, very very poor uptake of complementary feeding up to 2 years of age as you can see age wise it is pretty poor ok. Thank you so much as now we understood an FHS5 data very well. Let us see what in next session I am going to talk about what exactly we did in urban slums in other areas of India to improve this indicators in the small of course small program, but in those small program we learnt lot of you know loopholes and how to kind of come up with solutions to manage this malnutrition among those underprivileged children ok. Thank you.


In this study, we investigated the effectiveness of the BNT-162B2 mRNA SARS-CoV-2 vaccine in individuals with sarcoidosis compared to healthy controls. Our results showed that subjects with sarcoidosis have similar antibody responses to the vaccine as healthy controls, suggesting that they may be protected from infection. Additionally, our findings suggest that the antibodies produced by the vaccine persist over time in the sarcoidosis population. Further studies should investigate the role of other antibody types and their potential protective effects against infection. This article was authored by Crissen L. Wacht, Yixin Chang, Christian Ascoli, and others.


Do I have ADHD? Well, I'm about to take a test about the ADHD symptoms, so make sure that you stay tuned so we can find out together. What is up everybody? This is Chris from the Reward Soul, where we talk about the problem, but focus on the solution. And yeah, today I'm going to take an ADHD test. So it's still Mental Health Awareness Month. Be sure to share this video. Let's increase some awareness. A lot of people struggle with ADHD, so this is kind of a big deal. But anyways, I deal with this struggle that I could dedicate a whole video to. I read a lot of mental health books, right? And one of my fears is that reading these books makes me think I might have symptoms of a mental illness, which really trips me out. I was talking to my girlfriend about it, but it's one of the reasons why I'm going to start using better help for online therapy. And if you want to try better help, make sure you use the link down in the description below. But anyways, learning more about ADHD, I'm like, wait, I do that. I do that. And I do that. So I decided to take a test online, which is by no means like a diagnosis. This involves seeing a professional and things like that. So I'm just going to kind of get a rough idea of if I have any of the symptoms. So let's do this thing. All right. So all I did was hop onto Google and type in ADHD test. And the first one came up from Psych Central, pretty legit website. So let's see how this thing goes. I am a 32 year old, 33 next month, male. All right. So newly diagnosed? No. All right. One, how often do you have difficulty sustaining your attention while doing something for work, school, a hobby or fun activity? Example, remaining focused during lectures, lengthy reading or conversations. So like for example, right now I was just in class. I'm doing online courses for certified alcohol and drug counselor. And my mind was like all over the place. I'm checking the phone and stuff like that. But this is one of the reasons I meditate because it helps me acknowledge when my mind is wandering and going to other places. So I catch myself more often. Now, even though I catch myself, it doesn't really mean that I'm always going to pull my attention back. Sometimes I'll let my brain go and do its thing. All right. So let's say I'm not going to say often. I think that would be an exaggeration. All right. So number two, how often are you easily distracted by external stimuli? Like something in your environment or unrelated thoughts? All right, often. So this is the thing. Like I get hyper focused on things. And that's like, when something pops into my mind that I really am passionate about or I really want to do, like I have to do it. Like I'm really interested in how much that plays into addiction as a whole. Because from what I've been reading people with ADHD, they get this like laser like focus on something that gets their attention. And it's really hard to pull them away. So I got this idea for a video. I'm like, should I wait till tomorrow? Nah, I'm gonna do it right now. So let's see. Three, how often do you avoid dislike or are reluctant to engage in tasks that require sustained mental effort or thought? Never. Yeah, that's like, no, I don't, I don't do that. Like what I will say is if it's a task that doesn't interest me, I might avoid it. But like most things like I'm there. All right. How often do you have trouble listening to someone even when they are speaking directly to you? Like your mind is somewhere else. I'm going to go ahead and say rarely. I'll be honest, it depends on the person, the person, but something I practice a lot is mindful communication to connect with that person. I have clients who come in and things like that who need, who need to talk with me and sometimes about serious stuff. My girlfriend, I try to give her as much of my attention as possible, even though sometimes I pick up this thing while we're talking. But like my son, I'm really bad about it and I feel awful. But like again, I'm mindful of it and I try to give him my full attention. But he's nine years old and sometimes he just goes on and tells these like really irrelevant stories and my mind starts to wander. But anyways, Dylan, if you ever watch this, I'm sorry, daddy's working on it. All right. Number five, how often do you have difficulty in organizing an activity or tasks needing to get done? Poor time management fails to meet deadlines, difficulty managing sequential tasks. I'm going to say sometimes instead of often. Like only because fails to meet deadlines, I'm a huge procrastinator still, but I do not miss deadlines. Like it is extremely rare. The way I manage my hectic brain and racing thoughts is that I'm an organized mess. But yeah, time management and stuff. I've been talking to my buddy Kayla from the YouTube channel, Panko Bunny, about doing calendar blocking and like I'm trying to do calendar blocking on Google Calendar. So I have better time management, but I haven't found the time to do this thing that will help me manage my time. So hopefully I'll do that this week. All right. Number six, how often do you fail to give close attention to details or make careless mistakes and things such as schoolwork, at work or other activities? I'm going to say rarely. I'm not going to say never because I'm not perfect. But yeah, like that's one of the biggest reasons I practice mindfulness. Like so many of us like we're just forgetful or we're not paying attention and things like that. We don't follow instructions.  I skim a lot of things. But when it comes to like a task, I'm really, really focused on making sure that every piece of it is done. For example, it's something I teach my son when it comes to Legos. Like so, so many things in life are about following instructions. So I'm going to say rarely. All right. Number seven, how often do you forget to do something you do all the time such as missing an appointment or parent paying a bill? Rarely. Very rarely. You know what? Oh, this is only part two or three. Okay. Anyways, rarely, rarely, rarely. I have managed to set up reminders for myself. I'm a very forgetful person. I've taught some of you about this in other videos. I forgot which one. Sorry. But anyways, I utilize my cell phone a lot. Like when somebody gives me information to do something, I almost immediately put a reminder in my phone so I don't forget about it. I suggest you do that too if you're forgetful. Number eight, how often do you lose, misplace or damage something that's necessary in order to get things done? Rarely. Your phone, eyeglasses, paperwork, wallet keys, no, no, no, no, no. You know what? Never. I'm going with never. Like, no, no, no, no, no. I am very systematic with important things. Like, I have a pocket system, you know, phones in this one, keys in that one, wallet in the back pocket, right? Don't try to mug me, by the way. But anyways, I have a system and I always do a pocket pack before I walk out of the door. Um, because, all right, I'll switch to rarely, because I have now and then locked myself out of the house. So I do my best to always do like a pocket pad. All right, nine, how often do you have trouble following through on instructions or failing to finish schoolwork chores or duties in the workplace? You start a task with a quickly loose focus and are easily sidetracked. I'll do sometimes like, I don't know, but is that really ADHD? I avoid doing stuff that I don't want to do. Think a lot of people do that. But yeah, all right. So number 10, how often are you unable to play or engage in leisurely activities quietly? What? Never? What? That's a weird question. I don't know. Maybe I guess it makes sense. But yeah, maybe it's just weird to me. Like, I don't know. I just can't imagine like doing leisurely activities and making a lot of noise. Let's see. Number 11, how often do you have difficulty waiting your turn, such as while waiting in line? Never, never. I love waiting in lines. When I wait in lines, that's what I'm replying to all your YouTube comments and DMs and emails and all that stuff. Like put me in a line. I make stuff happen. All right. Or a good book. Go to the DMV, bring a good book. All right. Number 12, how often do you feel like you're on the go, acting as if you're driven by a motor? Example, you're unable to be or, wait, you're unable to be or uncomfortable being still for an extended period of time, such as in a restaurant or a meeting? Rarely. I don't really get fidgety. I can sit somewhere forever. My main problem is just getting tired. That's the main issue. Like if I like, if I stand up like during like a lecture or something like that, it's because I'm tired. It's not because I need to like like move around. 13, how often do you leave your seat in situations when remaining seated is expected? Like that's almost the same, but I'm gonna, I don't know. I'm going to say rarely. Like I was going to answer it based on like what the test is wanting or not what the test is wanting. Like I do, but only when I'm tired. I don't get fidgety. All right. So 14, how often do you blurt out an answer before a question has been completed? Uh, it's a no, no, no, no. I'm going to say never. Like today, never. Like again, mindfulness, man, if you're getting anything from this video, start practicing mindfulness. Like it happens a lot where I get the urge. I get the urge like when somebody's talking slow and I'm in a rush, or if I just want them to get to the point, like I'm mindful of getting this urge to do that. And I restrained myself and let them finish because I don't like getting interrupted. Do you? No, of course not. So I, I restrained that urge. Now, if that was a question about the urge to do so, I'd say often. All right. Last page. How often do you feel restless? Like you want to get out and do something sometimes? Um, it's not really get out and do something, but I do, I do have a problem, like just sitting back and relaxing. Um, and I don't know how much of that would be related to this or just my workaholic mindset. Like it's very hard for me to just sit down and watch a movie with my son or with my girlfriend. It's really hard for me to just sit down and read.  You need to go do work. So not like get out, but like in. Yeah. How often do you fidget with or tap your hands or feet or squirm in your seat? Rarely. How often do you find yourself talking excessively? Often. I didn't know this was like a symptom. Um, I, I'm very long-winded. I'm long-winded. Do, do all of you understand how hard it is for me to not make each video 30 minutes? I have to shorten them just because of other people's inability to sustain their attention, but I'm very long-winded. Like if, if you were ever in one of my groups, like when people ask me questions, it is a very long answer. Like some people are afraid of public speaking. I used to be, but like now like I, I love it. Like I always have something to talk about. Like go check my live stream. I'll link it up here, but I'll talk all day, baby. 18. How often do you interrupt or intrude on others, such as budding into their conversations or talking over whatever, uh, what others are doing? Never. That kind of relates to that other one. Uh, 19. Were several of symptoms, were several of the symptoms present prior to age 12? I don't know. I did, I did a lot of mind altering substances. Let's, let's say no. See, I'm answering no because I feel bad. I don't want to, I check in with my brain and I don't want to try to have ADHD. You know what I mean? Like I, I, I've been restraining myself in this meal. Like, yes, often. Yeah. Yeah. Yes. Cause another video I need to do something about is when people are like trying to have symptoms of a certain illness and like we need to really be mindful of when we're doing that. Like it's okay to just be okay. Um, do, do the symptoms appear, uh, do the symptoms appear in at least two or more settings? Yes. All right. Score my ADHD quiz. You scored a total of 21 in attention. Subscale is 13. Oh, so there's two different things. Okay. So hyperactivity, impulsivity, subscale eight. So adult ADHD is 34 and up. Um, moderate ADHD is 26 and 33. ADHD possible. See, that's why I made this video to see if it was possible that I had ADHD. Boom. We figured it out, ladies and gentlemen. All right. Um, so yeah, yeah, that's interesting. Like I think this actually maybe put my mind at ease a little bit. Like maybe I don't have it. Maybe I just have a racing mind. I don't know. But anyways, like I said, uh, once I, once I have some more funds, I am signing up for better help online therapy again, linked down in the description. Um, to see, um, what I can do. But until then I'm going to keep on meditating to train my attention. If you have, if you know somebody who might have some of these symptoms, make sure you share it with them. They might realize that they need to go get help. Who knows? Helping others, that's what we do. But yeah, if you liked this video, please give it a thumbs up. And if you are new here, I'm always making videos to help you out with your mental health. And sometimes I'm trying to help mine. Click that little round subscribe button. And if you want to check out some other videos on this channel, you can click or tap on that thumbnail right there. All right. So thank you so, so, so much for watching. Try to keep your mind focused and I'll see you next time.


check this out this is a camera 3 look at that also bring it up I'll get this uh I'll take this off of here so it's better quality for you but I wanted to show you that that's not sure what that is but we're going to go outside right now I'm gonna keep you rolling while we go outside so this is uncut it's that camera's right there on that side there there's nothing on that camera so let me grab a light and I'll show I'll show you I'll prove it to you then we'll go back in I'll show you again okay focus there we go there's nothing on that camera nothing that weird oh let's go in and see if it's still doing it's been doing it for about 10 minutes now there it is still there yeah look at that you guys saw there's nothing out there I saw bring it up on the big screen for y'all actually take it this is my DVR right here and what I do is I plug my memory card in there and then I plug it in the back of here and I put it on a memory card all right so I'm gonna take this footage off here and I'll put it on the so it'll be big screen for you I just wanted to show you you know the time and date weird looks like there's a there's a car out front here hmm maybe they're just looking at the lights okay anyway all right guys there's something else for you that's weird so here's the clip the actual clip from this camera