Beyond the Standard

Williams Cancer Institute

Dr. Jason Williams and Dr. Nathan Goodyear go live every week to break down the cancer research patients are actually reading about. Dr. Williams is an interventional oncologist and the founder of Williams Cancer Institute, where he treats advanced cancers by injecting immunotherapy directly into tumors. Dr. Goodyear is an integrative oncologist focused on metabolism, the microbiome, and the environment a tumor grows in. They take the week's headlines and explain what the study really found, what got left out, and what it means for someone facing a diagnosis today. Not medical advice.

  1. 6d ago

    Our New Book on Cancer and Why You Need It

    Originally recorded October 16, 2026. We've spent years researching cancer, immunity, and aging, and we're finally getting that work into readers' hands. In this episode, we're introducing our new book and why we're releasing it first as six short Kindle installments, with another planned every six weeks before the complete edition next spring. Our goal is simple. We want patients, families, and anyone interested in their long-term health to have access to the questions, science, and ideas that shape our work. We begin with a question every patient deserves to understand. What is cancer, and what should successful treatment look like? Dr. Jason Williams explains why eliminating a tumor is only part of the goal when treatment can also affect a person's health and quality of life. We talk about the limitations of one-size-fits-all care, the value of precision, and why we believe people should be able to understand the decisions being made about their bodies. Our first mini-book also includes material on GLP-1 medications such as Ozempic and their potential relevance to cancer and aging research. Dr. Nathan Goodyear explores the connections among metabolism, immune signaling, hormones, and the gut microbiome. We explain why we're interested in repurposed medications as part of individualized research and why emerging findings should be distinguished from established cancer treatments. We then explore cellular reprogramming and a central idea behind the book. Cancer and aging share some biological pathways, and the immune system is involved in both. Dr. Williams discusses senescent cells, the signals that surround tumors, and the possibility of changing how damaged cells behave. We look at preliminary animal research alongside the unanswered questions about safety, effectiveness, and what could eventually translate to people. The conversation also considers longer lifespans, affordability, and who might benefit from future advances. Finally, Dr. Williams shares why his mother's spinal problems made his interest in aging research personal. He describes changes he observed after an experimental approach, while acknowledging that more research is needed. We close with the reason we're publishing now. We want you to read, ask questions, and share what you learn, so patients and families can take a more informed role in their care. What is covered 00:29 We introduce the new book and the six-part Kindle release.01:31 Dr. Williams explains why he wanted to write another cancer book.03:34 Dr. Goodyear explains why patient education matters.05:24 We explain why the book begins with the fundamentals of cancer.06:28 Dr. Williams questions how treatment success should be measured.08:51 We explain why we're releasing the material before the full book.10:07 The first installment expands into GLP-1s and cellular reprogramming.11:20 Dr. Goodyear discusses GLP-1 drugs and precision oncology.14:41 We examine the shared biology of cancer and aging.16:49 Dr. Williams compares cancer cells and senescent cells.20:29 We discuss experimental cellular reprogramming.25:42 We reveal the book cover and explain the viewer offer.29:14 The doctors discuss future longevity possibilities and uncertainties.41:39 We consider who will be able to access emerging treatments.48:10 Dr. Williams shares his mother's experience with aging research. A weekly livestream from Williams Cancer Institute. Dr. Nathan Goodyear and Dr. Jason Williams take the cancer news dominating your feed and tell you what the underlying science supports. Dr. Williams is an interventional oncologist and the author of The Immunotherapy Revolution. Dr. Goodyear is an integrative oncologist. For educational purposes only. This is not medical advice.

  2. Oct 2

    Can infections lead to cancer? | Beyond the Standard

    Originally recorded October 2, 2026. Some cancers begin with infection rather than with inherited mutations or lifestyle factors alone. Dr. Jason Williams explains how viruses can insert genetic material into cells, how chronic infections can create persistent inflammation, and why pathogens such as HPV, H. pylori, hepatitis B, and Epstein-Barr virus belong in the cancer conversation. Some infection-linked cancer risks can be reduced or treated before they progress. The discussion first focuses on HPV. Dr. Williams explains how viral proteins can make an HPV-related tumor more visible to the immune system and why those cancers can behave differently from tumors without a viral component. He also discusses the role vaccines can play in prevention and describes how vaccines have been explored as immune stimulants during cancer treatment, including intratumoral approaches intended to increase immune activity at the tumor site. The conversation then turns to H. pylori, the stomach bacterium associated with chronic inflammation and certain gastric cancers. Dr. Williams explains how H. pylori can be detected, why some blood tests can be misleading after a past infection, and why treatment usually requires antibiotics. That creates a second problem because antibiotics can disrupt the gut microbiome, sometimes removing bacterial species that may not fully recover. Dr. Williams then looks at ways medicine may become more precise. He discusses bacteriophage therapy, which uses viruses that attack bacteria, as a potential strategy for targeting infections without the broad collateral damage of conventional antibiotics. He also explains why antibiotic sensitivity testing and more localized treatment may reduce unnecessary exposure. Natural compounds may sometimes support treatment, he says, but they should not be treated as substitutes for appropriate care when an infection is serious. The episode closes on prevention and timing. Dr. Williams discusses HPV and hepatitis B vaccination, H. pylori testing when symptoms warrant evaluation, and why infection-related cancers can look very different when caught early versus after they become advanced. The larger theme is that infection, immunity, inflammation, and cancer are connected. What is covered 00:10 The episode introduces the link between infection and cancer.01:29 Dr. Williams explains how viruses can alter healthy cells and drive cancer.02:24 Dr. Williams discusses HPV-related cancers and changing patterns in his practice.03:20 Dr. Williams explains why HPV-related tumors can respond differently to immunotherapy.04:18 Dr. Williams discusses why vaccines may stimulate immunity near a tumor.06:44 Dr. Williams explains how vaccines have been studied alongside cancer treatment.07:41 The conversation turns to H. pylori and its connection to stomach cancer.08:30 Dr. Williams explains how H. pylori can be detected and why testing has limitations.09:23 Dr. Williams describes why treatment can be hard on the gut microbiome.12:41 Dr. Williams explains how antibiotics can alter some gut bacteria long term.14:18 Dr. Williams discusses choosing antibiotics more precisely when sensitivity data are available.15:35 Dr. Williams introduces bacteriophage therapy as a more targeted way to attack bacteria.17:01 Dr. Williams explains why natural antibacterial approaches still require caution.19:34 Dr. Williams compares localized infection treatment with localized cancer treatment.21:13 Dr. Williams closes with practical prevention and screening considerations. A weekly livestream from Williams Cancer Institute. Dr. Nathan Goodyear and Dr. Jason Williams take the cancer news dominating your feed and tell you what the underlying science supports. Dr. Williams is an interventional oncologist and the author of The Immunotherapy Revolution. Dr. Goodyear is an integrative oncologist. For educational purposes only. This is not medical advice.

  3. Sep 25

    Can a Blood Test Screen for Cancer Accurately?

    Originally recorded September 25, 2026. A single blood draw that looks for signals from many cancers sounds like the kind of screening tool medicine has been waiting for. Dr. Jason Williams and Dr. Nathan Goodyear examine the Galleri multi-cancer blood test and explain why the promise is real but the limitations matter just as much. Dr. Williams argues that a negative result should never be treated as proof that cancer is absent. He compares the test to fishing in a lake and catching nothing. The result changes what you know, but it does not prove that no fish are there. Dr. Goodyear explains what the test is actually looking for. As tumors grow, they can shed fragments of DNA into the blood, and patterns in those fragments can point toward cancer and sometimes toward a likely tissue of origin. The doctors discuss why the test may be more useful as an additional tool than as a replacement for established screening or diagnostic imaging. They also explain the risk on both sides of the result. A false positive can trigger anxiety and unnecessary testing, while a false negative can create false reassurance and delay follow-up that still matters. The conversation then moves into cancer myths. Dr. Williams explains why healthy habits can reduce risk without making anyone immune to cancer, and Dr. Goodyear pushes back on the idea that diet has no role in cancer care. They discuss the limits of simple claims about sugar, why cancer biology is multifactorial, and why no single cause or treatment can explain every case. The final segment focuses on survivorship. As more people live for years after a cancer diagnosis, Dr. Goodyear argues that survival alone is no longer enough to measure success. He discusses the physical, psychological, functional, and financial consequences that can remain after treatment, including evidence that some cancer therapies may accelerate biological aging. Dr. Williams connects that problem to a larger goal for treatment. The best outcome is not simply removing cancer, but helping a patient return to a life that is as healthy and functional as possible. He also discusses early research into cellular reprogramming and the possibility that future therapies may one day address cancer and aging together. What is covered 00:36 The doctors introduce the Galleri multi-cancer blood test and its promise.02:15 Dr. Williams explains why a negative blood test cannot rule out cancer.04:20 Dr. Goodyear explains why the test should not be confused with early detection.08:21 The doctors explain what cancer-related signals a blood test can detect.09:15 Dr. Goodyear explains how tumor DNA patterns can point toward a likely cancer source.11:49 Dr. Williams compares screening tests with blood tests used after a cancer diagnosis.13:12 The doctors discuss why medical statistics and test limitations matter.16:31 The doctors explain the risks of false positive and false negative results.17:35 Dr. Williams explains how routine blood work can be misunderstood.21:00 The doctors challenge common myths about cancer risk and diet.23:21 Dr. Williams explains why simple claims about sugar can become misleading.25:24 The conversation turns to cancer survivorship and life after treatment.27:46 Dr. Goodyear explains why survivorship must include quality of life.30:16 Dr. Williams explains why treatment success should include long-term health.33:51 Dr. Williams discusses early research into cancer, aging, and cellular reprogramming. A weekly livestream from Williams Cancer Institute. Dr. Nathan Goodyear and Dr. Jason Williams take the cancer news dominating your feed and tell you what the underlying science supports. Dr. Williams is an interventional oncologist and the author of The Immunotherapy Revolution. Dr. Goodyear is an integrative oncologist. For educational purposes only. This is not medical advice.

  4. Sep 18

    Are stress and alcohol elevating your cancer risk? | Beyond The Standard

    Originally recorded September 18, 2026. The episode opens with four themes drawn from the latest AACR cancer progress report. Dr. Nathan Goodyear begins with “cancer interception,” a term he uses for the narrow window between prevention and treatment when a precancerous condition or very early disease may still be stopped before it becomes invasive. He explains why the idea depends on risk, screening, and timing, and why interception should not be confused with simply lowering risk before disease appears. The conversation then turns to de-escalation. Dr. Goodyear argues that the goal should be the right amount of treatment for the individual patient rather than automatically doing more. He traces that idea through changes in breast surgery, radiation, active surveillance, robotics, and precision oncology. He also explains why reducing unnecessary intervention can matter for quality of life, surgical stress, immune function, and the risk of complications. A large portion of the episode focuses on chronic stress. Dr. Goodyear describes stress as a measurable physiologic response that can affect metabolism, hormones, immune signaling, and the tumor microenvironment. He distinguishes chronic stress from short, adaptive stress such as exercise and discusses why the stress created by diagnosis, treatment, and even the way a prognosis is communicated may matter to a patient’s ability to cope with cancer. The discussion closes on the physician’s responsibility to be honest without stripping away hope and to treat the person rather than reducing someone to a diagnosis. The final segment examines alcohol and cancer. Dr. Goodyear acknowledges ethanol as a carcinogen while arguing that dose, pattern of use, treatment status, and the broader lifestyle context still matter when counseling an individual patient. During active treatment, he says he generally asks patients to stop drinking so the body can focus on treatment and recovery. The larger point returns to the theme running through the episode. Cancer care works best when risk, treatment, stress, behavior, and the individual patient are considered together rather than in isolation. What is covered 01:40 The AACR report and four themes that frame the episode.03:20 Dr. Goodyear explains cancer interception and how it differs from prevention.06:56 Risk assessment, screening, and the narrow window before invasive disease.12:46 Why cancer care is testing whether less treatment can sometimes be enough.13:12 Dr. Goodyear makes the case for de-escalation and active surveillance.17:19 How robotics may reduce surgical time, complications, and variability.20:11 Why “more is better” can conflict with precision oncology.23:09 Chronic stress enters the discussion as a cancer risk factor.24:08 Dr. Goodyear explains how stress affects hormones, metabolism, and immunity.27:16 Surgical stress, immune suppression, and the response to cancer treatment.29:14 Why the words used around a cancer diagnosis can add another source of stress.36:30 Dr. Goodyear argues for honesty, hope, and a better patient-doctor relationship.42:38 Acute stress, chronic stress, exercise, and what can realistically be changed.48:31 The conversation shifts to alcohol, cancer risk, and the importance of context.58:03 Dr. Goodyear explains how he approaches alcohol during active cancer treatment.01:05:28 Why restoring trust and humanity in cancer care matters. A weekly livestream from Williams Cancer Institute. Dr. Nathan Goodyear and Dr. Jason Williams take the cancer news dominating your feed and tell you what the underlying science supports. Dr. Williams is an interventional oncologist and the author of The Immunotherapy Revolution. Dr. Goodyear is an integrative oncologist. For educational purposes only. This is not medical advice.

  5. Sep 12

    Can Very Hot Drinks Raise Cancer Risk? Plus Tumor Ablation and the Aging Gut

    Originally recorded September 11, 2026. A treatment that destroys a tumor may also change the immune response around it. Dr. Jason Williams and Dr. Nathan Goodyear open with a study of pulsed electric field ablation in early-stage lung cancer and discuss why the way a tumor is destroyed can matter. Dr. Williams explains how rapid electrical pulses can kill tumor cells while preserving proteins and danger signals that help alert the immune system. Dr. Goodyear expands on the formation of tertiary lymphoid structures inside tumors and why B cells, T cells, dendritic cells, and other immune components may work together to create a broader and potentially longer-lasting response. The discussion then turns to how cancer treatment could become more dynamic. Dr. Williams describes a future in which biopsy and treatment could happen together. Dr. Goodyear argues that the important question is not only what a tumor looks like before treatment, but whether its immune environment can be changed. They discuss the limits of static biomarkers and why intratumoral treatment may help reveal which tumors can be pushed toward greater immune engagement. The second story asks whether very hot drinks can raise cancer risk. Dr. Williams explains how repeated heat injury to the esophagus can trigger cycles of tissue damage, repair, and inflammation. Dr. Goodyear points out a major limitation in the research because participants described their drinks as warm, hot, or very hot without a measured temperature. The doctors also discuss symptoms that can accompany esophageal cancer, including increasing difficulty swallowing and persistent hoarseness, and why repeated irritation matters more than an occasional burned tongue or throat. The final segment moves from the esophagus to the gut. A mouse study involving an age-associated gut bacterium leads into a broader discussion of the microbiome, immune function, inflammation, cellular senescence, and aging. Dr. Goodyear explains how loss of microbial diversity can weaken the gut barrier and contribute to systemic inflammation, while Dr. Williams argues that the microbiome is one more way the immune system can influence how the body ages. They close with a practical point that applies beyond any single supplement. The doctors favor diverse, fiber-rich, minimally processed food over relying on generic probiotics alone. What is covered 00:58 Dr. Williams explains why pulsed electric field ablation may stimulate immunity.04:37 Dr. Williams describes what happens inside a tumor after electrical ablation.06:24 Dr. Williams explains how tertiary lymphoid structures form near a tumor.07:37 Dr. Goodyear explains how B cells and T cells contribute to immune memory.11:33 The doctors discuss combining a biopsy with immediate tumor treatment.14:00 Dr. Goodyear explains why dynamic immune response may matter more than static markers.16:34 The doctors examine whether very hot drinks can raise esophageal cancer risk.19:02 Dr. Goodyear explains why temperature and other variables complicate the research.22:52 The doctors describe symptoms that can accompany esophageal cancer.24:05 Dr. Williams explains how the esophagus repairs heat injury.27:12 A mouse study opens the discussion about the gut microbiome and aging.29:41 Dr. Goodyear traces how microbial diversity can influence inflammation.32:29 Dr. Williams connects gut metabolites, immunity, and healthy aging.34:08 The doctors explain what may help support the gut microbiome.37:01 The doctors answer whether generic probiotics are enough. A weekly livestream from Williams Cancer Institute. Dr. Nathan Goodyear and Dr. Jason Williams take the cancer news dominating your feed and tell you what the underlying science supports. Dr. Williams is an interventional oncologist and the author of The Immunotherapy Revolution. Dr. Goodyear is an integrative oncologist. For educational purposes only. This is not medical advice.

  6. Sep 4

    Optimizing Your Health with Peptides, with Dr. Jesse Morse.

    Originally recorded September 4, 2026. Dr. Jesse Morse joins Dr. Jason Williams for this one. He is double board certified in family and sports medicine, practices in Miami, and has prescribed peptides since 2020. He also built a certification course for clinicians called Peptavo, because peptide training does not exist in medical school, residency, or fellowship. The episode opens on something Dr. Morse posted days earlier, that seventy five percent of ACL tears happen without contact and that those tears are preventable. His explanation is that ligaments have poor blood supply, so repeated stress leaves micro tears that accumulate the way a rope frays from the middle out. Nothing looks wrong until the rope is in two pieces. He scans athletes in the off season and grades each ligament, and describes a player whose knee he flagged as loose, who declined the injection, and who tore the ACL the following week. He also traces one running back's years of hamstring and groin injuries back to a single uncorrected ACL tear, with the quad, hip, calf, and ankle all compensating for it since. That leads into the argument both doctors keep returning to. Dr. Williams notes that cancer routinely reaches stage four without producing a symptom, which is the same problem in different tissue. Waiting for pain means waiting past the point where it was fixable. The middle of the episode holds the clearest version of the delivery argument this show has produced. Dr. Morse compares a knee to a wheel with eight lug nuts, where conventional practice injects the one that broke and hopes physical therapy handles the other seven. He injects all eight, which for a knee means twelve to fifteen separate injections, and he breaks up scar tissue with the needle first so the product does not have to. Dr. Williams says it is exactly what he does in a tumor, and that this is why his results differ. Dr. Williams also gives the fullest account he has given here of his own age reversal work. He explains partial reprogramming, why the mouse protocols needed immune modification to work in humans, and how he kept getting younger after he stopped taking it. He puts the current rate at roughly three years reversed per year of treatment, and talks about his eyesight, his hair, and his eighty one year old mother regrowing spinal discs she had already lost. He is also candid that the protocol cost about eighty thousand dollars a week when he started. What is covered 02:09 Why ligaments fray for years before they tear, and what a scan can predict.04:58 The player who was told his knee was loose, and what happened the following week.08:01 One old ACL tear, and the chain of injuries that followed it for years.12:26 When Dr. Williams first saw peptides, and why they appeal to people.13:33 Follistatin as an antiaging gene, and being the first human to take the gene therapy.15:14 The forty marker panel, and the difference between treating and managing.18:28 Which peptides Dr. Williams holds back from cancer patients, and why.22:20 Senescent cells, and why cancer and aging are the same disease.23:29 An audience question on cognition after long COVID.29:37 The safety document that ended up in the FDA hearings this July.32:10 Why the course starts one peptide at a time.36:14 The gray market, and why nobody knows what is in the bottle.40:27 Eight lug nuts, and why a knee and a tumor take the same approach.45:12 The insurance pay model, and why prevention has no advocate in it.54:16 Partial reprogramming, self-testing, and the rate of reversal. About the show A weekly livestream from Williams Cancer Institute. Dr. Nathan Goodyear and Dr. Jason Williams take the cancer news dominating your feed and tell you what the underlying science supports. Dr. Williams is an interventional oncologist and the author of The Immunotherapy Revolution. Dr. Goodyear is an integrative oncologist. For educational purposes only. This is not medical advice.

  7. Aug 31

    The FDA Approves Daraxonrasib - What Does It Solve and Not Solve

    Originally recorded August 28, 2026. The FDA approved daraxonrasib on Wednesday for adults whose pancreatic cancer has spread and who have already been through one other treatment. It is a once daily tablet. In the five hundred patient trial, people on the drug lived a median of 13.2 months against 6.7 months on chemotherapy. Dr. Jason Williams has said on this show that the drug is excellent and the delivery is the problem, and the approval does not change that. His position has not moved. Patients now have access, insurance permitting, but a pill sends the drug through the whole body when what you need is the drug in the tumor. He notes that a patient could fill the prescription and have those pills compounded into an injection, which is what his own team would do. He also says plainly that he would not give this drug orally to most patients. The side effects patients report exist because the drug goes everywhere it is not needed. Dr. Nathan Goodyear argues for using KRAS inhibitors early rather than after chemotherapy fails. His argument is that the KRAS mutation is not only a growth driver. It suppresses antigen presentation, excludes T cells, and builds a fibrotic shield around the tumor, which makes it an immune target too. He also raises a question nobody appears to have studied, which is what an oral KRAS inhibitor does to the gut microbiome on the way through. Much of the episode answers audience questions about mRNA, including a viewer asking whether this is the same technology behind the COVID vaccine. Dr. Williams separates the platform from the payload, noting that a delivery system can carry food or a bomb. Dr. Goodyear calls it a FedEx truck dropping a different package at every house, and ties the confusion to a broader collapse in trust, citing survey work in the Journal of the American Medical Association on how few patients now trust physicians. Matthew Herper at STAT reported the list price at $39,800 for a month of pills before insurance discounts, or $477,600 a year. That number opens the last stretch, on why intratumoral delivery is not standard. The answer is economic rather than scientific. Payers reimburse oral and intravenous administration. Drug companies build for oncologists who prescribe, not for radiologists who inject. Dr. Williams describes presenting data to major pharmaceutical companies in 2014 showing better results with far less drug, and the reception he got. What is covered 01:46 What the approval changes for patients, and why delivery is still the problem.03:49 Why his combination aims at cure rather than extension.04:45 The six to eight drug combination, and using mRNA in place of monoclonals.08:14 Why payers and referral economics keep systemic delivery standard.10:40 KRAS as an immune modulator, and the case for giving it early.15:47 Why chemotherapy and this drug leave no immune memory behind.17:26 A viewer asks about mRNA vaccines for head and neck cancer.19:10 A viewer asks whether this is the same mRNA behind the COVID vaccine.20:27 The FedEx truck, and what happened to trust between doctors and patients.26:16 A viewer asks about quality of life on the new drug.28:42 What an oral KRAS inhibitor may be doing to the gut microbiome.33:28 Why intratumoral trials are so hard to recruit for.35:39 The fastest FDA approval of 2026, and what the review actually checks.41:57 What pharma said when a treatment needed far less of their drug.47:01 Dr. Goodyear on sitting on the patient side of the desk.51:40 Losing patients, and the remission that makes it worth it. About the show A weekly livestream from Williams Cancer Institute. Dr. Nathan Goodyear and Dr. Jason Williams take the cancer news dominating your feed and tell you what the underlying science supports. Dr. Williams is an interventional oncologist and the author of The Immunotherapy Revolution. Dr. Goodyear is an integrative oncologist. For educational purposes only. This is not medical advice.

  8. Aug 26

    The Merck and Moderna Melanoma Vaccine, Explained

    Originally recorded August 21, 2026. Merck and Moderna announced that their personalized mRNA cancer therapy succeeded in a large phase three trial in melanoma. Moderna's market value rose by roughly forty billion dollars in a day. No hazard ratio was published, no survival curve, no paper. Dr. Jason Williams and Dr. Nathan Goodyear spend the whole episode on what was actually announced and what was not. Dr. Williams has been working with mRNA since 2022 and explains the technology without the baggage. It is a delivery platform, and what matters is what you deliver with it. The COVID vaccines gave mRNA a bad name because the payload was the spike protein, which is the pathogenic part of the virus. Used differently, mRNA can instruct a tumor to produce a cytokine it would never make on its own, which draws immune cells to it. He describes that as a Trojan horse and says his team does the same thing better with pulsed electric field ablation. His read on the business logic is blunt. Keytruda generates enormous revenue and its patent expires. A therapy that only works in combination with Keytruda extends the life of that franchise against generic competition. He says he does not think the effort was worth their time scientifically, and that they are extremely smart at making money, possibly smarter than they are at curing cancer. The scientific criticism is specific rather than dismissive. Melanoma is already one of the most treatable cancers with existing immunotherapy, so this addresses the outliers who respond poorly. Dr. Williams says the announcement would have excited him considerably more if the payload had been immune agents like IL-12 or IL-15 rather than neoantigens alone. Dr. Goodyear notes that this was demonstrated in a hot tumor, where immune cells are already present, which is a very different problem from the cold tumors his own published work addresses. They also break down what severe means in adverse event reporting, since the phase two data showed adverse events in essentially everyone while no grade four or grade five events occurred, and the two facts get reported as if they were the same thing. WHAT IS COVERED 00:19  What was actually announced, and what was missing from it. 01:50  Dr. Williams on how mRNA works and why the COVID payload damaged its reputation. 05:31  Why he does not think the effort was scientifically worth it. 05:56  The patent logic behind pairing it with Keytruda. 08:12  What a genuine preventive cancer vaccine would look like, and who it would be for. 11:25  Using mRNA to make a tumor produce a cytokine it would never make on its own. 12:21  Why mRNA costs a fraction of what monoclonal antibodies cost to produce. 13:27  When Williams Cancer Institute started using mRNA and where it is heading. 14:35  Dr. Goodyear on what the word vaccine does to people, and why inoculation is more accurate. 20:48  What Dr. Williams would actually do for melanoma, and what standard of care allows. 23:54  Whether these therapies could ever work alone or will always need a partner. 26:16  Why melanoma is already among the most treatable cancers with existing drugs. 29:10  What the therapy is doing before the checkpoint inhibitors get involved. 31:49  What severe means in adverse event reporting, and why the coverage got it wrong. 35:55  The payload Dr. Williams would rather have seen, and why it would have been a bigger leap. 42:21  Hot tumors versus cold tumors, and why this result may not transfer. ABOUT THE SHOW A weekly livestream from Williams Cancer Institute. Dr. Nathan Goodyear and Dr. Jason Williams take the cancer news dominating your feed and tell you what the underlying science supports. Dr. Williams is an interventional oncologist and the author of The Immunotherapy Revolution. Dr. Goodyear is an integrative oncologist. For educational purposes only. This is not medical advice.

About

Dr. Jason Williams and Dr. Nathan Goodyear go live every week to break down the cancer research patients are actually reading about. Dr. Williams is an interventional oncologist and the founder of Williams Cancer Institute, where he treats advanced cancers by injecting immunotherapy directly into tumors. Dr. Goodyear is an integrative oncologist focused on metabolism, the microbiome, and the environment a tumor grows in. They take the week's headlines and explain what the study really found, what got left out, and what it means for someone facing a diagnosis today. Not medical advice.