S1: From the historic campus of Hillsdale College in Hillsdale, Michigan,
S1: where the good, the true and the beautiful are taught,
S1: nurtured and honored. This is the radio free Hillsdale Hour,
S1: bringing the activity and education of the college to listeners
S1: across the country.
S2: He was the most congenial man, but also a man
S2: of firm convictions. And I think that amazed the press.
S2: Their feeling was that a man who was that congenial
S2: wouldn't be tough. He was tough.
S3: This is your host, Scott Bertram. Welcome to the Radio
S3: Free Hillsdale Hour. Part of the Hillsdale College Podcast Network.
S3: That was Don Hodel, former secretary of energy and secretary
S3: of the interior under President Ronald Reagan. He has a
S3: new memoir called Called to Serve. We'll talk in depth
S3: with Don in just a little bit. And later in
S3: today's program, Doctor Stephanie Laubach from Hillsdale's physics Department tells
S3: us about nanotechnology and magnetism. First, we're joined now by
S3: Don Hodel. He is a former secretary of energy and
S3: former secretary of the interior in the Reagan administration, also
S3: served in leadership in the Christian Coalition and focus on
S3: the family, among other things. Throughout his long and distinguished career,
S3: he has a new memoir out. It's called called To
S3: Serve My Path to President Reagan's Cabinet and Beyond. Don,
S3: thanks so much for joining us.
S2: It's my pleasure. Thanks, Scott.
S3: You serve as secretary of the Interior of Energy, Undersecretary
S3: of interior. I mentioned your leadership roles elsewhere throughout your life.
S3: You say early in the book that you always felt
S3: led to take on new assignments, new challenges from time
S3: to time throughout your life. Our leaders like you born
S3: that way. Do you feel like you were always supposed
S3: to be in that sort of position inside whatever environment
S3: you were in.
S2: You know, Scott, I really don't know. But as I
S2: wrote this book, I realized that in my life I
S2: had not sought these positions over and over. Positions seemed
S2: to seek me, and I responded positively on most occasions.
S2: Occasionally I felt I was not called to do something,
S2: but most of the time I didn't seek the position.
S2: But when it came knocking, I rose to the challenge.
S3: You also describe your leadership style as collegial. How would
S3: you describe that for the audience, and how does that
S3: perhaps contrast to other types of styles that you served
S3: under during your life?
S2: Well, it was interesting. Again, as I wrote the book,
S2: something came rather sharply into focus, which was that my
S2: preferred role was as the assistant or the number two
S2: man to a decisive leader. So I had the experience
S2: several times in my life in the legal department at
S2: Georgia Pacific and again at Bonneville Power Administration, and again
S2: with Jim Watt at the interior. And President Reagan to
S2: serve decisive leaders, people who seemed to know what they
S2: wanted to do instinctively. And they they made that decision decisively.
S2: My approach to a decision when I became the number
S2: one man, when I became the secretary or the head
S2: of the Bonneville Power Administration, or president of Christian Coalition
S2: or president of focus on the family, my approach was
S2: to bring in the key people involved in that matter
S2: and discuss with them what our objective was, what our
S2: alternatives were, and glean from that process a consensus decision
S2: as to what we ought to do. And that was
S2: much more gratifying and effective for me than trying to
S2: make a decision on my own part, and then just
S2: tell people what they should do.
S3: Don Hodel with us. His book is called To Serve
S3: My Path to President Reagan's Cabinet and Beyond. We'll take
S3: a few stops along your long career. I want to
S3: start back in the late 1960s and your career in politics,
S3: when it started working in 1968 for Oregon, Reagan for president,
S3: and being involved in the Reagan campaign at that time.
S3: What was politics like in the late 1960s, and how
S3: did you find yourself attracted to a candidate like Reagan
S3: in 68.
S2: Well, my as I relate in the book, I think
S2: my interest in politics was triggered partly because my father
S2: was impressed when I was age five at having met
S2: a state representative and I followed politics. Read about it,
S2: listened to it, and was active in college in the
S2: Young Republicans. And, uh, at that time in Oregon in 1964,
S2: we went through a very hostile campaign in the Republican
S2: primary for president between Barry Goldwater and Nelson Rockefeller. And
S2: my goal was to try to fill precincts at a
S2: time when people were polarized, which is akin to what
S2: we see today. But it was within the party.
S3: Mhm.
S2: Very disruptive. A disagreement between them. And I found myself
S2: having to play the role of a peacemaker. And it
S2: was only marginally successful in in doing that.
S3: You go on to work for the Bonneville Power Administration,
S3: and as part of that position, end up testifying in Washington, D.C.,
S3: in front of congressmen and senators and inside call to serve.
S3: You say you learned that however thin your knowledge of
S3: the subject matter might be, you almost always knew more
S3: than the senators or representatives asking questions. Do you think,
S3: or at least feel that's still likely the same case
S3: today in our politics? Is it something that we should
S3: be concerned about?
S2: I don't think it's something we should be concerned about.
S2: I think it's a very natural aspect of the process.
S2: The congressman or the senator has before him one of
S2: many agencies that may report to his committee. His knowledge
S2: is going to be relatively superficial, except in special cases.
S2: Staff may have deeper knowledge, but the person from the organization,
S2: the agency that's testifying to him, ought to have a
S2: great deal more knowledge about the agency because he's working
S2: in that one agency. So I think that's a very
S2: natural accompaniment to the system that we have.
S3: Don Hodel with us, his book called To Serve My
S3: Path to President Reagan's Cabinet and Beyond. You're at Bonneville
S3: Power Administration through the end of 1977, and we perhaps
S3: pick things back up with the beginning of Reagan's first term,
S3: when you are serving as the undersecretary of the interior,
S3: eventually you'd be secretary of energy, eventually secretary of the interior.
S3: How does one become a cabinet secretary or a cabinet undersecretary?
S3: What is that process like?
S2: Scott. There are as many paths to a cabinet position
S2: as there are positions. Some people have excellent personal relationships
S2: with the president, and he turns to them for the
S2: expertise that he knows they have. Other people are well
S2: connected with key senators or congressmen who push for their nomination. Others,
S2: as in my case, I was known to somebody that
S2: President Reagan trusted and relied upon for an for recommendation
S2: for the Secretary of Energy's job, gained my position as
S2: the number two man, the undersecretary of interior, because years
S2: earlier I had worked with Jim. What we had become
S2: close personal friends, had great respect for each other's abilities,
S2: and he recognized that I had management skills that would
S2: be very helpful to him as secretary. So he pressed
S2: to have me become his undersecretary, even though that was
S2: not one of my aspirations. So my path to being his,
S2: his undersecretary, was because of our experience. My path to
S2: being Secretary of Energy was because I had met and
S2: worked with a man named Tom Reed when he was
S2: running the Reagan campaign for president in 1968, and I
S2: ran the campaign for him in Oregon.
S3: I want to ask a number of questions about this
S3: particular time in in the book. And I want to start,
S3: I guess, with with Jim Watt, who you knew very
S3: well and served under and with throughout your career in
S3: a couple of places. And the Reagan administration. And what
S3: specifically had a reputation was criticized in the media during
S3: this time for not supporting the environment. And you were
S3: there with him along the way. What was wrong about
S3: that characterization of Jim Watt and the Interior Department at
S3: that time, and how did you consider environmental questions during
S3: that time in the Reagan administration?
S2: Very interesting question, because under Jimmy Carter, the Secretary of Interior,
S2: Cecil Andrus, announced publicly that whenever the environment, as it
S2: was involved in an issue, the environment. One period, end
S2: of discussion. And we came in with an absolutely different attitude,
S2: which was that environment was one of the many important
S2: things that needed to be considered. But we really believed
S2: that a balanced approach made great sense and that we
S2: did not have to choose between an improving environment and
S2: an adequate economy in this country. But it meant making
S2: decisions from time to time, specifically on what environmental matters
S2: had to be protected and what non-environmental matters needed to
S2: be protected or advanced. By the time we left Washington,
S2: I was pleased to see that even the Democratic National
S2: Convention recognized that we did not have to choose between
S2: the environment and economics. So we were successful to that extent.
S2: But the single issue environmental approach was in the Carter administration.
S2: And after the Reagan administration, it began to show up
S2: again in the national process.
S3: That's Don Hodel, former secretary of the interior and secretary
S3: of energy under President Ronald Reagan, will continue with his
S3: story in just a moment. First, I want to remind
S3: you about the new Hillsdale College online course on The Odyssey.
S3: Find it at hillsdale.edu/new course NEWCOURSE. Maybe you've already seen
S3: the new adaptation of The Odyssey in theaters, or you're
S3: planning to see it. It's even better to read it.
S3: In the words of Homer, the father of Western literature,
S3: Homer's epic poems like The Odyssey look at the noblest
S3: ways of life for man. The Odyssey itself contains themes
S3: about love, marriage, fatherhood, kingship, duty, loyalty. Now's the best
S3: time for you to learn more and to read The Odyssey,
S3: along with Doctor Ben Whalen, your teacher for this course,
S3: The Odyssey, right now at hillsdale.edu/course. hillsdale.edu/ewcourse for the Odyssey.
S3: We continue with Don Hodel, former secretary of the interior
S3: and secretary of energy under Ronald Reagan. His memoir is
S3: called To Serve My Path to President Reagan's Cabinet and Beyond. Don,
S3: we had just talked about Jim Watts and some misrepresentations,
S3: misunderstandings about him and how he ran the department. I've
S3: got to ask about the Beach Boys. I'm a music
S3: fan and a great music lover, and it's, of course,
S3: a story that music lovers know or think they know.
S3: And even those who aren't perhaps know the story about
S3: the Beach Boys and the 4th of July shows in
S3: the early 1980s. And the story goes that Jim. What
S3: the Interior Department band, the Beach Boys from performing on
S3: July 4th in Washington, D.C.. Unsavory characters. You were part
S3: of the department as this was unfolding. What do we
S3: have wrong? What do most people have wrong about the
S3: story about the Beach Boys? on the 4th of July.
S2: Well, I go into quite a bit of detail there,
S2: because neither Jim Watt nor I were fans of that
S2: kind of music. We had no idea who the Beach
S2: Boys were. The National Park Service decided on its own
S2: while he was secretary, that it would not have that
S2: type of music. It wasn't even the Beach Boys who
S2: had performed, but that type of music was bringing a
S2: drug culture, violence. We had rapes occurring during these performances.
S2: It was a mess on the National Mall, and so
S2: the Park Service, on its own, announced that we would
S2: not be having these performances in the future. Well, the
S2: Washington Post wrote an article that The Beach Boys had
S2: been banned by Jim Watt, and this was a big deal.
S2: And I walked into his office that morning and and
S2: he looked at me and he said, who are the
S2: Beach Boys? And I had to say, I didn't know. However,
S2: there was a furore over it and the story ran
S2: and the press pushed it. Nancy Reagan commented how she
S2: had raised her kids on the Beach Boys and, uh,
S2: Jim took a real beating over that. It was apparent
S2: to me later that it was because they were looking
S2: for something to beat him up with. Because when I
S2: was secretary, the Beach Boys were once again banned, and
S2: this time the Beach Boys specifically were banned by the
S2: National Park Service. And I didn't get a question about
S2: it for two years. So it was not the decision.
S2: It was the decision maker that was the target. So
S2: but it's become it's become part of the history that
S2: he took the decision to ban them, which was never true.
S3: Don Hodel with us, former Secretary of the interior. Secretary
S3: of energy under the Reagan administration. His book is called
S3: To Serve My Path to President Reagan's Cabinet and Beyond.
S3: I want to ask a question or two about your
S3: beloved wife, Barbara, who passed away a few years ago.
S3: At this particular time. And throughout the book, there are
S3: so many allusions to consulting her, talking to her about
S3: what your job might be or where you're going to move,
S3: or when you're going to, how long you're going to
S3: serve in a certain place. And you say you included
S3: your wife as much as possible, the secretary of Education,
S3: meaning you wanted her to be along on on trips.
S3: I think later as secretary of Interior, she was actually
S3: in some of the meetings but not talking in the meetings.
S3: She said hello. And then and then that was it.
S3: Didn't want to seem like she was involved, but you
S3: wanted to have your wife as close to you as
S3: possible during your service and during these years in Washington.
S3: is that common among secretaries, at least in your experience?
S3: And did you need to ask for approval to make
S3: this happen? How family friendly is a position like Secretary
S3: of the interior, Secretary of Energy?
S2: It's not. It is very uncommon. I don't know of
S2: anybody else who did anything like what I did. My
S2: wife and I had an unusually close and warm and
S2: loving relationship. She had no interest in outside activities. She
S2: was very interested as an observer in things, and she
S2: was willing to adjust her life activities in a way
S2: that would allow her to come into any meeting of
S2: mine that I would include her in. As secretary, I
S2: had great latitude in who I would include in meetings
S2: and for meetings where they were with staff. She would
S2: come anytime she had the time, which was a lot
S2: with outsiders if she knew them or there was nothing
S2: sensitive about the meeting. I would include her. She agreed
S2: that the one thing she couldn't do is talk about
S2: a substantive matter in the meeting, because that would confuse
S2: people as to where the decision was coming from. But
S2: she was perfectly comfortable with that. And so, as far
S2: as I know, nobody else did what we did. But
S2: nobody was critical of it. And it was a great
S2: relationship for us. And I worked when I was undersecretary,
S2: I worked from 730 or 8 in the morning until 11,
S2: 1130 at night. She would come in after hours and
S2: sit in my office and, and do cruel work or
S2: read while I worked on stacks of paper. And it
S2: was like me being at home, working on something and
S2: in our living room.
S3: Your wife is also involved in what I think is
S3: a pretty interesting piece of advice, or one that I
S3: had not considered before. As you were in the cabinet,
S3: you said that you figured out you weren't really happy
S3: something was wrong. You figured out you couldn't feel good
S3: about your successes because you didn't want to be too prideful,
S3: but you could feel bad about your mistakes or failures,
S3: so there was no upside at all. It was only
S3: only bad. And you talk to Barbara and said, I
S3: need someone that I can brag about without trying to, to,
S3: to hide my pride without trying to be modest. And
S3: she filled that role for you as you worked and
S3: continue to work in DC as at Interior and Energy.
S3: What did that arrangement allow you to do? How did
S3: that change the way you felt.
S2: In my head? Scott. I always heard my mother when
S2: I was a young boy, when I got a little
S2: happy about something I had done, she would say, don't
S2: get a big head, baby. So I would hear that
S2: as an adult. Now I'm in the president's cabinet. I
S2: do something that I'm pretty pleased with. And I hear
S2: that voice. And so I don't allow myself to feel
S2: pleased about it. That's getting a big head. But if
S2: I do something for which I get hammered or I've
S2: made a mistake that I can, that I can do.
S2: So all I had was downside. And I realized the
S2: job was becoming burdensome because I could not enjoy successes
S2: when they occurred. So because of a wonderful relationship I
S2: had with Barbara, I just went to her and laid
S2: that all out and asked if she would be willing
S2: to play the role of a listener who would not
S2: be critical and not suggest that I was getting a
S2: big head if I wanted to brag about something that
S2: I thought I had done well. And it worked beautifully. Yeah,
S2: she was wonderful at that.
S3: A few more minutes here with Don Hodel. His book
S3: is called To Serve My Path to President Reagan's Cabinet
S3: and Beyond. As I've mentioned, you served then as Secretary
S3: of Energy for a few years and then came back
S3: as secretary of the interior for President Reagan's second term.
S3: It was during that second term that you describe perhaps
S3: the biggest crisis you attended to during your time in D.C.,
S3: and those are the 1988 Yellowstone wildfires. For those who
S3: don't remember, or even those perhaps who weren't around. Tell
S3: us a bit about why that was such a big
S3: deal and how the Department of Interior could or could
S3: not respond to that sort of tragedy.
S2: Well, Yellowstone National Park is about 2 million acres, and
S2: it is largely covered in forests. There are some incredibly
S2: beautiful areas and wildlife in that park in the summer
S2: of 1988. Very dry. I. Several fires were started by lightning.
S2: A couple of fires occurred outside the park caused by.
S2: In one case, a logging operation, another a human action
S2: and fire campfire or something. The Park Service standard. The
S2: routine was that they would not fight naturally occurring fires
S2: because fire was a natural part of the habitat, but
S2: they would fight. A man caused fire. Well, very rapidly
S2: these fires merged and pretty soon a large part of
S2: the park was burning. mid-July, I was informed that they
S2: had gotten the fires under control, and that very day,
S2: the winds came at in excess of 50 miles an hour,
S2: and we had the fires jump all the fire lines,
S2: and pretty soon the fire was completely out of control.
S2: At that point, we had help from the Department of
S2: Defense with 9000 soldiers on the fire lines. We had
S2: 400 fire trucks from all over the west in the
S2: park trying to help fight the fire. And all we
S2: could do at that point was try to protect buildings
S2: and bridges infrastructure, because there was just no way to
S2: get out there and stop the forest fire. At one point,
S2: somebody suggested that we needed to bulldoze a fire line.
S2: But the problem was two things. One, the winds were
S2: such that the sparks from the fire would jump hundreds
S2: of feet, so that the fire line would have had
S2: to be wider than a six lane highway, and that
S2: fire line would be a visible scar on the landscape
S2: for the next 200 years. So we decided against doing that.
S2: The net result was that there was nothing really we
S2: could do to fight the fire until September came and
S2: the air got cooler and we got some. Finally some
S2: snow to help dampen the fire. And finally it went out.
S3: MM. At the end or near the end of President
S3: Reagan's second term, you helped describe what it's like to
S3: be a lame duck secretary as that second term comes
S3: to an end. And there is literally, as you point out,
S3: in call to serve nothing for you to do. There
S3: are cabinet secretaries and President Trump's second term who are
S3: about to experience this. Do you have any advice that
S3: you might like to pass along to them?
S2: Well, my advice is don't kid yourself that you're going
S2: to have a great deal of influence after the presidential election.
S2: And in fact, your influence will decline as you get
S2: closer to the election. And once the election is over
S2: and any policy decisions that you can still make have
S2: been made, there's nothing left for you to do. Nobody
S2: really cares at that point what you think or what
S2: you're going to do. Unless I would think somebody like
S2: the Secretary of State might be in the middle of
S2: a negotiation, but even there, his hands are substantially tied
S2: by the fact that his president is outgoing and the
S2: new president is coming in regardless of party. So you
S2: just power moves quickly, and the bureaucracy quickly recognizes there
S2: will be a new sheriff in town. And you're not
S2: that guy.
S3: Don Hodel with us, his book called To Serve My
S3: Path to President Reagan's Cabinet and Beyond a few minutes
S3: on the beyond, because there's there's more there are additional
S3: chapters after your service in Washington as you become involved
S3: in the Christian Coalition with Pat Robertson, focus on the
S3: family as well. You have public service and now private
S3: service as well. I don't know if it's a stretch
S3: to say that that the private service. I don't know
S3: if you were more unhappy during that time, but both
S3: seemed to end in ways that weren't quite satisfactory. How
S3: would you how would you contrast your time in public
S3: service and your time in private service with Christian Coalition
S3: and focus on the family?
S2: As I say in the book, I did not do
S2: my due diligence before going to Christian Coalition. Had I
S2: done it, I really would not have gone.
S3: Mhm.
S2: And, uh, in the long run, Pat and Robertson and
S2: I simply were not a good, good match. Uh, so
S2: that was not, in my view, a very productive or
S2: successful effort. By the same token, I did what I
S2: did because I felt called to serve. And so I,
S2: you know, things came out of it for which I
S2: was better off. But it was not a high point
S2: in my life when I went to focus on the
S2: family because of my tremendous respect and admiration for Doctor
S2: James Dobson, and I had served there temporarily as a volunteer,
S2: and in 96 we'd established a wonderful relationship, and later
S2: I went back when he was finally willing to relinquish
S2: the presidency. And I went as president. And I went
S2: knowing that there was a substantial chance that in that role,
S2: the relationship, the wonderful relationship we had, would be damaged.
S2: And of course, it turned out to be in that case,
S2: it was, I would say, an inevitable side effect of
S2: taking on that role. He was a founder, a very
S2: decisive man, incredibly gifted, great Christian leader. But as a founder,
S2: He just had a terrible time relinquishing his baby, and
S2: that's totally understandable. And my love for the man never changed.
S2: And I was very regretful that in the end, we
S2: had a somewhat ruptured relationship.
S3: We spent some time with Don Hodel. Haven't talked about
S3: Ronald Reagan, the man, the president, the person you served
S3: under for, I believe, all eight years of his time
S3: in office. What qualities did you experience first hand that
S3: Ronald Reagan possessed that made him an exceptional president?
S2: You know, Scott, I don't think most people recognize the
S2: importance of his Christian commitment. You go back historically, and
S2: his mother was very staunch, and he accompanied her to
S2: her witnessing. And that was a part of the man
S2: he was. He was the most congenial man, but also
S2: a man of firm convictions. And I think that amazed
S2: the press, because I think their feeling was that a
S2: man who was that congenial wouldn't be tough.
S3: Mhm.
S2: In fact, he was tough. He knew what he wanted
S2: to accomplish. He had a vision for America. He was
S2: wonderful at casting that vision for the American people, the
S2: shining city on a hill. And he really understood the
S2: importance of his vision to helping the country move forward.
S2: And I think he did that remarkably well.
S3: Stories about Ronald Reagan and much more in the memoir
S3: by Don Hodel, it's called To Serve by Path to
S3: President Reagan's cabinet and beyond. Don, thank you for your
S3: service to the country, And thank you for joining us
S3: here on the Radio Free Hillsdale Hour.
S2: Scott, thank you for giving me this opportunity to be
S2: with you.
S3: Up next, Doctor Stephanie Laubach from Hillsdale Physics Department tells
S3: us about her research into nanotechnology and magnetism. I'm Scott Bertram.
S3: This is the radio free Hillsdale Hour. Welcome back to
S3: the Radio free Hillsdale Hour. I'm Scott Bertrand. Be sure
S3: to check out older episodes of this program, plus tons
S3: of other fantastic Hillsdale audio presentations and podcasts on Hillsdale
S3: College Podcast Network, podcast.hillsdale.edu, or wherever you get your audio.
S3: We're joined by Doctor Stephanie Lorbek. She is associate professor
S3: of physics here at Hillsdale College. Doctor Lorbek, thanks for
S3: joining us.
S4: Yeah, thanks for having me on.
S3: Talking today about your research and work into nanotechnology and magnetism.
S3: Interesting stuff. When people hear nanotechnology, they might imagine some
S3: sort of science fiction novel. What does it really? And
S3: how small are we talking about when we talk about nanotechnology?
S4: Yeah. So nanotechnology is just any sort of a system
S4: that is manipulating matter or material on the nanoscale, which
S4: is between 1 to 100 nanometers. I'll give you an
S4: idea of what that size is. It's very small, but
S4: there's lots of different places where these are used. My
S4: a lot of the applications that I'm more familiar with
S4: is in medicine. So just to give a couple examples,
S4: if you there's labs that have built little boxes out
S4: of DNA and they'll put drugs inside and the lid
S4: of the box can be closed and have a key
S4: on it. That's a receptor that will only be opened
S4: if it has another different receptor on it. And cancer
S4: cells have certain receptors that are different than other receptors.
S4: So essentially, they can admit this drug and it will
S4: directly open once it hits a cancer cell. And so
S4: that's a way of doing direct, um, drug drug delivery. Um,
S4: so a lot of different drug delivery methods that people use. Um,
S4: I love another one. And Doctor Castro's lab, which I
S4: collaborated with when I was at Ohio State. Um, they
S4: had a cool system where bacteria basically had become resistant
S4: to drugs and the, um, they would hide basically the
S4: drugs inside of a DNA, uh, structure. They called it
S4: the Trojan horse. And it wasn't shaped like a horse,
S4: but it was called the Trojan horse because essentially it
S4: would trick the bacteria that it would trick the bacteria
S4: into thinking that it wasn't a drug and it would
S4: just take it in and think, oh, this is just
S4: some DNA, and it would bring it in, and then
S4: it would break down and deliver the drug to it.
S4: So it was like a way of directly delivering drugs
S4: to resistant bacteria. So there's lots of different uses in
S4: nano like in medicine, but even in like material science,
S4: you can use it to change properties of things. So like,
S4: for example, graphene is a really big hot topic, one
S4: which is basically a 2D layer of carbon that you
S4: can make, say nanotubes where you roll the carbon on
S4: itself to make a tube, or you can make nanoribbons
S4: where they're just cut in strips. And if you add
S4: this to materials, you can strengthen the material. People are
S4: using it in concrete and things like this. You can
S4: also change the electrical properties of it because it's very conductive.
S4: So there's lots of ways that you can change basically
S4: material properties using this. And then even in like computers
S4: and electronics, nanotechnology is a huge part of this. Making
S4: transistors smaller, which makes a computer run faster, helps us
S4: to store more information, process things at faster speeds. So
S4: there's lots of different areas that's being used.
S3: And as far as size, when it comes to this nanotechnology,
S3: how small exactly are we talking about?
S4: It's anything that's on the nanoscale. And to give you
S4: just an illustration, how small this is. If you had
S4: if you imagine one nanometer being the size of a pea,
S4: like a pea that you eat, a school bus would
S4: be what we'd consider a micrometer. Okay. A micrometer is
S4: 1000 times smaller than a millimeter. So if you think
S4: of your ruler, you have millimeters on your ruler. Those
S4: are the smallest division. So a thousand times smaller than
S4: that is micrometer. That's your school bus. And then the,
S4: the meter, which is, you know, how long your meter
S4: stick is. Your arm span is like one and a
S4: half to two meters, depending on how tall you are.
S4: A meter when one nanometer is a pea would be
S4: driving from LA to New York and back again. So
S4: you can imagine that pea to that meter. Um, and
S4: as far as like on the biological side, your hair
S4: is actually, you can see the diameter of your hair.
S4: I mean, it's obviously pretty small that you can't. Yeah. It's,
S4: um that is about 0.1mm. So that's a 10th of
S4: that division. Your white blood cells or cells in general
S4: are more like on the micrometer region. And then the proteins,
S4: which are the things that do all the work inside
S4: your cells. Those are on the nanometer size. So you
S4: can imagine the P is sort of like moving around
S4: inside of the school bus. And that's the cell, right?
S4: Which we have to look under the microscope in order
S4: to see. Yeah.
S3: Let's talk a little bit more about this DNA work.
S3: A lot of your work involves building these little structures
S3: out of DNA. How does DNA become a building material
S3: for machines?
S4: Yes, that's a good question. Picture would help with this,
S4: but I can give a little bit of an illustration.
S4: So I mean, essentially you build you can build material
S4: machines out of anything, right? You can build out of wood,
S4: you can build out of metal. Our building material is DNA.
S4: And the reason why DNA is so helpful on the
S4: nanoscale is because it has these small base pairs that
S4: interact or bind with one another. And so most people
S4: are probably familiar with the four bases adenine, thymine, guanine
S4: and cytosine. Adenine and thymine will bind together with two
S4: hydrogen bonds based on their chemical structure. And guanine and
S4: cytosine will bind together with three hydrogen bonds. And um,
S4: essentially these base pairs will form a sequence. We call
S4: it single stranded DNA. And they don't like to stay
S4: single stranded. So they naturally want to find that other
S4: base that will compliment them. And when they do that,
S4: they form the double stranded DNA, which most people can
S4: know that forms a helix, a helix. And so that
S4: helix is essentially what we view as our building block.
S4: In that helix has a very specific diameter. It's about
S4: two nanometers across. So you can imagine it's sort of
S4: like a cylinder. It's two nanometers across. And as far
S4: as how tall it is depends on how many base
S4: pairs you put in. So let's say you want to
S4: make it to be 3.4 nanometers tall. That would be
S4: ten base pairs that you stack on. Every base pair
S4: you add is a 0.34 nanometer increase. So you can
S4: imagine you have the precision. Unlike if you're building out
S4: of wood or metal, you can't cut down something to
S4: the nanometer scale, right? This one allows us to be
S4: with precision of 0.4 or 0.34 nanometers. So so that's
S4: that's the basic right is essentially we have these helixes
S4: that are just rods. And we can change how long
S4: they are. And you might say, well, what if I
S4: want to make more than a rod? Well, let's say
S4: you want to make a platform, a 2D platform. Well,
S4: then you just put the rods or the helixes side
S4: by side and you can make a bigger platform. And
S4: let's say you want to make something 3D. Well, you
S4: can stack those platforms on top of each other and
S4: you can make it more of a creative shake. Of course,
S4: you can imagine a cube pretty easily, but I can
S4: make it into a football shape by changing how long
S4: each of those rods at each of those places are at.
S4: And so that's essentially what we do. We use a
S4: technique called DNA origami, which came out in 2006. And
S4: that actually was what sort of revolutionized a lot of
S4: building structures out of DNA because we were able to actually,
S4: we were able to self-assemble them, meaning that we could
S4: encode all the information of exactly what we wanted it
S4: to build and design into. And then by applying some heat,
S4: some salt, it actually forms into that structure itself. So
S4: and it's very reliable. You get a very high efficiency.
S4: So forth. And so it's about 2006 when sort of
S4: this DNA nanotechnology actually sort of took off because of
S4: this technique.
S3: Stephanie Lobeck is with us, associate professor of physics here
S3: at Hillsdale College, talking about nanotechnology and magnetism. So again,
S3: some of your research here uses magnetic fields to move
S3: some of these DNA structures. So how does magnetism help
S3: to control something again that is so small.
S4: Yeah. So the magnetism allows us to apply what we'd
S4: call magnetic forces. And of course you say, well, DNA
S4: doesn't seem very magnetic. Right. And it's very true with
S4: with weak forces, you're not going to magnetize DNA at all.
S4: And so what we actually do is we use magnetic particles.
S4: So a lot of times there's beads, there's ones that
S4: are on the micron size. There's also ones on the
S4: nano size that you can attach to the DNA nanomachines.
S4: And then by applying an external magnetic field, essentially, you
S4: can think of this bead as being like a little
S4: bar magnet that wants to line up with the field,
S4: just like a compass needle. So if I point the
S4: field in one direction, the needle will turn to line
S4: up with that field. And so if it's attached to
S4: our structure, it will then move our structure. So if
S4: it's a hinge and you have a bead on the end,
S4: you can open and close the hinge just by sweeping
S4: the field across. And essentially you're just allowing it to
S4: apply a force directly through the bead onto the nano
S4: structure itself. So it's actually, it's, it's really cool. That
S4: was one of honestly, the, the big questions when first
S4: people started building these nanomachines was actually like, these are
S4: really cool, but how do we move them? Sure. And, um,
S4: that was yeah, a big question for a while. And
S4: the cool thing about using magnetism is it actually allows
S4: us to do direct actuation. Most methods, there's only one
S4: other one that is a direct actuation, which is using
S4: electric fields. But all the other ways are indirect. They're probabilistic.
S4: And they they take more time oftentimes to do it.
S3: One application that people hear about is targeted drug delivery.
S3: Can nanotechnology help to change the way that medicine works?
S4: Yeah for sure. So one of the big things that
S4: we're sort of working on in my lab is moving
S4: towards trying to make nanomachines that will be used for medicine.
S4: And one of the. So there's sort of two main things.
S4: So one is bacteria that have become resistant to our antibiotics.
S4: So we start to call these super bacteria. Once they
S4: start to become very resistant to drugs, they it's hard
S4: to kill them. And so a lot of our drugs
S4: today are basically chemical reactions that are taking place. And
S4: bacteria easily change can more easily morph to change, to
S4: react and not to resist basically those chemical reactions. And
S4: so what the Nanomachine would allow us to do is
S4: actually a mechanical mechanism to kill the to kill the
S4: cell instead of a chemical one. And so an example
S4: of this would actually be one, a professor actually at
S4: Rice University. His name is Doctor Tour. He has developed
S4: machines not out of DNA but just from molecules. They're nanomachines.
S4: And some of them are like a jackhammer. Mhm. And
S4: what he does is he can actually shoot light, different
S4: wavelengths of light at it, and it causes it to
S4: sort of vibrate up and down. And if he can
S4: basically put a molecule on there, so it finds this
S4: bacteria cell, he can then jackhammer and destroy basically the
S4: membrane of that cell. And then it now it's either
S4: killed or now you can administer the drug and it
S4: can get inside. And so what we're looking at doing.
S4: I was like, that's a really creative idea. So I
S4: thought we could do something like this to light, of course,
S4: can't pass all the way through your body, but magnetic
S4: fields do and they're very safe. We apply very large
S4: magnetic fields, say for example, in an MRI. Right. And
S4: so this would be a great way of if we
S4: could build a machine that would essentially, you know, be
S4: like a jackhammer or hammer or something like this that
S4: would basically mechanically destroy a cell. And again, you can
S4: target it by putting certain receptors on it that would,
S4: you know, respond to only cancer cell receptors or these
S4: bacteria receptors and so forth. You'd actually be able to
S4: target them and destroy them directly instead of killing other things.
S4: So that's, um, those are sort of yeah, cancer cells.
S4: And then these super bacteria, sort of two big topics
S4: that that people are working on doing.
S3: Doctor Stephanie Lobeck is with us, associate professor of physics
S3: here at Hillsdale College. Nanotechnology and magnetism. When you're working
S3: at this tiny scale, how do you observe what's actually happening?
S3: What does what does a lab look like?
S4: Right. That's a really good question. So you can actually
S4: look at something on the nanoscale in a microscope. So
S4: a lot of people sort of maybe picture us looking
S4: down in a microscope that actually only sees or can
S4: only resolve on the micron level. So what you have
S4: to do is actually label these nanostructures with something that
S4: we call fluorophore. And a fluorophore is something where when
S4: you shoot a certain wavelength of light, it will emit
S4: a different wavelength of light. It will it will excite
S4: the electron, and it will then emit a different wavelength
S4: of light. Essentially, what we can do is we can
S4: label our structures with different fluorophores, and then based on
S4: the light signal that they're emitting, because light spreads out,
S4: we can see the light that it forms even though
S4: we can't see the structure. And so that's one way visually,
S4: like if you want to see it happening in real time,
S4: you actually have to use fluorescence essentially. So that's a
S4: big one. But there's other ways like right now, um,
S4: a lot of the structures we've been working on, we
S4: actually been using micron sized beads to attach to these
S4: nano structures. And you think, how can that happen? That's
S4: like a huge scaling difference. We use these nanorods that
S4: are micron in length but have nanometer thickness. And so
S4: they can attach to the nanomachine, but also reach out
S4: to the micron sized rod and the micron sized beads
S4: we can see. And so it's very interesting. You'll see
S4: a bead moving in a certain way, but you can't
S4: see the machine itself. But because it's constraining how the
S4: bead moves, you can actually observe exactly what's happening to
S4: the bead. So that's another way. Now if you want
S4: to observe like a static, like you don't need to
S4: actually see it in action. You just want to like image,
S4: get a nice good image of it. You can use
S4: things like an AFM. We have one of those on campus,
S4: which is basically like a way of seeing like the
S4: height profile, essentially of the structure. It shoots a little
S4: cantilever and it shoots a laser down at the cantilever.
S4: And as it goes across the surface, it has to
S4: go up to go over the surface. So the laser
S4: beam goes up and it sort of traces out the
S4: structure of the surface. So that's one way. So we
S4: use an AFM to visualize. People use other things like
S4: a Tem which is using electrons to visualize stuff. But
S4: there's there's many different ways. But you those are just
S4: some examples.
S3: You have students who have worked on some of these
S3: projects who are working on some of your projects. What
S3: do Hillsdale College undergraduates get to do with this kind
S3: of research?
S4: Yeah. So they get to do a lot of a
S4: lot of stuff. Like pretty much they're involved in every
S4: step of this, this part of the project. So my
S4: students will build the structures in the lab, which involves
S4: a lot of biological techniques using pipettes and thermocyclers and
S4: centrifuges and all this stuff. So they get to learn
S4: the DNA origami technique. They will run experiments where they're
S4: applying the magnetic fields and watching the structures change, looking
S4: at them under fluorescence or observing the micron sized beads
S4: in bright fields. And then they'll also do the analysis
S4: like normally afterwards. We're analyzing, we have to analyze the
S4: videos and things that we're taking. And so there's a
S4: lot of, you know, maybe even coding and just analysis
S4: that goes involved in that. So there's like a whole
S4: stretch of what they do, but they, they get to
S4: be a part of, of all of it.
S3: As you're talking, I'm thinking back to a conversation I
S3: had with Doctor Russell from the biology department about bacteria
S3: and films. So does your research ever cross over with
S3: work that other professors here at Hillsdale are doing?
S4: Yes, that's actually a great question. So actually this summer
S4: I'm collaborating with him on a project and we have
S4: a student. He actually reached out to me because he'd
S4: seen a presentation I gave at a faculty meeting. And, um,
S4: he was like, hey, I grow these biofilms. And they
S4: are very resistant sometimes to drugs. And so we have
S4: to get the drugs past the biofilms. Can you use
S4: your machines to drill into them? And I was like, well,
S4: I don't have the machines yet. We're still working towards that.
S4: Probably in the next couple of years, we'll have the
S4: machines that we can drill into these. But I said
S4: we could try just some preliminary testing with the beads.
S4: So there are actually people right now that have used, um,
S4: nano sized beads as well as micron sized beads to
S4: either drill into, you know, materials or plaque or things
S4: like this. And so I said we could just try
S4: the beads. And I have two, I have a nano
S4: sized beads and I have a micro sized bead in
S4: my lab. And so we are doing very early on
S4: experimental result tests. Right. And we have a student working
S4: with us. I've showed her she's growing up the bacteria,
S4: and I'm also showing her how to run the magnetic fields.
S4: And so yeah, we're early on in this stage, so
S4: we're excited to see. We either expect that the beads
S4: might just the larger beads might just swipe the films
S4: off the surface, which would be good. It would be
S4: also a good way of getting rid of them. They
S4: actually do this right now with like dental stuff. Like
S4: they actually it's actively being used. And then the other
S4: one with the, with the nano sized beads, we think
S4: that one has more potential to actually drill holes through
S4: the the biofilm. So. So we'll see what we get.
S4: But we are actively working on doing a project based
S4: on this.
S3: So are we in the early days of this research
S3: meaning nanotechnology. Are we already starting to see changes or
S3: impacting everyday technology.
S4: Yeah. So I would say it's definitely already impacting the technology.
S4: People probably just don't realize where it's all being used.
S4: I mean, even in medicine, it's already there and probably
S4: a lot of your materials and stuff and even computers.
S4: So just people don't realize it's there because you just
S4: don't see it, but it's making things more efficient and better.
S4: But I would say there's still a lot of growth.
S4: And even in the DNA origami community. I mean, 2006
S4: was when it first that technique first came out. And
S4: people could make, you know, simple structures. They would make
S4: 2D static structures. Then they made 3D, you know, static structures.
S4: Then by like about 2015, we started seeing more like
S4: dynamic structures, but no one knew how to move it.
S4: And so now we're starting to get into the time
S4: where people are like, oh, we can actually move the
S4: parts on these machines. And in order to use a
S4: machine as a machine, right, where it can do work,
S4: you have to be able to move them. And so
S4: we're really just now starting to see that. And of course,
S4: especially in medicine, there's a lot more higher standards you
S4: have to do before it gets into it. So a
S4: lot of even the stuff I was mentioning in like
S4: Doctor Tours Lab, that stuff is all things that like
S4: they're doing clinical testing in mice and things like that
S4: or doing, you know, tests on petri dishes. You know,
S4: we're going to test it with bacteria that's grown on
S4: a film, right? But not in a body or anything
S4: like this. There's so much testing that you have to
S4: do initially before it gets into there. But even in
S4: medicine right now, like, I mean, they use nanoparticles for
S4: MRI contrast and things like this. You probably didn't realize
S4: maybe you got contrast and you didn't know, oh, there's
S4: nanoparticles in there that allowed them to image this better.
S4: So it's definitely already affecting our society. But I do
S4: think there's still a lot of growth and potential that
S4: it has.
S3: Doctor Stephanie Laubach is associate professor of physics here at
S3: Hillsdale College. Talk about her work in nanotechnology and magnetism.
S3: Doctor Laubach, thanks so much for joining us here on
S3: the Radio Free Hillsdale Hour.
S5: Yeah, thanks so much.
S3: That will wrap up this edition of the Radio Free
S3: Hillsdale Hour. Our thanks to Don Hodel. His memoir called
S3: To Serve My Path to President Reagan's Cabinet and Beyond.
S3: And Doctor Stephanie Laubach from Hillsdale Physics Department. Remember, you
S3: can hear new episodes every week on this station. You
S3: also can find extended versions of some of our interviews,
S3: or listen any time to the podcast. Find it@podcast.hillsdale.edu or
S3: wherever you get your audio. Until next week, I'm Scott Bertrand,
S3: and this has been the radio free Hillsdale Hour.