RACHEL: [00:01] I’ve been thinking about it for a while. And I guess it all stems from the fact that I always think about sustainability. And I don’t agree with how a lot of chickens are raised in the industrial sense. And so I like to eat eggs. And I think they’re a part of a balanced diet. And so I’ve never actually eaten chickens in my life because I’ve always been like, this is a beautiful animal. And this started when I was very, very young as a toddler, and my mom never served me chicken, that was really nice of her. But I’ve always thought that they were beautiful. And I never agreed with having a ton of chickens stuffed in a cage and raised in agriculture.

[00:49] So, I thought that this would be a great way to get something that we appreciate and eating eggs, and also have something to look at and that are really cute and fun. And they all have little personalities. So, my kids have really enjoyed watching them. But the problem was, is that there’s big startup costs and a lot of time to get them going, right, because you have to build a coop and you have to learn about them. So, during the pandemic, we had all this extra time on our hands and decided to take the plunge and do it.

[01:32] This episode of the Smart Athlete Podcast is brought to you by Solpri. If you’re active at all, whether you’re running or simply out walking for the day, you’ve probably experienced one of the number one problems that active people have, and that’s chafing. Solpri’s all-new, all-natural anti-chafe balm solves that problem while feeding your skin, the vital nutrients it needs to be healthy. If you’d like to stop chafing once and for all and treat your body right, go to Solpri.com to check out the anti-chafe balm today. And that’s S-O-L-P-R-I.com.

JESSE: [02:09] Welcome to the Smart Athlete Podcast. I’m your host Jesse Funk. My guest today is a former Division One swimmer. She’s coached youth in college-level swimmers. She has a Ph.D. in biology. Currently, she’s working as an education specialist at the American Society for Microbiology headquarters. She spent over 100 days at sea working on her research in a previous career move. And currently, via the pandemic, she has some chickens that she’s raising, which I’m definitely going to ask her about. Welcome to the show, Dr. Rachel Horak.

RACHEL: Thanks so much.

JESSE: So, Rachel, because I didn’t get to ask you before we got going, we’ll jump into the obvious thing. Why chickens, where do the chickens come from? I don’t know that it’s everybody’s inclination to say chickens are going to be my pandemic pet, as you put it before we got going.

RACHEL: [03:03] Yeah. I’ve been thinking about it for a while. And I guess it all stems from the fact that I always think about sustainability. And I don’t agree with how a lot of chickens are raised in the industrial sense. And so I like to eat eggs. And I think they’re a part of a balanced diet. And so I’ve never actually eaten chickens in my life because I’ve always been like, this is a beautiful animal. And this started when I was very, very young as a toddler, and my mom never served me chicken, that was really nice of her. But I’ve always thought that they were beautiful. And I never agreed with having a ton of chickens stuffed in a cage and raised in agriculture.

[003:53] So, I thought that this would be a great way to get something that we appreciate and eating eggs, and also have something to look at and that are really cute and fun. And they all have little personalities. So, my kids have really enjoyed watching them. But the problem was, is that there’s big startup costs and a lot of time to get them going, right, because you have to build a coop and you have to learn about them. So, during the pandemic, we had all this extra time on our hands and decided to take the plunge and do it.

JESSE: But what’s beyond monetary startup costs, I think there’s at least a little bit of a learning curve getting going.


JESSE: So, I mean, as you mentioned, you’ve kind of been thinking about this for a while. So, it’s like you spent some time researching and thinking and researching and thinking and then took the plunge, or was it still despite that like now we’ve got, oh crap, like what do we do? Is there any of those kind of moments?

RACHEL: [04:57] There was because I bought a coop that was too small for the birds, instead of actually doing my research and talking to people about people that have been raising birds in their backyard for a long time. They actually build a coop because the prefab coops that companies make are way too small. So, yeah, so that was the first mistake. And so we had to build our own.

Fortunately, before the price of lumber shot up during the pandemic, we were able to get it done before then. But yeah, so I’ve learned a ton through social media. Like Facebook groups have been my lifeline of how do I deal with a sick chicken or what do I feed the chickens? It’s been pretty incredible the power of social networking to find out all this new things that I had to learn. Yeah.

JESSE: [05:46] And so since they have personalities do they all have names now? Since I’m assuming they’re never going to be dinner, they’re just they’re providing eggs, and they’re part of the family now. Do they have names and collars and take them for walks and all the routine?

RACHEL: Well, sometimes we let them free range in our backyard. Occasionally, one got loose and got into a neighbor’s yard one day, but not my fault. That was my husband’s fault. Yeah, so they all have names and because I’m the primary chicken mom all the duties fall on me, I took it upon myself the name of what I wanted to name them. So, they’re all named after the internet and Grey’s Anatomy. So, if you’ve ever watched the show, we’ve got an Izzy, we got a Meredith, we got a Cristina, and Sadie and a Lexie. So, they’re all girl girls, we think.

JESSE: [06:42] Well, I mean, that would make sense. If they’re laying eggs, that’s probably a fair indication that you’re on track.

RACHEL: Yep, yep.

JESSE: So, because I guess I’ll call it a proclivity for lack of a better term. Since you’ve had this proclivity for having affection for chickens, again, I’m not probably saying this the right way. But you’ve thought about this for a while. Did you have any looks from family members? Because I know– If I, for instance, was gonna say, Hey, I’m gonna raise chickens in my backyard, I know despite my father having grown up on a farm, he would still look at me like, “What are you talking about right now? Like, you’re not– This isn’t your thing.” Was it a matter of everybody already knows. It was no surprise. Or were there still some like Rachel, we need to sit down and have a talk.

RACHEL: [07:37] Yeah. My mom doesn’t understand it. And certainly, my in-laws don’t understand it. But they think it’s cute. They wouldn’t pet the birds. Like I’m holding the chicken I’m under my arm and saying, look, there’s a really friendly chicken, she’s not gonna bite you, and they wouldn’t get near it. So, I think it’s just they’re kind of – they’re not animal lovers. Right? They’re not biologists. And so I think part of it comes from my background of being a biologist and being a naturalist. and really seeing the beauty in the chickens. And some people don’t see that. And that’s okay.

But they appreciate it. And they, like my in-laws and my mom and dad, they see the kids really enjoying the chickens, enjoying that this is a new hobby for the family. And so they really think that that’s a good thing for them because they’re learning a little bit of responsibility. And they’re learning how to care for them, how to maintain their health, those kinds of things.

JESSE: [08:42] Yeah. So, then – I mean it seems like that kind of love, respect, admiration for animals in general, is that kind of what led you to the biology path?

RACHEL: I think so.

JESSE: Okay. So, then maybe a good clarifying question, how did you end up going biology versus like, veterinary? Where’s the split off? What led you one way versus the other? Because just in general, if we say, I love animals, I know like, in college, I was taking horseback riding through the college, and they had vets that come to take care of the horses. And I really enjoyed the horses and the vets were like, hey, you can shadow us in this. I’m like I love animals, but I’m not interested in veterinary work. So, I’m just curious how that split or designation idea came for you?

RACHEL: [09:41] Yeah. It all boils down to I had an outstanding teacher in undergraduate. And I’ve always loved the oceans. I never live near the ocean, but I always love studying them. And I had a marine science class as a junior at Davidson College. And just this teacher that was so enthusiastic, love the subject, and I think he was like 75-80 years old still teaching. He would take us out into the field, so we would take a field trip to the coast. And he was so excited every day to talk about marine science. It made me excited and made me study harder and made me investigate on my own.

And I knew I liked biology, but I didn’t know what type of biology I wanted to go into. And so I took two years off after school to work in the real world, real world. I worked as a swim coach, and I worked at a YMCA and I coached my college team. And I was thinking, what do I do? What do I do? And I really wanted to study the oceans. And so I started looking around, where can I studied the oceans? What institutions can I do that at what kind of mentors can I find? So, it all started with a great teacher.

JESSE: I always think that’s interesting, just how, in some ways, it seems like luck. But there’s something infectious about that, that attitude from a great mentor or teacher, like somebody who respects and loves their field so much. Like that rubs off on you, even though maybe you had no prior inclination or thought about it. It’s like, they’re excited so you’re excited. It’s just right together. It’s nice when that happens.


JESSE: [11:35] So, I guess since at the time, if that professor was 70, or 80, are they still alive? Have you reached back out to them since you’ve kind of gone further into the field?

RACHEL: Great story. I have actually heard from the professor several times in my professional career. Because I kept in touch with my professors from Davidson and they knew that I was an oceanographer. And at some points, he would email me names of students that were interested in the field. And I would reach out to current college students and talk to them about what it’s like to be an oceanographer.

And it’s not whales, and sea lions, right? We’re studying the chemistry of the ocean, the physics of the ocean, and microbes, mostly because they’re the important stuff. The whales, the fish, the sea lions, they don’t really matter that much. And he came to my 15-year reunion, and it happened that I was able to see him in person again, 15 years after I graduated. So, yeah, that was really exciting, and really fulfilling for me to see him again.

JESSE: [12:43] That’s great you’re able to keep in touch, and then also provide some guidance. Because I know kind of think back on that time, you’re going through it, I always say it’s one of the most insane propositions to try to ask an 18-year-old what they want to do with the rest of their life. You know what I mean? So, having some guidance of people that have already passed that point, gotten into whatever they’re going to do, just like that professor kind of spread that infectious enthusiasm, sometimes it’s easier, at least in my opinion, to see when you have somebody out there doing it.

Like, does this click with me? Does that sound like a good time? Because as you mentioned people get distracted by the shiny objects, which the whales basically. Like, oh it’s all about the whales. No, there’s lots of lots of life going out in the ocean that are not whales. But thinking about that, how do you get to be out at sea for 100 days doing research? Like, was that like a one-off job? Was it a larger, like a niche part of an overall scope of research you’re working on? How does that occur?

RACHEL: [14:01] Yeah. So, I’ve been on several research expeditions over a period of about 10 years, starting when I was– Actually, longer than that. So, I started going on these expeditions 2003 as part of my graduate work at William and Mary. And this was probably the best course I’ve ever taken. But part of the course is that you had to go on a boat for two weeks, and do research on fish, and study the biodiversity off the coast of Cape Cod and Massachusetts.

And I mean, what better field trip than that? I thought it was awesome. And we were studying these really deep-sea fish that live 2,000 to 4,000 meters deep. And so that’s over a mile deep, and so it’s permanently dark. So, these fish were unlike anything you’ve ever seen in your life. They’ve got huge teeth and they’ve got really flimsy bodies, they’re not muscular, these are definitely fish you don’t want to eat.

[15:04] So, it started with that and I was hooked on ocean research after that. I got to work on a couple of submersible dives after that. And then, a couple of other times throughout my career, a lot of these research expeditions are funded through the National Science Foundation, the NSF, or NOAA. And if you’re a principal investigator and you work as a professor at a university, you can apply for money through the NSF or for NOAA, to go on these research trips. And the grants are pretty substantial because you need a lot of money to go out to see, right, several millions of dollars of grants.

So, I always had the benefit of being a student or a postdoc at the time, and going as a researcher for my principal investigator and doing the work for them that they propose to do. So, the longest cruise I went on was 40 days on a boat, off the coast of Chile. And then others have arranged some period of time from like seven days to that time.

JESSE: [16:19] So, when – I’m gonna walk back a little bit with you. But when you do the initial research and you’re looking at, like the deep-sea fish, are you working with, like robotic submersibles? Or how are you looking at the fish?

RACHEL: Right. So, what we do is we trawl a large, huge net behind the boat, okay. So, you pull up to the station, wherever you want to find the fish, you drop the huge net, and then pull it off the back of the boat called the stern. And then it’s called trawling. And so you drive the boat, one to two to three knots very slowly, and drag up all the fish, and then you pull up the net onto the back deck, and then all the fish die in the process. And we’re talking not just fish but jellies, squids, squids, lots and lots of amphipods like shrimp. And so you bring the net up when they’re all dead, and then count them. So, you have to physically sort them into species and enumerate who’s there.

JESSE: [17:26] Okay. Okay.

RACHEL: Yeah. So, I wish it was robotics, and that we wouldn’t have to kill the fish. But that’s one of the things, if you want to find out what’s there, sometimes you have to make that sacrifice. So, we attempt to make as little sacrifice as possible, and only go to places that we know there’s a sustainable enough population that we wouldn’t cause further harm.

JESSE: Right. Well, that’s something that I think, for people not familiar with the kind of work you do, or I’ll say ecological work, in general, there’s so much cataloging that ends up with dead animals, you kind of wonder are we doing harm by doing this study? So, maybe I guess, I’ll let you explain. You already kind of touched on it like how that works when you’re collecting specimens, or doing counts like that, how do you determine that you’re making a net positive impact?

RACHEL: [18:29] Yeah. That’s a really good ethical question. And now that I’m thinking about and pondering it, I think that’s beyond my expertise because I haven’t– I am sure that there are people in science ethics that I’ve thought about that. We always have to remember that the amount of specimens that were taken for scientific research pales in comparison to what deep-sea fishing vessels are getting, right. And a lot of the research that biologists do on fish populations is to ensure that fisheries aren’t depleting the catch, right, the species that are there. So, I wouldn’t even be able to quantify how many fish scientists are taking as compared to like fisheries, biologists, but it’s going to be minuscule. It’s going to be very, very tiny.

JESSE: [19:30] Yeah, I just guess – I mean you’re not an ethics professor so it’s fine not to have the most like, perfectly rounded prepared answer. But I just know like my fiance’s brothers kind of in a similar field. And we went out to see him graduate from University of Colorado and they’ve got their whole department. You go in the department, they have all these different insect specimens and all these different wildlife specimens. And I’ve spoken to other people, I wish I could remember who right now. I’ve spoken to another researcher who was working on bees. And it was like, I can’t remember if they collected like a million bees over a year or two years or something, like a lot of bees.

[20:18] And then we think about there’s the ideation of the bees are in trouble yet we’re collecting all these bees and trying to figure out– It’s hard, I think for the average person to wrap their head around, hey, the scientists going out doing this thing, are they actually doing the opposite of what they say they’re going to be doing? So, I like to kind of let you square that in your own words, instead of people guessing. You know what I mean?

RACHEL: Yeah. The bottom line is the science is needed in order to sustain what’s there. Right. And that’s irrefutable. And there are some parts of science that you cannot do unless you sacrifice a very small number. And we’re talking like teeny tiny amount. My dissertation research was bacteria in a lab. And so it’s very different studying microbes, which is the bulk of my research, well, bulk of my [??? 21:35] science research. And that there are no ethics about killing a bunch of bacteria in the name of science. But there are when you consider animals that have backbones, right? So, when scientists want to do a study, on any animal with a backbone, any vertebrate, they have to go through an institutional review board process in order to get approval of doing something to that animal, right. But you could do anything you want to a jellyfish, right, because they don’t have a backbone.

JESSE: Gotcha.

RACHEL: [22:09] So, when I think about these things, I always try to think about the position of scholars to think about these questions that are very, very important, and collaborate with people that know a little bit more than me. And think about the ethics of a little bit more. Yeah.

JESSE: I guess we’ll say for you listening, which you probably if you’re listening to this, you’re probably already familiar but if you’re not, Rachel mentioned the Institutional Review Board, the IRB, which goes over anytime, I’ll say generally speaking when most research is going to be done, it’s going to go through an IRB. Which is a group of people at any given institution that looks at the ethics in the study and tries to make sure that harm is not being done to put it in a kind of blunt way.

So, there are people that studies have to pass through. Rachel can’t just be like, I’m gonna go do whatever– You can’t just be like, I’m going on a deep-sea fishing adventure. And we’re just going to start trawling for fish as long as– There’s people that check these things. There are checks and balances in the academic community, to be able to do those things. I just wanted to clarify that because that’s an important point too, to my inquiry is it’s not a free for all in academia to just do absolutely whatever you want.

RACHEL: [23:44] That’s right. So, that especially applies to any laboratory animal. And right now with the COVID-19 outbreak, they’re doing a lot of laboratory animal studies, especially in things like ferrets and minx. But more important to my research, the research that you do out in the field out at sea has gone through in order to do it. In order to get the research money, you have to go through a peer-review process in order to get the money.

So, you wouldn’t go out and just start trawling a bunch of animals. Other colleagues, your peers, a scientist have to approve that they agree that this is a good thing to do, and that this is needed to answer a very important science question. So, the process of peer review is probably the best way we have to make that delineation, as is this important enough for science that we can go make this action?

JESSE: [24:47] Yeah. So, I did want to ask you about your research, in particular. I think you’re setting at least at one point the nitrogen cycle in the oceans and kind of the effects of Maybe nitrogen depletion or it’s changing in oceanic situations. Am I on base here?

RACHEL: You are so on base. Yeah. Good.

JESSE: Can you tell me a little bit about that?

RACHEL: [25:12] Yeah. So, some of my research involved looking at parts of the world’s oceans that are severely depleted in oxygen. And oxygen is that you need it to breathe, and so do things like fish, squid, whales, right. But there are parts of the oceans that don’t have any. And it turns out that those parts of the oceans are expanding. And that has big negative consequences, as you can imagine in that it decreases the living space of bigger animals. And so the reason this is happening is changes in the microbial density, changes in phytoplankton proliferation, changes in the microbial nitrogen cycle.

JESSE: [26:06] So, I was looking at one, is that area of low oxygen increasing and expanding? And we turn the question and we were able to answer is, yes. We studied a certain patch of water off the western coast of Mexico, and we found out over a 40 year period ending in 2012, it is expanding, okay. The area of no oxygen is getting bigger. And that’s not good news, right? Because we’re continuing to pump out fossil fuels, we’re continuing to negatively impact our oceans. And this is not a good thing. So, yeah.

JESSE: One of the things that I think it makes sense, but it also, I have trouble with maybe the listener will be ahead of me here. But thinking about say these areas of the ocean that are nitrogen-rich and lacking in oxygen; how do they I’ll say stay contained? Because I think about water and like it’s going to disperse, right? So, how does an area of water stay in a high concentration of nitrogen without basically dispersing and filling back up or averaging out with oxygenated environment?

RACHEL: [27:45] Okay. Okay. So, why is that area pretty much stationary or that period?

JESSE: Right.

RACHEL: Okay. Yeah, you’re right. So, and it all refers to ocean physics, which is not my forte. But I had to learn a little bit about it. [crosstalk]

JESSE: Me either. But between us, it’s gonna be you that know.

RACHEL: Right, right. So, because of the ocean circulation, and so this is currents that are driven by the winds, and where the continents are. And so because of prevailing currents, a patch of ocean water will stay very consistent in the nutrient and the gas profile over a period of time. So, you can think of it, let’s think about it a little bit more close to home. You can think of like, Mississippi River is always outflowing into the Gulf of Mexico. And in that area, because you have a very consistent output.

And you know that there’s going to be nutrients and gas profiles that are going to be pretty much similar through the year. They’re going to fluctuate based on how much farming is going on, how much fertilizer people put in, in their lands, and have gone to runoff. But you can expect that patch of water at the Mississippi River Delta to be more similar over time as compared to a patch of water elsewhere in the Gulf of Mexico, just because of that physical process of the river runoff coming off circulation.

JESSE: [29:32] Okay. Like I said, it’s one of those things where it’s, some of it seems intuitive, and some of it is like, wait, but why is this happening? And then as you know, you explain anything about currents or as you were explaining it, I was thinking about a river and thinking about say there’s an [??? 29:52] or something that kind of swirls the current back in the opposite direction and then you have debris kind of pile up in that area.

It’s like well that all the current’s going this way, but then something for some reason has caused the current to change in that area. That’s kind of a microcosm of maybe what we’re talking about. And maybe it’s not the exact replica, but I’m just thinking about the physics of the water there. And how that could have trapped things in that environment, despite everything else moving in contrary motion.

RACHEL: That’s right. And this brings to mind if you heard of the great garbage patch in the Pacific.

JESSE: Right. Right.

RACHEL: [30:34] Right. It’s super sad to hear. But the last that I heard and I don’t remember how long ago I heard this, but there was a patch of microplastics, meaning like, I’m thinking like, definitely less than a centimeter and smaller. So, we’re not talking big coke bottles, but small, broken down pieces of plastic just circulating out in the middle of the Pacific the size of Texas. And I guess I was watching 60 minutes where I heard that some entrepreneurs were going out there and trying to find new ways to clean it all up. Very hard, though, and a huge square footage that is currently there.

JESSE: [31:19] Right. Yeah. Well, I actually had a previous guest on, Maddie Steer who’s working on research in nanoplastics in the oceans and their effect. And one of the things she talked about was the issues with, yes, of course, we want to clean this up. But then how do you get the things that are even smaller, that it’s not so easy to take in and those get into the entire ecosystem, and the plants and the animals and all the things and they’re so pervasive. So, yeah, we’ve touched on that a little bit. I can’t remember the episode number right off the top of my head, but– [crosstalk]

RACHEL: All right. So, listen to that podcast.

JESSE: Yeah, go back and listen to that one. We’ll tie it all together. So, from there, I think before we got going, you said you’ve got kids now. So, spending large quantities of time at sea wasn’t quite as feasible as you kind of made a little bit of a career shift. So, what are you doing now?

RACHEL: [32:19] Yeah, that’s right. I definitely know female scientists that have continued to have children and continue lives going to see but it wasn’t for me. Everybody’s a little bit different. So, currently, working at a Professional Science Society and I help faculty, college faculty who teach biology and microbiology, I help them learn how to do their job a little bit better. So, we talk a lot about good teaching techniques. These days, we’re talking a lot about dismantling systemic racism in their classrooms. We’re talking a lot about how to help people that are maybe underserved in science; black, indigenous populations, people of lower socioeconomic status. What can we do as teachers to help them succeed and biology and microbiology?

[33:23] These are people that we really need as scientists in our country. Science is no longer white and male. And the problem is, is that the way that a lot of faculty teach is solely lecture because it’s the way that other teachers were taught. But the research and education shows that this is not the way that the majority of students learn best is lecture. So, I’m trying to find new ways to help college faculty teach without doing lecture, and to help reach out and help all the students succeed. And not just people that are currently well represented in science.

JESSE: [34:08] So, does that mean that you’re looking at things like a methodology to get your hands dirty while you’re learning? And I don’t mean that in like a negative sense. I mean, that like, if we think about the sciences, like the lab, you’re getting your hands dirty when you’re going to a lab. Versus lecture, you’re actually in the middle of doing something while you’re learning and applying, versus just sitting and listen to the professor tell you about this is the equations and this is how this works and all that kind of thing. Is it methods like that, or can you tell me more about that?

RACHEL: [34:44] Absolutely. So, we call it active learning. It’s finding a way that you can interact with the content and interact with your peers, with your fellow students, and interact with your teacher so that you can deepen your knowledge. And you can use it for things other than just finishing a multiple choice test. I always try to remember that. What do I want my students to take with them when they leave their class? I don’t really care if you can spout out facts, that’s what Google’s for, right?

You can take any kind of MOOC, you want to learn the content, but I think the real value of the education is talking to your peers, getting their points of view about the content, learning from them at the same time, and deepening your knowledge about how does this relate to what’s going on around me and the crazy world we have. Right. And you can’t get that from just a teacher standing in front of the room and spouting off facts. And here’s a table, tell me what’s going on.

[35:53] And then another part of it is learning to become science literate, where you’re given some new data, say about COVID-19, or something going on in the ocean and thinking about it critically in a way that is grounded in evidence and facts, and making it your own, and then taking action about it. So, I want my students to care about what they’re doing, and to care about the world around them and make decisions in their daily lives that have a positive impact on our planet around us.

JESSE: Gotcha. Being able to look at literature that you aren’t automatically familiar with, and in being able to absorb the implications of it is something that’s, I would say, is probably lacking in a general sense right now. COVID-19 obviously, something that’s contentious at the moment. Disassociating ourselves from that and just thinking about anything, [??? 37:03] talk about climate change, or whatever contentious subject towards science is this, science as a whole.

Obviously, there’s going to be some detractors, always. But it seems like if we could increase science literacy, and that’s part of my hope, with the show is allowing people like you to speak directly to people versus just saying, hey, go read my paper, which people may be like, I can’t do it. I don’t even know where to start. It seems like we could come to an easier conceptual understanding of topics, if we are all able to speak the same language.

RACHEL: [37:46] Absolutely. I totally agree with you.

JESSE: So, Rachel, as we’re starting to run down on time, I’m asking everybody the same question this year, because it kind of transects disciplines, sports, all that kind of stuff. So, I’d like your opinion on what do you think the purpose of sport is?

RACHEL: [38:10] That is a great question. Wow. Okay. So, when I think about this, I think of why do I have my three preschoolers in sports right now. And one thing that I have, especially one of my children in sports, is to learn perseverance through difficult things and difficult challenges.

Right. And I think that’s probably the biggest thing that I learned from a career swimming is I had so many ups and downs, injuries, changing coaches, losing pools, not being able to train, and finding ways to persevere through that in new and different ways. And I think for one of my children, that’s my primary purpose is to have her in sports right now is to learn, hey, things aren’t going to go your way. But pick yourself up and keep going and you’re going to learn at the end. Learn about yourself.

[39:17] I think that’s another big thing that I learned in sports is you learn a ton about who you are as a person and in new ways, yeah. And for me, right now, the thing that I’m learning about sports is continuing to maintain some relationships with those around me outside of my house, right?

I think that that’s one thing that sports gives us that unfortunately, we can’t do that much right now, during this current year. And the thing that I’m missing is like swimming, working out with my own team. So, you learn a lot about other people. I attract people that all like swimming together. And so there you go, you have something to talk about right there. So, I think that it’s a really meaningful thing for me.

JESSE: [40:05] Yeah. Rachel, if people want to see your research, keep up with you, see what you’re up to, where can they find you?

RACHEL: Yeah. So, my Twitter account’s not that old, but that’s probably the best place to find me. Dr. Rachel Horak, H-O-R-A-K. And yeah, I have Instagram, but I don’t use it.

JESSE: That’s okay. I don’t either so no big deal. So, check her out on Twitter where a lot of scientists seem to be aggregating and many of my guests are. So, that’s a great place to keep up with people. And I know you will probably be tweeting and retweeting to research and interesting stuff going on. Just like many of my guests do, so check out Rachel there. Rachel, thanks for hanging out with me today.

RACHEL: Thank you.