There was a time when a protein powder didn't pretend to be a personality type, thanks to history doing its irritating job. Inside a compostable wrapping, it offered no intensity, calmness, or equitable harmony. It was only a coarse, chalk-like implement for those who viewed eating as an administrative task.

So how did we get from a few bars in the latter part of the 1980s and early 1990s to today's chaotic, unending protein aisle?

We follow the sector's development via geography in this episode of Decisions at the Fulcrum, concentrating on the manufacturers, ideas, and commercial activities that made protein an adaptable point of view. Vega, our mentor guide today, started out in 2001 in Vancouver, British Columbia, where protein was presented as reliability, credibility, and responsibilities without the shouting.

In an industry that is prone on spurious approaches, I trace Vega's exceptionally patient rise (independent for over a decade), WhiteWave's 2015 acquisition of the company, and WhiteWave's 2017 acquisition by Danone, in an exceptionally "responsive" sequence. Along the way, I consider what it really means when eating becomes designation rather than sustenance and why, frequently, competency seems to transcend all of the hype. Although these protein bars are no longer available, they certainly created space for the plethora of plant based varieties in the protein bar aisle today and they continue to offer several protein powders, often with additional nutritional claims attached to them.

There are state flags everywhere, but they are seldom investigated. In this episode of Decisions at the Fulcrum, I focus on Maryland's state flag, a quartered design that seems to be contrasting a lot with itself. The tension was a decision though about a state sense of place and identity.

Let's be clear: The Civil War was not a conflict of equal moral standing, and acknowledging division or later reconciliation amongst divided parties is not the same as legitimizing both positions during the conflict. The question today is how a state constructs a shared civic future without pretending the past never happened.

Using Communication Theory of Identity (Hecht et al.), I explore how Maryland’s Calvert and Crossland imagery shifted from civic war symbolism to an official state flag in 1904 all the way to today.

I examine Maryland's evolution from the diffused early symbols from the 17th and 18th centuries to a flag the retains the original houses in Maryland before independence. Maryland has managed to hold an identity infrastructure that moved history ahead and allowed for a civic future. That's what I'm getting into today on decisions at the fulcrum.

Maryland.gov source:

https://sos.maryland.gov/Pages/Services/Flag-History.aspx

Part II of the DuPont episodes begins after the armistice following World War I. The episode begins in November 1918, when the explosions cease, contracts disappear, and a munitions-based firm determines what to become afterwards.

This episode follows DuPont's postwar shift from an explosives firm to a materials empire, beginning with nylon. Nylon was that material in American department shops. We start there, but the episode concludes with the lengthy and unresolved narrative of PFAS. Along the way, we look at how industrial risk shifted from a loud, visible threat to something far more difficult to perceive, assess, and regulate.

Rather than portraying DuPont as an antagonist or an unlikely hero, the current episode investigates how companies react to uncertainty, how innovation becomes framework, and the ways that harm might come from duration, magnitude, and latency.

Drawing on organizational sensemaking, regulatory precedent, and social context, this tells a story about what happens when materials perform thoroughly enough — and remain effective long enough — that their consequences exceed the decisions that formed them.

In this episode of Decisions at the Fulcrum, we look at BrightSide Produce, a produce distributor that works in impoverished parts of San Diego County, and discover that food availability isn't only a matter of supply, demand, or good intentions.

It's a complex situation with coordination, not optimization.

Let's follow BrightSide Produce through forecasting discussions, uncertain delivery trajectories, and the hushed aftermath of decisions that never prove to be right or wrong. Along the way, I explain how uncertainty in food distribution is not a mistake to be corrected, but rather a reality that organizations must learn to live with.

Using principles from communication studies, notably the premise that organizations are formed through communication, this episode investigates how inventory models, explanations, and common interpretations keep fragile systems together. I investigate how judgments about waste, stockouts, and risk do more than just allocate produce: they define what accountability, access, and success mean in practice.

Cited Case: Pyke et al. (2024) Sage

In this episode of Decisions at the Fulcrum, I map out one of the more complex disputes in international resource policy: the seabed mining near Nauru. We'll look at the issue by going from the depth seabed floor to the brightly-lit world of international governance. I employ Paul Wehr's conflict mapping approach to comprehend how conflict arises when parties have disparate "maps" of the same terrain that have different interpretations of what constitutes proof, harm, benefit, urgency, and fairness. To start, we explore Nauru, a small Pacific country that has been influenced by the lengthy history of phosphate extraction. Thanks to the ISA's much-discussed "two-year" procedural trigger, Nauru is now a major driver in speeding up international discussion. The episode then maps the conflict background, including draft exploitation laws, the International Seabed Authority, UNCLOS, and institutional constraints that condense nuance into positions that must be met by a certain date. The stakeholders and their opposing legends are then highlighted: Nauru as a sponsoring state; contractors and supply-chain narratives; the ISA's legitimacy challenge; member states divided between caution and pace; scientists navigating uncertainty; NGOs promoting risk thresholds; and Pacific regional voices whose ocean relationships don't neatly fit into regulatory templates. By the conclusion, we go back to the ocean itself and pose the central question of the episode: Whose map becomes the guide when the world discusses the ocean floor, and what maps remain obscured? Note: For the show to keep going all the way through next year, please share the show with one person if this episode gave you a better understanding of the problem. The show can continue in its current form entirely through word-of-mouth, which is what makes lengthy, extensively researched episodes like this one possible. Happy New Year!

Music credit: "Lafa" David Charrier References: The New Yorker 2022; UNCLOS, 2025; World Bank, 2025; Reuters, 2023

Music & Audio Notice:

This project includes music licensed through Canva. All rights remain with the original creators. No copyright infringement is intended.

This episode of Decisions at the Fulcrum starts with the Brandywine River, instead of inventiveness, innovation, or even chemical synthesis. This is an account of how a few generations of refugees taught in European scientific disciplines morphed into an institution much bigger than a company. Instead, this institution gradually became a kind of infrastructure the United States grew to rely on, from the War of 1812 through the First World War due to timing, partnerships, regimen, and the predisposition of an emerging nation that was also unprepared to exert control over its own threats.

Following DuPont's development from gunpowder manufacturer to biochemical organization, this episode explores why nineteenth-century science, grounded in the criteria of reliability, rather than inventiveness, was the primary fulcrum point. Gunpowder was infrastructure in 1802, not an item of goods. Political, tumultuous, and heavy, it revealed the operational vulnerability of American independence. DuPont was the only arrangement that met all of the demands simultaneously but not the most suitable one, as imports failed, domestic producers were insufficient, and government control was still ideologically untenable. When an arrangement solved a shortcoming, despite the fact it was not flawless, the state continued to construct it on that answer.This was not inevitable; rather, it was dependency on the path.

This episode, which speaks directly to a Wilmington audience, contends that DuPont was not a chemistry legend in its entirety by the time of World War I. This recounted a story of how private organizations balance public susceptibility while staying entirely insoluble, and how modern institutions absorb responsibility without absorbing visibility. DuPont's history, from the Brandywine to a world conflict, is not filled with surging patriotism or heroic entrepreneurship, but rather the careful, reliable establishment of stability in an environment that was increasingly realizing how vulnerable it was. Part One of a longer analysis of how empires are subtly constructed on risky theories is presented herein.

A note:

This episode discusses topics that could be close and unsettled for many people. This work isn’t meant as an allusion to events in the present (i.e., the time you listen to it), though the information could be examined in that way. Nothing in this episode is meant to sensationalize harms, minimize dangers, or draw parallels across time. It’s an attempt to understand how societies organize and how decisions persist long after the moment that produced them.