UCLA Professor Faces Backlash After Advising Jeffrey Epstein on How to get babies to ‘suck harder on pacifiers’

A University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA) professor has sparked controversy and protests after email correspondence with convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein was made public as part of the U.S. Department of Justice’s release of Epstein files. The exchanges include a 2017 message discussing infant behaviour that has drawn widespread online reaction.

What the Emails Show

The professor in question, Mark Jude Tramo, is an associate adjunct professor of neurology at UCLA and director of the Institute for Music & Brain Science. Newly released documents show that Tramo corresponded with Epstein over several years on a range of academic topics, including potential research funding and studies related to neuroscience and auditory stimulation.

Among the exchanges that drew public attention is a 2017 email in which Tramo wrote that, based on research, “newborns will suck on a pacifier more vigorously if it triggers playback of a recording of her/his mother’s voice than another woman’s voice.” This message was part of a discussion about potential research involving infant responses to auditory stimuli.

Academic researchers do study infant behaviour and responses to sound — including whether recordings of a mother’s voice influence feeding or soothing — as part of broader neonatal research. That type of work seeks to understand aspects of early development in clinical contexts. However, references to such research in correspondence with Epstein have prompted debate over the appropriateness of the association.

Public Reaction and Protest

The disclosure of the emails has sparked backlash online and on campus, with critics arguing that any professional relationship with Epstein — regardless of content — raises ethical concerns, given his criminal history. Hundreds of messages from the archive mention Tramo’s name and show prolonged communication with Epstein or his representatives.

Some UCLA students and activists have organised protests and online petitions calling for disciplinary action or removal of Tramo from his faculty position. University directors reportedly removed his faculty profile from UCLA’s public directory shortly after the controversy erupted, though he remains employed.

Tramo’s Response and Context

Tramo has defended his correspondence by emphasising that his research is legitimate neuroscience work and that his interactions with Epstein were motivated by the possibility of research funding. In public comments reported to news outlets, he said he was unaware of the full extent of Epstein’s criminal conduct at the time of early exchanges and that his focus was on academic inquiry.

Tramo also stated he never visited Epstein’s private properties, never flew on his aircraft and never witnessed any wrongdoing, and that he has since regretted some specific responses. His broader academic work includes peer-reviewed research on music, sound and brain science.

Academic and Ethical Debate

Experts note that unredacted references to infant behaviour and auditory experiments in these emails are rooted in scientific questions about neonatal development, not unusual or inappropriate practice in isolation. Researchers have long explored how different stimuli, including familiar voices, affect infant feeding and calming responses in clinical settings.

Nevertheless, any documented email exchange with someone of Epstein’s notoriety is politically and ethically sensitive, particularly when linked to public universities. Opponents argue that even academically framed correspondence can harm institutional reputation and that universities must maintain clear ethical standards for funding and external partnerships.

Current Status

As of now, UCLA administrators have not publicly detailed disciplinary measures against Tramo. He continues to hold his adjunct position, and the university has not issued a formal statement on any review process. Protesters and online critics continue to push for accountability, while defenders stress the importance of separating legitimate scientific discourse from unrelated misconduct by third parties.

The episode highlights how the ongoing release of the Epstein files — a vast trove of previously confidential correspondence and documents — continues to spark public debate over past associations between powerful or prestigious institutions and the disgraced financier.

• British Family in Dubai Speak About Taking Shelter During “Potential Missile Strikes”
• Epstein Files Reveal Claim He Told Friend Princess Beatrice “Liked” Him
• Why Canada Is Critical to Any “Made in America” Vehicle Ambition
• Barack Obama Breaks Silence, Blasts Donald Trump Over Racist Video and Political Conduct
• UCLA Professor Faces Backlash After Advising Jeffrey Epstein on How to get babies to ‘suck harder on pacifiers’