Real Coffee with Scott Adams - Episode 1483 Scott Adams： Hurricane Ida, the Afghan With Drawl, and Other Things That Totally Blow

00:00:00.920 Well, good morning, everybody.

00:00:03.320 Yeah, I'm a little less punctual than usual.

00:00:07.080 A little bit.

00:00:08.200 Just a little bit less punctual.

00:00:11.520 But does that mean the show will be any less amazing?

00:00:16.020 Yes, if I keep dropping things on the ground,

00:00:18.940 it will be far less amazing.

00:00:21.020 But, not counting that,

00:00:25.420 things are going to go really, really well this morning.

00:00:29.380 In fact, this might be one of the highlights of your whole life.

00:00:34.680 You just don't know it yet.

00:00:36.460 Sometimes, things turn out better than you think.

00:00:40.060 Not always, but sometimes.

00:00:42.520 And if you'd like to increase your chances of good luck,

00:00:46.000 all you need is a cupper mugger, a glass of tanker, chaliser stein,

00:00:51.080 a canteen jug or a flask of vessel of any kind.

00:00:54.100 Fill it with your favorite liquid.

00:00:57.620 I like coffee.

00:00:58.340 And join me now for the unparalleled pleasure,

00:01:02.020 the dopamine hit of the day.

00:01:04.160 The thing that makes everything better.

00:01:06.960 It's called the simultaneous sip,

00:01:08.720 and watch it turn that Category 4 hurricane into a 3.9.

00:01:12.800 Go.

00:01:13.040 I think it's working.

00:01:20.580 Well, speaking of that hurricane, Hurricane Ida,

00:01:27.340 here's some news.

00:01:28.420 This is breaking.

00:01:29.380 I don't think you'll see this anywhere else,

00:01:31.580 but you all know journalist Andy Ngo.

00:01:36.160 Last name is spelled G-N-O.

00:01:37.980 But Andy Ngo has decided to identify as Wind.

00:01:43.860 And he's identifying as Wind so that he can marry Hurricane Ida.

00:01:49.120 And Hurricane Ida will take his last name.

00:01:51.560 And then when people talk to Hurricane Ida and they say,

00:01:55.080 hey, what's your name?

00:01:56.460 Hurricane, the hurricane will say, I don't know.

00:02:02.960 And then they'll say, no, seriously, what's your name?

00:02:06.080 I don't know.

00:02:07.860 No, seriously.

00:02:09.900 What's your name?

00:02:10.800 I don't know.

00:02:15.340 All right.

00:02:16.460 Did you see the Sleepy Joe fake video?

00:02:19.840 There's a video of Joe Biden talking to, I guess,

00:02:24.800 the Prime Minister of Israel, whose face I don't recognize.

00:02:30.660 Can you imagine not recognizing the Prime Minister of Israel?

00:02:35.440 Like, I didn't even know who it was.

00:02:37.480 I couldn't have named him.

00:02:38.840 I certainly didn't recognize him.

00:02:41.080 It's like Netanyahu was sort of a genius in self-promotion.

00:02:44.880 You always knew who he was, right?

00:02:46.700 Even when he wasn't Prime Minister, you still knew who he was.

00:02:49.920 But I don't even know who the Prime Minister is now.

00:02:53.400 But anyway, the Prime Minister was talking to Joe Biden at the White House.

00:02:58.660 And there's some misleading video, misleading video of Biden closing his eyes.

00:03:05.160 Now, it's being debunked as a fake video because he answers a question with his eyes closed,

00:03:13.400 showing that he was awake the whole time and listening to the question.

00:03:16.840 So, there's your fake video.

00:03:21.160 But is it impossible, is it impossible that he did nod off for a little bit?

00:03:29.300 You know what I mean?

00:03:29.960 Maybe he might have nodded off for five or ten seconds and then came back in time to hear a question and answer.

00:03:38.500 Maybe.

00:03:39.720 But it's being listed as a fake video.

00:03:42.180 I think it's probably more fake than not.

00:03:45.300 But he may have fallen asleep.

00:03:47.340 Could have happened.

00:03:48.880 There's also a fake Obama video going around on Facebook.

00:03:53.960 So, I guess in the fake, and it's just misleadingly edited,

00:04:00.540 he is purported to say ordinary men and women are too small-minded to govern their own affairs.

00:04:08.040 Which, of course, he did not say.

00:04:10.560 And that order and progress can only come when individuals surrender their rights to an all-powerful sovereign.

00:04:19.100 Obama never said anything like that.

00:04:20.900 But that's the video going around.

00:04:22.840 So, I guess it's just edited to take out the context.

00:04:27.940 Here's an interesting persuasion point.

00:04:31.060 This is probably the least, let's say the least obvious persuasion point you'll ever see.

00:04:39.200 When I learned hypnosis, one of the things that my hypnosis instructor taught us

00:04:44.120 is that people will be more easily hypnotized if they pay for it.

00:04:49.440 If you do it for free, people will think it's worth nothing.

00:04:54.140 That's the problem.

00:04:56.320 If you say, I'll hypnotize you, and I'll do it for free, the person you're going to hypnotize assumes you're not very good at it.

00:05:03.620 Or you can't do it.

00:05:05.120 Because otherwise you'd charge for it.

00:05:06.940 It'd be like a service.

00:05:08.600 So, if it's free, it doesn't work.

00:05:10.960 Because people will assume it won't work, and then you can't get people into the right frame of mind.

00:05:14.560 But if you charge them a lot, and put them in a fancy-looking office and wear a nice suit and everything,

00:05:20.940 they will expect it to work.

00:05:23.060 Because it costs a lot.

00:05:24.820 And then it works.

00:05:27.140 There's something else like that happening now, along those lines, which is maybe a big deal.

00:05:34.220 And a Twitter user named Machiavelli's Underbelly, who you should be following, Machiavelli's Underbelly.

00:05:44.400 Just Google it, or just search for it on Twitter, you'll find it.

00:05:48.340 And he tweets this.

00:05:49.980 He says, the biggest reason for so much vaccine hesitancy, and I'm not joking, parenthetically,

00:05:56.160 is that the vaccine was free.

00:05:57.900 Now, he doesn't go on to explain the reasoning behind that,

00:06:02.800 because it's a fairly well-understood psychological phenomenon.

00:06:07.060 What about that?

00:06:07.860 What do you think about that?

00:06:09.520 Do you think that the credibility of the vaccination is degraded by the fact they're giving it away for free?

00:06:17.700 Now, free means just free to the consumer.

00:06:20.920 Obviously, your taxes and inflation will pay for it.

00:06:24.140 And obviously, the governments pay for it, blah, blah, blah.

00:06:26.580 So it's not that it's free-free, but to the person who makes the decision, it's free-ish in the short term.

00:06:35.940 I have an economics degree, so I don't like to call anything free, because there's always some related cost.

00:06:44.220 But here's the thing.

00:06:47.120 The fact that it's free, has that convinced anybody, and maybe they don't realize it, that it's no good?

00:06:56.580 Because they don't have to pay for it.

00:06:59.640 Maybe.

00:07:00.040 Now, I think we'd probably get a lower uptake if it were not free, just because people would be making budgeting decisions.

00:07:08.680 But there is something to the observation.

00:07:11.560 There is something about the fact that it's free, or feels free, even though it's not,

00:07:16.900 that probably makes it look less credible, I think.

00:07:24.600 So it's an interesting persuasion point of view.

00:07:29.680 All right.

00:07:31.800 You may have heard that the anti-Trump smugness index has reached a record low.

00:07:37.360 You know that smugness?

00:07:40.140 Well, you're pretty sure that Joe Biden was a serious adult in the room, and that clown Trump,

00:07:48.120 he was getting everything wrong.

00:07:49.540 Everything.

00:07:50.580 Absolutely every single thing he got wrong.

00:07:53.960 Well, that was when the smugness index was at its peak.

00:07:58.240 Oh, very smug.

00:08:00.020 Joe Biden's going to fix a lot of problems that Trump left.

00:08:04.480 But as time goes by, the smugness index starts to reduce.

00:08:13.140 For example, people may be thinking that Trump was somewhat right about Black Lives Matter and Antifa, 0.99

00:08:22.580 because they're not so popular these days, and it doesn't look like they did anything good.

00:08:26.960 I mean, maybe Black Lives Matter did, but I can't think of anything.

00:08:31.000 Maybe they did.

00:08:32.140 Raised awareness, anyway.

00:08:33.260 But I don't think people are having a great feeling about these groups that were against Trump.

00:08:39.680 I don't think that critical race theory is as popular as it could be in the United States.

00:08:48.420 I think people think Trump's largely right about that.

00:08:51.420 I think people think he could have done better in Afghanistan.

00:08:54.280 We don't know that, but it feels like anybody could have.

00:08:56.780 He looks right on immigration, he looks right on taxes, he looks right on China, 0.95

00:09:01.960 and he looks right on energy policy and gas prices.

00:09:06.980 So every day that goes by, Trump looks better.

00:09:11.780 Now, I predicted that.

00:09:13.140 To me, that was an obvious thing.

00:09:14.680 Because as soon as the fake news affect the clouds, everything, as soon as that started to dissipate,

00:09:22.060 you would see just the policies.

00:09:24.780 And then the policies wouldn't look that bad.

00:09:29.100 But the rhetoric does, right?

00:09:31.000 If you add the Trump rhetoric to anything, it turns it into a different thing.

00:09:35.820 But as soon as the rhetoric sort of fades in your memory,

00:09:39.500 and all you're doing is saying to yourself,

00:09:41.360 oh, wait a minute, does remain in Mexico policy make sense?

00:09:45.920 And then you think, yeah, it does.

00:09:48.520 It does. It does make sense.

00:09:50.680 So he continues to look better.

00:09:54.360 CNN allegedly did an interview,

00:09:58.700 and I guess this was before the explosion at Kabul Airport.

00:10:03.960 It was an interview with what purported to be an ISIS-K leader.

00:10:10.340 And the ISIS-K leader said he'd have no problem getting into Kabul. 0.93

00:10:14.760 Now, this was before the withdrawal, I guess.

00:10:17.140 And he met with the CNN crew,

00:10:21.540 and the only thing he asked is that they blur his face and hide his identity.

00:10:26.920 Now, if you were a leader of ISIS-K,

00:10:30.980 would you trust CNN to blur your face?

00:10:37.200 Are you kidding me?

00:10:38.820 Are you telling me that the CIA didn't talk to CNN and say,

00:10:44.400 you know, we'd like to see the unblurred version of the face?

00:10:48.620 Because that would be pretty helpful.

00:10:51.040 You don't think CNN would show the CIA an unblurred copy?

00:10:55.260 Now, I don't know if it makes any difference if only the CIA sees it.

00:11:00.400 You know, maybe that doesn't make much of a difference.

00:11:02.340 Maybe they already knew who it was.

00:11:03.920 They may have already had a picture of him.

00:11:05.920 But does it make sense that an ISIS leader

00:11:09.360 would want to give a CNN interview in such a dangerous way?

00:11:14.900 Well, apparently skeptics are saying,

00:11:16.980 we're not so sure you actually talked to an ISIS leader there.

00:11:20.640 And, yeah, somebody's asking on Locals in the comments,

00:11:28.480 was this guy hit by a drone recently?

00:11:32.200 And I have to think that he would have been droned by now 1.00

00:11:36.880 if he really gave that interview,

00:11:38.940 because I think we'd find him, right?

00:11:42.360 So I agree with the skepticism.

00:11:46.040 I'm not saying it's fake news,

00:11:47.620 but I don't think you could trust that that was really an ISIS leader.

00:11:52.700 I don't think you could trust it.

00:11:56.860 I'm just looking at some of your comments there.

00:12:02.860 Let's talk about this hurricane a little bit more.

00:12:08.600 Apparently it picked up steam

00:12:09.980 because it passed over a lot of hot air.

00:12:13.500 I think it went over Congress.

00:12:14.960 But how much are we going to talk about climate change

00:12:19.420 because of this hurricane?

00:12:21.660 Probably a lot, right?

00:12:23.260 So every time there's going to be a hurricane,

00:12:25.140 we're going to have that same dumb debate

00:12:26.740 where somebody says,

00:12:28.200 well, it's proven that it's climate change,

00:12:31.160 and then somebody else will say,

00:12:32.660 yeah, it's not proven.

00:12:34.500 There are some flags and some indications,

00:12:37.200 but it's not proven, proven.

00:12:40.260 And here's my question.

00:12:42.460 Where are the places that are getting better on Earth

00:12:47.220 because of climate change?

00:12:49.320 That has to be a thing, right?

00:12:51.260 If you imagine that there are just as many places on Earth

00:12:55.480 that are a little too low a temperature to be optimal,

00:12:59.400 and there are some places that maybe were at the right temperature,

00:13:02.180 but now they'll be a little too warm,

00:13:03.620 shouldn't we have stories about the amazing farming yield

00:13:11.080 that they've never seen so good coming out of some damn place?

00:13:16.500 Shouldn't we be seeing that?

00:13:17.920 I feel like the news is removing the context

00:13:20.240 of all the places where things are much better

00:13:23.140 because that has to be the case, right?

00:13:27.460 It seems like it would be.

00:13:28.700 So Alex Berenson, a famous, let's see, contrarian,

00:13:36.520 I think I'd call him a contrarian,

00:13:38.380 has been suspended by Twitter

00:13:40.360 for what Twitter calls COVID misinformation.

00:13:45.260 Now, do you think that Alex Berenson

00:13:47.920 did actually say something that was misleading,

00:13:53.100 dangerously, on Twitter?

00:13:55.660 Did he?

00:13:56.140 Well, here's the tweet that got him kicked off.

00:13:59.820 So I won't get kicked off because I'm talking about it.

00:14:03.400 I think if you state it to be true,

00:14:05.320 you might get kicked off,

00:14:06.480 but I'm talking about the story so I can talk about it.

00:14:09.680 So Berenson said,

00:14:11.540 don't think of it as a vaccine.

00:14:15.400 Think of it, at best,

00:14:17.620 as a therapeutic with a limited window of efficacy

00:14:20.680 and terrible side effect profile

00:14:23.220 that must be dosed in advance of illness.

00:14:26.140 He says in all caps.

00:14:28.480 Now,

00:14:29.300 which part of that,

00:14:31.380 as he notes,

00:14:32.660 I guess he indicated he might be thinking of legal action,

00:14:36.620 but which part of that is inaccurate?

00:14:38.940 Let's take it part at a time, okay?

00:14:42.240 Don't think of it as a vaccine.

00:14:44.760 Is that accurate or inaccurate?

00:14:46.980 Well, it doesn't matter because that's just an opinion, all right?

00:14:51.000 So don't think of it as a vaccine.

00:14:52.980 It's just an opinion about what to call things.

00:14:55.060 So that, you know,

00:14:55.700 you don't get kicked off for that kind of an opinion.

00:14:57.660 I've said the same opinion, by the way,

00:14:59.140 and I didn't get kicked off.

00:15:01.100 He goes,

00:15:01.700 think of it, at best,

00:15:03.000 as a therapeutic.

00:15:04.680 Now,

00:15:05.020 do you get kicked off for that?

00:15:07.100 I don't think so,

00:15:08.500 because I've said it,

00:15:09.560 how many times have I said the vaccine is really more of a therapeutic?

00:15:12.700 I've tweeted it.

00:15:13.400 I've said it in public a bunch of times.

00:15:15.020 There's no problem.

00:15:16.220 Because when I say it,

00:15:17.560 but I give my reasons,

00:15:19.620 and those reasons are known to be true,

00:15:22.500 which is that the vaccine doesn't stop you from getting,

00:15:27.000 doesn't completely stop you from getting the illness.

00:15:32.180 So in that way,

00:15:33.240 a reasonable person could call it more like a therapeutic than a vaccine.

00:15:36.880 So, so far,

00:15:37.420 it's just opinion,

00:15:38.740 and it's just opinion about what the words mean,

00:15:41.280 and that's completely fair, right?

00:15:43.180 I don't know if it's meaningful,

00:15:44.420 but it's fair.

00:15:45.400 All right,

00:15:46.560 the next thing he says is a limited window of efficacy.

00:15:51.720 Well,

00:15:52.420 now you're getting to a little bit more of an opinion that's kind of pushing on fact.

00:15:58.320 Does it have a limited window of efficacy?

00:16:02.820 Well,

00:16:04.320 yes and no,

00:16:05.220 right?

00:16:06.460 Because it does have efficacy that decreases over time,

00:16:10.940 and the booster shots would presumably,

00:16:13.280 you know,

00:16:14.440 boost that back up.

00:16:15.980 So in theory,

00:16:17.080 it doesn't have a limited window of efficacy,

00:16:20.060 as long as boosters are a thing.

00:16:22.260 So in theory,

00:16:23.500 it would be unlimited forever efficacy,

00:16:27.140 so long as you got boosters,

00:16:29.420 right?

00:16:29.920 Now remember,

00:16:30.580 we're in the fog of war,

00:16:31.600 so people are adjusting as they find out data,

00:16:34.380 and now they're adjusting for the boosters.

00:16:36.220 And I'm not saying you should get one or not.

00:16:38.180 I'm just talking about whether there's any disinformation or misinformation in this quote.

00:16:45.340 All right,

00:16:45.560 so I would say limited window of efficacy is subject to debate.

00:16:50.020 I know what he means.

00:16:53.000 He means that if you get one shot,

00:16:54.900 it's going to wear off before the pandemic ends.

00:16:59.360 So I think what he meant to say is accurate,

00:17:02.820 but because things have changed with the booster,

00:17:05.900 it's sort of,

00:17:06.580 his accurate statement sort of drifted into inaccurate, didn't it?

00:17:10.840 Now I think he said it probably after the boosters were already in conversation,

00:17:16.640 but it's kind of an interesting one

00:17:18.960 because it's more about the way he says it

00:17:21.480 than being inaccurate entirely.

00:17:25.140 Then he says about the vaccination's terrible side effect profile.

00:17:29.500 Is that true or false?

00:17:32.500 True or false?

00:17:34.180 That the vaccinations have a,

00:17:37.220 quote,

00:17:38.020 terrible side effect profile.

00:17:39.900 What would you say?

00:17:41.960 What would you say?

00:17:43.100 True or false?

00:17:45.100 Somebody says true for some,

00:17:47.280 but then would it be fair to say it as just a statement?

00:17:50.260 If it's only true for some.

00:17:52.460 I'm seeing lots of truths.

00:17:54.440 Let's see on YouTube if you think it's true.

00:17:57.580 I'm seeing no.

00:17:59.080 Too strong.

00:17:59.960 Too strong a statement?

00:18:01.580 Maybe.

00:18:02.540 As compared to what?

00:18:03.720 More than terrible.

00:18:04.760 No idea.

00:18:06.940 False.

00:18:07.700 Fine.

00:18:08.100 So this one's a little ambiguous, isn't it?

00:18:11.600 Because I would agree that if you are one of the people who has a bad side effect,

00:18:17.720 if you happen to be one of those unlucky people,

00:18:21.140 could it be said that you got a side effect that was terrible?

00:18:24.960 Well, if you happen to be one of those people, then yes, you could actually maybe die.

00:18:31.740 So that would be terrible.

00:18:33.680 But when you say it has a terrible side effect profile,

00:18:38.700 are you sort of suggesting that it's a bigger risk than it is?

00:18:44.000 Because it's certainly terrible if it happens.

00:18:48.900 But is he referring to what would happen if it does happen, which would be terrible?

00:18:54.380 I think we'd agree with that.

00:18:55.800 But it sort of suggests, the terrible part, sort of suggests the risk as well as what would happen if that risk came true.

00:19:06.140 And I don't think that the risk, the size of the risk, not what would happen,

00:19:10.840 but the size of the risk, I don't know that it would be reasonable to call that terrible.

00:19:15.780 Because it's sub 1%, well under 1%, right?

00:19:21.340 Is that a terrible side effect?

00:19:23.460 It would be a terrible outcome if you're one of the bad ones, you know,

00:19:27.740 you got a bad case of the side effect.

00:19:30.460 But the odds of the side effect are really low, aren't they?

00:19:34.000 As far as we know.

00:19:35.220 I mean, we could find out later.

00:19:37.560 So I would say I agree with Twitter on this.

00:19:45.780 Sorry.

00:19:47.380 Sorry.

00:19:48.540 I agree with Twitter on this opinion.

00:19:52.080 Now, I do think that he should have gotten a chance to rewrite it for clarity

00:19:57.640 and then, you know, be back on Twitter.

00:20:00.460 So I'm not sure a suspension makes sense.

00:20:03.000 But if their standard is misinformation,

00:20:07.720 then I would say that the ambiguity of the tweet, just the ambiguity,

00:20:12.640 because I think Berenson is completely correct

00:20:15.920 that what he believes to be true

00:20:20.080 and what he believes he said to be true are accurate.

00:20:25.340 So I think Berenson has a pretty good argument.

00:20:28.720 At the same time, there was enough ambiguity there

00:20:32.560 that I think Twitter was within its moral and ethical boundaries.

00:20:39.460 Now, this is a pretty close call, isn't it?

00:20:45.140 Now, I'm not saying they should have that standard.

00:20:47.400 It's a different question.

00:20:49.300 I'm not defending that they have a standard.

00:20:52.100 I'm saying that they met the standard.

00:20:54.540 Not that there should be a standard.

00:20:56.640 That's a separate question.

00:20:58.380 But I think they met their standard.

00:21:02.040 I don't like it.

00:21:03.160 I would rather see the skeptics than not see them.

00:21:07.660 I'd rather, you know, the debate happened in public

00:21:10.800 than just have them kicked off of Twitter.

00:21:12.960 I don't think that's the best way to handle it.

00:21:15.120 But I feel like they met their own standard

00:21:17.980 for what that's worth.

00:21:20.740 All right.

00:21:23.000 This is the point where those who don't like vaccination stuff

00:21:26.020 should, you can find something else to do.

00:21:29.420 But I'm only going to be talking about the odds of things.

00:21:32.520 I'm not going to be telling you to get it or don't get it.

00:21:36.020 And here's the kind of information that we get on vaccinations.

00:21:40.960 See if this tracks with what you believe to be true.

00:21:44.520 All right.

00:21:45.060 So here's the only test we're going to do.

00:21:46.900 I'm not going to tell you something is or is not true.

00:21:52.400 Is rationalizing censorship a side effect of the jab?

00:21:56.520 Maybe so.

00:21:59.420 So I'm not going to say these are true.

00:22:02.000 These are just statistics that come off of CNN.

00:22:04.660 But I want to see if it agrees with what you think is true.

00:22:08.120 So this is CNN's reporting.

00:22:09.840 If you're fully vaccinated now,

00:22:11.220 your chances of getting infected go down by three and a half fold.

00:22:16.260 Is that your understanding?

00:22:17.760 That if you're vaccinated,

00:22:19.680 the odds of getting infected in the first place

00:22:22.580 are way, way lower.

00:22:24.820 Three and a half times lower.

00:22:27.140 Is that your understanding?

00:22:28.140 Because I actually wasn't sure what that was until I read it today, actually.

00:22:33.740 How about this?

00:22:35.040 Your chances of having symptoms if you're vaccinated go down by eightfold.

00:22:42.140 Does that agree with sort of generally speaking how you thought of it?

00:22:46.500 Did your sense of it match that?

00:22:52.220 Chances of having symptoms go down by eightfold.

00:22:54.680 That's about what I thought it was.

00:22:56.160 I mean, not necessarily eight, but I thought it was a lot.

00:22:59.560 Your chances of ending with illness,

00:23:02.260 significant enough to go to the hospital,

00:23:04.200 go down 25-fold.

00:23:05.720 You probably knew that, right?

00:23:07.660 You probably did know that your odds of being hospitalized

00:23:09.960 are way, way down.

00:23:11.120 25 times lower.

00:23:13.860 And more than 99.99% of people who are fully vaccinated

00:23:18.640 have not had a breakthrough case.

00:23:22.020 So let me say that again.

00:23:24.160 Of people who are not vaccinated,

00:23:27.040 the odds of them,

00:23:28.900 you know,

00:23:30.560 getting it and then passing it on

00:23:32.620 are pretty good.

00:23:33.380 But if you're vaccinated,

00:23:36.000 99.99% chance

00:23:38.180 that you'll not have a breakthrough case.

00:23:41.400 You could still be infected,

00:23:43.140 but not necessarily get symptoms.

00:23:46.920 And then here's this last one.

00:23:49.280 And I'm guessing that these statistics are debatable, right?

00:23:53.660 You're probably going to debate this.

00:23:55.020 But according to CNN,

00:23:56.580 states with below average vaccination rates

00:23:59.160 had, on average,

00:24:00.780 almost triple the rate of new COVID cases.

00:24:04.160 Compared to states with above average vaccination rates.

00:24:07.280 This is according to Johns Hopkins University.

00:24:13.460 Do you believe that?

00:24:14.740 Do you believe that the vaccination rate of states

00:24:17.320 very, very highly correlates

00:24:20.880 with how many infections you're getting?

00:24:24.000 I don't know.

00:24:25.040 Maybe.

00:24:26.160 All right.

00:24:26.480 Here's my warning of the day on data.

00:24:29.760 Whenever anybody talks about a specific country,

00:24:34.380 assume it's wrong.

00:24:37.580 Sometimes it won't be.

00:24:39.280 But that's only 5% of the time.

00:24:41.320 I'm guessing.

00:24:41.940 This is just based on my observation of life

00:24:44.500 over the years.

00:24:46.000 And here's another one.

00:24:46.820 So Twitter user,

00:24:48.900 People's Pundit.

00:24:50.200 Some of you follow him.

00:24:51.680 So he's rich.

00:24:52.560 The People's Pundit, Barris.

00:24:53.800 And he tweeted that Sweden

00:24:55.980 went the natural immunity route

00:24:57.800 as opposed to Israel,

00:24:59.320 which went for vaccine immunity.

00:25:01.860 And that even though one went for vaccines

00:25:07.220 and one did not,

00:25:08.600 that Sweden actually is doing better.

00:25:10.040 Now, is that true?

00:25:13.580 Well, how long did it take

00:25:14.860 for the very next Twitter person to say,

00:25:17.300 no, Sweden is 50% vaccinated,

00:25:20.080 fully vaccinated,

00:25:21.080 and Israel is only 60% fully vaccinated?

00:25:24.500 I don't even think those statistics are right.

00:25:27.500 But it doesn't take more than a second

00:25:30.620 for somebody to tell anybody

00:25:32.180 who says anything about a country.

00:25:33.760 It takes about one second

00:25:36.160 for somebody to say,

00:25:37.020 you got the data wrong,

00:25:37.940 here's the right data.

00:25:39.760 Now, I don't know if the second person's right.

00:25:41.680 Maybe the first person is right. 0.93

00:25:43.360 But the thing you need to know

00:25:44.780 is if you're making any kind of decision,

00:25:48.480 any kind of decision,

00:25:50.240 based on what one country did,

00:25:52.780 that's not rational.

00:25:54.980 Because the one country comparison of anything,

00:25:57.980 Sweden, Israel, China,

00:26:00.500 it doesn't matter.

00:26:01.860 New Zealand.

00:26:02.360 And as soon as you're looking at the one country,

00:26:05.540 you're not in rational territory anymore.

00:26:08.960 How many people believe that?

00:26:11.120 I'm still seeing people say,

00:26:12.400 but Sweden is doing pretty good.

00:26:14.260 Listen to me.

00:26:16.280 I'm going to make the same point,

00:26:19.540 but I'm going to say it

00:26:20.400 in a more emphatic, like jerky way.

00:26:23.080 Because I don't think I'm getting through.

00:26:25.800 If you're talking about the results of one country,

00:26:30.120 stop it.

00:26:30.940 It means you're not good at analyzing things.

00:26:34.120 In fact, that would be the number one flag.

00:26:37.520 For people who are good at analyzing things,

00:26:39.940 what would be the biggest red flag

00:26:41.760 that you're talking to somebody

00:26:43.220 who's not good at analyzing things?

00:26:46.320 They tell you that they're looking at one country

00:26:48.420 and they've determined something.

00:26:50.080 Soon as you hear that,

00:26:51.960 you know you're talking with somebody

00:26:53.140 who's not experienced at analyzing stuff.

00:26:55.360 All right.

00:26:58.860 Somebody says, read Alex Berenson.

00:27:01.140 Let me tell you the skeptic problem.

00:27:07.040 Now, I like to give you these examples

00:27:08.860 of categories of risk,

00:27:11.540 which is different from knowing

00:27:13.000 whether one thing is right or wrong.

00:27:14.980 All right.

00:27:15.120 So a category, for example,

00:27:18.280 would be there's a rogue doctor

00:27:20.240 who made a viral video

00:27:21.840 saying all the experts are wrong.

00:27:24.280 In my opinion,

00:27:25.780 whenever you see the rogue doctor,

00:27:28.580 there's a 95% chance,

00:27:30.720 at least, it's bullshit.

00:27:31.880 No matter how sensible it sounds,

00:27:34.940 no matter how good his graphs and data are,

00:27:37.740 just know that the category

00:27:39.740 of rogue doctor disagrees with science

00:27:42.740 is going to be wrong 95% of the time.

00:27:45.700 That's just based on experience, right?

00:27:47.500 It's not based on some study.

00:27:50.740 But 5%, 5%, if they're ever right, 0.90

00:27:54.240 books are written about them

00:27:56.120 and they become heroes

00:27:57.260 and this scientist was the one who was right

00:28:00.280 when everybody was wrong

00:28:01.400 and Einstein knew that, you know,

00:28:03.980 Newton wasn't completely right about gravity

00:28:06.720 but nobody thought Einstein was right

00:28:09.540 until, you know,

00:28:10.480 it took a while to figure out who he was.

00:28:12.760 So you hear about all the stories

00:28:14.320 about the 5% time the rogue expert is right.

00:28:18.440 But just know,

00:28:19.880 if it's day one

00:28:20.820 and you're hearing a rogue expert,

00:28:22.380 95% chance no.

00:28:24.300 All right, here's another category.

00:28:27.120 A professional skeptic

00:28:29.080 tells you something is wrong.

00:28:34.600 So Berenson also

00:28:37.220 is a skeptic about marijuana

00:28:40.560 and says it should be,

00:28:41.660 I guess he wrote a book saying

00:28:42.620 it should not be legalized.

00:28:44.540 Now, I'm not going to get into the debate

00:28:45.860 of whether it should or should not be legalized,

00:28:48.280 but would you agree that's a contrarian view?

00:28:51.020 That's the only point.

00:28:51.920 It's a contrarian view.

00:28:53.160 He might be right

00:28:53.900 and he might be wrong,

00:28:56.000 but I'm just saying

00:28:56.580 it's a contrarian view.

00:28:58.360 Did he take a contrarian view

00:28:59.880 about masks?

00:29:00.860 Yes.

00:29:01.180 Did he take a contrarian view

00:29:02.480 about vaccinations?

00:29:04.200 Yes.

00:29:05.080 Did he take a contrarian view

00:29:06.500 about basically everything?

00:29:08.700 Yes.

00:29:10.220 So how much should you treat,

00:29:12.700 how much credibility

00:29:13.880 should you put

00:29:14.820 in someone who has a track record

00:29:19.060 of being the contrarian?

00:29:24.400 Low.

00:29:26.160 Really, really, really low.

00:29:28.360 Which doesn't mean he's wrong.

00:29:31.060 He could be right about everything.

00:29:33.580 He might be the one contrarian 0.65

00:29:35.380 who just gets everything right.

00:29:36.860 Could happen.

00:29:39.140 But whenever you see the contrarian

00:29:41.460 who's just sort of automatically

00:29:43.580 against everything that's standard belief,

00:29:46.740 just sort of automatically,

00:29:47.860 that pushes on the credibility.

00:29:53.780 Now, you've seen me disagree

00:29:56.760 with the standard opinions

00:29:59.800 over and over and over again.

00:30:02.380 But you've also seen me be right about it

00:30:04.560 more often than chance would suggest.

00:30:07.380 So you have to look

00:30:08.520 for your special cases.

00:30:09.720 But I'd say if somebody's

00:30:10.700 just automatically a contrarian,

00:30:13.080 you've got to factor that in.

00:30:15.600 All right.

00:30:21.940 So what are the economics

00:30:24.560 of vaccination?

00:30:26.980 Here's what I think.

00:30:28.520 And I'm going to give you

00:30:29.340 a little surprise.

00:30:30.600 There's a little surprise

00:30:31.440 in here coming.

00:30:32.660 It'll be a surprise coming from me,

00:30:34.260 that's for sure.

00:30:35.760 If you took an economics filter

00:30:37.980 on the question of natural immunity

00:30:41.360 versus getting vaccinated,

00:30:42.760 what would it look like?

00:30:46.680 Well, I would say that the price

00:30:48.520 of the coronavirus

00:30:51.260 versus the price of the vaccination,

00:30:54.560 if you were to look at it that way,

00:30:56.820 I would say that not getting vaccinated

00:30:59.620 has an extra price,

00:31:02.240 which is the long-haul COVID risk,

00:31:05.000 whereas getting vaccinated

00:31:05.980 has a smaller price for that.

00:31:08.020 Otherwise, it's kind of immaterial.

00:31:12.800 The only price that you would consider,

00:31:17.200 probably,

00:31:18.080 because the risk of actually

00:31:19.140 getting COVID and dying

00:31:20.380 versus the risk of getting

00:31:22.420 the side effect from the vaccination

00:31:25.120 and dying,

00:31:25.720 they're both so small

00:31:26.580 you could just round them to zero.

00:31:28.780 But the risk of long-haul COVID

00:31:30.700 is big enough

00:31:31.380 that that's actually part

00:31:33.160 of the calculation.

00:31:33.800 I saw two doctors today on Twitter

00:31:37.320 doubt long-haul COVID

00:31:41.080 is a big deal.

00:31:43.720 Now, and one of them said,

00:31:45.620 quite reasonably,

00:31:46.740 it's like we're not hearing

00:31:48.040 much about it lately, are we?

00:31:50.360 To which I thought,

00:31:51.560 oh my God,

00:31:52.380 that's another dog not barking.

00:31:54.780 You have to look for what's happening,

00:31:56.460 but also what isn't happening

00:31:57.660 that should be happening.

00:31:59.120 If any of the estimates

00:32:00.700 of long-haul COVID

00:32:02.020 were accurate,

00:32:02.920 I feel like it's all

00:32:05.000 we'd be talking about.

00:32:07.100 There's something going on.

00:32:09.120 Now, if you talk to Dr. Drew,

00:32:10.600 he'll tell you he had

00:32:11.500 long-haul COVID

00:32:12.380 and there's not much doubt about it.

00:32:15.000 And he's a doctor.

00:32:16.720 And, you know,

00:32:17.460 he's steeped in this stuff.

00:32:20.800 So, I don't doubt him.

00:32:23.440 I think he had long-haul COVID.

00:32:26.080 And I know at least

00:32:27.160 one other person

00:32:27.880 who seemed to have had

00:32:28.920 long-haul COVID

00:32:30.040 as far as I can tell.

00:32:31.000 Yes, it's anecdotal, right?

00:32:33.540 It's anecdotal.

00:32:34.840 So, you have to say to yourself,

00:32:36.420 well, that one report

00:32:38.220 of the one person,

00:32:39.580 you never know.

00:32:40.520 You never know.

00:32:44.020 And I'll give you

00:32:45.180 an example of that.

00:32:48.320 As you,

00:32:49.500 many of you know,

00:32:50.780 I was on prednisone

00:32:52.120 for too long last year.

00:32:53.840 And if you get off

00:32:56.000 of prednisone

00:32:56.580 after you've been on it,

00:32:57.760 it just messes,

00:32:58.920 at least in my case,

00:33:00.160 it just messed with

00:33:01.040 my health for months.

00:33:02.880 But did I have

00:33:03.760 long-haul prednisone?

00:33:06.200 I don't know.

00:33:07.300 Maybe it was

00:33:07.740 some other problem.

00:33:08.600 It just happened

00:33:09.040 at the same time.

00:33:11.300 So, I just assumed I did.

00:33:13.320 So, I'm going to agree

00:33:15.660 with the two doctors

00:33:17.000 who questioned

00:33:18.440 my assumption

00:33:20.120 that long-haul

00:33:21.160 is going to be

00:33:22.500 a big deal

00:33:23.140 and big enough

00:33:24.020 to be the major part

00:33:25.780 of your decision.

00:33:28.020 I don't see any headlines

00:33:29.440 about it today

00:33:30.240 or yesterday

00:33:31.520 or the day before.

00:33:33.240 Do you?

00:33:34.400 I mean, for a while

00:33:35.160 we were talking about it

00:33:36.100 quite a bit.

00:33:37.580 And then we just sort of

00:33:38.640 stopped talking about it

00:33:39.760 when it should be

00:33:41.300 the biggest factor.

00:33:43.540 In other words,

00:33:44.120 if you were trying

00:33:44.620 to convince somebody

00:33:45.800 to take a vaccination,

00:33:47.800 what would be

00:33:48.340 the most convincing

00:33:49.460 data you could give them?

00:33:51.160 It would be

00:33:53.040 long-haul COVID.

00:33:54.640 That would be

00:33:55.360 the most persuasive thing.

00:33:57.480 Because everybody thinks

00:33:58.480 the odds of dying

00:33:59.500 of the COVID

00:34:00.280 and the odds of getting

00:34:02.300 the vaccination side effect

00:34:03.500 are both really,

00:34:04.340 really small.

00:34:05.540 Like, one is even

00:34:06.340 smaller than the other.

00:34:08.120 But they're both so small

00:34:09.260 you just discount them both.

00:34:12.000 But,

00:34:13.160 long-haul COVID?

00:34:14.940 If that shit's real,

00:34:16.980 that's your biggest

00:34:17.780 decision point.

00:34:18.640 In my opinion,

00:34:19.360 that would be

00:34:19.720 your biggest decision point.

00:34:20.800 And we just stopped

00:34:21.920 talking about it?

00:34:23.500 I think the two doctors

00:34:25.900 who called me out on that

00:34:27.080 just totally got me.

00:34:29.320 Right?

00:34:29.520 I don't usually...

00:34:32.160 Well, actually,

00:34:33.840 let me take this

00:34:35.600 as a learning point here.

00:34:39.000 The learning is this.

00:34:40.740 I've told you that

00:34:41.660 I uniquely,

00:34:43.620 because of the way

00:34:44.280 I've positioned this podcast,

00:34:46.160 that I uniquely

00:34:47.160 can say I was wrong.

00:34:48.460 because I don't have

00:34:50.260 the incentive

00:34:50.820 to say I was right

00:34:52.400 once the data,

00:34:54.300 you know,

00:34:54.680 suggests that maybe

00:34:55.400 I wasn't.

00:34:56.180 My incentive is

00:34:57.060 to tell you I was wrong

00:34:57.960 because the nature

00:34:58.680 of this live stream

00:34:59.840 is showing people's

00:35:01.600 blind spots

00:35:02.340 and psychological mistakes.

00:35:05.160 So if I make

00:35:06.180 a big psychological mistake

00:35:09.040 in analyzing something

00:35:11.160 or have a big blind spot

00:35:12.580 and then I find out

00:35:13.340 about it,

00:35:14.100 that's exciting to me.

00:35:15.560 And I would want

00:35:16.760 to tell you that.

00:35:17.840 I would want to say,

00:35:18.780 man, I was wrong

00:35:19.580 about this.

00:35:20.540 And it's starting

00:35:21.580 to shape up

00:35:22.360 like this might be

00:35:23.120 one of those cases.

00:35:24.700 Because I made

00:35:25.600 most of my decision

00:35:27.800 on that long-haul thing.

00:35:30.960 And now I think

00:35:32.140 it's reasonable

00:35:32.820 to be quite skeptical

00:35:33.980 about it.

00:35:34.980 Because we're not

00:35:35.760 hearing more about it.

00:35:36.700 It's the dog not barking

00:35:37.920 as much as it should.

00:35:41.200 Scott,

00:35:41.720 how is your

00:35:42.360 prion disease coming?

00:35:44.020 I don't know.

00:35:51.040 Scott,

00:35:51.780 one minute ago,

00:35:52.620 don't believe quacks. 1.00

00:35:53.860 Scott,

00:35:54.360 now,

00:35:54.820 believe those quacks. 1.00

00:35:56.440 Did I say anything

00:35:57.200 like that?

00:35:59.460 Did I say anything

00:36:00.880 like that?

00:36:02.260 No,

00:36:02.800 I didn't.

00:36:04.260 All right.

00:36:07.040 Long-haul is similar

00:36:08.300 to the sonic weapon.

00:36:09.660 It might be.

00:36:10.820 Yeah,

00:36:11.120 that would be

00:36:11.560 the theory.

00:36:12.040 The theory would be

00:36:13.840 that it's mass hysteria.

00:36:16.500 Along with confirmation bias,

00:36:18.520 along with coincidence,

00:36:20.060 et cetera.

00:36:21.800 It seems to me

00:36:22.840 that if COVID

00:36:23.940 kicks the shit out of you 0.99

00:36:25.200 for a month,

00:36:27.220 that your health

00:36:27.840 isn't going to be

00:36:28.420 that good

00:36:28.980 for the next three months.

00:36:30.880 Am I wrong about that?

00:36:32.120 If you get something

00:36:33.380 that just kicks 0.74

00:36:34.080 the shit out of you, 0.97

00:36:35.480 it doesn't matter

00:36:36.000 what it is.

00:36:36.880 It could be COVID

00:36:37.660 or something else.

00:36:38.780 Don't you have

00:36:39.580 three months

00:36:40.520 of bad health

00:36:41.140 after that?

00:36:42.220 Because it just

00:36:43.580 takes a while

00:36:44.200 to get back.

00:36:45.940 So,

00:36:46.300 I don't know.

00:36:46.780 Maybe it's just that.

00:36:56.000 Let's see.

00:36:56.680 Towards the end,

00:36:57.140 we had several people

00:36:58.060 with the exact same symptoms.

00:36:59.460 Yeah.

00:37:05.100 So,

00:37:05.820 let's put that out there

00:37:07.500 as some skepticism

00:37:08.680 that is earned.

00:37:12.320 And that

00:37:12.860 is what I'd like

00:37:14.600 to say today.

00:37:15.400 Now,

00:37:15.660 let me do a temperature check.

00:37:18.680 So,

00:37:19.220 I just talked about

00:37:20.260 vaccinations again,

00:37:22.240 and you hate that.

00:37:23.380 You've told me loud and clear

00:37:24.800 you're sick of it.

00:37:25.500 was this discussion,

00:37:28.200 especially if I put it

00:37:29.140 at the end.

00:37:32.900 Somebody says,

00:37:33.600 yes,

00:37:33.780 I hate it.

00:37:35.800 Well,

00:37:36.220 I'll put it at the end,

00:37:37.220 and then I'll flag it

00:37:38.620 so you can know

00:37:39.400 to go do something else.

00:37:40.860 And I don't mind

00:37:41.400 that you do,

00:37:41.800 by the way.

00:37:42.700 If anybody says,

00:37:44.520 hey,

00:37:44.700 that content

00:37:45.300 is not for me,

00:37:46.820 well,

00:37:47.500 you know,

00:37:48.340 that's certainly subjective,

00:37:49.920 and I respect that

00:37:50.780 completely.

00:37:51.820 And I also respect

00:37:52.720 that you told me.

00:37:53.380 I don't know

00:37:55.620 if I've told you

00:37:56.140 this before,

00:37:57.500 but I have an attitude

00:37:59.200 about criticism.

00:38:01.220 And it goes like this.

00:38:02.560 If it's just a troll,

00:38:03.880 then,

00:38:04.220 you know,

00:38:04.740 I like to use them

00:38:06.240 as entertainment

00:38:06.880 and mock them online.

00:38:09.140 But if somebody

00:38:09.820 has a criticism

00:38:10.520 that actually hits home,

00:38:12.940 and I feel like,

00:38:13.760 oh,

00:38:14.340 well,

00:38:14.780 that's not my opinion,

00:38:15.920 but there sure are

00:38:16.780 a lot of people

00:38:17.240 who have that opinion,

00:38:18.080 so I'm going to

00:38:18.820 take it seriously.

00:38:20.320 To me,

00:38:20.780 I hear this sound,

00:38:22.120 cha-ching, 0.97

00:38:22.540 cha-ching, 0.97

00:38:24.300 cha-ching, 0.97

00:38:25.300 when people brutally

00:38:26.660 criticize me,

00:38:28.420 if they're right,

00:38:29.680 right?

00:38:29.980 Sometimes I'll say,

00:38:30.860 yeah,

00:38:31.120 you got a point.

00:38:32.440 And this is one of those.

00:38:34.300 You're definitely right

00:38:35.560 that I talk too much

00:38:37.820 about,

00:38:38.220 you know,

00:38:38.820 masks and vaccines.

00:38:41.520 And I told you why,

00:38:42.720 because there's not

00:38:43.100 much else going on,

00:38:44.280 but that's not really,

00:38:45.220 doesn't help you,

00:38:46.060 right?

00:38:47.180 That's my problem,

00:38:48.120 that's not your problem.

00:38:50.400 $25 from Chad.

00:38:51.680 Chad,

00:38:52.680 did I make a credible

00:38:54.860 and persuasive argument?

00:38:56.020 Did your fact checkers

00:38:56.860 find fault with my claims

00:38:58.080 or questions?

00:39:00.140 Chad,

00:39:00.780 for $25,

00:39:02.140 I don't know what

00:39:02.600 your exact question is.

00:39:04.520 Did I make a credible

00:39:06.140 and persuasive argument?

00:39:07.340 Tell me the exact

00:39:09.340 persuasive argument

00:39:10.300 you're talking about.

00:39:11.000 The fear factor

00:39:18.020 seems inflamed.

00:39:22.180 Oh,

00:39:22.740 Glenn Beck

00:39:23.220 is funding

00:39:23.840 Afghan extractions.

00:39:25.180 I saw something

00:39:25.720 about him trending.

00:39:27.380 So that would make sense.

00:39:31.960 Scott is doing

00:39:32.920 mental gymnastics

00:39:33.960 because he's jabbed.

00:39:35.420 Well,

00:39:36.520 what would that be?

00:39:39.340 What mental gymnastics

00:39:40.840 would I do?

00:39:41.980 I just told you

00:39:42.920 that the biggest variable

00:39:44.180 that I considered,

00:39:45.880 I now doubt

00:39:46.760 to be even true.

00:39:47.580 If I had

00:39:49.780 confirmation bias,

00:39:51.320 it would look

00:39:51.940 the opposite of that.

00:39:53.500 So confirmation bias

00:39:54.640 would be me saying,

00:39:55.960 yeah,

00:39:56.720 yeah,

00:39:57.160 all those studies

00:39:57.940 about long-haul COVID,

00:40:00.600 totally true.

00:40:01.500 I believe them.

00:40:03.060 That's what it would look like

00:40:04.260 if I were rationalizing.

00:40:05.940 But I just did the opposite.

00:40:07.500 I got the shot

00:40:08.620 and then told you

00:40:10.240 that my biggest variable

00:40:11.540 for my reason,

00:40:12.920 forgetting it,

00:40:14.320 could be very flawed,

00:40:16.260 like completely fake news.

00:40:18.620 Now,

00:40:19.740 do you not hear me say

00:40:21.580 that there's really good evidence

00:40:24.900 that my biggest decision variable

00:40:27.480 wasn't even true?

00:40:31.320 Chad says,

00:40:32.200 about no wide-scale serology

00:40:34.100 being done,

00:40:34.780 no acknowledgement

00:40:35.460 of a recovered included.

00:40:37.520 Yes,

00:40:38.180 I think,

00:40:39.180 Chad,

00:40:39.480 I think other people

00:40:40.160 agree with that as well.

00:40:41.320 You're definitely overpaying

00:40:42.540 to make these comments,

00:40:43.620 but I agree with you

00:40:44.620 that we should have

00:40:46.840 continuous widespread serology

00:40:49.540 to find out

00:40:50.780 how many people

00:40:51.320 have already been infected.

00:40:52.360 And we should,

00:40:53.800 as far as I can tell,

00:40:55.620 it doesn't make sense

00:40:56.540 to give vaccinations

00:40:57.600 to people who've been infected,

00:40:59.700 but, you know,

00:41:00.260 unless they have

00:41:00.660 some immunity problem.

00:41:02.200 But I'm no expert,

00:41:03.660 so I'm not going to,

00:41:04.640 I don't think I would be

00:41:05.960 inclined to override

00:41:07.480 the experts on that,

00:41:08.880 but I would certainly

00:41:09.680 want people

00:41:10.160 to have an option.

00:41:12.180 It's one thing to say

00:41:13.320 that you should

00:41:13.840 or should not get the vaccine

00:41:15.020 if you're already immune.

00:41:17.780 That part I can't speak to.

00:41:19.360 That's science beyond me.

00:41:23.800 Chad just tipped me $5

00:41:26.180 just to say thank you

00:41:27.480 for reading his comment

00:41:28.560 for $25.

00:41:29.200 Chad, you're overpaying.

00:41:34.480 All right,

00:41:35.160 but he's entertaining.

00:41:38.240 All right,

00:41:39.040 yeah, Chad's getting

00:41:40.160 his money's worth,

00:41:40.820 I guess.

00:41:45.980 All right,

00:41:46.720 he has good points.

00:41:49.400 Yeah, I agree.

00:41:49.900 Do vaccinated people 0.78

00:41:56.960 get long-haul?

00:41:57.860 That, I believe,

00:41:58.560 has not been studied.

00:41:59.900 But if you do believe

00:42:00.960 that vaccinated people

00:42:02.020 get far less symptoms

00:42:03.880 in general,

00:42:04.940 it seems reasonable.

00:42:06.680 I mean,

00:42:06.940 I would be amazed

00:42:08.120 if long-haul COVID

00:42:10.100 actually exists.

00:42:11.180 I would be amazed

00:42:12.460 if vaccinations

00:42:13.500 don't substantially

00:42:14.520 reduce the risk of it.

00:42:15.800 But, you know,

00:42:17.960 we could be surprised.

00:42:19.420 Our common sense

00:42:20.180 only goes so far

00:42:21.140 in this kind of domain.

00:42:22.660 You have to be

00:42:23.120 kind of careful

00:42:24.180 about whether

00:42:25.760 your common sense

00:42:26.480 is really sensible.

00:42:29.840 Somebody says

00:42:30.600 long-haul seems to be

00:42:31.940 something made up

00:42:32.900 to scare.

00:42:34.240 Well,

00:42:34.640 I can tell you

00:42:35.200 that the people

00:42:35.740 who think they had it

00:42:36.860 didn't make it up.

00:42:39.580 I mean,

00:42:40.460 it could be a coincidence,

00:42:41.800 but a lot of real people

00:42:44.120 think they had it.

00:42:44.900 Why do our experts

00:42:52.640 push vaccines

00:42:53.940 but not diet and exercise?

00:42:56.220 Well, you know,

00:42:57.100 there are plenty of experts

00:42:58.620 you see saying,

00:42:59.580 hey,

00:43:00.060 do more diet and exercise.

00:43:04.080 But,

00:43:04.940 I don't think people

00:43:06.840 can do that as quickly

00:43:08.060 as they need to.

00:43:09.700 It's not the quick solution.

00:43:12.280 But, yeah,

00:43:12.680 I feel like we should be

00:43:14.900 at least persuading on that.

00:43:17.600 All right,

00:43:17.820 that's all I've got for now.

00:43:18.720 And I am going to

00:43:19.840 go do something else.

00:43:22.640 And,

00:43:23.120 as usual,

00:43:24.340 I enjoy our time here today.

00:43:25.840 I hope you're using it

00:43:26.640 to exercise

00:43:27.180 or take a walk,

00:43:28.640 which is exercise.

00:43:30.060 Or,

00:43:30.560 I hope you're using

00:43:31.300 these podcasts

00:43:32.540 to get something done

00:43:33.840 while you're listening

00:43:34.680 so that you

00:43:35.960 can be

00:43:37.240 double productive.

00:43:38.860 All right,

00:43:39.320 and that's all for now.

00:43:40.020 and that's all for now.

00:43:40.760 All right,

00:43:41.020 and that's all for now.

00:43:41.340 All right,

00:43:41.900 and that's all for now.

Real Coffee with Scott Adams - August 29, 2021

Episode 1483 Scott Adams： Hurricane Ida, the Afghan With Drawl, and Other Things That Totally Blow

Episode Stats

Summary

Transcript