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

Length

43 minutes

Words per Minute

145.24173

Word Count

6,349

Sentence Count

460


Summary


Transcript

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,
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,
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.
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
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.
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,
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
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.
00:35:53.860 Scott,
00:35:54.360 now,
00:35:54.820 believe those quacks.
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
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
00:36:34.080 the shit out of you,
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,
00:38:22.540 cha-ching,
00:38:24.300 cha-ching,
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
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.