The Megyn Kelly Show - Left's Hypocrisy on Women, Ignoring Nashville Trans Shooter, and How to Live Better Longer, with Glenn Greenwald and Dr. Peter Attia

00:00:00.000 Beat, beat, beatboxing actually has hidden health benefits.

00:00:04.360 It can help strengthen and protect your voice from injury.

00:00:08.900 See healthy living differently with Manulife.

00:00:11.160 Visit manulife.ca slash health.

00:00:14.020 Yeah.

00:00:15.460 Welcome to The Megyn Kelly Show, your home for open, honest, and provocative conversations.

00:00:26.860 Hey everyone, I'm Megyn Kelly.

00:00:28.520 Welcome to The Megyn Kelly Show and happy Monday.

00:00:31.680 Hope you all had a great Easter weekend, enjoyed Passover, et cetera.

00:00:36.140 We did.

00:00:36.720 We had a great Easter weekend.

00:00:38.080 We did the baskets.

00:00:39.240 We did the Ten Commandments.

00:00:41.200 We did church where it was standing room only.

00:00:44.040 And there is something so good about seeing that, isn't there?

00:00:46.340 Our priest was saying how happy it made him to see the number of people who were there

00:00:51.660 for Sunday Mass.

00:00:52.780 And I felt the same.

00:00:54.140 You know, it's just like a good message for your kids.

00:00:55.860 You're part of something larger than yourself.

00:00:58.720 There are others in your community who share these same beliefs.

00:01:01.780 This is not just something being forced on you by mom and dad.

00:01:04.420 See, there are your friends.

00:01:05.540 There are your buddies.

00:01:06.500 There are your teachers, our neighbors.

00:01:08.060 The whole exercise, so worthwhile and just a great time to reflect as a family on what

00:01:15.200 it means, what Easter means, what your religion means to you, how it bonds you with your community

00:01:20.820 and your family and so on.

00:01:22.680 So thumbs up to ceremony, to religious holidays and to Jesus on his big comeback.

00:01:30.940 Later, we're going to be joined in the show by Dr. Peter Atiyah.

00:01:34.500 Oh, love him.

00:01:35.760 I have thought so many times about our last interview with Peter.

00:01:38.960 Happened around this time last year.

00:01:40.480 And now he's got a new book out, which you must buy.

00:01:43.180 It's so good.

00:01:44.240 It's number one right now on the New York Times bestseller list for nonfiction.

00:01:48.020 And for a reason, I love audio.

00:01:50.900 He sent me the, you know, hard copy.

00:01:52.380 I love audio.

00:01:52.900 I put it on two times two.

00:01:55.260 I burned through that thing in like a morning plus a little bit of the afternoon.

00:02:00.360 Great, great info.

00:02:01.940 Good stuff.

00:02:02.660 We're going to help extend your lifespan.

00:02:04.120 Second hour of the show.

00:02:05.700 Want to tell you that right now it's noon Eastern and we are keeping an eye on some news this

00:02:09.980 morning regarding a shooting in downtown Louisville, Kentucky at a bank.

00:02:13.980 It sounds like from the initial reports, this is a case of workplace violence.

00:02:18.020 Reports are that there are five dead, including the shooter, who appears to have been an employee

00:02:22.860 of the bank.

00:02:24.260 Meanwhile, over in Tennessee, the so-called Tennessee Three, as they want to be called,

00:02:31.760 continue to dominate the headlines.

00:02:33.380 I mean, the absurdity with which the mainstream is reacting to what happened in Tennessee.

00:02:38.160 It's outrageous.

00:02:39.800 They're making heroes into these guys who disrupted the proceedings, broke protocol,

00:02:44.800 were absolutely rude and disruptive and disrespectful to their fellow colleagues, many of whom were

00:02:50.920 voicing the opinions of families aligned with the victims of that Tennessee shooting.

00:02:56.300 The media wants to make it sound like, oh, all the victims of that Nashville, Tennessee

00:03:00.580 shooting were on our side.

00:03:02.260 And then they threw our two guys out.

00:03:04.040 And it was all about race, too, because the black guys got thrown out without the white

00:03:06.900 woman.

00:03:07.200 We attacked that on on Friday.

00:03:09.160 That's absurd.

00:03:10.380 The seven million people in Tennessee, many of whom did not agree with what those two were

00:03:14.680 asking for, those three.

00:03:16.820 And they were rude in trying to silence the debate when they didn't get their way.

00:03:21.020 That's what happened there.

00:03:22.520 Of course, Vice President Kamala Harris making a surprise visit to Nashville on Friday not to

00:03:29.000 support the victims of the Christian school shooting over which the lawmakers were arguing

00:03:33.460 in the first place, but in support of the ousted lawmakers, she did not even deign to visit

00:03:39.660 with the families of the three nine-year-olds who were murdered at that Christian school.

00:03:46.220 She didn't even try to do the fig leaf of saying she wanted to.

00:03:50.520 Joining us now to discuss this unbelievable news and news cycle, Glenn Greenwald.

00:03:55.420 Glenn is a Pulitzer Prize winning journalist and host of System Update on Rumble.

00:04:01.040 Glenn, great to have you back.

00:04:01.960 How are you doing?

00:04:02.320 Hey, Megan, great to be with you.

00:04:04.880 The Tennessee thing is so annoying to me.

00:04:07.400 The fact that she would deign to go down there and not even make a showing of saying, I would

00:04:12.440 love to meet with the victims of the six who were killed, especially the victims of the

00:04:16.300 three nine-year-olds who were killed there.

00:04:18.880 But I'm going to meet with these three posers who are looking for their moment in the sun,

00:04:24.600 who disrupted the proceedings, were disrespectful and rude to everybody, but are now being lionized.

00:04:29.420 Did you see them on the Sunday shows by the media as, you know, critical to democracy?

00:04:35.940 And by the way, they're going to get right back in, too, because they were expelled.

00:04:38.980 Two out of three were expelled.

00:04:40.160 They're going to get put right back in there by the voters like this week.

00:04:42.740 So what's your take on it?

00:04:45.560 Yeah.

00:04:46.080 I mean, first of all, I remember very well in the weeks and months after January 6th that

00:04:50.360 he demands that a whole variety of members of Congress who had nothing to do even arguably

00:04:55.260 with the January 6th riot, such as Ted Cruz and Josh Hawley, anybody basically who wanted

00:05:00.680 the congressional examination of that election be expelled.

00:05:03.760 They were demanding expel Josh Hawley, just expel Ted Cruz, expel these dozens of House

00:05:08.800 members, and now suddenly expelling elected members of Congress for disrupting congressional

00:05:15.720 procedures, not for positions they've taken as some sort of fascist assault on democracy,

00:05:20.360 exactly what people like AOC were demanding not all that long ago.

00:05:23.780 I think the bigger and more important point, though, Megan, is this Nashville shooting has

00:05:29.320 been erased from memory, even though it happened very recently, because it's such an

00:05:35.080 inconvenient narrative, given that the shooter was not just someone who was trans, but very

00:05:41.240 possibly acted on behalf of this radical ideology.

00:05:46.940 And amazingly, they won't show us the manifesto, even though we always see the manifesto when they

00:05:51.180 can link it to the right. And we're actually we retain counsel in Nashville to try and obtain

00:05:56.580 that that manifesto, because, of course, it's journalistically in the public interest.

00:06:00.820 So that's why Kamala Harris goes there and pretends there are no victims, because they want

00:06:04.240 to forget about that shooting completely, except to the extent they can exploit it for gun control

00:06:09.340 issues. That's exactly right. And now what we're seeing is this message that once again,

00:06:15.260 it's Jim Crow 2.0. I mean, how many times have we heard that? It's like they're excited

00:06:20.720 on the left because they can turn what was the targeting of a Christian school and little

00:06:25.580 nine year olds by a trans person into Black Lives Matter. You threw out the two black guys

00:06:31.480 instead of the white woman. And by the way, her expulsion only failed by one vote. And

00:06:35.520 she did not grab a bullhorn and take it out into the well. And she did not lead the protests

00:06:39.780 of the people up in the balcony. So there was a distinction. And she argued those distinctions

00:06:43.760 on her own behalf and through her representatives in distinguishing her own behavior from that

00:06:48.160 of the two black men, only to then be saved. And then when she was saved and the black men

00:06:52.520 were kicked out, she turned around and said, racism. You're the one who distinguished your

00:06:57.220 behavior. OK, so but the left is loving the shift to it's not about the dead Christian children.

00:07:03.600 It's not about the trans person who committed the murders or the buried manifesto. It is about

00:07:08.620 the the expulsion of the two black people who were fighting for democracy.

00:07:12.960 Yeah. You know, I first of all, one of the main weapon of the Democratic Party,

00:07:20.700 kind of the establishment that would the establishment wing that leads it is to depict

00:07:24.660 anyone and everyone who opposes them and their views of being bigoted in some way.

00:07:28.940 It's an automatic reflex. It probably had its roots or at least it's kind of newer iteration

00:07:35.320 back in the 2016 election when I don't know if you recall, but the main tactic of Hillary Clinton's

00:07:40.260 defenders against Bernie Sanders supporters who were trying to kind of challenge the establishment

00:07:44.060 wing of the party was to claim they were all misogynist. That was the only possible reason

00:07:48.160 you might be opposed to Hillary Clinton, somebody with a long line of ideological positions and all

00:07:53.480 kinds of corrupt behavior in public life. It had to only be misogyny and it worked. They did it through

00:07:58.540 the general election where it didn't work, but that became their main tactic. So they're incapable of

00:08:03.760 ever engaging in any kind of political debate without immediately insisting that anyone who's on the other

00:08:09.400 side by virtue of being on the other side of them is automatically a racist or a misogynist or a

00:08:14.560 homophobe or transphobe or whatever. That's why they're so eager to destroy Clarence Thomas because

00:08:19.960 he's kind of a living, breathing testament to the lie of that narrative. But that's the only political

00:08:25.540 debate and the only framework in which they're comfortable. And so somehow a shooting by what

00:08:30.420 appeared to be somebody motivated by, at least in part, radical theories of gender ideology and killed

00:08:36.680 Christian children in the name of that ideology, somehow that has been turned around so that

00:08:41.020 whoever is concerned about that component of the story is now back to being a 1960s Jim Crow racist.

00:08:47.480 And of course, it wouldn't work without the media's cooperation. That's how they frame everything in

00:08:51.720 partnership with their partisan allies.

00:08:53.520 Yes. You see, Kamala Harris goes there to meet with, again, the lawmakers, the ousted lawmakers,

00:09:02.260 not the victims. And for the first time in her vice presidency, she was truly animated. You could tell

00:09:08.220 this is what she actually cares about. The race narrative. Yes. Something I can glom onto. I can really

00:09:13.800 get behind. That's been injected. That actually fires me up. And listen to her messaging. Listen to this.

00:09:20.280 This is a sought three. It wasn't about the three of these leaders. It was about who they were

00:09:29.280 representing. It's about whose voices they were channeling. Understand that. And is that not what a

00:09:38.660 democracy allows? A democracy says you don't silence the people. You do not stifle the people. You don't

00:09:46.880 turn off their microphones when they are speaking about the importance of life and liberty.

00:09:55.040 Okay. So she finally cares about something. She's finally managed to have an articulate moment

00:09:59.240 because race and divisive insertion of it where it doesn't belong. That's what fires her up. But the

00:10:06.040 irony, Glenn, the irony of her saying in a democracy, you don't silence people. You don't take away their

00:10:11.520 microphones. Tell it to the disinformation doesn't. Right. Tell it to Trump who you impeached twice

00:10:16.480 because you didn't want the people to be able to vote for him a second time. Tell it to the Twitter

00:10:21.800 files reporting on how how many private citizens have been stifled and not been able to offer their

00:10:27.580 opinions online. Tell it to Facebook. The shutdown discussions that went against the administration's

00:10:32.460 narrative when it came to COVID and so on. Tell it to the people who are on the banned lists

00:10:36.300 after January 6th who suddenly couldn't get books published or hired or do business at banks

00:10:42.040 because they were affiliated with Donald Trump. This is an absurd statement to come out of her mouth.

00:10:48.680 What a lie that she believes that. All right. She didn't believe any of that. Let's remember the

00:10:53.520 only good moment of her ill-fated presidential campaign. Remember, she dropped out before the first

00:11:00.280 vote was cast. That's what a complete object failure it was, was when she accused Joe Biden of being a

00:11:06.080 racist because he had opposed bus busing and and desegregation of schools. And she had that moment

00:11:12.680 in that debate where she said that little girl was me, Joe, really strongly implying that he was a

00:11:18.900 racist. She shot up in the polls very temporarily. And then if she really believed that Joe Biden was

00:11:24.060 animated by racist sentiments, depicting him as this Joe Jim Crow supporter of segregation, which is what

00:11:29.860 she said. It's amazing that, you know, then she turned around less than a year later and embraced him

00:11:34.420 and heralded him as this man of great character when just a year earlier she was claiming he hated

00:11:39.580 black people. That shows you how cynical this game is. And on top of that, the bigger issue is exactly

00:11:45.100 the one that you raised, which is suddenly now the Democratic Party is the party that safeguards the

00:11:50.620 voices of dissent and the right to protest. Like when all those people were going to protest

00:11:55.640 COVID lockdowns at the beginning of the COVID pandemic and they were told they were should be

00:12:00.220 arrested and were criminals and were risking grandma's life because they wanted to go protest.

00:12:04.960 And then suddenly when they had a protest, they liked after George Floyd's death, they demanded

00:12:09.800 everybody go protest or exactly. They've imposed a censorship regime on this country using not just

00:12:15.040 their power over big tech, but also the law. Remember, they tried characterizing parents at school

00:12:19.320 board meetings, expressing concerns about the curriculum their children were being taught as

00:12:23.760 people engage in a RICO violations or terrorism. The Democratic Party is about nothing other than

00:12:29.520 criminalizing dissent and protest. Everything she just said there is so cynical and so disingenuous.

00:12:36.200 It's hard to know where to start, honestly. And let's look what actually happened in Tennessee,

00:12:40.920 that she's that this is what's firing her up. This is what's outrageous to throw out two guys

00:12:46.340 who in the wake of all these protests in which people are now officially getting hurt as the mobs get out

00:12:52.140 of control. And we'll get to rally gains in a second. Finally, somebody stood up as the lawmakers

00:12:57.220 of Tennessee and said, you will not do this. You this is such a breach of decorum. You're thrown out.

00:13:01.800 You're out of here. You're done. And that's a procedure available to us to expel lawmakers who go

00:13:06.380 beyond who actually lead the protest of the protesters up in the balcony, who actually breach decorum to the

00:13:11.760 place where they take out the bullhorn and start shouting over civil debate that we're trying to have on

00:13:16.500 a public shooting because you didn't get your way. Do you remember how the Democrats

00:13:21.680 freaked out at Marjorie Taylor Greene for heckling Joe Biden at the State of the Union, how disgusted

00:13:29.820 they were at the breach of decorum? Oh, my God. But this with the bullhorn underneath the jacket,

00:13:35.460 that's fine just because you're losing the debate. That's totally fine. What does it depend on skin

00:13:39.820 color? Does it depend on ideology? Does it depend on whether you're talking about shootings of little

00:13:43.800 Christian children? What is it?

00:13:45.200 Yeah, I mean, there are a lot of things that have, you know, increasingly sickened me about the

00:13:51.840 Democratic Party. It's kind of new hegemonic coalition with people who had spent their lives

00:13:57.860 as Republicans and who became disaffected Republicans. One of the things, maybe the thing

00:14:02.720 that principally revolts me the most is the utter lack of principle. They just have no principles of

00:14:08.580 any kind. They feign outrage at one thing and then turn around the next day and do exactly that.

00:14:14.100 And they demand that nobody notice. And the Marjorie Taylor Greene thing is a perfect example.

00:14:18.500 Nancy Pelosi melodramatically tore up President Trump's State of the Union speech in front of him

00:14:24.040 and in front of the cameras to express her disgust. And that was a potted that became a very popular

00:14:29.400 meme among liberals. And now suddenly they're worried about decorum because Marjorie Taylor Greene

00:14:33.980 yells something during his speech. But then expelling people who actually disrupt the procedures,

00:14:39.680 not just speak out of turn, is this grave assault on democracy. It's just from one day to the

00:14:43.860 next. What they condemn becomes what they do. And then the next day it goes back

00:14:47.600 to what they condemn again, entirely based on their own power, whatever they need in the convenience of

00:14:53.640 the moment. And there are a few people more repellent than that because they sanctimoniously pretend to

00:14:57.760 defend things that are righteous. And in reality, it's all just about their own power. And, you know,

00:15:03.640 it's just a repellent character trait. And I just want to add one more thing, which is,

00:15:06.740 you know, Megan, just as a human being, like if you want to go to Nashville and exploit

00:15:10.080 that situation for political gain, you know, have at it, that's what politicians do.

00:15:14.100 But isn't there like any kind of human, you know, sentiment that would say, oh, I'm the vice

00:15:20.440 president, I can go and like, give the power of my office to console these families who just lost

00:15:26.400 their three children, as well as the other three families that lost adults because they were blown

00:15:31.840 away and had their lives snuffed out by some crazy unhinged person acting the name of a radical

00:15:37.740 ideology. You would think just like on a human level, there'd be some desire to do this. But

00:15:42.020 these people are vacant of that. They're just so craven that they see the world entirely as a

00:15:47.160 function of their own agenda. On this same front, you have a week, at least, of the Democrats telling

00:15:56.160 us no one is above the law. No one is above the law on the week that Trump sits and gets arraigned

00:16:01.980 on this indictment, this paper thin indictment that Alvin Bragg, the DA in Manhattan, has brought

00:16:06.920 against him. No one's above the law, totally ignoring that there is prosecutorial discretion

00:16:11.720 and that prosecutors make decisions all the time on whether this case is worth it or can

00:16:15.800 be proven and is worth the time and heartache it's going to bring to any given community.

00:16:22.240 Never mind the defendant. That was the messaging. Then we get a ruling out of a Texas federal district

00:16:29.040 court that this abortion drug approved by the FDA in 2000 may need to be stopped, that the FDA is going

00:16:37.920 to have to stop distributing it in the wake of the collapse of Roe and the Texas law down there on

00:16:44.760 abortion. There was a conflicting ruling in another jurisdiction. And you have AOC going on with CNN State

00:16:52.640 of the Union, I think, to begin. First, it was Anderson Cooper. First, it was Anderson Cooper saying,

00:16:57.560 do not comply. OK, so we've gone from no one is above the law to F that federal court ruling. Just

00:17:03.320 don't follow it in the span of about two minutes. Here she is, top one. Senator Ron Wyden has already

00:17:10.220 issued statements, for example, advising what we should do in a situation like this, which I concur,

00:17:15.700 which is that I believe that the Biden administration should ignore this ruling. The interesting thing when it

00:17:21.800 comes to a ruling is that it relies on enforcement and it is up to the Biden administration to enforce

00:17:29.760 to choose whether or not to enforce such a ruling. OK, so it's all it's like your choice. I'll leave

00:17:36.400 it up to you. And then to her credit, Dana Bash actually asked her about it on State of the Union

00:17:41.880 on Sunday. And listen to this. What? Listen to AOC dodge, because here's the real question.

00:17:48.000 You could make the argument that when there's dual dueling court rulings in two federal district

00:17:52.320 courts, just proceed. If you're the if you're the Biden administration, just proceed with the status

00:17:56.920 quo until the higher court resolves it. You could definitely make that argument. And Dana Bash zeroes

00:18:02.120 in on this with her and listen to the dodge that follows, which is just to simply ignore the court ruling.

00:18:07.700 That's a pretty stunning position when this case is resolved by the Supreme Court. Should the

00:18:16.100 administration follow that decision if that decision ends up banning this abortion drug?

00:18:22.620 Well, you know, I want to take a step back and dig into the grounds around ignoring this preliminary

00:18:28.240 ruling as well. There is an extraordinary amount of precedent for this, for folks saying this is a

00:18:33.620 first, that this is a precedent setting. It is not. The Trump administration also did this very thing,

00:18:40.040 but also it has happened before. And we know that the executive branch has an enforcement discretion,

00:18:46.260 especially in light of a contradicting ruling coming out of Washington. But I do not believe that the

00:18:52.020 courts have the authority to to have the authority over the FDA that they just asserted. And I do believe

00:18:59.760 that it creates a crisis. So Dana Bash asked, should that apply if the Supreme Court upholds the Texas

00:19:08.480 judge's decision? If the Supreme Court of the United States of the land says the Texas judge was right

00:19:14.980 and the FDA should not release this drug, should that hold? And she dodges because now she's out on a limb

00:19:22.600 saying we can say F the Supreme Court and not. And this is where the Democrats are going, Glenn. This is where

00:19:28.180 they're going. The mentality of the Democratic Party, the court animating principle, it was actually

00:19:33.700 expressed in a very viral video by the philosopher Sam Harris when he was asked about the way the

00:19:40.120 media lied and the CIA lied about the Hunter Biden laptop. And they made up the story that it was Russian

00:19:44.740 disinformation, got the story centered and discredited before the election. And he said, I think Trump is

00:19:49.860 such a singular evil. I think our cause, meaning Democrats or Trump opponents, is so just that anything

00:19:56.540 and everything we do, even lying, censorship, disinformation is justified in the name of this

00:20:02.280 broader cause because the evil of Trump is so much greater than anything we might do to stop him.

00:20:07.840 It's an ends justify the means argument. It's what's led to every historical evil when you completely

00:20:12.760 are unmoored from any poor principle, any fixed principle, which is exactly what they are. That is

00:20:18.480 their mindset. Judicial review is the foundation of our entire republic. It was, you know, Andrew

00:20:24.580 Jackson, who notoriously said when the Supreme Court ruled against him, oh, well, the Supreme

00:20:29.920 Court made their ruling. What army are they going to enforce it with? This is, you know, this was

00:20:34.220 resolved 215 years ago with the idea that the courts do have the power to rule that executive

00:20:40.180 branch conduct or executive branch policy is it legal or transgresses the Constitution.

00:20:46.120 When she first made those statements, it wasn't grounded in the fact that there was a conflicting

00:20:50.120 district court ruling. It was grounded in the fact that when Democrats believe that a court ruling is

00:20:56.380 sufficiently erroneous or baseless, that the executive branch, since they're the one with all

00:21:02.920 the power, they're the ones with the people with the guns, can just go about and ignore the courts

00:21:08.220 because the courts have no enforcement mechanism, just like the Congress does it. So this would work

00:21:13.180 for the Congress as well. This is a recipe for presidential tyranny. The idea that the president

00:21:19.140 is like this strongman figure, you know, that's what happens in Latin America and in Asia a lot where,

00:21:24.320 you know, they get to the point where they say, we don't care about the courts anymore.

00:21:27.560 We're going to strip the courts and the legislature of all its power so that we just have a strongman

00:21:31.740 ruling with no barriers. That is what she and a lot of other Democrats were calling for here.

00:21:36.800 And I think it reflects this kind of underlying mindset that's very dangerous.

00:21:40.500 Mm hmm. You get to the point where you're just completely ignoring Supreme Court rulings and we

00:21:45.800 don't have a country anymore. I mean, that is the fundamental thing that binds us together is the

00:21:49.100 rule of law. Well, there's no Constitution. It's the Supreme Court. The Constitution is a list of things

00:21:54.580 the government can't do. And if the government does one of those things anyway, it's the courts

00:21:59.180 that come in and say, this is something that the Constitution doesn't allow you to do. And if the

00:22:03.480 president can now ignore court rulings instead of appealing them, which, of course, they should do.

00:22:08.480 But no, ignore them. And they don't exist. Violate them. There's no Constitution. There's

00:22:13.420 no republic. It's just rule by tyranny. The same person was on the air last week saying that Clarence

00:22:19.380 Thomas needs to be impeached for accepting perfectly acceptable gifts from a very rich Republican donor

00:22:27.580 for the last 20 plus years. They changed the rules on March 14th to say, OK, if you go on somebody's

00:22:33.940 private jet, you do have to report that publicly. Part of that, you didn't have to.

00:22:36.900 She wants to get him impeached for taking nice vacations with the guy and going on his private

00:22:42.920 yacht before it was required that he disclose any of it. My point is, she's a congressional

00:22:48.240 Kardashian. She's an idiot. She's there to make herself a star. And yet she's all over the Sunday

00:22:53.160 shows. We have to listen to this. I object to being surrounded by this stupidity.

00:22:58.500 Yeah, you know, I was defending 60 Minutes for interviewing Marjorie Taylor Greene because the

00:23:02.560 reality is whether you like her or not or things about her or not. Marjorie Taylor Greene is somebody

00:23:06.360 who does represent the views of millions of people. And I don't think it's a job of journalists

00:23:10.580 just wish people away. And I know you're not suggesting that. It is annoying how ubiquitous

00:23:15.260 she is because she is extremely ignorant. I don't know if you ever watched her get interviewed about

00:23:20.300 foreign policy, but she can barely place countries on a map, including ones about what she has very

00:23:24.840 didactic views. She was on with Margaret Hoover once on Fire in Line. She had made this like very

00:23:29.080 melodramatic statement about Israel and Palestine. It turns out she had no idea what she was talking

00:23:33.120 about. She didn't know what the occupation was that she was condemning. She's a person of complete

00:23:37.280 ignorance. Exactly. Her talent is a social media star. But I don't think that that her ignorance should

00:23:43.040 distract us from the fact that she is a talented demagogue and is channeling not just sentiments on

00:23:50.320 the kind of conservative or mainstream Democratic Party wing, but also their allies now on the left.

00:23:56.720 There used to be kind of a tension between establishment liberals on the left from the

00:24:00.300 Hillary campaign against Bernie, but that has disappeared. And this sentiment is now united.

00:24:05.140 And there's a lot of neocons and Bush era Republicans with them that our country faces such a grave threat

00:24:10.920 in the name of Trump's movement or conservatives in general that we can't even allow people basic

00:24:17.620 freedoms anymore. They can't vote for themselves. They can't decide things for themselves because when they

00:24:22.040 do, the outcome is too dangerous. And all we should do, this is the AOC view, and a lot of people are

00:24:27.800 cheering, is just seize power in whatever way we have to, including by ignoring court orders. That really

00:24:32.860 is what's animating everything they're doing from the censorship regime to criminalizing dissent.

00:24:38.560 One of the things that's bothering me about AOC and others like her is I watched them absolutely ruin

00:24:46.880 the Me Too movement. You know, that that was rooted in something good, which was we shouldn't force

00:24:54.280 women to be sexually harassed in order to advance their careers at the office. Who would disagree with

00:24:59.660 that? Really? I mean, what normal person would say? Oh, I disagree. And it's complex. I get it. And

00:25:04.580 you know, whatever. But they're the ones who turned it into a witch hunt. They're the ones who just

00:25:08.460 wanted scalps. They wanted male scalps. Brett Kavanaugh, believe all women, all women. OK, unless the target

00:25:14.960 happens to be a Democrat like Andrew Cuomo, in which case it's complicated. Oh, we're all going

00:25:19.460 to switch secretly and help the man accused and not the women or Joe Biden. In the case of Tara

00:25:24.020 Reid, let's secretly work against Tara Reid to ruin her life and smear her as a human because the

00:25:30.560 target is Joe Biden. So they ruined it. And it was people like AOC. And they're the same ones who told

00:25:35.680 us they were all about women. They're about women, women, women, women. And now that leads us to

00:25:40.820 Riley Gaines, an actual woman and a fierce competitor, somebody they would normally be

00:25:46.020 celebrating out there in the pool with the best of the best NCAA tournaments, winning medals and so on,

00:25:51.680 who didn't win in the NCAA final. And I can't remember whether it was the 100 or what heat it

00:25:58.940 was because she tied instead with Leah Thomas. And instead of getting the trophy to Riley to hold,

00:26:06.300 they gave it to Leah Thomas saying we want Leah to hold the trophy, not you. Why? Oh, why would

00:26:10.840 that be the one who was on the guys team this time last year, placing 500th or or Riley Gaines?

00:26:18.480 OK, so Riley has a thing to say about trans people in sports, trans women in particular and in women's

00:26:23.800 sports. And she goes, as we discussed on Friday, to this San Francisco State University and gets

00:26:29.740 absolutely attacked. She did speak. So that was a plus. But then get absolutely attacked.

00:26:34.540 The video is horrific. She says she was assaulted twice by a trans woman, some guy wearing a dress,

00:26:40.380 punched in the shoulder and then again grazed her face. They were screaming terrible things at her.

00:26:46.140 She was forced to hide in a room for three hours as the cops on campus did virtually nothing.

00:26:51.780 They were yelling ransom demands to let her out. And I mean, not a peep, not a peep from the AOCs of

00:27:00.160 the world on women's rights and the assault of a woman who was not saying trans people don't exist,

00:27:06.720 who was not saying I refuse to use pronouns, who was simply saying it's not OK to have trans women

00:27:13.080 compete against biologic women in sports like mine or they have an unfair advantage. That's it.

00:27:17.640 So I can't listen to them paint themselves as our advocates. It's absurd and it's an obvious lie.

00:27:24.800 I'm sure you've had this experience to be willing to bet. But when you're somebody who's in a so-called

00:27:32.140 marginalized group, if you're a woman, if you're black, if you're a person of color, if you're a

00:27:36.560 gay, a gay man or a lesbian, whatever, this is something that Democrats and liberals supposedly

00:27:43.180 honor and protect and constantly demand that you be respected to right up until the point that you become

00:27:50.740 some kind of a dissident to their ideology, at which point the vitriol and and use of these

00:27:58.920 very bigoted tropes is just unleashed like nothing before. I mean, the most grotesque racism I see

00:28:05.680 directed toward Clarence Thomas comes from liberals and Democrats who hate him. The most grotesque

00:28:12.080 misogyny I bet you you've encountered probably came during moments when you confronted Donald Trump

00:28:19.180 and people were angry at you for that, but then also from liberals who hate you. And that's

00:28:23.600 definitely been my experience in terms of just like ugly homophobia has mostly come overwhelmingly

00:28:29.860 from those moments in my career when I've been perceived as being a dissident to the Democratic

00:28:34.160 Party or the American left. And so to watch this woman who, as you say, would ordinarily be celebrated,

00:28:39.840 be violently and physically threatened. It wasn't that they were just disagreeing with her or

00:28:45.160 expressing dissent toward her speech, all of which is fine. They menaced her physically to the point

00:28:50.520 that she needed 20 police officers in order to safely leave. She was trapped in that school for three

00:28:55.900 hours. They were saying things like, let her pay us and we'll let her leave. This is criminal behavior

00:29:01.160 that's obviously misogynistic, misogynistic in nature. It's exploiting this perceived vulnerability

00:29:06.860 that women have under those kind of situations to defend themselves physically. That's the way in which

00:29:11.620 she was menaced. And nobody has the slightest objection to it who ordinarily would be waving

00:29:16.920 the misogyny flag because she's expressing dissent to their agenda. And it's it's you know,

00:29:22.580 that gets back to the thing I was describing earlier. It is absolutely repulsive to watch.

00:29:26.400 I mean, who would look at that video no matter what your views are on trans women in sports and

00:29:30.900 not be disgusted and horrified by that behavior? Absolutely right. There's and there's a lot more to

00:29:36.180 discuss on Riley and what the university is now saying. We'll pick it up right there after this

00:29:40.600 quick break. More with Glenn after two minutes. Don't go away.

00:29:44.400 Beat, beat, beat boxing actually has hidden health benefits. It can help strengthen and protect

00:29:50.340 your voice from injury. See healthy living differently with Manulife. Visit manulife.ca

00:29:56.560 slash health. Yeah.

00:30:00.080 What I experienced was peaceful. It wouldn't even be peaceful in an alternate universe. I mean,

00:30:07.300 it was quite literally the exact opposite barricaded in a room where I could not leave for three hours

00:30:12.540 where they were yelling obscene, terrible, violent things towards both myself and these officers who

00:30:19.260 were protecting me. What you have to do to make changes in regards to protecting those freedoms is

00:30:27.540 to go where it hurts, which is the pockets. If I weren't to do something, there would be no repercussions

00:30:34.880 for these people. Therefore, something needs to be done to hold these people accountable.

00:30:40.440 Right on. That's Riley Gaines saying she's going to sue. She's going to sue the university over what

00:30:45.760 was done to her. Welcome back to the show. I guess today, Glenn Greenwald, Pulitzer Prize winning

00:30:50.080 journalist and host of Rumble's system update. She's right, Glenn. You hit him in the pocketbook.

00:30:55.800 That's the only thing they'll listen to. Absolutely. I mean, you know, I was just thinking,

00:30:59.920 first of all, I'm a little bit worked up still from those clips about how the Democrats should ignore

00:31:03.360 court rulings. I forgot how angry I was about that. It was a few days ago. So I'm trying to

00:31:06.840 put that to the side. On this Riley Gaines thing, the one point I do want to make that I think is

00:31:11.160 very important is, I don't know if you saw, you might have. There was a viral clip where Ben Shapiro

00:31:15.680 was interviewing Neil Tyson DeGrasse and asked him about this kind of gender ideology. Can a trans woman

00:31:21.380 be a woman? And he basically said, look, beyond the issue of what we teach kids in schools, which is

00:31:26.600 always relevant, the only real issue that matters when it comes to trans people, otherwise we could just

00:31:33.240 say adults live and let live and they have the right to do what they want, is the issue of how

00:31:37.480 we treat fairness in sports. Even people who are on the side of the trans movement acknowledge this

00:31:43.820 is a very, very legitimate question. People like Martina Navratilova and Chris Everett, who are

00:31:48.180 pioneers in women's sports, who basically are the reason why there's so many opportunities along with

00:31:54.060 Billie Jean King for female sports to exist on a professionalized level with a lot of corporate

00:31:58.920 money involved and for female athletes to get wealthy and famous doing it, are very good liberals.

00:32:04.220 But both Martina Navratilova and Chris Everett have said, there's no way it's fair to allow people

00:32:09.260 born as biological men to compete in professional women's sports because you can never treat or

00:32:16.280 hormonize out the advantages, the inborn advantages that come from being a biological male, especially if

00:32:22.500 you pass through puberty as a man. This is all Riley Gaines is saying. She's talking about that issue

00:32:27.420 that even supporters of this movement acknowledge is a valid one that requires debate and to grapple

00:32:35.600 with. And she obviously has a lot of credibility since she's devoted her life to excelling at swimming

00:32:41.120 and feels like she's being cheated against or mistreated. And to treat her like she's some kind

00:32:47.060 of Nazi figure to the point where violence and that kind of abuses is merited is sickening.

00:32:55.180 But I'm not surprised this movement, once a movement gets so righteous, you know, it gets

00:33:00.420 back to what we're talking about before. They feel like anything they do is justified in the name of

00:33:04.300 their cause. And increasingly, that is liberal politics in the United States.

00:33:09.140 They they're jumping the shark. This is their moment of, you know, when BLM would go up to the

00:33:14.800 private diners in the summer of 2020 and say, raise the fist, get your fist up or your tables going

00:33:21.980 over or you're getting attacked. And they lost the American people who they had after George Floyd.

00:33:27.480 They had this is their this is that moment. You've gone too far. You're losing the people who are in

00:33:34.140 the center, who are open minded to you. It's it's done. And I do think this is an inflection point.

00:33:39.540 What happened to her? The latest poll, I think it was by trying to find out who to NPR. Ipsos

00:33:45.040 suggests nearly two and three Americans oppose allowing trans people to compete on the sport of

00:33:52.440 whatever they identify with. So they don't support trans women competing against actual women in

00:33:58.720 sport. That's two thirds of the American people. That includes a lot of Democrats. And this kind of

00:34:03.360 thing is not going to help. So that brings me to the problem with the university system, which

00:34:08.740 deserves at least a nod here. I know we're all aware of it, but we can't just breeze by it.

00:34:14.000 So when we saw the behavior out at Stanford and it was terrible and, you know, I mean,

00:34:19.360 the protests out there with the judge and how disgracefully he was treated, at least Stanford

00:34:23.380 tried to say, we're sorry, we stand for free speech and we're going to do a half day reeducation

00:34:28.940 clinic for the protesters on why you should not say to a federal judge, you can't find the CLIT on a sign

00:34:36.480 and do fake throwing up sounds as he begins his remarks. They need a little lesson on that at

00:34:42.700 Stanford law. God help us. This university didn't even feel the need to pretend it cared about Riley

00:34:49.880 Gaines and what happened to her. San Francisco State University issues this long statement.

00:34:55.180 I got to tell you, Glenn, I read it and I literally thought they forgot a paragraph. Whoever posted this

00:35:00.380 must be a San Francisco state hater. And they removed the paragraph where they said, we're very sorry

00:35:04.480 about what happened to Riley. No, that's not what happened. It's not in there. I won't read the whole

00:35:10.020 thing as it just goes on, but it's basically as follows. Let me begin by saying clearly the trans

00:35:14.880 community is welcome. Okay, wait, well, that's not where you begin. What? What? No, Riley Gaines is

00:35:20.160 welcome. Free speech is welcome. Let me begin by saying the trans community is welcome and belongs

00:35:25.180 at SFSU. Further, our community fiercely believes in unity, connection, care, and compassion, and we value

00:35:33.120 different ideas. Okay, great. We do. How? How do we let those ideas be expressed? Walk us through it.

00:35:38.000 Doesn't get to that. We may also find ourselves exposed to divergent views on campus and even

00:35:45.080 views we find personally abhorrent. These encounters have sometimes led to discord, anger,

00:35:50.400 confrontation, and fear. We must meet this moment and unite with a shared value of learning.

00:35:54.560 Where's the condemnation? Where's the, we must not let those emotions take us to the place of violence

00:36:00.120 where we actually heard another human, not in there. Then this woman goes on to say,

00:36:04.080 thank you to our students who participated peacefully in Thursday evening's event.

00:36:09.840 It took tremendous bravery to stand in a challenging space. Oh my God. I hope she's

00:36:16.800 referring to Riley Gaines. I am proud of the moments where we listened and asked insightful

00:36:22.320 questions. I'm also proud of the moments when our students demonstrated the value of free speech

00:36:26.500 and the right to protest peacefully. This is, I don't, she's just ignoring what happened.

00:36:32.540 And then she says, this is the capper. This feels difficult because it is. As you reflect,

00:36:38.160 process, and begin to heal. From what? Your assault? Your foray into the criminal behavior?

00:36:48.200 Please remember there are people, resources, and services available. And she goes on to list them.

00:36:52.440 Equity and community inclusion, counseling, psychological services, dean of student's office,

00:36:57.340 and goes on. Her name is Jamila Moore, vice president of student affairs and enrollment management.

00:37:02.540 My comment on the, on my memo, I'm not going to lie, reads, you asshole. But when you go back and

00:37:08.200 look at her history, Glenn, it's a long list of DEI. Of course, it's straight out of central casting.

00:37:13.420 Nothing to Riley Gaines, not even an apology.

00:37:15.180 It's also Orwellian. I mean, first of all, the idea that to be a student of this extremely left-legged

00:37:22.580 school in San Francisco, it requires courage to protest a speaker that I'm sure 98% of the faculty

00:37:30.680 and student body at least are opposed to. It requires courage to join a mob, to join the crowd,

00:37:36.940 to take the majoritarian position and threaten somebody from dissenting over it. That doesn't

00:37:41.700 require courage. That requires this kind of mob behavior, this, this like thuggish sentiment.

00:37:48.340 And, you know, I think when I see stuff like this, you know, people often, not often, but sometimes

00:37:54.220 argue about what my political ideology is. Am I on the left? Am I on the right? Am I Democrat,

00:37:59.500 Republican, whatever? Really, my ideology is just anti-authoritarianism. I distrust human beings,

00:38:04.860 institution, human institutions to wield power without limits, which is why it was so horrifying that the

00:38:09.760 idea that Joe Biden, as president with all of his immense power, could even ignore when the Supreme

00:38:15.420 Court or the judiciary tells him that he's crossed constitutional lines, like Democrats can just

00:38:19.600 ignore that because they're the ones with all the guns and power. And that's what's happening at these

00:38:24.600 kinds of universities when you're part of the mob that commands overwhelming majoritarian sentiment,

00:38:31.180 when almost nobody is willing to stand up and disagree with you because that's actually what

00:38:34.860 takes courage, is to disagree with the mob. They have this sense of power, and it's very inebriating.

00:38:42.080 Like what you were saying with going and forcing somebody to raise their fist against their will

00:38:46.740 in support of a cause they may or may not support under threat of physical violence. That's the kind of

00:38:52.580 power that when human beings get it, it pulsates through the body, and it makes them do very,

00:38:57.620 very dangerous and kind of threatening things. And I think that's really what you're seeing here is this is

00:39:03.520 mob justice, the idea that if we gather enough people, and we unite in hatred of somebody else based on

00:39:09.520 their political viewpoint, there's nothing and nobody that can stop it. I wouldn't be surprised if they had

00:39:14.740 torn her apart physically without being in a locker room and without that police escort. I think those

00:39:19.280 measures were necessary because that's what mobs start doing when they work themselves into that kind of

00:39:24.500 frenzy. But increasingly, that is what is animating left wing politics on the culture war is that kind of

00:39:30.580 sentiment. Yeah, mob justice is right. And that's that's why I for one was delighted to see the

00:39:36.700 Tennessee legislature do something about these three out of order rude, disruptive lawmakers teach

00:39:44.280 them unless they're coming right back in. Please give me a break. This is not the death penalty for

00:39:48.380 these three. But they were trying to stand up for the constituents who they represented. There will be

00:39:54.380 law and order inside of this chamber. There will be a protocol that you follow. You are not the leader of

00:39:58.780 a protest mob. You are a lawmaker. You were elected here and agreed to follow certain protocols. You

00:40:03.680 didn't do it. And I noticed you sent out a tweet that I thought was perfect because let's just say

00:40:09.120 you disagree with me on Tennessee. They shouldn't have thrown out the lawmakers, whatever. Fine. That's

00:40:13.240 OK. There's room for disagreement there. That's how you would see it. That's how I would see it.

00:40:19.580 When reporting on it as straight news reporters, we would report the facts and let the people decide

00:40:25.200 not if your name is Ben Collins and you work at NBC as a senior journalist over there.

00:40:33.200 I loved your response to this. So Ben Collins tweets out. He retweeted somebody else and agreed

00:40:41.720 with a Democratic Party activist, like an overt liberal Democratic Party activist.

00:40:47.680 Yeah, you tell the story. I mean, I have the quote in front of me if you need it.

00:40:49.860 But no, you go read it. I just wanted to make clear that the person he was retweeting,

00:40:52.760 because I don't have the quote, is someone who says I my my goal in life is to advance

00:40:57.580 the interests of the Democratic Party. I want to elect as many Democrats as possible

00:41:00.740 because I'm a liberal and I believe in liberal ideology. That's the person this news reporter

00:41:04.820 for NBC was retweeting. And you go ahead and read the tweets. I don't have it in front of me.

00:41:09.240 OK, so so this guy is tweeting out. He's outraged about the Tennessee lawmakers expulsion.

00:41:13.800 And Ben Collins, the NBC guy, tweets out exactly right. Both sides are not the same. And it's time

00:41:20.820 for media outlets to stop pretending they are. The polarization is asymmetric. And you made a great

00:41:27.800 point about how this is a good thing. It's a good thing that Ben Collins was bold enough to retweet

00:41:34.020 that and say what he said on behalf of NBC News. Why? Yeah, you know, I it's so ironic because when I

00:41:41.240 first began writing about politics, I really disliked the conceit in journalism that journalists

00:41:46.160 were objective. I don't think journalists or any human beings are objective or all the byproduct of

00:41:51.680 our subjective biases. I think we strive toward objectivity. We that's the goal is to present facts

00:41:58.300 as neutrally as possible. So as you say, we inform the public rather than propagandize them.

00:42:03.000 But everything about what we do, including who we recognize as experts, how we describe situations,

00:42:08.220 what we react to. Of course, we're seeing that through a subjective prism. And I never I'd always

00:42:13.060 felt that the journalistic claim that they're objective and partisans are subjective was a kind

00:42:17.840 of fraud that corrupted the profession. Because if you start off lying to people about what you're

00:42:22.220 marketing to them, which is journalism, they're already going to be suspicious of everything else

00:42:26.340 that follows. And I always wanted more candor among journalism. So when I did that Snowden story,

00:42:32.660 I would report what the NSA was doing. But I would also be very clear that I opposed what the NSA

00:42:37.780 was doing, massifying on Americans, because I didn't want to hide my own views and pretend I

00:42:41.820 had no no perspective. I feel like reporting is more honest when journalists admit what their biases

00:42:47.020 are. We're now at the point where NBC and CNN, like ostensibly apolitical or at least nonpartisan

00:42:55.040 news outlets that would be claimed to be allow their reporters to be very explicit about the fact that

00:43:00.420 they believe the Democratic Party is superior. And what was so notable about that tweet that he

00:43:04.940 retweeted, that media coverage should reflect that premise that the parties are not equal, that the

00:43:10.820 Democrats are superior, the Republicans don't believe in democracy, they don't believe in freedom or

00:43:15.080 whatever, they're a fascist party. And so for an NBC News reporter to say this is how I see the world, I

00:43:21.040 believe the Democratic Party is not only better, but that journalism should be about making that clear

00:43:25.440 was kind of a new level of candor to me that I do consider positive because that is really what they all

00:43:31.960 think. So why not just have it on the table? Come right out and say it. So that great. Half the

00:43:37.700 country now knows this is explicit from NBC News is Ben Collins. Both sides are not the same. And it's

00:43:43.000 time for media outlets to stop pretending they are. OK, got it. Keep that in mind when you watch their

00:43:49.840 coverage and read his reporting, how he feels about 80 million Americans on the subject of NBC.

00:43:56.840 I have to touch on what happened this morning. So the some of the Easter festivities at the White

00:44:03.440 House took place today and Al Roker was sent over to the White House to interview President Biden,

00:44:08.720 I assume, because everyone on both sides is assuming zero damage can or will be done in such an exchange.

00:44:16.000 Well, guess again. Watch what happened when Al Roker tried to get the president to make news on whether

00:44:22.480 he is going to run again. Are you saying that you would be taking part in our upcoming election in

00:44:31.300 20? I'll either roll an egg or, you know, being the good, you know, the guy who's pushing him out.

00:44:37.180 Come on, help. Help a brother out. I plan on running out, but we're not prepared to announce it yet.

00:44:43.580 All right. There you go. I'm planning on running. I'm planning on running, but we're not going to

00:44:49.900 announce it. I don't know what that first half is about. I'm going to roll it. I'm going to push it.

00:44:53.920 We're going to don't know. But he said it. He said he's going to run again. And all we could talk

00:45:00.240 about on the team before the show, Glenn, was they needed the Easter Bunny again. Remember last year

00:45:04.900 how the Easter Bunny was like, no, no questions. And he was in charge. That guy really served a

00:45:10.560 purpose. Look, this person needed to get back in the suit and keep him away from Al Roker.

00:45:16.040 I mean, it's really, you know, it's such an interesting media dynamic because on the one

00:45:23.260 hand, obviously, the overwhelming majority of people at NBC and places like it, CNN,

00:45:28.440 want the Democrats to win, want Joe Biden to be reelected. That was what we were just talking

00:45:32.380 about. But on the other hand, and you were the one who pointed this out in a clip I always use

00:45:37.340 because it was said so vividly and so clearly, nobody benefited more from Trump's candidacy and

00:45:44.800 from Trump's prominence in politics than liberal media outlets, because that's the only thing that

00:45:50.180 generates ratings for them. Nobody watches their show. If Trump's not in the news, the only time

00:45:54.200 people watched was when he emerged in politics because he's interesting and liberals won't watch

00:46:00.500 them unless they they're excited by Trump and they need Trump. So they're in this very weird position

00:46:05.920 where on the one hand, they obviously for as as ideologues don't want Trump reelected.

00:46:12.700 But as media figures, as people whose career depends on ratings, which they can't get without him,

00:46:17.640 they do need Trump to go back. And if you're somebody who's worried about another Trump presidency,

00:46:23.200 the fact that he's leading polls, especially after the Salvin Bragg indictment in the Republican side,

00:46:28.520 and you watch Joe Biden, who's going to be even two years older when he runs, he's going to be 82,

00:46:33.440 too, Megan. His term, if he wins, well, he'll be 86 when he completes it. He's already so clearly

00:46:39.780 addled cognitively. I think it's going to be, you know, I don't think there are enough medications

00:46:45.020 in the world to get him through that this time, let alone a covid pandemic that really helped them

00:46:49.560 hide in the basement the whole time. And I think they're playing a very dangerous game,

00:46:53.880 but we'll see how that works out. But you really see that clip and he's just degenerating before our

00:46:58.360 eyes. Well, here's another one, which is just funny. Look, look at this, where he appears to be

00:47:04.240 terrified that the Easter bunny is chasing him. This is from this morning. Watch. They're walking

00:47:10.080 in jail. The Easter bunny holds hands with jail. He turns around, notices that they're twice.

00:47:16.660 Twice. You got to go to YouTube and watch this later. He's like, oh, shit. Here he's coming for

00:47:24.600 me again. He's going to stop me. It's pretty amazing. Well, I think there was like a jealousy.

00:47:30.360 There was a little jealousy there. It was like, who is this rabbit holding my wife's hand? Like

00:47:34.620 there was some kind of like protectiveness. And then, yeah, he kind of got scared. He like

00:47:38.140 scampered to stay in front of the rabbit so the rabbit couldn't get him. Meanwhile, they really

00:47:42.400 should have used the rabbit again to keep him away from Al Roker and making any additional news.

00:47:47.640 He's obviously running again. I think that's right. He was supposed to announce in February. He

00:47:51.220 didn't. Now here we are in April. He hasn't. There's no way they want Kamala Harris, who at this

00:47:56.620 point would be the only realistic. I mean, the closer they wait until we get to the summer debate system

00:48:01.160 a season, the less likely anybody else can run. Although Robert F. Kennedy has thrown his hat into the

00:48:07.960 ring. Oh, it's a pleasure. Oh, I forgot about Marianne. Yeah. My friend. Thank you, Megan.

00:48:13.180 Great to talk to you. Great to see you. All right. We're looking forward to Dr. Peter Atiyah. He's

00:48:18.320 back. His new book is so good. And there are really, really great approaches to your well-being,

00:48:24.100 your long-term well-being and your longevity. Don't go away.

00:48:31.880 Aging is a fact of life, but one of our health did not have to decline with the passage of time.

00:48:37.960 I mean, we all got to go sometime, but what if we could push that time back and live really well

00:48:42.700 up until the moment of death? In a new book, Dr. Peter Atiyah challenges the conventional

00:48:48.400 medical thinking on aging. This is a brilliant man who's done so much research and study

00:48:53.780 on all the aspects of aging. We are so lucky to have him here. When we had Peter on the show last

00:48:58.660 year, he mentioned he was working on this book and now it's out to save us all. It's called

00:49:04.900 Outlive, The Science and Art of Longevity. And it is a number one New York Times bestseller,

00:49:11.880 which is not easy to do. Peter, congrats and welcome back to the show.

00:49:16.560 Thank you so much, Megan. And thanks for having me back.

00:49:19.460 Oh, I think it's so interesting. And I love how you sort of say up front, look, I know if you're

00:49:25.080 reading this book, you're like, tell me what to eat. Tell me exactly how to exercise. Tell me exactly

00:49:30.160 what I should be taking. Right. So I can live forever or at least to 110. Well, and you're you

00:49:35.420 talk about how that that's not exactly what this book is. We're talking about approaches and educating

00:49:41.580 you on what matters and what doesn't matter. And you do get lots of very practical, useful tips,

00:49:48.160 but it's it's an education on how to think about your life and your wellness. And before we get to all

00:49:56.220 that, I think that you set it up beautifully when you started the book with the egg story. And as I

00:50:00.440 listened to the books, I listened to the audio with you reading it. The egg story keeps coming

00:50:05.260 back and it makes sense to me. Can you tell us about that that nightmare that you that plagued you

00:50:09.060 for a long, long time? Yeah, it was basically kind of standing beneath a building and trying to catch

00:50:17.080 eggs that were being thrown off the top of the building and being, you know, sort of quasi successful,

00:50:22.920 right? So you catch an egg, but then you miss an egg and it sort of splats all over the ground. And

00:50:27.640 this was just, you know, kind of a feeling of helplessness. But it led to an epiphany eventually,

00:50:35.320 which was the strategy of waiting until the eggs are about to hit the ground and then trying to make

00:50:41.940 a miraculous catch was really doomed to fail in the long run. A far better strategy was to go to the top

00:50:48.620 of the building and find the guy who was throwing them and either forcefully or not remove his basket

00:50:54.100 of eggs. And that's the same when it comes to one's wellness, one's health. You talk about how

00:50:59.960 as a doctor, you saw young people dying in the hospital and you think, oh, that's terrible. The

00:51:04.460 woman with the aneurysm. But really that aneurysm, even though she was a young woman who died of it,

00:51:09.220 was coming her way a long time prior to that. And so there's very little the doctors can do when you

00:51:14.240 come into the hospital about to have an aneurysm, but there's a lot the doctors can do 15 years before

00:51:19.420 that in checking your wellness and advising you on how to avoid the aneurysm 15 years later.

00:51:26.980 And where does it start? Does it start by just a good person going in to see a good doctor and saying,

00:51:32.640 here are the blood panels I actually want, not the nonsense lipid panel that we do that just gives

00:51:38.540 us surface level info every year? It's actually many things. And I don't think I could

00:51:44.220 say it's just one thing, but I think the most important thing and the most important first

00:51:48.700 step is the cognitive shift from what I describe as medicine 2.0 to medicine 3.0. And that cognitive

00:51:56.820 shift, I liken to as important a shift as what took us from basically witchcraft into the modern era of

00:52:05.800 medicine 150 years ago. That was the scientific method. So that was a huge step forward. Being able

00:52:13.720 to realize that not only was everything that we saw happening in the body explained by actual nature,

00:52:21.600 laws of science, but that you could form hypotheses and test those hypotheses with experiments using

00:52:27.560 the experimental and scientific method. That's basically what allowed us to eradicate, for the

00:52:32.720 most part, infectious diseases and double human lifespan in the span of five generations.

00:52:38.540 Well, we're sitting here looking at a deeper problem today, or at least a different problem,

00:52:42.060 for which that solution isn't working. The solution of let's just extend life once life is close to its

00:52:51.040 end, as the example we've just discussed, isn't working. We need a radical shift. And the radical

00:52:56.500 shift is living longer does not mean living longer with disease. It means living longer without disease.

00:53:02.500 disease. And you can only accomplish that if you truly adopt principles of prevention that get a ton

00:53:10.380 of lip service in the conventional system. There's nobody who's going to say, oh, I don't agree with

00:53:14.080 prevention. The question is, what does that mean? How early do you have to start and how aggressive do

00:53:19.000 you need to be? Well, and also what came across to me in the book is you're not without data.

00:53:24.240 Like there are data that are available. If you connect with the right doctor on where you are

00:53:29.560 right now, what genetic blessings you may have, what genetic, I don't want to say curses, but

00:53:34.560 challenges, as they say, when you get your school kid review opportunities, yet another opportunity for

00:53:40.720 us to work on, uh, opportunities for you. Um, so it's not just, I have shitty genes and that's that

00:53:48.020 I'm going to die young. It's there's so much that you actually can do. Even if the magic age of 52,

00:53:53.520 you write about it in your book. Um, you use it as an example age. It's where I am now. Last year,

00:53:58.320 you told me I really needed to be committed to a health routine and like sort of be getting my

00:54:02.320 fitness on by 53. So I've got about seven, eight months. I don't know what it is. Anyway,

00:54:08.260 there are things that you can do. And to me, the reason I mentioned the lipid panels,

00:54:11.460 because that's one thing that's, that's real data you can get that's available to you.

00:54:14.560 Yeah, it's really interesting. We got an email through our website over the weekend from a guy

00:54:20.320 who had read the book already. And I say already, cause the book has only been out about 10 days.

00:54:24.660 And it's, as you know, it's not the shortest book. Um, nevertheless, the guy read the book

00:54:28.720 and immediately and went and had, uh, his LP little a checked. Now LP little a is a, is a lipid that most

00:54:37.380 people aren't aware of. It's a lipoprotein. Most people aren't aware of yet. It's the most common

00:54:40.920 hereditary, uh, uh, cause of cardiovascular disease. He went and had his checked and it was,

00:54:48.920 uh, a little bit elevated, not hugely elevated, but, but certainly elevated. Uh, his APOB, which

00:54:54.360 is another lipid we talk about was also slightly elevated, but not enough that anybody would have

00:54:58.060 cared. But a CT angiogram revealed a 90% occlusion in, um, the main artery that runs down the left

00:55:05.900 ventricle. Um, interestingly, this guy's a remarkable athlete, uh, you know, has done

00:55:11.780 several iron men. And in the past, he'd even complained a little bit of chest pain, but it

00:55:16.860 was never taken seriously because how would you take that seriously in a 41 year old who's a,

00:55:21.000 you know, as fit as a fiddle. And there are lots of other reasons why, you know, people have chest

00:55:24.700 pain, especially young, um, healthy athletic people to make a long story short. He ended up requiring

00:55:29.300 two stents in his, uh, left interior descending artery over the weekend. And, um, just wanted to write us to

00:55:34.700 tell us, you know, Hey, thank you for, you know, alerting me to all this stuff so I could go out

00:55:38.900 and get this done. And in some ways that's a success story, but in some ways it's a tragedy,

00:55:42.500 right? It's a tragedy in that, you know, why aren't we checking LP little a on everybody in

00:55:47.060 their teenage years? Because there's a lot that can be done about this. If you catch this early.

00:55:51.940 You know, it makes me think because Abby knows my assistant every year, because my dad died at 45.

00:55:56.340 And I know you've had lots of early death and thanks to cardiovascular disease in your family,

00:56:00.580 which I now believe was like, there was a reason for it. That it gave you, it gave us,

00:56:05.100 you determined to look into these issues. Um, but yeah, so my dad died of a sudden heart attack at

00:56:10.400 age 45. So I, every year I go for a stress test and Abby's always got to give me the 30 day warning

00:56:15.360 because I do exercise going into my stress test, Peter. I'm defrauding myself. Study for the test.

00:56:22.780 Yes. It's very sad. But, um, in any event now I'm wondering what am I doing? Am I, why am I getting,

00:56:28.620 you know, the stress, it's the real stress test with, you're hooked up to the monitor and you have,

00:56:31.880 you get down right after you do the 13 minutes and they check your breathing. But like you're,

00:56:36.280 I don't know. I didn't, I'm not sure. I can't remember how you feel about that, but

00:56:39.340 I've also had my calcium score done. It was zero, but you're not even saying the calcium score is

00:56:44.800 all that reliable. It's the CT angiogram, which I do think is really, should everybody be getting

00:56:49.360 that? I think at some point it depends. Well, let me back up for a second. So the calcium score

00:56:55.780 is directionally helpful. But as you're alluding to, as I wrote about in the book,

00:57:00.480 15% of calcium scans give a false negative. So 15% of the time, if you get a zero on your

00:57:06.920 calcium score, it's not actually zero either. There is calcification that's so small it's being

00:57:12.880 missed. That actually happened to me once. Alternatively, you don't have calcium, but you

00:57:18.100 have soft plaque, which is just as problematic, meaning you still have atherosclerosis, even at

00:57:25.040 the level or at the gross resolution of a CT scan. So that's one point I would make. The other point I

00:57:30.620 would make is, you know, I don't believe in doing tests unless the test is going to alter your

00:57:36.000 behavior. So if I'm treating a person who's young and has other risk factors that we deem relevant,

00:57:44.500 I don't necessarily need the CT angiogram because the probability that, you know, a 30-year-old is

00:57:50.520 going to have advanced atherosclerosis, that's going to change our management might actually be

00:57:55.060 low. So, you know, in your case, having that calcium scan of zero is great news, but I'd want

00:58:01.680 to make sure I knew what your LP little a was, what your ApoB was, and were those things being treated

00:58:06.400 as aggressively as you could tolerate medically? And if they are, then I wouldn't feel the need to

00:58:11.560 repeat those scans or move you to CT angiogram. And as far as the stress test goes, you know,

00:58:17.800 a stress test is a great test because it's, as its name suggests, putting you under the maximum

00:58:22.520 amount of stress, which is when we can see changes in the heart that would be different in its

00:58:28.500 electrical activity. And those would be real, you know, canary in the coal mine changes for ischemic

00:58:33.620 heart disease. The good news is generally for people who are exercising aggressively, if they're

00:58:40.060 doing it symptom free, a stress test is not adding a whole heck of a lot in a, in a, in a case like

00:58:45.060 yours. But again, I still think the stress test is a valuable test and we do use them in, in select

00:58:50.760 patients. You talk about the four horsemen of death and you know, what's going to get us. We all know

00:58:58.040 something's going to get us, but can you just walk us through what those are? Yeah, the four horsemen

00:59:03.660 are basically the big chronic diseases that took over. So once medicine 2.0 ushered in an era of

00:59:10.140 remarkable success against infectious diseases and communicable diseases, which really happened

00:59:15.200 again in the late 1900s in the early part of the 20th century, we basically started living longer,

00:59:20.700 right? We went from living an average of 40 years to getting into our, you know, eighth decade of life,

00:59:26.040 living into our seventies. And all of a sudden something happened, which was all of these chronic

00:59:31.320 diseases started to kill us. So the, basically the way I think of them is these four horsemen,

00:59:36.380 right? So atherosclerotic diseases, so heart disease and stroke far and away, number one

00:59:40.700 cancer, which is not one disease. Of course, cancer is a herd of diseases that all get lumped in under

00:59:47.840 one umbrella. So breast cancer and colon cancer are totally different diseases, different risk factors,

00:59:52.500 et cetera. But nevertheless, we think of it as one disease neurodegenerative diseases. And when a lot of

00:59:58.600 people think of that, they think of course, is the most prevalent of these, which is Alzheimer's

01:00:01.560 disease, but that also includes Lewy body dementia, Parkinson's disease, et cetera.

01:00:06.540 And then the third one doesn't directly account for a lot of, you know, lists on the death certificate,

01:00:14.440 but indirectly may be the single greatest contributor of them all. And that is the suite of metabolic

01:00:20.580 diseases that ranges all the way from even just insulin resistance through fatty liver disease,

01:00:26.660 which is an enormous epidemic at this time, uh, all the way up to type two diabetes. So that I kind

01:00:31.860 of think of that as a metabolic continuum of disease that again, in terms of actual lives lost

01:00:37.440 on a given year is not an, it's not a huge number, but when you have those conditions, your risk of the

01:00:43.500 other three horsemen that I mentioned goes up significantly. And on that last front, I do think

01:00:48.840 it's interesting. You don't really refer to obesity so much in the book. It's about metabolic disorder

01:00:53.080 because you could be thin and have the fatty liver there. You tell some harrowing stories in

01:00:59.240 there about cutting people open and seeing, Oh my God, this is a thin person who's not a drinker.

01:01:03.400 And there it is. So don't, don't assume you don't have that just because you're not heavy into booze

01:01:10.120 or you're not obese. The metabolic disorder could encompass you. And as Peter points out, it could

01:01:15.560 lead to one of the other three horsemen. So that's disconcerting.

01:01:19.180 Yeah. We have this preoccupation with weight, right? That, you know, obesity is the big boogeyman.

01:01:25.420 And I don't want to suggest that obesity doesn't come without its problems or that it isn't correlated

01:01:30.280 strongly with some of these other issues. But I also think like we should be smart enough to walk

01:01:36.900 and chew gum at the same time. Like we should be nuanced enough to actually be able to talk about

01:01:41.760 what really is causing the issues. And it's not obesity per se. It is the metabolic derangement

01:01:48.460 that often comes with obesity. But as you point out is often present without obesity. I think I have

01:01:53.720 a figure in the book that I drew that shows the Venn diagram, the overlap of lean people who are

01:02:00.020 metabolically unhealthy, obese people who are metabolically unhealthy. And interestingly,

01:02:06.260 a lean person who is metabolically unhealthy has worse outcomes than an obese person who is

01:02:12.880 metabolically unhealthy. In other words, there's something really dangerous about a person who can't

01:02:18.400 get fat, but goes directly to metabolic unhealth.

01:02:23.660 If memory serves, it was like 10 million people are walking around in that boat. So it's a lot.

01:02:28.500 Yeah. Yeah, exactly. And it's about the most conservative estimate I can come up with is

01:02:33.060 that there are 100 million adults in the United States that are metabolically unwell from both of

01:02:38.480 these camps.

01:02:39.660 So how does one, before we get to lifestyle changes, because a lot of this is within your

01:02:44.700 control. It is not just the genetic lottery. Did you win it or didn't you? But there are ways of

01:02:49.680 finding out whether you won it or you didn't, which we can talk about too. But how does one begin?

01:02:53.680 Like people who are inspired by your book, by this conversation who say, I'm with you. What should

01:02:58.280 I do? How do I get data to figure out where I am?

01:03:00.920 Well, I mean, you know, unfortunately, we do live in the medicine 2.0 world still. And so that means

01:03:09.620 that as an individual, you have to become a bit more of a consumer. I guess that's why I wrote the

01:03:14.480 book. So think about it from your profession, right? So you're a lawyer, Megan. And if a person comes to

01:03:22.360 you and says, you know, Megan, I need to retain an attorney. I'm just going to go to Google and find the

01:03:27.300 person closest to me. Would you say to them, like, that's a great strategy. Definitely do that.

01:03:32.500 I mean, of course not, right? If they said, I need a contractor to build my house. I guess I'll just

01:03:38.940 find the guy with the nicest truck. Like, you know, in most other areas of our life, we're relatively

01:03:44.960 sophisticated consumers. And we're relatively interested in taking some ownership of the

01:03:51.100 problem. Somehow medicine has turned into this deity state where we just assume every doctor is

01:03:58.820 equal and every doctor is incredibly knowledgeable and we don't have the right to become stewards of

01:04:05.880 our own health. And I think step one is sort of saying, how much of this stuff can I do without a

01:04:12.340 doctor? For example, I can go and get a DEXA scan without a doctor and that DEXA scan will tell me

01:04:18.000 how much muscle mass I have, how much body fat I have, how much visceral fat I have.

01:04:23.540 And the data is all readily available to tell me how I stack up against other people in the

01:04:27.600 population. So in other words, I'm not just going to have some abstract number that doesn't mean

01:04:31.520 anything to me. I will know for my age and for my sex if I'm doing well or if I'm not. Similarly,

01:04:37.560 I could go and get a VO2 max test and that will tell me how fit I am. And you can certainly ask

01:04:43.960 the doctor to say, look, I know that you're going to order these standard tests, but I also want to

01:04:48.700 see some of these more advanced tests, for example, ApoB and LP little a. And right there and then you

01:04:53.720 have a check gate because a doctor that says, I don't know what those are, bingo, failed the test,

01:05:00.040 time to get another doctor. So I know that people don't necessarily want to hear that because that's

01:05:05.140 work. You know, it takes work to go out and doctor shop and find people who have this level

01:05:10.720 of sophistication. But I can't think of a problem that's more pressing, that's more worth putting

01:05:16.420 effort into. So one of the things you would love to hear if you go through all that is that under

01:05:22.260 this ApoE, ApoE I think it is, which is right about in the book, there are three little subsets,

01:05:30.580 E2, E3 and E4. And I loved hearing about this. I don't know what my numbers are, but okay. E2,

01:05:38.380 one copy of this gene and no copy of E4 is good. That seems to protect you against dementia and

01:05:48.740 suggest you are more likely than the average person by far to reach old age. So yay, you would love to

01:05:54.760 go get this test and find out you have one copy of E2 and no copies of E4. However, E4,

01:06:00.580 E4 is not so good. One copy of E4 increases your risk of Alzheimer's by a factor of between two and

01:06:07.440 12. And it makes you 87% less likely to reach old age. If you have two E4s, you got one from mom

01:06:12.680 and dad. So you may be thinking I'm screwed if I've got two of these E4s. However, you keep reading

01:06:18.280 the book, you go down and you find out there's another possible longevity gene, FOXO3, where you can

01:06:25.800 activate, you can activate better things for you when it comes to longevity. So I don't know that

01:06:30.920 I'm making them all relate to one another accurately, Peter, but to me, it seems like people are afraid,

01:06:36.400 right? They don't want to hear that they have two E4s, but it's better to know because there are

01:06:40.020 things available to you to activate longevity genes inside of you. So you can fight that. It's better

01:06:45.260 to don't just let it sit dormant. It is what it is. The truth is there yesterday, tomorrow, and today,

01:06:49.500 tomorrow, it could be a lot better if you take action. Yeah. I mean, it comes down to a philosophical

01:06:55.580 question. So I've been spanked very hard in the past from various physicians when I've tested for

01:07:03.680 their APOE status. And it's exactly as you say, with a couple of differences. So if you have one

01:07:09.980 copy of the E4 gene, so if you're a 3-4, your risk of Alzheimer's disease is about twofold higher,

01:07:16.840 maybe up to threefold higher. But as you said, when you have two copies of the 4-4,

01:07:21.200 we're talking about that eight to 10, maybe even 12-fold higher risk. That's an enormous risk

01:07:26.800 difference. So I've had some doctors say, how careless of you, how cavalier of you to order

01:07:32.840 such a test because all you're doing is giving the patient something to worry about for which they can do

01:07:38.020 nothing. Now, I was involved in this series called Limitless that was part of NatGeo. And Chris

01:07:45.880 Hemsworth was kind of the protagonist. He's the star of the series. And then there's a whole

01:07:50.220 bunch of little two-bit people around him like me that are kind of helping him along this longevity

01:07:54.740 journey. And in the process of this, Megan, unbeknownst to any of us going into this, we

01:07:59.800 discovered Chris had two copies of the E4 gene. Now, keep in mind, this is pretty rare. Only one to

01:08:04.820 2% of the population have this. But what I explained to Chris and what Chris now understands

01:08:11.700 and has accepted and embraced is knowing that at such a young age, I mean, Chris found this out when

01:08:18.580 he was 37, empowers you to make a lot of changes that will reduce risk greatly. And where people like

01:08:27.280 me fundamentally differ from people who are kind of stuck in the old way is, I think the data is

01:08:32.520 overwhelming that you can indeed reduce risk of all of the horsemen, including Alzheimer's disease.

01:08:39.200 And if that's true, and again, I could point to reams of data that suggest it's true,

01:08:44.160 then not knowing is simply the worst thing that you can do from an outcome perspective.

01:08:49.400 Wow. The Chris Hemsworth thing made national news. And I didn't realize that he was quite that young.

01:08:57.500 Oh my God, I thought he was a little older and that you were involved from the baseline in that.

01:09:02.240 That had to be a moment on your heels.

01:09:05.900 Yeah, it was kind of an interesting situation because we're getting ready to do this thing.

01:09:11.800 We took advantage of Chris being in the US passing through to get his blood tested. And then the plan

01:09:17.940 was I was going to go out to Australia for the first shoot. This is over three years ago,

01:09:21.540 COVID really slowed down the production of this thing. And two weeks before I'm supposed to go

01:09:27.440 out to Australia to begin the shoot, I get the blood test back. And I go through it and I see

01:09:31.580 that he has two copies of the E4 gene. Again, you don't see this all the time. This is very rare.

01:09:36.380 And I knew that they wanted me to present the data to Chris on screen for the first time because it

01:09:43.020 is a documentary. And so I was stuck in a bit of a bind because one, I just didn't think that was the

01:09:50.980 right thing to do to present that type of news to a person for the first time on camera.

01:09:56.680 So I called Darren Aronofsky, who is the producer and also a very close friend. That's the reason I

01:10:03.400 was involved. And I said, look, I can't tell you why, but I need to talk to Chris before we're on

01:10:09.620 camera alone. Meaning like now, like in the weeks that lead up to this. And you have to trust me

01:10:15.640 because I'm not going to, you know, I couldn't tell Darren why I wanted to have this discussion.

01:10:18.940 And Darren was like, yep, no problem. I trust you completely. So he connected me and Chris

01:10:22.940 beforehand. Chris and I had a chance to discuss just that one finding. And truthfully, Chris was

01:10:30.760 not sure that how comfortable he would be with that information being public. So interestingly,

01:10:36.480 as we filmed Limitless over the course of several years, everything was done in parallel. There was a

01:10:42.820 version that included that information and a version that did not. So that at the end, Chris could make

01:10:47.960 the decision. Um, and completely on his own, Chris decided, you know what, I really do want people

01:10:53.900 to know this. Cause I, you know, I know that 25% of the population have one copy of this gene. So if

01:11:00.840 being public about this is going to help those 25% of people, that's a lot of people.

01:11:06.380 Does it mean, I mean, he's also got a very famous brother. Does it, if you have it,

01:11:10.240 does it mean your siblings also have it? Cause you have the same gene pool.

01:11:12.900 Um, you have to go back and look at the parents. So for example, if his parent, if one parent has a

01:11:20.020 two, four, and one has a two, three, uh, say a three, four, one sibling could be a four, four,

01:11:26.960 the other could be a two, three. So as a general rule, we just sort of test everybody. Um, and you

01:11:33.760 know, if we, if we can't figure it, it's not worth trying to guess what a person is.

01:11:38.000 Hmm. I mean, does this, is this what explains, cause you talk in the book of fair amount about the,

01:11:42.900 I I'm not going to pronounce it right, but it's not centurions. It's centenarians.

01:11:48.320 Yeah. The people who live above to be above 100 and happily we have one of those in my,

01:11:53.400 in my family. I think I mentioned my Nana to you last time. My mom's mom lived to 101

01:11:57.760 and broke all the rules. And you mentioned that's not unusual that it's not all Japanese fishermen.

01:12:05.200 You know, that's what you think of, right? It's like, it can like, there's lots of examples in

01:12:09.480 your book of the person who loved the whiskey every day, the person who smoked cigarettes,

01:12:13.460 the person who had two glasses of wine every day and just cut back on calories. There's just no

01:12:18.640 unifying principle. If you look at diet exercise or general approach to life in my Nana's case,

01:12:24.700 she, yes, she was born in 1915 and she ate natural foods for most of her life. But then

01:12:29.400 for most of my life, she was eating processed foods. She was kind of stressed out. She never once

01:12:34.360 exercised a day in her life. Um, all the rules, right? She didn't smoke and she didn't really

01:12:39.520 drink a lot, but I will say one good thing she did was she was very social, very social. And I

01:12:44.480 think, you know, you write in the book about how important that is in emotional wellness and,

01:12:47.440 you know, connection. But in any event, what do you glean from these centenary? Like what,

01:12:53.420 what? Cause of course everybody's like, I'll do it. I'll drink whiskey. I'll, I'll eat processed foods.

01:12:57.220 I'll socialize. I'll get grumpier. What do I need to do?

01:13:00.020 Yeah. The lesson from the centenarians is pretty clear and you're right. There's an entire chapter

01:13:05.460 devoted to them because they teach us a very important lesson. And there's some sub lessons.

01:13:11.260 The most important lesson we learned from centenarians is that they live long despite

01:13:16.800 their lifestyle, not because of it. Because on average, centenarians are indeed doing things less

01:13:24.860 healthy than the non centenarians. It's kind of crazy, but they're more likely to smoke more likely to

01:13:29.960 eat poorly, less likely to exercise. And despite all of those things, they live longer. So this

01:13:35.520 points to a very clear set of genetic attributions that they have. And, you know, the truth of it is

01:13:42.460 the genetic study of centenarians has proved less exciting than people would have hoped. There are a

01:13:49.660 handful of genes that seem to crop up more often than not in this group. You've already mentioned a

01:13:55.920 couple of them, right? So APOE, the two version of that gene crops up disproportionately here.

01:14:02.480 A certain variant of FOXO3 pops up disproportionately here. I could rattle off a few others. It's not

01:14:10.860 relevant. Here's what is relevant. The superpower of the centenarian is their ability to live longer

01:14:18.940 without disease, not their ability to live longer with disease. This is so important. It's worth

01:14:25.660 reiterating. Once a centenarian comes down with a given disease, i.e. has their first heart attack or

01:14:32.540 develops cancer, they're just as likely to die in about the same time period as a non centenarian.

01:14:40.640 What their superpower is, is the length of time it takes them to get that disease in the first place.

01:14:46.780 What everybody else looks like at 60, they look like at 80 or 85. This effectively becomes the

01:14:57.460 cornerstone of the strategy for medicine 3.0. You must delay the time it takes for chronic disease

01:15:03.920 to sink in, not do what medicine 2.0 does, which is figure out ways to extend life once disease has

01:15:11.040 taken hold. That strategy has produced lousy outcomes. That's so helpful.

01:15:16.780 And we can spend some time now on how, even though it's not, as I pointed out, a TikTok on exactly

01:15:23.040 what to eat and how to exercise. But let's talk about the E word. Because exercise is really,

01:15:29.380 I mean, if it boils down to one thing, it really is exercise.

01:15:33.320 Yeah, there's virtually nobody out there who doesn't have opportunity to get better based

01:15:40.340 on exercise. And I know we talked about this the last time I was on, Megan, so I won't need to

01:15:44.680 rehash it. And exercise is so important that of the 17 chapters in the book, three of them are devoted

01:15:50.240 to exercise. There's no other chapter, there's no other topic in the book that warrants so much

01:15:54.940 attention as exercise. But I think the simplest way to explain it is the following. Take the magnitude

01:16:02.300 of harm that is caused by the most harmful things you can think of. Smoking, type 2 diabetes, high

01:16:09.440 blood pressure, coronary artery disease, cancer, you name it. When you look at the all-cause mortality

01:16:17.320 risk associated with those things. In other words, if you have X, let's take smoking. If you are a

01:16:23.820 smoker, when compared to someone who is otherwise identical, but not a smoker, what is the risk that

01:16:30.380 you will die in a given year relative to the non-smoker? It's about 40% higher. That's huge,

01:16:35.980 right? Do the same exercise with high blood pressure, type 2 diabetes, all of these things.

01:16:40.600 You're going to see anywhere from a 20 to 100% increase in the risk of all-cause mortality.

01:16:47.320 When you do the same exercise and compare being unfit to being fit or being weak to being strong,

01:16:57.040 that magnitude difference is two, three, and even four times higher than the ones we just spoke about.

01:17:07.120 In other words, being unfit relative to being fit is worse than having any of these typical

01:17:14.560 medical conditions that we know so clearly are associated with a shorter life.

01:17:20.020 That is huge. Okay. So define fit.

01:17:24.940 So typically fit is defined by this metric called VO2 max because it is reproducible. It is highly

01:17:32.400 objective. And it's been, you know, we have so much data on it. It is the gold standard by which

01:17:38.300 we measure peak aerobic performance. It's not a pleasant test. So it's a test where by definition,

01:17:45.700 you are exercising to the point of maximum exertion and failure. It's typically done on a bicycle or on

01:17:52.220 a treadmill. So it's sort of like your stress test, Megan. It's almost exactly like your stress test,

01:17:56.800 except my guess is they stop you a little earlier on your stress test because they probably just target

01:18:03.200 a certain heart rate for you. And they say, okay, you got there. You're fine. We're going to stop you

01:18:07.660 with the VO2 max. You'd be doing the same thing, but you'd also be wearing a mask. And that mask is

01:18:13.480 measuring how much oxygen you're consuming and how much carbon dioxide you're producing. And you would

01:18:18.300 go until you truly failed until you couldn't stay on that treadmill any longer. What we'd be looking

01:18:23.860 for is at your peak, how much oxygen were you able to extract from the air you breathed in?

01:18:29.960 That number is called VO2 max, ventilation of oxygen max. And that number is so predictive of how long you

01:18:40.120 live. In fact, I haven't seen, and I've been looking, I haven't seen a single number that can be gleaned

01:18:47.300 from an individual, either a biomarker test or otherwise, that is more predictive of how long you will live

01:18:53.320 than your VO2 max. What if you could do really well on that after 30 days of exercise, but then you

01:19:01.740 totally abandoned it. You've got to keep the VO2 max going, I imagine.

01:19:07.420 Well, here's the good news. The reality of it is if you did nothing for 11 months and then just train

01:19:14.780 for 30 days, you wouldn't really get to a high VO2 max. To truly have a high VO2 max, it does require

01:19:21.740 consistently training. By the way, it doesn't require consistently killing yourself. It just

01:19:26.000 requires consistently training. And you don't have to be in the top 5%. That's certainly where

01:19:34.460 you're going to see the most benefit. But simply going from being in the bottom 25% of the population

01:19:40.100 to being in the third quartile, so being from the 50th to the 75th percentile, that's a very reasonable

01:19:47.440 jump, right? To go from being in the bottom quarter to the third quarter has the equivalent

01:19:53.120 of reducing your mortality by 50% in any given year. Huge.

01:19:59.520 So yeah, it's just like there is nothing. There's no drug that does that. There's no diet that does

01:20:05.420 that. There's no anything that does that. Not even close. And that's not a big ask. That's the kind

01:20:12.840 of thing that you can achieve that level of fitness exercising five hours a week, combined

01:20:18.340 with weight training, right? So it doesn't have to be five hours of cardio. It's like five hours,

01:20:22.360 six hours of really well-balanced exercise consisting of both strength and cardio. That's

01:20:27.600 completely achievable.

01:20:30.340 The cardio is important, though, because in my world of women who would like to be thin,

01:20:35.660 um, the, the messaging is don't be a cardio bunny. You know, that the new messaging is cardio bunnies.

01:20:43.940 They don't lose weight. You know, you just tread away, tread away, you know, you spin, spin, spin,

01:20:48.680 and you never lose any weight. And it's better to just eat less, not drive up your appetite and

01:20:53.640 remain thin. But that doesn't take into account at all fitness, cardiovascular or other strength

01:21:01.460 or longevity. It just takes into account appearance.

01:21:07.280 Yeah, it's, it's a, it's a real tragic set of messaging. And it's, um, it's, it's, again,

01:21:12.000 it's missed the mark. Um, I think obviously there are lots of reasons for that, that, that are

01:21:16.440 certainly beyond my area of expertise in terms of the social and cultural reasons of why, you know,

01:21:21.780 we place such an emphasis on leanness aesthetically without any concern for health. I mean, I'm sure

01:21:29.440 you're very familiar with the latest craze with semaglutide, which is a, an injectable drug that

01:21:35.620 has Zempic. Yeah. Zempic being the diabetes version of that would go V being the pure weight

01:21:41.420 loss version. It's the same drug, just a different name. Um, you know, there are clearly patients who

01:21:47.120 benefit from this drug, but Oh my God, what I see behind the scenes of what it's doing to people.

01:21:52.860 And I'm sure other doctors can tell you similar stories. Um, this, so, so give you an example,

01:21:58.760 Megan, if a person, let's just say a person wants to lose weight and, and, and they need to, right.

01:22:02.800 You know, you do the DEXA scan. They've got, they've got too much body fat. Um, they've got

01:22:06.760 visceral fat. They need to lose 20 pounds. Here's what we consider ideal weight loss. Ideal weight loss

01:22:14.320 would be if you lose 20, 15 of it should be fat. Five of it should be lean mass. So you can't just

01:22:23.840 lose fat mass, but three quarters of your weight loss should be fat mass. When we're putting people

01:22:30.260 on a Zempic and every person we put on a Zempic or semaglutide or, you know, whichever one of the

01:22:35.180 variations, and there's another drug called trazepatide. That's actually even better than

01:22:39.340 semaglutide. When we're putting patients on these drugs, we're doing DEXA scans before and after.

01:22:44.120 This is something the FDA did not require the company to do when they sought approval.

01:22:50.440 We're seeing two thirds of the weight loss is lean mass. Only one third is fat mass.

01:22:57.760 Wow. So they're getting lighter, Megan, but they're getting fatter. Meaning their body fat is

01:23:04.800 either not improving or getting slightly worse and they're disproportionately losing muscle mass.

01:23:10.140 They are becoming less healthy. They might look better in some perverse metric where they,

01:23:15.960 you know, wear a smaller set of jeans, but there's nothing about them that's healthier. Furthermore,

01:23:21.000 we track our patient's heart rate overnight, every night. And without exception, every patient who is on

01:23:29.140 a GLP-1 agonist or dual agonist, so semaglutide or trazepatide, every patient, Megan, and we've seen this

01:23:35.660 for the last three years, their resting heart rate at night is going up by eight to 12 beats per minute.

01:23:41.000 Wow.

01:23:41.440 There's nothing I'm aware of that is good about your resting heart rate going up at night.

01:23:47.620 Hmm. Well, that's scary. What did you say? You said that one of the drugs is better.

01:23:53.420 Did you, do you mean better at curbing appetite or better at messing you up?

01:23:57.600 No, more potent. No, it's more potent. It's just, uh, trazepatide is a, is a, is a more potent version

01:24:02.380 of, of this type of drug. Um, it just produces better results. It may be more durable as well.

01:24:08.900 I think it's too soon to say, cause that's the other drawback of these drugs. And again,

01:24:11.820 I don't want to suggest that these drugs shouldn't be used. They're absolutely our use cases for them.

01:24:17.160 And clearly we use them in some patients, but we don't use them in patients who say,

01:24:22.120 I just want to lose 10 pounds to look really good in a bathing suit or look good at the wedding next

01:24:26.060 summer. We're like, that's, you know, you can find another doctor, but that's not how we operate.

01:24:30.260 And we think that that's a lousy strategy. Um, but one of the challenges with these drugs that we

01:24:36.120 don't really know is when you stop taking the drug, are you eventually just going to regain all the

01:24:40.180 weight? Uh, and in the short run, it looks like that's mostly the case. Um, yeah, they say that,

01:24:46.880 they say that in the studies, people regained at least two thirds of the weight. And that if you go on

01:24:53.340 it, it's really kind of a lifetime drug. If you don't want to regain the weight, you just have

01:24:56.280 to stay on it forever. And it's very expensive. Unbelievably expensive. I mean, truthfully as

01:25:01.780 draconian as it sounds, you're better off getting a gastric bypass, which has equal efficacy that

01:25:07.580 lasts indefinitely and costs a fraction of the, you know, the whole thing is just, again, if we could

01:25:13.280 just come back to metabolic health, muscle mass, you know, caring about those things. Um, I think

01:25:20.120 there'd be less demand for this. I want to ask you about metformin because, uh, a good friend of

01:25:25.940 mine read your book and had a question about that. That that's, that could be a potential miracle

01:25:30.720 drug. It's also got some downsides. Um, but we'll talk about it. Let me squeeze in a quick break

01:25:36.160 and come back and we'll talk about that and food more with the one and only Dr. Peter Atiyah right after

01:25:41.620 this. We're kind of on the subject of meds because I brought up metformin. The book talks about

01:25:49.540 rapamycin, talks about, uh, AMPK. Is there something right now in the form of a pill moving

01:25:56.900 on from the shot? Let's move to the pill that can help us live longer that we should be considering.

01:26:02.460 I think it's a bit too soon to say, um, to your question about metformin, that question

01:26:06.600 is being posed in a clinical trial. Uh, I don't know if the trial has started yet, but it has secured

01:26:13.060 funding. So, you know, at the pace at which this type of science moves, it might be five years before we

01:26:19.020 know the answer to that question, but it is asking this question, which is does taking metformin,

01:26:24.920 if you are not a diabetic, because metformin is a drug that is indicated as a first line treatment

01:26:30.280 for people with type two diabetes. And it it's proved beneficial in that regard, but is a non-diabetic

01:26:36.300 person who takes this likely to delay the onset of chronic disease, which is we've discussed is

01:26:41.520 tantamount to living longer. Um, I, I think it might, to some extent, I don't, I don't,

01:26:49.200 you know, and again, I could, I'll be happy to be proved wrong on this, right? So be happy in five

01:26:52.840 years to look at this clip and have egg on my face. My intuition is it's not going to be a dramatic

01:26:59.420 difference. Um, but again, I could be wrong. Uh, but I, but I, the reason I say all that Megan is if

01:27:05.780 you go back and look at all of the epidemiology that has been suggestive of metformin's gyroprotective

01:27:12.900 benefits, gyroprotective is just a word that means it broadly tackles or targets the hallmarks of

01:27:20.200 aging. I actually think the epidemiology is not as compelling as it looks on the surface. In other

01:27:24.800 words, I think there are enough confounders in those data that I don't think metformin is as potent as

01:27:30.320 we would be led to believe if just looking at the, at the surface level data.

01:27:33.580 Is there another drug that we should be consider a supplement people? A lot of people think there's

01:27:38.200 a supplement they need to be taking. I, I, you know, again, my bias is having looked at all of

01:27:43.880 these data. I think rapamycin is the most promising gyroprotective agent out there, but I say that with

01:27:51.800 an enormous, uh, set of caveats. First, it's unambiguously the most gyroprotective agent. If you're

01:27:58.220 anything other than a human, in other words, when you look at the, this is what they give to transplant

01:28:02.120 victims. Is this the one they give to people? Transplant patients take this, um, and it's, uh,

01:28:07.860 it's an immune suppressant, but, um, it's all about the dose and it's all about the frequency.

01:28:12.660 So if you take a low dose of this drug every day, it suppresses the immune system. If you take a higher

01:28:18.320 dose, say once a week, it actually enhances immune function. And it seems that almost independent of how

01:28:25.660 you give it to animals, they live longer. Um, so the, the, the sort of accolades supporting

01:28:32.620 rapamycin's efficacy in, you know, anything from mice to worms, you know, fruit flies, yeast up to

01:28:40.220 dogs seems pretty promising. There is a very large study that's, um, undergoing, well, I guess it'll be

01:28:47.500 done in 2025 or 2026 looking at dogs. It's called the dog aging project done by Matt Kaberline at the

01:28:53.460 University of Washington. That will be the closest we get to human data. And frankly, that's as close

01:28:57.960 as it's going to get. So the real question is, could we believe that a drug that has proven efficacy

01:29:05.460 across a billion years of evolution on basically all more, all model organisms, will it extend to

01:29:12.680 humans? I don't know. Uh, you know, full disclosure, I take rapamycin myself. I've been taking it

01:29:18.480 for five or six years. Um, and, but it's a bit of a leap of faith because I don't, we don't have a

01:29:26.640 biomarker for it. You see, if you're taking a drug that to lower your cholesterol, you have a biomarker,

01:29:32.020 you can measure your cholesterol. You know, the drug is working at least through that metric.

01:29:35.480 We have no biomarker for the efficacy of, you know, a zero protective drug like rapamycin. So

01:29:41.700 it's possible. When I, when I read the book about the dog study first, I was like, Oh dogs. But if

01:29:47.480 you're saying that it helps them either way, then that makes me feel a little better. But you're,

01:29:51.220 the point you make in the book is that this is on another thing. This is on intermittent fasting,

01:29:54.700 which got my attention since I'm a fan of it. The studies that have been done on that saying it's,

01:29:58.780 Oh, it's so good for you have been done on mice and they're useless because mice have a very limited

01:30:04.600 time on this earth. And so you're basically saying like studies on mice really are very limited in

01:30:11.640 terms of your takeaways. Well, certainly for that application, they're a little more,

01:30:16.060 depending on the strain of mice, you can learn something about drugs from them. But yes,

01:30:21.400 on the fasting cause, boy, it's really tough. The reason is if you keep mice fasting for 14 hours a

01:30:28.660 day and it does something heroic to them, you really have to be careful how you extrapolate that

01:30:34.240 to humans because a mouse not eating for 14 hours is like you not eating for probably three days.

01:30:40.780 Hmm. Very different. Yeah. Very different.

01:30:45.960 I know. So you're not really a fan of the intermittent fasting anymore, but you do acknowledge

01:30:50.040 that lower calorie intake on a daily basis has beneficial effects.

01:30:55.600 If you're overnourished, meaning I sort of go through these three questions when I'm looking

01:31:00.920 at everybody. Are you undernourished or overnourished? Meaning are you storing excess energy? Yes or no.

01:31:05.860 Are you under muscled or adequately muscled? And are you metabolically healthy or not?

01:31:11.440 Only when you have the answer to those three questions, can you begin to dole out advice on

01:31:17.760 how a person should be eating? Do they need to be in a calorie deficit? Are they eucaloric? Do they

01:31:22.880 need to be in a calorie excess? Are they getting sufficient protein? Yes or no. You know, obviously

01:31:27.480 what's the role of exercise and sleep because those play a huge role in insulin sensitivity and metabolic

01:31:33.260 health as well. So sometimes you get these really hard cases, right? The hardest case is the person

01:31:38.260 who's overnourished, meaning they're overweight, but they're under muscled. Because in that person,

01:31:43.460 you have to lose weight while adding muscle, which is not easy to do.

01:31:48.120 Right. I haven't been asked anybody. Pretty much everybody would like to do those two things

01:31:52.820 simultaneously. You also spend a little time on seed oils, which is interesting because we've done

01:31:58.140 shows on that and I was turned hard against the hateful eight and all that. Tell me,

01:32:03.260 well, look, it's a, it's a great story, right? It's a great story to demonize seed oils because

01:32:09.880 as you know, having had people on the show, I'm sure, um, you know, these things didn't really

01:32:15.400 exist 150 years ago and now they're running rampant. Um, but if you look at the data and

01:32:22.420 I'd love to demonize seed oils because I think that the foods that they come in are horrible

01:32:27.000 for the most part, but if you look at the data, Megan, if there is, if there's a downside to

01:32:33.660 seed oils, it's, it's, it must be pretty small at the level, at the resolution that we can measure

01:32:39.460 it. You know, and I cite the three most comprehensive meta-analyses ever shat into our

01:32:47.020 civilization on this subject matter. And there just doesn't seem to be much of an effect.

01:32:52.060 So I think the precautionary principle is a reasonable approach, right? I think when it

01:32:57.540 comes to the three main types of fats, saturated fat, monounsaturated fat, and the polyunsaturated

01:33:03.920 fats, which are predominantly made up of seed oils on the Omega six branch, you know, the data are

01:33:09.660 pretty clear. One of those is a clear winner. And my view is why not make that the fat that is the

01:33:14.880 dominant fat in your diet, that fat of course, being the monounsaturated fat. So rather than dwell

01:33:21.180 on, you know, seed oils, like I don't eat a lot of seed oils, not because I think they're bad,

01:33:25.580 which they may be, but the data doesn't really suggest it if you're being honest and looking at

01:33:29.800 it, but because the data are so clear that Omega, that, that pardon me, that monounsaturated fats,

01:33:34.360 like olive oil, olives, avocado, that those things are really beneficial. So it's, it's, it really

01:33:40.120 should be 50 to 60% of our total fat intake should come from, from, you know, olive oil and the like.

01:33:46.100 Yeah. And just finally, because people were wondering about the diet, you said this last time and you

01:33:50.160 maintain it in the book, you're not, you're not a keto, paleo, vegan. It's the diet. It's just,

01:33:57.680 there's no silver bullet there. No, I mean, look, any, any, any sort of named diet is going to be

01:34:04.680 an improvement over the standard American diet, the standard American diet, which says basically

01:34:08.720 eat whatever you want, whenever you want, and whatever quantity you want. That's our default state.

01:34:13.340 We live in a default environment that, that fosters that. And that for most people is devastating.

01:34:18.380 Our genes did not have enough time to catch up to that environment. So instead I argue that

01:34:25.720 virtually everybody to be healthy is going to have to live in some form of restriction. And there are

01:34:31.440 three things you can be restricting. You can obviously do combinations of these, but you have

01:34:35.700 to be thinking about this through the lens of dietary restriction, time restriction, or caloric

01:34:40.320 restriction. So dietary restriction is kind of where most people think of diets. It's pick a boogeyman

01:34:46.040 and just don't do it. So the boogeyman might be plant food or whatever, animal food or sugar or

01:34:53.500 carbs or fat or whatever. Um, that said, it could be, uh, you know, limit the time in which you eat

01:35:00.660 that's time restricted feeding, or of course, just restrict the calories altogether. And that's what

01:35:04.280 calorie restriction is. Hmm. That's, I mean, that's, that does make sense. And the way you outlined

01:35:09.580 the questions you should be asking of your doctor before you get to what's my next move makes sense

01:35:14.520 to all of this is in the wonderful outlive. And this is a gift from Dr. Peter Atiyah who didn't

01:35:20.880 have to write this down for us at all, but has, and there's a reason that it's number one on the

01:35:24.660 New York times. I mean, this is legit. Um, thank you so much for writing this and please, will you

01:35:28.700 come back? There's so much more to discuss. I feel like we only scratched the surface, but hopefully got

01:35:32.460 people inspired. Yeah. Thanks so much, Megan. Really appreciate it. And thanks for taking the time to read

01:35:36.660 it or listen to it. Cause I know it's, uh, Oh, the pleasure is all mine. Again, the book is called

01:35:40.780 outlive the science and art of longevity. Uh, and it's well, well worth your time. And you're going

01:35:46.060 to have more time. Thanks to this book. It's out now. We'll be back tomorrow with the EJs. The gals

01:35:52.600 are going to come on. There's so much to discuss. Don't miss that show. Thank you for spending the past

01:35:57.200 hour plus with us. Thanks for listening to the Megan Kelly show. No BS, no agenda, and no fear.

01:36:06.660 Thank you.

The Megyn Kelly Show - April 10, 2023

Left's Hypocrisy on Women, Ignoring Nashville Trans Shooter, and How to Live Better Longer, with Glenn Greenwald and Dr. Peter Attia ｜ Ep. 525

Episode Stats

Length

Words per Minute

Word Count

Sentence Count

Misogynist Sentences

Hate Speech Sentences

Summary

Transcript