Episode 1087 Scott Adams: What I Think is Bullshit About Coronavirus Opinions. Biden’s Rotting Brain

Date: 2020-08-10 | Duration: 46:26

Topics

Find my “extra” content on Locals: https://ScottAdams.Locals.com

Rough Transcript

This is an auto-generated transcript and may contain errors.

Transcript

---

• Adding President Trump to Mount Rushmore

• 59% say Biden won’t finish a 4 year term

• Breaking the habit of watching sports

• Emergency budget situations and Congress

• My revised opinions on coronavirus and HCQ

• Blood serum antibody therapy

If you would like to enjoy this same content plus bonus content from Scott Adams, including micro-lessons on lots of useful topics to build your talent stack, please see scottadams.locals.com for full access to that secret treasure.
---
[0:14]

hey everybody come on in it's time for coffee with scott adams is it gonna be a good one no it's gonna be a great one so great that you'll be wondering why i held back until now yes that's how good it will be just like every morning the simultaneous sip is the highlight of the day
day and all you need to enjoy it i think you know but just in case someone is new you need a copper mug or a glass of tanker chelsea stein a canteen jugger flask a vessel of any kind fill it with your favorite liquid i like coffee and join me now for the unparalleled pleasure the dopamine of the day the thing that makes everything better it's called the simultaneous sip but it happens now go i feel the herd immunity level

[1:15]

i feel the herd immunity level dropping yes we'll have herd immunity probably at one percent now if you all did the simultaneous sip if some of you decided not to do the simultaneous step by well i make no promises see that's my out all right let's talk about the news uh chicago is falling apart it's being looted and i still don't care i'd love to i want to care but i don't feel like i should care about people more than they care about themselves so i'd say that black lives matter is completely discredited which is sad because it was only a month or so ago that they were riding high and looking very credible in their claims but time goes by
by and now black lives matter has morphed from a sincere concern by most people who are marching

[2:16]

marching into some kind of a marxist looting opportunity based on so um i feel sorry for the people who are trying to make a difference because if you've associated with black lives matter the organization not not the idea but just the organization you have chosen a bad horse to ride so the highlight films from the looting in chicago the big game big game in chicago were fun to watch and that was all i cared about it i just can't care about chicago more than chicago cares about itself i don't think it works that way if they really really cared about themselves well they might act differently and then i would see what i could do to help
the fake news story of the day is that president trump was trying to figure out

[3:17]

president trump was trying to figure out how to get his face on mount rushmore now when i say fake news you know we live in a world where nothing's quite as clean as it could be is it possible that uh the president had once once mentioned to the governor of north dakota south dakota whichever dakota um that uh all the dakotas are alike i mean do you really need an earth in the south it's a little bit overkill how about just one dakota we don't need two
but anyway does it is it possible that the president ever asked about what it would take to get on there yeah it's possible totally possible but how serious would he have been maybe you look into it now the the thing that i like most about president trump other than he's just

[4:17]

he's just damn entertaining all the time is that he doesn't seem to have any limits on what he thinks is possible to a large degree that's what makes him successful he has that anything can happen i can be president i can build a building i can become a billionaire even if i've lost all my money so he has this sort of indomitable why not
not attitude so if you take the person who you know won the presidency against all odds did some you know amazing accomplishments in my opinion even already would he would that personality at least at least ask the question i'm just asking hypothetically what would it take for a president who did a really good job you know just for example do get an extra head up on there what would it take is it possible that president trump ever

[5:19]

is it possible that president trump ever asked that question i hope so i really do i hope he did because that's the guy i like as my president i like the guy who might say
say i'm not saying it's likely but let's just feel it out a little bit if if you can tell me that you genuinely don't appreciate that that that's you know that that's who he is i don't know i think you're missing the best part of him is that he literally thinks there's nothing there's nothing out of bounds in terms of you know possibilities in terms of good things specifically um is it possible that a staffer once contacted somebody to ask what the process is could be i mean it's as likely fake news is not right whenever the anonymous person did something so when the president says it's fake news that's probably true that's probably true it's probably fake

[6:19]

that's probably true it's probably fake news but things are not always yes or no is it possible that a rogue staffer could have asked about the process here's why that makes sense if i were uh let's say on the campaign staff or just the staff at the white house wouldn't you kind of know if what do you want to know if there's a process because if there is a process how hilarious would it be to start it going you see where i'm going so cnn reports it like it's a case of trying to get on there maybe who knows more likely you just ask the question because hey you never know but if a staffer contacted to ask what the process is the calculation you should do in your head is how would it look if he was already in the process and obviously you could get enough republicans to to vote for it to sign a poll do a

[7:21]

to vote for it to sign a poll do a petition fill out some paperwork so if there is a process wouldn't it be funny if he were in the process even if he didn't think it would necessarily culminate with him being on there it would just be sort of delightful it would be sort of like being nominated for the nobel prize you know this is better than better than nothing right it doesn't mean you're going to get it but it would be kind of hilarious to have that process going so could a staffer have done that as sort of a strategic thing because it would look good and it would be funny maybe maybe but i think fake news has got to be your your first go-to on likelihood now there's a i i could give you a uh sneak peek of some information that's going to come out in a few hours so rasmussen will be reporting

[8:21]

reporting this morning uh but i have not yet i i got permission to to tell you this in advance but uh they're going to show the rasmussen poll that 59 think biden is unlikely to finish a four-year term in the white house 59 think he won't finish a four-year term
now uh as you know cnn has quite hilariously decided that and i think the washington post and some other anti-trump outlets have hilariously decided that their defense of joe biden will be the the monty python defense if you don't know the monty python defense i'm not going to do a monty python scheme or sketch because it's been done to death i will however bring in dale to give his full-throated defense of why it is that joe biden is clearly

[9:24]

of why it is that joe biden is clearly clearly mentally competent uh dale could you come over here we've got some questions about president biden what's the question well the question is why do you think he's mentally competent because we're all watching him talk and it's not looking good but you're pretty sure he's mentally competent dale can you come over here and explain this
sure it's obvious have you seen the man ride a bike proof i don't want to get all science on you because i know you're a denier but when you see the science of the bicycle riding i think that's pretty pretty much puts the lid on those rumors about joe biden's competence and moreover i think you'd agree he didn't just he didn't just ride it in a straight line he took corners and he took a well

[10:26]

he took corners and he took a well he took corners on that bicycle like i i don't know like you you know a 25 year old man could barely make a corner like that it was almost 45 degrees he took it with no
no trouble at all and you know that you can't have a mental and confidence and a ride of bicycles what what okay i'm being told that you could totally ride a bicycle if you were mentally incompetent but that's not what's happening you can tell by the way he is riding it the style of his writing the capability the confidence the corners the way he turns that just speaks mental competence i think pretty clearly and seen so the hilarity of if if you didn't see uh brian stelter's uh defense and now

[11:27]

brian stelter's uh defense and now there's another there's a hilarious uh blog post on cnn saying that that biden has just driven a stake through the argument that he is mentally incompetent you know before that bicycle riding thing yeah you can see why people might be saying it but now that he rode a bicycle for i don't know 50 50 yards now that we've seen that well case closed case closed
no no he's not dead he's just resting in fact cnn went so far as to say that president trump's attack on biden for being sleepy has now been completely discredited because he rode a bike for 50 yards and they said that with like a straight face if you could have a straight face while you're writing something if you know what i mean they sold that as a serious commentator common

[12:27]

common commentary so that was pretty amusing uh the simulation continues to amuse just as we're wondering if kamala harris is going to be the vice president choice or if that choice is dead there was somebody with the same name kamal harris who apparently is a professional wrestler who tragically died yesterday that's right somebody named kamala harris died yesterday at the same time we're wondering if her political career is alive or dead yeah in the sense of the vice president pick now there's some speculation that if she's not chosen as the vice president pick that uh maybe she's they're holding her out for the presidential spot now people ask me scott scott scott it doesn't make sense that they would pick somebody else for a vice president because that person would be the obvious

[13:29]

because that person would be the obvious person to become the top candidate if joe biden dropped down so it doesn't make sense that they would you know put in somebody else at the top when the whole point of a vice presidential pick is that they're ready now
now to take the top spot so you'd have to ask yourself why you know if somebody else is the top spot why did you pick this vice president in the first place and the answer is what if they already know they're going to get rid of the top spot before election day what if they know they want to replace the top and put in the vice presidential pick at maybe the same time what would that look like well what that would look like is you would absolutely have to pick somebody for the top spot who had been recently running for president i think you would be limited to that because the public would just sort of insist that somebody who put in the work you know is considered so that would be you know your elizabeth warrens your

[14:31]

you know your elizabeth warrens your um kable harris's your cory bookers etc but kamala is probably the strongest of that group if you ask me and if she doesn't get picked or let's say the longer you go every day that we go without a vp pick suggests that they're looking to change out both candidates so that doesn't mean it's true but it's very suggestive of the fact that there's a bigger decision than just the vp now if today they announce the vp and it's you know bass then i think there you have other problems in terms of the the kamala harris theory and would it be possible that you can make the change after biden had picked some other vice president and the answer is yeah you could work with me on this let's look just think this through let's say you bind and picked uh

[15:32]

say you bind and picked uh karen bass for vice president you might say to yourself well you know not really tested and at the highest level you kind of want a governor or a senator or something wait what is karen bess a representative um so you might say yourself okay that's as good as you know a vice presidential pick needs to be now the whole point of a vice president pick is that they need to look less good than the top of the ticket if you don't get that right it's a bad look you don't want your vice president pick to be clearly a better candidate than the top of the ticket so what happens if biden drops out before election day and bass is the vice presidential pick do you feel her as the top of the ticket i don't because i feel like she hasn't been quite tested enough but you could easily see kamal harris at the top of the ticket

[16:33]

the top of the ticket so i do think that in this weird case of replacing a candidate before the election if it happens it does open the possibility that kamala could be slotted into the top slot without ever having been picked as the vice president completely possible in my opinion but um every day that goes by people are saying i don't think it's kamala maybe like uh willie brown said recently she'd be a better attorney general to which i say strong argument strong argument she could be uh she would probably be uh you know a strong pick for attorney general so maybe we'll see um let's see what else is going on
um i think we got to talk about coronavirus but before we do that let's talk about sports i did a tweet in which i asked people

[17:33]

people if they've lost interest in any professional sports that they used to be interested in and man did people lose interest people lost a lot of interest and i don't know if it's just because the way they're doing it without the crowds because it's a late season so it doesn't look like it really counts in the usual way or if people just got out of the habit and here's the thing i'd like to inject into the conversation if you're looking at what is the future of sports i would suggest that breaking people from their habit of every sunday i sit down and i watch my sports or every evening i watch a basketball game in the fall whatever your habit was your habit probably got broken and when a habit gets broken it's hard to
to hard to get it back because you just can't beat habit for locking in a product it's one of the reasons that comic strips can last for 30 years in the newspaper whereas a tv

[18:36]

30 years in the newspaper whereas a tv show typically can't etc and it's because people are very habit driven for their newspaper habits which is why newspapers can even still be a thing years after you think people should be watching on their devices so habit is incredibly strong and the coronavirus broke it it broke the habit so once that habit is broken i don't know that sports can ever recover back to where they were you know i'm sure it'll be a viable business but i don't think it's getting back to where it was
all right let me talk about the coronavirus oh yeah one more thing i so the president did his executive orders which uh he can't create money that doesn't exist you need congress to do that in terms of creating a budget but he can move things around and he can delay things and he's using

[19:36]

delay things and he's using he's using that power for the coronavirus relief stuff now here's my question or maybe it's a statement doesn't congress seem like the wrong place for budget authority in an emergency now congress is exactly the right place for budget authority in normal times even as dysfunctional as they are it's still the right place you still need it to be there but in the very specific case of a national emergency should that affects the economy as well as the well-being of the people i'm feeling like that's a commander-in-chief job my perfect situation would be the commander-in-chief in an emergency could just simply allocate funds as as if it were congress and you'd have to constrain that so it doesn't get out of control it has to be an emergency maybe maybe congress needs to say it's an

[20:37]

maybe congress needs to say it's an emergency i don't know and then then i would also suggest that if you have that system and you just say you know our our homeland defense is inseparable from our economic health they're inseparable so the only way to protect the country is to protect the economy the only way to do that right is also by protecting the people the health etc and therefore since the economy and the p the public health and homeland security are really all just one big ball in the specific case of an emergency i'd rather have the commander-in-chief have complete control of the budget with this control that the supreme court could line veto anything that doesn't meet the test of being applicable to the emergency so in other words if your president tried to push through i don't know border wall funding just because the commander-in-chief has all the power

[21:38]

the commander-in-chief has all the power now it's an emergency i'll use the emergency to get this other stuff and he makes a case and goes well you need border security because then you know people don't get in with the virus and then the supreme court looks at it and say yeah i hear what you're saying but you only have authority for immediate stuff so the border wall is out but the bill can continue so nothing gets delayed the supreme court would look at it 24 hours and say no not this one you know the the payments to the people that's good the delay of this you can do that but you can't build a wall you know that that's not what this emergency stuff is about um would that be a better system i'll just put that out there because i don't know that when the constitution was created this sort of situation was really contemplated because in those days you just have more time for everything uh so that's the tweak i would make put it make it the commander-in-chief's job

[22:40]

it make it the commander-in-chief's job under the emergency situation with the supreme court as kind of a check all right um because you know depending on congress for money in an emergency it's just not a thing it's just not a thing all right i i've come to some new revised opinions on the coronavirus and let's go through that the hydroxyl chloroquine estimate i have been at 50 chance that it's real and it works if you if you combine it with the zinc and azithromycin and you give it to people early when they first have symptoms so i've said based on what i've seen sort of a coin flip sort of a 50 50. you just can't tell and i've revised that down to 30 and i'll tell you why so still might work if it's a 30 chance of working i'd still want to get the prescription

[23:40]

the prescription just in case because the downside is so low
low and the upside is really high um so it doesn't change whether you should get a prescription but let me tell you why i've lowered my estimate i've been saying since the beginning that we don't have the good you know the rpt you know what he called the placebo placebo-controlled randomized study the the gold standard study so we don't have that kind of study for the appropriate use of the drug which is early and with the zinc we have studies that show without the zinc they're worthless we have studies that show it when you use it at the wrong time when it's too late they're worthless so there are lots of high quality studies of the wrong stuff so we've got good studies of the wrong stuff worthless we have i think the number was 56 or more studies if you will but not the rpt gold standard studies that suggest it works

[24:42]

it works and it's been asked what are the chances that you'd have all these studies that sure they're not gold standard but they're different ways of looking at it and they all point the same direction it's a pretty good point but it's not evidence it just doesn't rule it out that you know so i wouldn't put too much weight on that because first of all if somebody had a study that was different wouldn't we have ever seen it i don't know so there's lots there's lots to be asked about that and then what i thought was going to be the most persuasive was comparing countries that used hydroxychloroquine to countries that didn't how many of you have seen the chart that shows that the country is not using hydroxychloroquine or like their curve is way high lots of death lots of infection compared to the ones who used it early and it's like nothing it's like it just wiped out the virus practically how many of you have seen

[25:44]

practically how many of you have seen that chart i think laura ingram added on the show i've tweeted it a bunch of times you've all seen it right so um and dr zelenko had tweeted it himself so i tweeted his tweet that included that chart and study and i asked the smart people on the internet to say does this look right and what do you think they said not even close yeah i think gummy bear has run that chart as well and when you open it up to people who are sort of good at finding problems with things which is most of my followers it just doesn't hold up at all so here's what's obviously wrong about it
it it leaves countries out now if you say to yourself yeah but so what if you left some countries out the ones that are in tell the whole story if it's true that these countries used it early and they got this result

[26:45]

it early and they got this result and it's true that these countries didn't use it and they got a wildly different result does it really matter that you left out other countries because that's enough right no that's how you fake it the way you create a fake chart is by leaving out the other countries that don't show the pattern now let me ask you this does every country have a chart that goes up and then there's some point where it goes down you all agree that every country has one of those charts right they don't all use hydroxychloroquine some of them just go and the united states has sort of that double dip thing but they all have a point where there's an inflection now the inflections are all compressed in
in let's say just a month or so right there's like maybe two months but it was something like one month where every country that had an inflection point it was so it was around about that same time how many of them also

[27:47]

same time how many of them also made some kind of a change with their hydroxychloroquine that just coincidentally lines up with when that was going to happen anyway doesn't take many if there were only let's say 25 percent of them coincidentally were doing better with the let's say social distancing at about the same time they were also saying hey why don't we use this hydroxychloroquine you could draw the chart and it would look like 25 percent of the countries coincidentally lined up that you've got something that looks like a correlation it's like hey at about the same time they did this hydroxychloroquine things got really good on their curve and then you look at it and you say well but there were lots of countries that were having that same curve thing a quarter of them lined up with your hypothesis and those are the ones that ended up in the chart 75 of them you either didn't know or didn't line up and so they're not on the chart now i

[28:47]

and so they're not on the chart now i don't know if i'm explaining what happened in this specific case what i'm trying to do is open your mind to the understanding that that chart has no credibility whatsoever and when you look into who produced it who's the original source how they put it together you find mumbo jumbo and that is clearly somebody trying to hide their identity so you don't even know where it came from they use words like it's randomized when it's not which is a big red flag and uh the whole thing looks super sketchy to the point where the chart producers look more like foreign interference than they do like good helpers who just want to be anonymous
now does that mean that hydroxychloroquine doesn't work it does not i'm still a 30 chance it works i'm just saying that what it would take to convince me has never happened so that chart complete the

[29:49]

so that chart complete the all the 56 studies that are not the right kind not confirming anything this study is confirming it doesn't work complete they studied the wrong stuff so there's a weird situation here in which why is it that studying the right thing is so darn hard i mean we've had several full month periods that have passed it's been five months since the beginning and from the very beginning we were talking about this drug are you telling me you can't do a one month trial in five months when it's an emergency no nobody pulled that off
i'm just not buying it but here's the other challenge i had i have not yet heard of one case anywhere in the world in which somebody got the drug early and then later died now that doesn't mean it didn't happen but why have i never heard of one you know could couldn't i get one anecdote one anecdote

[30:53]

couldn't i get one anecdote one anecdote of somebody who took it at the right time didn't have some horrible obvious comorbidity and then went on to die if your fake news really wants to embarrass the president give me some of those anecdotes sure i know it's just anecdotes and it won't really mean anything because because even the proponents don't say it saves every person in every case they're just saying that's an amazing difference but just show me one anecdote of somebody who took it and died and died anyway you can't find one you can't find any must be one out there somewhere all right let's talk about sweden um let me check the news on sweden uh let's see here's a story in which uh the person writing about it says it's absolutely true that sweden did the right thing okay scroll down here's another news story that says i've looked at sweden and they did all the wrong things they sure lost

[31:56]

really nobody knows what's going on but let me give you some insight as to how bad the analysis of sweden is check me on my math but see if i'm in the neighborhood here all right so sweden has a population of 10 million to reach herd immunity and we'll talk about whether this number is is too high or not let's say 60 infection would get you to herd immunity so if six million which would be sixty percent of their total population if six million people had it uh already and that's what's happening because sweden seems to be doing well and the thought is they've reached some kind of herd immunity and the last i checked the fatality rate was 3.75 percent so 3.75 of people who get it would die that includes you know elderly etc
etc so that would imply that for sweden to be at

[32:57]

be at 60 percent herd immunity which would be enough that they would have 225 000 deaths
we'll get to those who are screaming at me in the comments that it would be much less sorry so if sweden got to herd immunity at the 60 level which is what most experts say you need to get to we would have seen 225 000 deaths what's the actual number six right so if you thought if you think that sweden reached that 60 herd immunity you're off by a lot because they would have 225 000 deaths not 6 000. so they're nowhere near anything like traditional herd immunity but let's get to the second part so there are smart people arguing that we don't need to get anywhere near 60 percent in fact the number could be as low as you know 35 percent it could be you know

[33:59]

you know 35 percent it could be you know it could be 20 and the reason being that's offered is that there are so many people who have had some related kind of coronavirus that has some markers that are similar enough that your body is sort of prepped for it but it wouldn't show up in specific immunity so if you if you tested somebody who was resistant to it because of other exposures you wouldn't be able to test for it they would just have some markers but not immunity per se but then but then in reality they just wouldn't get it so that you would have to include them and then if you did the real herd immunity could be closer to 20 or something but sweden's still more at like uh three percent so even if you went all the way down to say 20 percent gives you herd immunity sweden's not even close to that they're

[35:00]

sweden's not even close to that they're nowhere close they're not even in you know they're not in the you know dynamiting distance from even the lowest 20 percent herd immunity but yet they seem to be doing okay what's going on and the answer is we don't know we don't know we don't know we don't know if they're doing well we don't know why they're doing what they're doing but there are some other big differences in sweden which are worth noting one is that we talk about them not closing their economy but that's not exactly what happened the the voluntary social distancing etc were pretty well maintained so they weren't that different from somebody who closed their economy they did have a better economic outcome that they you know they took a hit too but not as bad as other countries um then you'd also have to ask yourself why is it that sweden is doing so much better than um

[36:01]

is doing so much better than um the uk why is sweden doing so much better than the uk because if this herd immunity thing is really really really low and this sweden somehow hit it how did the uk zoom right past it by by a lot so why would herd immunity in sweden be down here but herd immunity in the uk would be up here doesn't work does it right because unless there's something genetic or something about where they live what they've been exposed to in the past i suppose but it seems inconsistent to me that anybody would have a higher death rate than anybody else if sweden is hitting herd immunity if you can get her immunity at that lower level of death wouldn't everybody be there or just about there i don't know um and then it has been mentioned as the swedes have a different lifestyle they

[37:03]

swedes have a different lifestyle they might spend more time alone naturally and that they might be healthier they do better on vitamin d because they supplement because they don't get enough sun so they supplement which might make a difference and apparently they have much lower rates of diabetes i don't know if that's true but if you assume that the swedes have a low african-american community that alone would put their death rate lower would it not because the african-american community in well no if it was if it were in sweden it would be uh just the black or the african sweden community i guess so the fact that we have a larger minority population who are tragically more susceptible to it
it that's part of the story too so maybe sweden is just being sweden and there's there's nothing magic happening there all right so here's what's not credible so far

[38:03]

so here's what's not credible so far these studies which proclaim they have debunked hydroxychloroquine are not credible even the rpt ones because they studied the wrong thing studied it not with zinc they studied it on deathly ill people when it's too late so there's no good study that shows it doesn't work likewise there's no high quality gold standard that shows it does work and the country comparisons seem completely garbage and i forgot to mention this but nobody really knows what different countries are doing with hydroxychloroquine nobody really knows because it's up to the doctors and we don't know if the doctors are really using it they really have supply how are they using it kind of don't know so if you think you can compare countries good luck with that because you'd have to talk to a lot of doctors in every country to get some kind of a representative sample all right so here's what i think is our best hope at this point

[39:04]

at this point that the blood serum antibody treatment will become a commercial market uh that is our best hope i think now my understanding is that if you take the blood from somebody who's had it and it's you find out that you've got the you know the better blood there's some some blood is better than others for the antibodies and you put those antibodies in somebody it will confer some immunity in them but it might not last forever but it also doesn't need to i don't think it needs to last forever and just to give you an idea of what a commercial market for this would be as opposed to just working through the normal health care system if there were a commercial market where somebody could offer me right now literally today they could say if you come into my clinic i've already got some antibodies that i've you know harvested put them in your body it's safe enough you know i would need some evidence that

[40:04]

you know i would need some evidence that it's safe but safe enough what would you pay for it
it and here's my answer five thousand dollars i would personally because i'm rich right so you don't need to throw that in my face i'm rich so i would pay five thousand dollars to get that antibody treatment now why would i pay five thousand dollars two reasons one it'd be worth it if you have the money it'd be worth it but two and this is just important in my particular case that's what makes it a market the when the dumb rich overpay and that's actually a market segment if you've ever worked in corporate america you know that the dumb rich are actually a market segment the people who will buy the new expensive thing regardless of price because they want the new expensive thing so you sell it to the dumb rich first because they'll buy it no matter what if you know if it's expensive and good

[41:06]

if you know if it's expensive and good in some way and then that drives the price down eventually to so that people who can afford it would be able to afford it so if it came out today and they said hey it's going to be five thousand dollars for one treatment and we don't even know how long it'll last i would say well first first partly for the community the immunity and partly to help drive down the price because the more money we shovel at it the more they can lower their price so that those of you who can't afford it would be able to and i mean that seriously i would i would be in line in one minute because it would be part of a larger good i think plus you know might work for me too
so in my opinion that plus uh maybe rapid testing are the two things that could help us the most you probably need both the rapid testing meaning if we could get fda approval for the the little paper tests it's basically a spit test you can do it

[42:08]

it's basically a spit test you can do it at home it won't pick up if you just got the virus it won't pick it up but if you're already infectious it will pick it up quite reliably and so that's enough given that it might only cost a dollar to do the test that's enough to really really push on a bunch of tests you know people could test themselves twice a day and it wouldn't be too expensive and so i'm putting the odds of the vaccine making the difference at the odds of the vaccine making all the difference 30 30 30 that the vaccine is the answer the the likely answer is a a war on every front where we're just doing everything that works and i think the uh the blood serum thing is clearly going to be in that category that's the one thing nobody doubts will work right i don't think there's anybody smart who says that the uh that the blood

[43:10]

who says that the uh that the blood serum thing wouldn't work it just might be hard to scale it up but i think we can figure that out if people like me are willing to overpay for the service what is uh i'm seeing percentages go by but i don't know what you're speaking about um
a game changer is not 30 yeah i think there's just a 30 chance that the
the virus vaccinations will make all the difference
um somebody says the vaccine will be a home run i like your optimism but you know keep in mind that we haven't been successful with these vaccines in the past so it would be kind of remarkable if it worked and even if it works it might only work at 50 percent for 50 percent of the public and that's according to fouchy so fauci is warning us that getting the shot doesn't mean you're immune might mean you're more immune fifty

[44:12]

might mean you're more immune fifty percent you know of the people maybe something like that um monoclonal antibodies i have a big question about why we don't know what's going on with that the idea is you take somebody's antibodies from their blood and instead of just making them give more and more antibodies you clone it in a machine and i don't know whatever kind of chemistry you have to do to do that but i don't know why we're not doing that already so that feels like a big black hole of knowledge where we should really know what's going on because that could be easily the most promising thing
uh ivermectin yeah i'm reading about ivermectin but i need to figure out what's going on there
all right um a meth house blew up in baltimore somebody says how did i miss that story you have flu shots regular flu shots don't always

[45:13]

shots regular flu shots don't always work
um feed your mitochondria
i like that comment feed your mitochondria look it up all right um
are you saying it will be an annual shot oh i don't know i doubt it
your death rate percent seems high yeah you know you should check that check my uh death rate estimates because it feels like 99 of the people survive right i think the uh the three point whatever death rate includes people over 80 and there are a lot of them
somebody says wrong scott regeneron is doing trial on antibodies they're doing a trial on it but what part is wrong was there something i said that violates

[46:14]

was there something i said that violates the fact that there's a company doing a trial on antibodies i don't know dow is up all right that's all i got for now i will talk to you later