ungry and also not have a Diet Coke. Those are two really strong forces to be fighting at the same time.

So I say take two months. Give yourself a break on the rest of your diet. You know, eat healthy food but don't obsess over it. And just do one thing. Just quit Diet Coke or Coke or soda. It doesn't have to be Coca-Cola company. Just sugary drinks. Just quit that. In two months you will not only not crave it, it will look like a chemical experiment and not even look like a food beverage item. In two months the way you think of it will completely change just by not drinking it. You don't have to do anything else. Just don't drink it for two months and you will think it's crazy that anybody puts that in their body. It won't even look like a beverage.

I look at a soda now and I think, oh my God, I just feel sorry for anybody who drinks this stuff. After drinking 12 sodas a day for 30 years, right? So I'm the biggest hypocrite in the world and that's what I'm telling you. The moment you go two months without it, it doesn't look the same. When you're done it completely changes what it is subjectively.

So two months. Don't do anything else hard. Just do that. And here's the extra benefit. You know I like to find the benefit in chaos, right? Whenever there's chaos there's advantage. Whenever there's tragedy there's something, some little thing somebody created to make money.

And here's what the Coca-Cola company did for you and you should thank them for this. Coca-Cola just made it the easiest it's ever been to stop drinking soda because they pissed you off. Use it. Use it. If you're pissed off, don't waste that. Do not waste a good anger. Employ it. Use it. When that Diet Coke's looking at you saying drink me, drink me, use this anger and say I would love to drink you, you little freaking bastard, but I'm not because I hate you. I hate you.

Use it. The Coca-Cola company made I think a gigantic business mistake because they made it easier for a third of the country to quit their product. And it's good for your health if you do. Now I'm just going to quote people who know more than I do to make that claim that it's good for your health if you do.

So do it. Take the good from this which is they made it easy. Dr. Nicole Saphier tweeted on these sets of tweets and she said the pandemic showed an unhealthy diet contributes to approximately 678,000 deaths each year with diabetes, heart disease, and obesity making people vulnerable to COVID-19.

And this number is much larger than 2020 because of the pandemic. 670,000 people here dying from basically eating themselves to death. You know that's the comorbidity that puts them in a vulnerable position. So let's get healthy. I want everybody who watches this livestream to be healthier than the average. Just take the tips and put together a system that works for you.

All right, let's talk about the Floyd trial. So there was something interesting that came out of that. You know I've been telling you that the defense for Chauvin, they'd be missing the most obvious play if they don't challenge the quality of video evidence. You want to challenge the idea that just because you think you saw it with your own eyes on video that doesn't mean anything because video lies.

So the point that video lies and lies a lot and lies easily, it has to be communicated to the jury. Because if the jury sits there and thinks well it's on video, I saw it with my own eyes, it's over.

So the defense, I'm going to give them an A-plus for the following move. Apparently they had some camera angles in which it showed that Chauvin's knee at some point — we don't know how often during the nine minutes, we don't know how often this was — but at some point Chauvin's knee was actually on the shoulder blade above the neck. And it's very clear in the photos. But at other times I think he was on the neck.

So the way that I guess the lawyer introduced this was he asked one of the experts whoever was on stand if you'd heard of camera angle bias. Have you ever heard of camera angle bias? And I think the witness said no. And then he showed him two photos side by side. One the one you've probably seen that looks exactly like the knee is on his neck and then another camera angle of the same thing where it looks like it's on maybe further back on his shoulder blade. And apparently they time stamped it so you can tell it's the same time.

Now imagine you're in the jury. The entire time you've been watching these videos. So because you've seen them as part of the trial the entire time all you saw was a knee on the neck. And now the defense says okay, here's a different angle. It's not on the neck.

Now you might say to yourself but Scott that doesn't matter because he just took it off at one point, put it back on. It's not really relevant to anything. To which I would say it is relevant to intent. The entire argument is that he intentionally put Floyd in a dangerous situation, not intentionally killed him. Intentionally killed him I think is a higher charge. But intentionally put him in a dangerous situation. Where if he took his knee off every now and then that would suggest he was trying to mitigate the danger, right? That he was aware of a situation, was trying to not kill him. Because sometimes he took his knee off the neck. But I think there's other evidence to suggest that might have been after he'd already passed out. So he might have been dead by then. Don't know that part.

So the only thing I'll say is I don't know if the evidence makes the point the defense wanted to make because the timing, it might have been too late when the knee was off. But it's a really good play in terms of persuasion. Because the persuasion of it is that the jury just learned that they can't trust their own eyes. Regardless of the timing of when the knee was on the neck or the shoulder, the lesson is the same. You can't tell by looking at it. That's really good defense. That's really good. We'll see what happens.

Again, for the people who are watching this, I don't defend Chauvin. I don't defend Matt Gaetz. We just talk about the persuasion element of it and see if we can learn anything.

Carl Bergstrom, who often tweets about the virus and statistical truths about it, is warning us that we're misinterpreting — we being the public — that we're misinterpreting what it means to reach herd immunity. And specifically that herd immunity doesn't mean that we're past all the trouble and that the virus goes away.

So herd immunity you should understand is not the point when you don't have any more virus or more deaths. Herd immunity is when it doesn't go as fast. In other words it's not another pandemic peak coming. But the baseline infections could just go forever. I mean you could just have new babies being born and being infected forever.

So if you think that getting to herd immunity means oh we're done, throw away the masks, stop the social distancing, unfortunately it might not mean that. Now I'm not telling you that we're going to wear masks forever. I don't think we will. But we — the cough has to be a technique. Somebody says no, just woke up and I got a little allergies at the moment.

So here's what I would add to this. I'm less concerned because the weirdness of this virus is that we might be able to vaccinate basically 100 percent of the people who would die. So if it's not a dry cough, don't worry. I don't have COVID. So I'm going to disagree with Carl Bergstrom even though he's about a hundred times smarter than I am on the topic. I'm disagreeing.

And the only thing I'm going to add is that I think this virus is not like any other virus because you actually could vaccinate 100 percent of the people who might die from it. Nothing would stop you from doing that. All right, so what happens if 100 percent of the people who are vulnerable or something like it get vaccinated? Do you care if the rest of the people get it? I don't know. I don't know if you care. Now you've got the long-haul problem but isn't the long-haul problem probably even that people seem to get over it? It's just a really bad problem for several months.

Elon Musk said he will not take the vaccine. Interesting. I should tell you that I have scheduled myself to take the vaccine. I've been telling you that I wouldn't make a decision until I had to, until it was available, because I'd get all the information I could. And I've decided that given my age that I'm going to take it. If I were Elon Musk's age I don't know, I might think differently. But I'm not. So I'm going to call this early today because I'm going to go do some o