ow right you'd be fine. We'd be done. That's what I believe. I don't have data to back that up but everything is pointing in that direction.

Do you realize that Chris Christie actually went to the ICU? Trump could have actually killed him. Trump might have actually killed Chris Christie. It was close. And Trump himself had a tough time with the virus. So both Christie and Trump could have died. Now of course they had the best health care so the odds were against it in their cases. But all right.

There were multiple tornadoes that ripped through Kentucky and several other states, Arkansas, Illinois. And there's not much to say about that but 50 people dead. Good Lord. I guess the only thing I'd like to say on this is you have to worry about the one you don't hear. Have you heard this old thing about the military? If you hear the bullet, then it didn't get you, because the one that gets you, you don't hear. I'm not sure that's true because if it was a sniper I think you'd hear it before, wouldn't you? If it was a sniper at a distance, wouldn't you hear it before it hit you? I hear you. I don't know. Maybe no. I'm seeing people say no. I think this crowd knows guns more than I do. No, okay. So let's stick with it that you don't hear the one that gets you.

This tornado situation reminds me of that. So you know probably the 50 people who died were worried about other things, don't you think? They were worried about other things and I'll bet none of those other things would have killed them. I bet they wouldn't have died of COVID. You know, I'll bet they wouldn't have died of a climate change disaster or whatever they were worried about wasn't the thing. And I always like to remind myself of that because you find yourself getting all worked up worrying about something like climate change or you know something's going to kill you that's big in the world. You know there's going to be a war. Kim Jong-un is going to bomb you any minute, whatever. Almost never can you see it coming. Almost never.

Please study PCR tests. I'm not going to do that. I know if where you're going on this is that the pandemic is fake and the tests are picking up, that's really a dumb hypothesis at this point. In the beginning it was, you know, you throw it in with everything else because everything was confusing. But at this point if you're still bitching about the PCR test, I think events have left you behind, is what I think. Now I don't mean to be condescending. If it sounds like that that's not my intention because I think everybody's confused about all of this stuff. But if you're reading stuff about the tests being bad, yeah, I agree that we're probably doing a bad job of counting stuff. But here's the problem. The ICUs are clearly being impacted where there are waves of COVID. That's not imaginary. It's not imaginary.

So although the PCR tests may have some problems, it's a real pandemic. So I just wouldn't spend any time on that path. My friend who got monoclonal, he's good as far as I know. He was on the mend. Scott's finally waking up to tornadoes. Sniper, would it? It's true. I work in a hospital. So Doc Bailey, you're saying it's true that it's obvious that COVID is real. And because you don't hear frontline people saying it's not real. Do you hear, dear anybody who actually deals with COVID patients saying, you know, I don't think these are real. I think the PCR test was wrong or something like that? Yeah. Somebody has a registered nurse who is a wife and she's quite sure it's real. COVID is real, just overhyped. Well every danger is overhyped if it's in the news. It's overhyped because that's where the money is.

The inventor of PCR said they shouldn't be used the way, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah. It's a real pandemic, blah blah blah blah. Tests, I don't care. I mean you might be completely right. It doesn't seem relevant. It's not like we're wondering if there's a pandemic. You do hear the frontline talk about heart issues in the young. That's true. Yes, I would say that the, oh here's a good question that somebody asked me. Let's, I'll let you deal with this too. Rifle bullets are faster than sound. Sparky says thank you. There is some disagreement on this but I'm not the expert. So trouble with these super chats is they're really disruptive to the flow of thought. And I believe I just lost my flow of thought. Oh, it'll come back.

Yesterday I tweeted that it seemed like we stopped hearing about long COVID. Is that, do you find that it seems like the news was a lot about long COVID and then the news, I'm not talking about the reality, I'm just talking about the news coverage. I feel like the news just stopped talking about it when it was actually maybe one of the biggest variables for my decision to get vaccinated. And we were talking about all the other stuff but it seems like the biggest one of the biggest variables other than death. And oh, most rifle bullets are faster than sound. Okay, thank you.

So I tweeted that to see if other people were having that experience. And I was, again, I was just talking about the reporting of it, not the actuality. But it did make me wonder if the actuality had disappeared. You know, did we just stop thinking it existed? But there were plenty of people who gave me links and anecdotes and a lot of people have experienced it themselves, etc. So I think we can say that long COVID is real. How many of you would agree with that statement that long COVID is real? Yes, yes, yes. Before you say it, yes, yes, yes. Before you say it, vaccinations could give you long-term problems too. Please don't tell me that. Please know that I knew that. Okay? I'm begging you. I'm begging you don't say the obvious NPC thing. Well vaccinations are bad too. I know, I know, I know.

All right. Yeah, so I think everybody believes long COVID is real. Not that it necessarily would change your decision at this point.

All right. The question that I forgot about was how many anecdotal reports would it take to sway you if you didn't have good scientific studies? And let me walk you through it. Let's say you walk out your back door and a bird shits on your head and you say to yourself, what bad luck. But obviously it's not any kind of a trend or anything. So the next day you walk out of your front door going to work and a bird shits on your head. Two days in a row and you say to yourself, damn it, that is a big coincidence. Third day, bird shits on your head. Fourth day, bird shits on your head.

Let me do a survey for you. How many times does the bird have to shit on your hat before you say, okay, there's something going on here? Not once. I think every one of you would discount one. How about two? If it happened twice in a row would you automatically conclude this is not a coincidence? How many of you would? Some of you would go at two. Some of you would call it five or six. I don't know what to say about that. I'm pretty sure if I got hit five times in a row walking out the same door, I don't know if I would get to six. I think I would. I'm pretty sure I would tap out after three. But it's funny seeing all the differences in the answers.

Now my example is meant to be artificially constrained, right? And in that case I think it would only take me two. I think I'd be, I probably would never use that door again after the second time. That's just me. But if you're looking at like a global thing, you know it's not about you and your house. You're looking at lots of population of people and stuff. It should take you more anecdotes.

So in the context of, I don't know, five billion people who might get vaccinated, how many anecdotes of bad outcomes would it take to convince yourself that five billion people shouldn't get vaccinated? How many anecdotes would it take? Give me a number. Give me a number. A hundred? A thousand? Ten thousand? A hundred thousand? A million? What would it take? Somebody says zero. Millions. Some people say zero. A thousand. So if a thousand people had a bad outcome you would, would you cancel the vaccination? Because that would cancel every vaccination, you know, for everything, I think, right? Doesn't every vaccination kill a thousand people like eventually?

Someone's trying to tell me that Russia and China are invading Ukraine. Nice try. Nice try. All right. Well so when I put it that way it's hard to come up with a number, right? So my point is you could easily think that two dozen reports tell you something. You could easily think that a hundred adverse reports is telling you something it probably isn't. How about a thousand adverse reports? And let's say they're pretty well documented. Let's say they're in the VAERS database which means a doctor had to fill out paperwork so there's a professional who has something at risk. Let's say ten thousand. What if you knew for sure there were 10,000 reports of adverse, let's say death from the shots? Does that mean you shouldn't take them? How about a hundred thousand?

Here is the really bad thing. Suppose you're the leader of a country and your experts tell you, don't tell the public, but the only way we're going to get through this pandemic without losing 10 million people is to lose a million through the vaccination. Now I'm not aware of any numbers that would support what I'm saying. I'm just giving you numbers to do the math. There's no reality behind these that I know of. But what if behind closed doors they said we're positive this is going to kill 10 to 20 million Americans. The only way to stop it is with vaccinations that will kill a million different people. Probably it won't be the same people who the virus would have killed. It's a million people who probably would have been fine. But you might save 11 to 19 million Americans. What do you do?

You tell the Americans what their actual risk is? Look, here's the deal people. You get the vaccination, a million of you are going to die. A million of you. But we're pretty sure we can save tens of millions. Pretty sure. Nothing's a hundred percent but we're very, very sure. What would you do as a leader? Would you tell people or would you fudge the data and say we'll give you all the data in 75 years when everybody involved in the decision making is dead but just don't ask too many questions. It's looking fine. Vaccinations are good. Because I feel like that's what happened. Not the million number and not the 10 million number. I'm making up numbers. But I feel as if the truth is that our government knew that these vaccinations, and the experts knew and told the government, would be far more dangerous than ordinary vaccines and it still made sense. And it still made sense.

The stratified risk thing is a scandal of unlimited proportions in my mind. But it's a separate question. Why is vaccines being pushed on kids? Follow the money. There can't be any other reason, can you think of a reason other than following the money? I can't.

Now the idea was that we would sacrifice the young to save the old. Do you think that the government could tell you that that's actually what they're doing? Here's the deal. We know that we're going to kill a bunch of children but we have a pretty good feeling that if we kill a bunch of children we can save even more older people. I feel like that was a conscious decision. But you see that these decisions can't be sold, right? You can't go to the public and say we're going to kill a million of you to save 20 million. That's a no sale. That is no sale. Even if it was the best thing for the country. You could argue it but you can't sell it.

I think you have to lie to sell it. And I think that a lot of what we saw in the so-called leadership about this was our leaders lying intentionally for what they thought was our own good. In some cases probably money was the influence. But when they lied about the masks that was for our own good. It wasn't, allegedly. But we know it happened. They lied to our faces for our own good. Don't you think that they're lying about the vaccinations too for our own good? I do. I do.

Now here's where I get in trouble, right? Because there seems to be a binary like there always is, right? Vaccinations are good and safe or vaccinations are very unsafe and bad. I have neither of those feelings. I feel that they're probably less safe than just about anything we've ever done medically and might have been the right leadership decision because I don't think you could have sold that proposition. It was an unsellable proposition. So you either let 20 million people die and destroy the economy that ends up destroying another 10 million people by indirect effects or you lie to the public for their own good. For their own good. Just like the masks. You don't think your government would do that? I do. I think that there were at least elements of the government, not necessarily the president, you know I'm not sure who tells the president what, but I have a feeling that there were enough people involved in decision making that they knew it was way more dangerous than medicine in general. Still worthwhile in their opinions but they never could have sold that to the public.

Adam saying Scott's finally waking up to people lying. Finally I've learned that lesson. I lived my whole life without understanding that people can lie. Risk of losing credibility is too high. Nope, nope. Apparently the risk of losing credibility is not driving anything because their credibility is gone. You can't lose what you didn't have.

Scott wants to kill the young and strong to save the old and weak. There's your mind reading of the day. Incorrect, of course. I've said explicitly that one of the reasons that I volunteered to get the vaccination is it would save other people, not necessarily just older people. They don't care about credibility. Yeah, it is weird how often our public servants lie for various reasons, either for their own or for they think it's for our good. You know the old line, you can't handle the truth. That's true.

All right. How about, do you have any questions? Because I think I'm done with my prepared thoughts. How angry are the kids about all this? I think they're just used to it. I think they're used to it.

I'm going to give you a story that drives a lot of my decision making. It's called the Indian elephant trainer. So over in India there are some people who train elephants. And one of the things that always confused me is why does a big old elephant do what a tiny human being tells it to do instead of just killing the human? And the answer is that they train them when they're babies. So the elephant trainer is going to be beating on the baby elephants to make it do what he wants it to do until the baby elephant is afraid of it. And then the elephant grows up and still thinks that this little tiny human can hurt it. Well it can hurt it if the elephant doesn't fight back. But if it did fight back it wouldn't be a fair fight, right? A human with a club versus