ests, not just for vaccinations but for everything the FDA does, for everything, the staff is like a pinprick. So the amount of staffing they have is nowhere in the neighborhood of what they would need to get the job done competently. All right so that's the first thing.

Second thing is that I guess there's a lot of stuff that has to be redacted which means you have to pore over it and you probably have to show it to three people to make sure you redacted the right stuff. And I can imagine that if you've got a gazillion pages of stuff you just couldn't even staff up to do that. There would be no way to staff up enough because you'd have to have people who are trained and know what they're talking about. I mean I don't think you can get there from here. And so I've got a few comments on this. Number one I think what's happening is malicious compliance. Imagine you're the FDA and it is your requirement, it's just a legal requirement that if people ask for this information about anything the FDA is doing that's non-private that they have to give it to them. So you imagine you have this incredibly understaffed group of people who do these requests at the FDA, totally understaffed. What's their attitude? It's your job to do this impossible thing and you've been given a speck of a budget. I mean it's actually I think it's hundreds of millions of dollars but compared to how much it actually would cost it's just a speck. What would you do if that was your job and you said, "Boss I need 10 times the budget to even put a dent in this," your boss says, "Nope can't get it to you." You come back next time, it's the budget. You still need — now I need 20 times the budget because things are just getting worse. And your boss says, "We don't have the budget. Do it." You can, you know that's the real situation, right? You don't even have to be there to know that that's true. There's something like that anyway.

So what does the average employee whose job it is to do the impossible — their boss has given them no budget and a job that's literally impossible — what does that employee say? Do they say, "Nope I quit. I'm just not even going to do that for you"? No, not in any world has the employee said that. Not in any world. Here's what the employee says: "Absolutely. That'll take, based on the budget we have, the resources that you my boss have allowed me — let's see, with the resources you my boss have given me, calculate 75 years. So let's do that. I'm all in." Your boss says, "Wait a minute, what?" "Yes, 75 years with the resources that you've given me to do this job. I'm all on board. Let's start this today. Can I get going? Why are we talking? I should get going on this." "You must wait. Wait a minute, 75 years? That would be like it's worthless. It's not even worth doing." And your employee would say, "No this is totally worth doing. These are very valuable requests and I want to put all the resources I have that you've given me into this request. Very important. I think we need to do this for the public. Should take 75 years. Can I get going on that?" And then what does your boss say? Well the boss either has to say, "Oh I gotta admit it's my fault. I couldn't get you properly funded." Or does boss just take that number to his boss and say, "Oh I'm just going to take this to my boss. They said 75 years. What would it take to get it done faster? Three billion dollars of extra funding on top of the 300 million a year or whatever it is. It's pretty high. And a staff of 15,000 and then we could put a dent in it." Never going to happen, right?

So I think this is a malicious compliance story about a bureaucratic situation within the FDA. Has nothing to do with Pfizer. Now here's the second question. How much of that information is the im