ight or wrong. It's a coin flip, 50/50. So if it's 50/50 and one of the members is making money from the belief that you can be cured of this condition, and it's a, what kind of studies are the gold-plated ones? You've heard this, right? There's a kind of science that's a gold standard and it's a randomized controlled trial. So the randomized is important so that you don't accidentally study the wrong body of data. You know, you make sure it's appropriate. You want it to be big because the bigger the number of people, the more likely you're going to get a good result. And you want to have a control. You know, you want to have a control group so you know that what's happening. So a good study would predict what's going to happen and it would have a control group and then you would do the thing and then you would compare the control group to the other one and you'd have lots of people involved and it would be peer reviewed and all that. That would be a good study. This one was not that. So there was no control group. It was a study of studies that had been just digging up data. So it's more like a study than a scientific trial. A gold-plated scientific trial is probably also a 50/50 in today's world because the people who can afford to do a huge study are the ones who have financial interests. So I would say that even the gold-plated best study, at least in this domain, is probably closer to a toss-up. We used to think that was closer to 80 or 90% chance it's true. But in today's world we know everybody's just working for money. Maybe 50/50 now. Since it's not one of those gold-plated standards, it's just a study of studies. You don't have the good randomization, you don't have a control group, and you don't have a prediction that you know if you do the thing a thing will happen. So it doesn't have most of the conditions for the best most reliable data. And in fact there are several conditions that are heavy signals for not being true. And they looked at 325 autopsy cases. Do you know that the 325 were randomly selected? And is there anything about some groups of people that might make a difference? And do you think that the people who die or the people most likely to get the vaccination were the people closest to death in the first place? Because in theory the people who were most enthusiastically vaccinated were the ones who had the most to worry about, most likely to die on their own anyway. Did they sort that out? I don't know.

So here's what I'd say. I'm not saying that it's not true. It does seem to me that the vaccination has plenty to worry about. So I'm not doubting the outcome. I'm just saying that if you believed it because scientists did a study, you missed the whole show, right? You have to look at who the scientists are. Is there money involved? How big is it? Is there a control? Is it a big enough group? Is it randomized? It wasn't any of those. So that is not an opinion of what is true or false about vaccinations. I didn't even talk about that. I'm only talking about what you should believe when you see the news.

Anyway, that, ladies and gentlemen, is all I had for today's amazing show. And I'm going to say goodbye now to the folks on the other platforms. But before I go, let me give you a preview. On Tuesday of this week at, if all goes well, could change, but if all goes well at Tuesday of the coming week at 11:00 a.m. Pacific, which would be 2:00 p.m. Eastern time, I've arr