ese use of inefficient real estate in a non-free market, wouldn't it make more sense for the government to get out of the way? If the government just said, "How about we don't do anything? We won't have any regulations or rules you have to follow." I mean, I'm exaggerating just to make the point. You'd want some. It just got out of the way. Don't you think the free market would provide more housing at a lower cost over time? I don't know.

And what about those freedom cities that Trump promised us? I don't see any of that happen. So I would be happy if Trump said, we're going to do something in the US that's at least as good as what we plan for Gaza. We're going to take some government land and we're going to say the government is not going to build the cities or even design them. We want private people to do it. The only thing we're going to do is make some government land of which we have lots of available. So I'd like to see that.

There was a guest on Tucker Carlson's show. I didn't have his name when I talked about him before. Psychiatrist Joseph Witt-Doerring. So that psychiatrist Witt-Doerring says millions of Americans are taking these anti-depressant SSRIs long-term. And he says there is no safety data. Well, I don't know if there's no safety data, but maybe there's not anything that's sufficient. And apparently it's 7 to 10% of Americans are on these long-term drugs. So I don't have an opinion of how safe or unsafe those are, but it does seem to me yet another example where you thought there was lots of science, but maybe there isn't. Maybe the only science was funded by the people who want to sell you these pills for life.

Related to this tangentially is I saw a post by the real ER C saying that the new fat miracle drug, the GLP-1 receptor agonist, apparently there's a claim that they have other massive health benefits. Now, I'm going to read what the claims are, but then I'm going to tell you that Grok says that those claims are not fully substantiated. Okay? So before you say, "Wait a minute, that's not true." Just remember that that's what I'm going to say when I'm done telling you that it's not true.

Suicide 58% reduction. So that the claim is that people on the GLP-1, that drug, also get these other benefits that we weren't expecting. Depression down 37%, substance use down 42%. By the way, that one might be real, etc.

So I asked Grok, I said, is it true that these GLP-1s are having all these other related health benefits? And Grok says that is not fully substantiated. There is some evidence that would give you the suggestion that maybe it's true, but it's not proven at a scientific level. The thing I think that's closest to being true is the substance abuse because I believe that whatever it is that makes you eat less has a close cousin mechanism to make you do fewer drugs or alcohol. So I'm not 100% sure that's true but at least it's more believable than the other stuff. Anyway, it could be that it is a miracle drug, but I would suspect that the people looking to sell it to you are behind most of those studies.

And once again, the topic of birth control pills ruining your brain. There's an article in Medical Express and I saw Elon Musk had boosted that on X. So new research suggests that the pill isn't just stopping pregnancy, but it might be rewiring how your brain feels and remembers stuff and not in a good way, according to Medical Express. So there's a new study, Rice University, that found that girls on hormonal birth control had way stronger emotional reactions and remembered fewer details from bad moments. Now, you might say it's good that you remembered fewer bad moments, but if your brain is not designed for that, you know, it might give you an unintended bad part.

Anyway, so do you believe that's true? So allegedly the pill would give some people mood swings, emotional numbness, weird memory glitches, etc. Well, I don't know that it's true, but what would you look for in the world as circumstantial evidence that it might be true that people on the pill are having more emotional problems? Well, if you're looking at politics, you would say to yourself, why is it that there are so many single young women, white women, who are Democrats, and why is it that when we see them talking, they seem like they're emotionally out of control.

Now, we see lots of people, male and female, being assertive, you know, like Randy Weingarten. She dances around and yells and stuff, but to me that just looks like theater. She looks like she knows exactly what she's doing. She doesn't look emotional and crazy. So it's not like it's something that affects all Democrat females. But I'm wondering, is it possible that the reason that the Democrats seem to own the market for young white, highly educated women, is it because they're more likely to be on the pill and then they could be manipulated by emotions? So are the people who want to take care of all the immigrants and leave the border open, are they operating on logic or emotion? Emotion, right? Because in the long run, it would be bad for everybody. The whole country would fail if you just let everybody in.

So I went to Grok and I said, what demographic is on the pill the most? And it's white women. It's white women. And I said, is it more for educated women? Yep. If you're more educated and you're white, your odds of being on the pill are much higher. And it makes me wonder if the things you think are political conversations are nothing but medical malpractice. I'll just let that one sit there.

What else? So here's a little sort of a mystery, but maybe not. How many of you believe that it is now proven by science and certainly sufficient studies that there was nobody who was better off getting the COVID vaccination? How many of you believe that to be true? That we now have evidence, like strong scientific evidence, that literally no one was better off on a risk-reward basis for getting the shot. How many of you believe that?