00:00:00
sexy blue how much heat and momentum has Nikki Haley gotten this week oh my God stop trying to make Nikki Haley happen
00:00:06
fetch is not happening stop trying to make fetch happen stop trying to make Snapchat it's happening
00:00:13
this is like my long Google short Facebook spread trade of last year it's happening that's just that's
00:00:20
happening okay stop [Music] stop Rain Man David attack [Music] just as a um programming note
00:00:42
we did a Twitter survey and you selected sax as the person you wanted to moderate
00:00:47
the Pod most next so welcome to Fox News Sunday and here's your post David sucks you're really chafed about
00:00:55
this aren't you Jacob no I'm excited for it I'm so excited just to save a keyboard Warrior the time
00:01:02
I will never ever ever moderate this thing so I'm here to talk all right three two
00:01:10
welcome to the all in pod I am your host the Rain Man David sacks the famous Doomsday Clock that Atomic scientists
00:01:17
use to measure the threat of nuclear Annihilation has never been closer to midnight not even during the Cold War
00:01:22
but since the best you think it's more important to discuss their stock portfolios we're going to save Ukraine
00:01:27
for later in the show priorities right gentlemen and why not who says you can't take it with you the dictator is
00:01:35
planning to be entombed with his money like an Egyptian pharaoh and with his sweaters too even though it certainly
00:01:40
won't be cold where he's going and of course he'll throw in the world's greatest moderator Jason calcamus and
00:01:47
the tune to be his servant in the afterlife it's a little Jake house been preparing for all his life by sucking up
00:01:52
to every Tech founder of BC you can get in a room with I give better odds to the Sultan of
00:01:57
science David freberg he's just paranoid enough to survive with me in the bunker
00:02:01
even though he still won't be questioning the Davos Elites that got us here how much did that intro cost
00:02:09
does he come with the money back refund you guys are laughing I'm laughing I don't know I'm laughing I thought with
00:02:18
you or at you that's good the funniest part was when you almost read aloud like it's like you
00:02:24
were like and then David Friedberg insert pause here it's an intro it's an intro I'm so glad
00:02:33
we do an unscripted show okay go ahead Freebird I remember when you did the intro come on did I read actually didn't
00:02:40
we cut it yeah you read and then you cut it you hated it and then we made you put
00:02:43
it back in or something like that all I have to say Tremont is job security is here all right well done okay issue one
00:02:50
issue one Google breakup the justice department and eight states are now seeking to break up Google's business
00:02:57
brokering digital advertising across the internet this is one of the most important legal challenges the company's
00:03:02
ever faced filed a lawsuit on Tuesday the justice department did alleging that Google abuses its role as one of the
00:03:10
largest broker suppliers in online auctioneers of ads placed on websites and mobile applications the filing
00:03:15
promises a protracted Court battle with huge implications for the digital advertising industry of course Google
00:03:22
responded to the lawsuit in a blog post saying that the doj's request for it to unwind to
00:03:28
previous Acquisitions from a decade ago is an attempt to rewrite history they said the doj mischaracterizes how its
00:03:34
advertising products work they say that people choose to use Google because they're effective and the company
00:03:41
highlights other companies Making Moves In the advertising industry as well such as
00:03:45
Microsoft Amazon apple and Tick Tock so I guess I'll kick it to you chamoth do you think the doj has a case here do you
00:03:53
believe that Google has a monopoly in online advertising and is unfairly using it to gain market
00:03:59
share and is this the right remedy breaking up the company yeah I think that this is a totally
00:04:04
ill-founded lawsuit and I think it just shows more of the personal enmity and anger that
00:04:13
some people in the U.S government has towards entrepreneurs and Entrepreneurship than anything else now
00:04:18
why is that let's just think about what a monopoly is I mean a monopoly or a monopolist
00:04:25
effectively creates a completely stagnant non-vibrant Market in which they have pricing power
00:04:31
and complete control now the argument that I think that refutes that just on its face is if you
00:04:39
actually look number one at their share and number two how the rest of the share
00:04:44
has changed over time so Nick can you just please throw that up from Bloomberg this is just in a Bloomberg article that
00:04:48
I just shared with you guys but Google controls 26.5 percent of a market 43.4 percent of that market is with a
00:04:57
diverse group of others meta has 18.4 percent and Amazon has 11.7 this is not the type of pie chart you
00:05:07
would see if you had a monopolist so for example if you went back to the big big
00:05:12
big monopolist case in the 1980s which is when we broke up Ma Belle well what that Circle would have shown is that
00:05:19
they basically had effectively a hundred percent share and what this shows is that there's a
00:05:24
huge diversity of people in this market the second thing is that if you had done
00:05:28
this chart many years ago Amazon would not have really even been there and over the last five years they represent
00:05:35
almost 12 percent of the entire market and it means that if you forecast It Forward they could be at 15 to 20
00:05:42
percent in a few years as well so while the pie is growing and definitely Google
00:05:47
takes a lot of the profit dollars the distribution is so much more than what anything looks like in a monopoly and so
00:05:54
I just think it means that the doj is more focused on trying to punish these Great American companies than it is in
00:06:00
trying to be logical and reasoned and so I don't think this is going to work the
00:06:05
last thing I'll say about this is that if you think about what you should have done if I were the US government
00:06:12
I would have actually focused on search because search is a monopoly for Google and while Google would try to argue that
00:06:22
there are other ways of acquiring information that is really not true and if you could prove that that
00:06:28
Monopoly then led to pricing power in ads I think that's a much more nuanced but logical argument that could work but
00:06:36
by focusing on this I think it's going to get deconstructed it's going to fail the Texas version of this exact lawsuit
00:06:41
already was thrown out of federal court so I think that judges and the legal system don't have a
00:06:48
lot of patience for this thing it just meant more to kind of scare American companies and try to play Boogeyman and
00:06:54
decision maker and I don't think it's going to work freeway let me go to you I think you know tremath raises a really
00:07:00
great point that if you define the market as digital advertising that you know Google's market share is only about
00:07:05
a quarter that doesn't seem like a monopoly however what the government says is that you shouldn't look at
00:07:10
digital advertising as a whole but rather this sort of brokered advertising that you know Google does for
00:07:17
third-party websites and applications let me show a chart from their lawsuit you can see here that the way they
00:07:25
Define it again they see it as this brokering of sell side inventory which our website Publishers and then buy side
00:07:32
demand which are advertisers defines this way it looks like Google has 90 or more market share on the sell
00:07:41
side because the doubleclick acquisition they've got somewhere between 40 and 80
00:07:46
market share on the demand side with advertisers and then in the middle they have over 50 market share of the ad
00:07:52
exchange is this the right way to look at Google's business or should we be just thinking about in terms of the
00:08:00
overall digital advertising Market I've been involved in ad networks since about 2002 so it's
00:08:08
been obviously I'm not directly involved in the business anymore but I was pretty
00:08:13
close to this and I was pretty close to double click in the acquisition I was a business product manager for a period of
00:08:18
time on AdWords so the way that that chart kind of shows the connection between advertisers
00:08:26
and Publishers is correct that an ad network uh generally speaking brings buyers of AD inventory to the sellers of
00:08:35
AD inventory and the sellers of AD inventory have the option to sell their inventory on an ad Network and if the
00:08:42
money that they're making on those ad slots that they have whether it's a slot on the side of a page at the top of a
00:08:48
page or an interstitial video ad whatever it is they're going to keep selling their
00:08:53
inventory through that network if they're getting paid the most and the real reason Google has won is two-part
00:08:58
one is because they ran their ad Network as an auction meaning advertisers were competing with
00:09:04
each other to pay the most for an ad spot that was the highest quality there's also an ad Quality Index uh
00:09:10
calculation a click-through index a bounce back index so there's all this data that feeds into Google's ad Network
00:09:17
auction so that the ad that's shown on the publisher site is not just the best ad for the publisher but the best ad for
00:09:23
the consumer and then when the consumer clicks on the ad the publisher gets paid
00:09:27
and the second thing that Google did and so the auction Dynamic is a really powerful Dynamic it creates the best
00:09:33
price for the publisher and it creates the highest quality ad for the user which translates typically into higher
00:09:41
click-throughs and and better Revenue what they also did that was really powerful is they did the highest revenue
00:09:47
share in the market so historically ad networks had like a I think initially like a 60 40 red share
00:09:53
where they only paid Publishers 40 of the revenue The Advertiser paid then the network started to move to a 55-45 model
00:09:59
then a 50 50 model then a 45-55 model I believe on average Google currently is paying somewhere between
00:10:07
70 and 80 percent to their publishers I gotta check my math on that or whatever the latest yeah yeah so but
00:10:14
call it 70. and so it is a very competitive share now the the point being because it's an
00:10:21
auction system and because it's opt-in by the publisher if they're not paying the highest price the publisher can go
00:10:26
and get ads from somewhere else and historically Publishers built their own sales force to sell ads and to Source
00:10:32
advertisers and to make money off of their ad inventory and it turns out it was a lot more effective to use an ad
00:10:37
Network to do that the other AD Network simply haven't been as good at building an auction model and building
00:10:43
competitiveness but I will tell you that when you get to a certain volume and it's not a big volume you don't need a
00:10:49
million advertisers bidding against each other you only need a few dozen advertisers and once you have a few
00:10:54
dozen advertisers bidding against each other you start to get very competitive in inventory so Google's real lock-in
00:10:59
with Publishers and the real reason they win in this Marketplace is because they've their pay the Publishers the
00:11:05
most and if you try and break this up and if you actually do try and you know get into the the weeds of this whole
00:11:11
system and change it the Publishers ultimately will make less money and this will be
00:11:16
a real problem on the publisher side that they're making the most money they're getting the highest share of
00:11:21
advertisers spend and consumers are getting the best quality experience that's what makes Google's model so hard
00:11:27
to tackle from an Anti-Trust perspective because it's giving so basically is what
00:11:31
you're saying that because fundamentally this is an auction model it prevents Google from extracting Monopoly rents
00:11:39
correct and and already paid the highest share on their ad Network back to the Publishers and so you could go in and
00:11:46
say hey high 60s or 70 they should be paying 90 what's the real right number if they're already paying more than
00:11:51
anyone else to the Publishers they're already making a lower margin than anyone and I'll say let me just let me
00:11:56
just add two more things sorry which I think are just well can I go to jaycal first I just want to get Jake Owen here
00:12:00
even though he wouldn't do the same for me yeah Jake how do you agree with Freeburg that uh that the reason for
00:12:06
Google success is that they're hyper efficient and this auction mechanism prevents Monopoly Behavior no I there is
00:12:14
Monopoly Behavior going on at Google obviously with search and putting their own content and services up top and to
00:12:20
shimon's point like that's probably the easier Target here this just feels like they are
00:12:26
maybe 10 years behind they should have just blocked the double click you know acquisition in 2008 and this
00:12:31
consolidation of power the the what Publishers would say to friedberg's point is
00:12:38
when you're selling your own advertising you get a much higher CPM when you go direct to Samsung or IBM or Disney and
00:12:45
so you want to create those direct relationships how much do those direct relationships cost it's probably 20 or
00:12:50
30 percent which is exactly to the percentage that uh Google is taking off the top so Google's pretty aware of that
00:12:58
but it's just paradoxical that they're doing this at this time David because Amazon has developed a huge ad business
00:13:04
Netflix and Disney have now have ad tiers for their services to go up against YouTube so and then for the
00:13:10
first time we're even talking about Google search Supremacy being challenged by chat GPT
00:13:15
so right with Microsoft you know they're they're just late 10 years too late maybe right right so to use one of your
00:13:23
favorite words is the doj acting as a rug puller here for Google in the sense that they're trying to unwind 10 year
00:13:29
old Acquisitions is that does that make sense yeah it doesn't make much sense should the government be able to unwind
00:13:35
Acquisitions that happened a decade ago does that make any sense no of course no
00:13:39
that they should they should learn from it and not do it again yeah sex what do you think
00:13:45
I think it's a pretty bad way to approach things because it creates so much uncertainty in the marketplace and
00:13:50
has a chilling effect on future Acquisitions yeah like when you get approval from the government you want to
00:13:55
know you're good yeah and we have an approval process so it seems to me I agree with Jayco like if the government
00:14:00
is going to have a problem with an acquisition state it up front but then once they approve it you're approved
00:14:06
you're done otherwise you know companies will be much less likely to engage in Acquisitions and that's kind of a
00:14:12
chilling effect on m a behavior in the ecosystem which is bad for the ecosystem as a whole well it really does it puts
00:14:21
us competitiveness against every other country and any other regulatory regime that'll be more permissive to this stuff
00:14:27
that doesn't make any sense and I think this is what's lost on this I just feel these lawsuits right now are bordering
00:14:34
on the mean-spirited because these things have been tried they've generally failed and so the real solution it
00:14:41
always goes back to this and it's ugly and messy is you need to rewrite the actual laws to reflect how business
00:14:49
conditions exist today and so it's not the responsibility of the doj to try to fit a round peg into a square hole it
00:14:56
doesn't work like that and that's what they're trying to do they're trying to manipulate and
00:15:01
contort the law to try to go after somebody that shouldn't frankly be gone after because
00:15:07
these deals to your point were done a decade ago and they were done legally and they were done rightly so if you
00:15:13
have an issue with how the market has evolved change the law right I'll also add I totally agree with chamoth I think
00:15:20
that this action you know as one of our friends put it on our on our text stream it's like killing
00:15:27
the Golden Goose I mean this is one of the the big job creators innovators and taxpayers and employers and drivers of
00:15:33
economic growth and why would we allow that to go and kind of burgeon offshore as a as a government this is absolutely
00:15:42
um going to become uh kind of an opening for some you know International competitor to come in and try and
00:15:48
provide alternative services with similar economics I'll also say I just sent you guys a link I'll send you one
00:15:54
more the market itself is becoming so much more challenging to operate in as an ad Network
00:16:00
you know e-commerce so Amazon's ad business is booming right as Jamal pointed out earlier
00:16:06
but so much more of consumer behavior is Shifting where people are going direct to e-commerce sites and then the ads
00:16:12
that are getting the highest click-through and where advertisers are spending more and
00:16:16
more money uh is on e-commerce sites I know this from experience on a couple boards I'm at where companies stop
00:16:22
spending on Facebook and Google and just started spending exclusively on Amazon and that's where you get consumers that
00:16:27
are much more likely to purchase the purchasing proclivities higher the click-through rate is higher so the
00:16:31
return on ad spend is much higher and then I think that there's a big shift happening right now as you guys know
00:16:37
with third-party cookies Google has declared that they're removing third-party cookies in 2024. this means
00:16:42
that in 2024 it is going to be very hard to track a user from one website to the
00:16:48
next if you go to a website and look at furniture and then you go to another website third party cookies allow an
00:16:53
Advertiser to find you on that other website knowing that you were just looking at furniture and send you a
00:16:58
Furniture ad and say hey come on over and you're more likely to click on that ad it's been very effective for
00:17:02
advertising and particularly in the segment of advertising called retargeting but it is becoming much
00:17:08
harder to do this with third-party cookies and with the Apple identifier being Inked and Google just made an
00:17:12
attempt to try and get this change with the w3c that was rejected and that change is now
00:17:18
going to make this hit very very hard beginning in 2024. so the ad networks themselves are already being massively
00:17:24
hurt by apples ID changes the third party cookies being removed it's becoming harder to Target
00:17:30
consumers harder to make money as a um for Publishers so meanwhile the Market's being challenged Amazon's coming in the
00:17:37
inverse definition of a monopoly when you have a market where there is dynamism where companies are changing
00:17:42
the rules and that is reallocating share gains to different players that's the definition of a dynamic Market that's
00:17:50
self-regulating totally five years ago this would have made more sense yeah much more sense so I think just this
00:17:56
goes back down to one basic thing which is do our elected and appointed officials really understand what's going
00:18:04
on in the economy and I think this is an example that highlights not as much as they should and before a lawsuit like
00:18:12
this gets filed they should call us up if they called 30 of us into a room one by one and said can you please explain
00:18:21
how this works you would have come to a different conclusion because we could have
00:18:26
articulated these things and it would have been clearer and so why do they not do that or if they do do it who's
00:18:32
actually in there either way whatever's getting to the conclusion of let's go file this lawsuit in 2023 is late at a
00:18:41
minimum and misguided at best you know you have to ask the question like how is this different than Xi Jinping saying
00:18:48
you know what Jack ma is too powerful therefore he's going to learn Japan I think this is like
00:18:54
Google it is totally different totally different other than that of course I think that this lawsuit
00:19:01
makes no sense you always better bring it back to China does everything in your brain have to Virtue signal like it's
00:19:06
like intellectually interesting conversation Jason intellectually honest position exactly
00:19:16
let me finish before you jump the fence very simply you asked like why are they filing
00:19:23
something that makes no sense my position I think they want to have an outcome and their outcome is they want
00:19:29
to stick it to Big Tech because it's too powerful and then you just said yourself
00:19:32
square peg round hole they're trying to find something to get Google on this is not it how does it because it relate to
00:19:38
China agree with Jay Cal here actually I'll defend it for a second world second greatest moderator yeah third greatest
00:19:46
take China out of it for a second because that could mean that could mean a lot of different things and so I don't
00:19:52
want to get hung up on that but it does feel to me like the government is lashing out against companies like
00:19:58
Google because they're perceived as being too powerful that's what's going on and in fact I mean that's Lena Khan's
00:20:04
theory is that we have to stop big tech companies from getting bigger because power but in this case it doesn't make
00:20:11
any sense because the auction market for advertising is very competitive and the
00:20:16
remedy of unwinding 10 year old deals doesn't make any sense so yeah they're they're just kind of barking up the
00:20:21
wrong tree there's two other things that they really should be looking at as these ad
00:20:26
Networks are losing their market share in the overall digital ad spend there are two
00:20:31
other players Disney uh you know and uh Netflix doing these digital ads on their platforms and
00:20:38
having ad tiers and then you may have noticed Uber's doing an ad business now they did 350 million dollars in the
00:20:44
first year of that business a million a day and they're projected to do a billion next year and those have
00:20:49
location information in it because you have your destination yeah and so those networks and opportunities are emerging
00:20:56
it's a dynamic space I just want to say like you guys are making like I think a really important macro point which is
00:21:02
like in a Marketplace it's always easy to hate the winners and claim that their success is unfair if you're not part of
00:21:12
it and I I think that just because something's successful in a Marketplace doesn't mean it's a monopoly
00:21:17
you know this whole thing of envy you know we've we've heard from like the Berkshire
00:21:23
shareholders meeting I think there was a good conversation around this but Envy really is ultimately the Doom of
00:21:29
innovation and democracy it's like you see the success you want to take down the successful nothing can be too
00:21:35
successful or else it has to be destroyed and then you know as we talked about it's going to go somewhere else
00:21:40
well I mean just play Devil's Advocate with it on that free bird it sounds like we all agree that the government has
00:21:45
kind of the wrong Theory and is barking up the wrong tree here however isn't it the case that Apple and Google are too
00:21:52
powerful maybe not in this auction advertising auction Marketplace but when it comes to the App Store I mean they
00:21:59
have an operating system in opoly with IOS and Android or duopoly but I think you're you're bringing up the key point
00:22:05
which is these nuances are the ones that matter there is a body of law today David that you can apply pretty
00:22:11
intelligently and thoughtfully to that exact problem and also to Google search and so it's a bit of a head scratcher
00:22:19
why the doj hasn't spent the time to figure out to even understand that that's actually where they should be
00:22:24
focused because that is where there is truly in the afternoon it's a duopoly so it's very clear the
00:22:32
share shift has already been set there is no share shift happening to a third player there is no side loading that's
00:22:38
really happening and so domestically in the United States and Western Europe there's a de facto duopoly complete
00:22:44
control completely inflexible inelastic pricing that is a monopoly and then separately for surge
00:22:52
in the United States it is also an effective Monopoly and those are the things where if you really wanted to go
00:22:58
after them because you think there's some damage being done to people I would have focused there but the ad
00:23:03
business has nothing to do with any of this and just means that right they don't understand how the market works
00:23:08
right okay so shifting gears Microsoft has just been sued on Anti-Trust accounts or rather there's a pro by the
00:23:15
EU and this was based on a complaint actually from slack slack filed a complaint back in 2020 that Microsoft
00:23:25
was basically engaging in in bundling or tying of products the allegation is that
00:23:30
Microsoft fairly ties Microsoft teams and other software to its widely used office suite do you guys think that's a
00:23:38
better claim okay so I mean I'll just say like you know there was an episode that we did I think back in September
00:23:44
where I basically railed against Microsoft for exactly this kind of bundling it seems like the EU has picked
00:23:50
up that theory and wants to go after bundling we did slack series a I was on the board
00:23:57
took it public blah blah blah I'll tell you the thing that we talked about a lot
00:24:01
that was the thing that I was always like the most afraid of which is how can we compete with a better product
00:24:10
in the face of Superior Distribution I think what Microsoft did was anti-competitive
00:24:17
but I don't think it was monopolistic and I think that the EU in that time has a much better framework of laws that
00:24:26
they had demonstrated up until now they were willing to enforce around anti-competitive pricing
00:24:32
and so part of what slack was trying to do was create some airspace for that to get into The Ether to the
00:24:40
discussion that it's like we could build the best product in the world but if Microsoft gives it away with this other
00:24:46
product that is quasi-essential they'll always beat us and there's nothing we can do about it what do you think and I
00:24:53
think that was basically the question that was posed to the European authorities because we thought that they
00:24:57
would pay attention to it what's interesting about it is that then you know when the acquisition happened
00:25:02
to Salesforce it sort of waters down that claim because now Salesforce also has a set of really essential products
00:25:09
that are useful and needed in the market that slack can go and attach themselves
00:25:14
to and in many ways David it forced the hand of slack to be acquired by Salesforce and if not
00:25:21
Salesforce it would have to have been somebody else but could it have been an independent
00:25:25
company had we not had to compete against teams in that way meaning if we had to compete against another
00:25:31
well-funded startup would it still be public I suspect so I don't think we would have sold to Salesforce
00:25:37
well that's exactly was my point when we talked about this last time is that if Microsoft can basically clone the sort
00:25:46
of the the Breakthrough Innovative product you know just to say they do one every year and then they put a crappy
00:25:53
version of that in their bundle yeah 10 20 or 50 worse but they give it away effectively for free as part of the
00:25:59
bundle and then they basically pull the legs out from under that other company so it can't be a vibrant competitor and
00:26:05
then the next year they'll just raise the price of the bundle right and they've done that with slack they've
00:26:10
done that with OCTA they've done that with zoom you know Jake how can we have a vibrant Tech ecosystem at least in B2B
00:26:18
software if Microsoft can just keep doing that indefinitely yeah it's it's a difficult question I
00:26:24
don't know though if what the consumer harm is here if you keep adding great features to a bundle so to take the
00:26:30
other side of the argument you know Zoom has now added channels like slack slack
00:26:35
has added huddles which are essentially Zoom calls and now they're both going to
00:26:40
try to add the coda and notion wiki wiki style you know documents to both zoom and slack so everybody's
00:26:48
copying everybody's features everybody's incorporating everybody's features it takes a little bit of time
00:26:53
this is actually a lot better behavior for Microsoft than the old days when they would do something called vaporware
00:26:59
they used to announce products to chill people from buying them so they would announce a slack two years before slack
00:27:05
came out just to get people to not install slack they did that with Lotus Notes they said they had a Lotus Notes
00:27:09
competitor coming for two years and it never materialized so I think the marketplace will compete and
00:27:16
if you look at slack itself it's still growing the same percentage growth it did
00:27:22
inside of Salesforce that it did as an independent company so it's growing at a similar point about that great Nick can
00:27:27
you pull up this chart yeah it was like High Teens or something was there was there I mean it looks like from this
00:27:33
chart that slack is kind of leveled no no that's the number of users I was talking about Revenue okay if you look
00:27:37
at slacks Revenue quarter over quarter it's basically it wasn't there a report that it's been a little bit of a
00:27:43
disappointment to Salesforce or no well I mean you know this number here that we're looking at where it says 75
00:27:49
million Microsoft teams members 12 million stock members by the way if you wanted to if you
00:27:55
wanted to play conspiracy theorists maybe that's why there's a falling out between benioff and Brett I mean Brett
00:28:01
was the champion of this deal you know 28 billion dollar acquisition and 28 billion dollars is threading a needle
00:28:08
the the only one of that scale that's really worked out definitively has been LinkedIn so if slack hiccuped in a
00:28:14
moment when we also had a regime change in rates and valuations now look at benioff as looking down the
00:28:20
barrel of a activist investor program from Elliott man I mean yeah maybe it's not doing as well as they needed it to I
00:28:28
got the sense that benioff was genuinely sorry that Brett decided to leave and that it was voluntary voluntary on
00:28:34
Brett's part and regretted basically as opposed to you know a non-regretted termination
00:28:40
I have no idea like I said I was I was pre-qualifying with saying let's play conspiracies fair enough okay
00:28:47
you have a suggestion here's a suggestion for The Regulators that are listening or watching our podcast
00:28:55
a really valuable thing for the industry that you could do would be to introduce
00:28:59
transparency on elas what are those Enterprise licensing agreements these are these things that these big
00:29:06
companies use to throw everything in the kitchen sink into a deal when they sell
00:29:10
to a company but if there was transparency and there was a sense of how those things were priced so think of it like
00:29:17
the FDA saying here's you have to publish your ingredients right and what percentage of it is this and that it
00:29:23
would be really beneficial because it would slow down the tendency of these big companies to try to kill the small
00:29:30
companies with these poorer products and something around elas and more transparency around pricing to the
00:29:36
market could be a good Governor without having to go down the path of all this antitrust legislation after the fact I
00:29:41
think there is some good advice for Regulators there I think they should focus on anti-competitive tactics and
00:29:46
like clarifying what those are as opposed to some of these crazy lawsuits to break up companies that don't seem to
00:29:54
have well-grounded theories it'd be I think better to focus on the specific tactics that create the harm and
00:30:00
identifying what those are Jake out of your point about how what Microsoft is doing doesn't seem to be harming anybody
00:30:06
it seems to be benefiting consumers I think that's a valid point but I would bring up a different example which is if
00:30:13
you look at the anti-competitive behavior of dumping where a company will basically dump its
00:30:20
product on the market for free destroy all the other competitors and once they're out they can raise prices
00:30:25
because the barriers to entry are high there's a huge cost of like basically entering the industry I think that this
00:30:31
bundling behavior is a form of dumping where in the short run it looks like consumers are benefiting because they're
00:30:37
getting Zoom a zoom clone for free or you know a slack clone for free but then what happens is once they've you know
00:30:44
hobbled those companies they raise the price of the bundle so I think if we want to have a healthy long-term
00:30:49
ecosystem I think this type of like bundling behavior is bad I think it's anti-competitive it's a great point but
00:30:56
I think there's a very specific solution for it you don't need to break up Microsoft what you need to do is require
00:31:01
that when they create a bundle every product in that bundle needs to basically have an individual price
00:31:06
exactly and the price of every product in that bundle should add up to the cost of the bundle so they can't do like you
00:31:12
said charmath these like transfer payments or subsidies to basically you know take over systematically take over
00:31:19
every SAS vertical I think that would be amazing by the way there are many other
00:31:22
markets David where that exactly exists where if you have the ability to preferentially put your product into
00:31:30
your distribution Channel you have to transfer price it transparently at the market
00:31:37
and it's what everybody else would be able to get it at and that then allows the best product to win in the market
00:31:44
and it gives the government the ability to say I understand that these rails are
00:31:49
roughly monopolistic but I'm going to leave them alone as long as you treat everything that sits on top of those
00:31:54
rails equally and that Nuance is missing in software so I think the combination of transparency in these Enterprise
00:32:01
licensing agreements and more transparency and accounting treatment for what you just said
00:32:06
would solve a lot of this problem and you would have a more vibrant ecosystem where the big guys can't just snuff out
00:32:13
the small guys whenever they want yeah I disagree with you guys oh let me just let me just play let me just play my
00:32:18
devil's advocate which is kind of how I feel uh as well I think these concepts of um
00:32:25
monopolistic bundling made a lot of sense I make a lot of sense in the sense in if if what you're bundling in the
00:32:32
service or the product or whatever is a commodity product and these statements that you're making assume that one
00:32:38
messaging service is the same as a another messaging service that one video app is the same as another video app
00:32:44
and that by giving a discount they're going to win the market the real that may have made sense back in the day when
00:32:51
there were things like trains and trains had a monopoly on where things could go
00:32:54
or electricity or oil production and all of the kind of origins of kind of monopolistic antitrust
00:33:02
laws and actions started to kind of emerge here in our free market in the U.S but when it comes to software if
00:33:09
your product is the same as the other guy's product maybe they deserve to win by bundling and maybe it's okay for them
00:33:15
to offer a discount and beat you on pricing because if your product is actually better and it provides better
00:33:21
Roi for the customer it has a better feature set it's faster it has a bunch of stuff that the other product doesn't
00:33:26
have the market will pick it it's not that the Market's going to say hey we're just a bunch of idiots these products
00:33:32
are so differentiated but because these guys are giving me a discount I'm going to go over to the discount that's not
00:33:36
how it works and you guys know this I'm not saying that Microsoft can't copy slack and then under charge a different
00:33:42
price and charge a different price and a lower price and discount it what I'm saying is they can't cross subsidize
00:33:48
they're a slack competitor it's the fact that they can copy slack that makes Slack that means that slack should lose
00:33:55
the fact that that slack actually creates almost look software new software is really hard to create but
00:34:03
really easy to copy I mean the first version of a new product is hard to create but you can
00:34:09
reverse engineer almost any software product show me where someone's made a better competitor to Google search show
00:34:15
me where like consumers don't choose to go to another search engine because Google's built a better search engine no
00:34:19
it's because there's a Data Network effect there that the more searches they provide the more data they get it's the
00:34:24
reinforcement learning I'll say I'll say it differently it's easier to copy there's an asymptote to that quality
00:34:29
point though I don't think that that's necessarily no I think there's a Nuance here that and by the way all the social
00:34:33
networks that people thought were had massive lock-in effect turns out they don't right David no dude that's not
00:34:37
true look there's more lock-in deeper in the stack that you exist there's very little lock-in at the application layer
00:34:44
so workflow apps which effectively is what most of these Enterprise software things are are very copyable because
00:34:52
there's nothing that really locks it in but if you're a social network or if you're some deep machine learned thing
00:34:58
that basically generates great search results that's much harder to copy because more and more of the product
00:35:03
precise generates the product quality is underneath the water line but I think in
00:35:08
Enterprise software it's all thin UI layers on top of very simple then don't compete because the bigger guy that
00:35:15
offers a discount is always going to be you what he's saying which I agree with is you just if you could add
00:35:20
transparency so that you understand what is happening I don't think anybody's against transparency nobody should be
00:35:26
against against it and if if Microsoft wants to charge a penny a seat for teams then they should be allowed to do that I
00:35:34
don't think we're saying that they shouldn't a lot of startups have used the opposite tactic where they've
00:35:37
entered with free offerings or free services and then they try and upsell later and we don't complain about that
00:35:42
there's a lot of ways to compete in the marketplace but that's my point there's a lot of
00:35:48
ways to compete in the marketplace If the product you're offering is of parents no the problem is a commodity
00:35:54
build something that's different enough that people are willing to pay for it well then you know that they're willing
00:35:59
to pay more than they'll pay the big guy that's giving them a bundling discount just build a better product then the
00:36:04
whole B2B SAS space should basically pack up shop and go home we should just stop funding VCS just to stop funding
00:36:10
new SAS companies because and all those productivity games will just go up the window yeah why would you fund any you
00:36:16
know it's a definition of anti-competitive then yeah how's that bad for the customer they're paying less
00:36:21
and they're getting a better price there'll be fewer new products created yeah freebrook at the limit what you're
00:36:25
basically saying is because Comcast is a monopolistic provider of my internet connection I should have to take their
00:36:31
video offering and will never or use Netflix no it's a they have they offer a commodity that's my point if you're
00:36:37
offering a commodity these things should apply it makes a ton of sense effectively and what you just said is
00:36:43
that B2B software is effectively commodity and you want to copy it anyone can reply to you I'm turning this off
00:36:49
you only have one choice and it's mine because these is my rails and I built it you would turn to the government to help
00:36:56
you because you would say but Netflix is a better product and what David is saying is the exact
00:37:01
same argument so my point is unless you also believe logically that you're allowed to turn
00:37:06
off Netflix if you're Comcast and take their crappy VOD service then you're you're at least intellectually
00:37:12
consistent commodity too steel is a commodity too and you can't engage in dumping
00:37:18
I mean this is the argument is that for example you know with respect to China the argument was that they were dumping
00:37:24
cheap Steel in the U.S market to drive all the US producers out of business and then once they were out of business
00:37:30
they'd raise the price the point is there's all these examples where we have had the intelligence and the ability to
00:37:35
be nuanced about this to see that these things are possible and they shouldn't exist we don't let Comcast turn off
00:37:40
Netflix okay we have a law around that I understand so my so I think what we're saying is Embrace and extend this law
00:37:48
for these new markets that didn't exist 50 and 100 years ago when these laws were written so that the same benefits
00:37:55
that we have in the steel market and in the cable Market we have in the software
00:37:59
Market it'll just create a healthier ecosystem Jacob you want to get in on this yeah
00:38:04
I wonder when you install teams does it automatically when you install the Microsoft Office Suite does it
00:38:10
automatically install teams because it does seem to default there matters do people have to actively turn it on or is
00:38:16
it actively built in and so the bundling of it I think matters and that interoperability matters so there are
00:38:22
other vectors here to force them interoperability so if you open your Windows machine do you have a
00:38:29
choice of it depends which browser let's just let's just say that you use exchange for certain things but in other
00:38:37
things for example to manage your name space you may use OCTA but then they say actually no we need you to use our
00:38:44
version of OCTA it all becomes complicated I think it's too complicated for a government to understand so I
00:38:49
think the general thing is can we extend the definition of these basic rules that
00:38:55
we've agreed to in other markets to include technology and would we be better served and I think for the most
00:39:02
part I do think it would be it would better serve startups it would better serve the folks that want to build how
00:39:08
would that work in practicality though you would you would I think that David says
00:39:12
turned it on for a dollar a person or something here's introductory price I think the combination of what David said
00:39:18
and I said would do the trick which is if you force these highly complicated licensing agreements to be transparent
00:39:25
it would not allow them to dump and then the second thing is that all of that transfer pricing that goes into that
00:39:32
license cost needs to sum up to the cost itself now why is that important you can
00:39:37
learn about how they prevent this in healthcare so let's take Pfizer good example here's a company with 30 billion
00:39:44
dollars on the balance sheet right and Pfizer has a need still to subsidize all of the r d of their
00:39:52
drugs and you would say well yeah they have 30 billion dollars so they should just take the money off the balance
00:39:56
sheet and do it why don't they do it it's because the accounting laws and all the complicated anti-competitive laws
00:40:01
say well if you want to take this cash pile and use it over here it goes from an asset liability item 30
00:40:08
billion of cash and all of a sudden I'm going to net it against your EPS all right
00:40:14
there's an actual cost for these companies to do this stuff to bundle to cross to all of this stuff and so what
00:40:20
do they do they go into the market they ask startups to build stuff and then they buy it that's the kind of Market I
00:40:26
think is better for us yeah let's have that be the last word on this topic because we've been going for a while but
00:40:30
I'm glad you brought up Pfizer because this brings us to issue two oh boy which is and I think we can show this red meat
00:40:38
for David yeah so Albert berla who's the CEO of Pfizer went to Davos last week and he probably expect to Davos you know
00:40:45
the the conference of the Surplus Elites and he expected probably nothing but softballs and fawning treatment from The
00:40:52
Establishment media and instead he probably had the most uncomfortable walk of his life when two reporters from
00:40:57
Rebel news approached him outside the Ruiner and I started asking him some tough questions let's roll tape what's
00:41:04
Rebel news borla can I ask you when did you know that the vaccines didn't stop transmission how long did you know that
00:41:13
without saying it publicly thank you very much I'm sorry that question I mean we now know that the vaccines
00:41:20
didn't stop transmission but why did you keep it secret good question you said it was 100
00:41:26
effective then 90 then 80 then 70 percent but we now know that the vaccines do not trans stop transmission
00:41:33
why did you keep that secret have a nice day I won't have a nice day until I know
00:41:39
the answer why did you keep it a secret that your vaccine did not stop transmission we should cut
00:41:47
this okay we can stop from there but that wow welcome to Infowars first of all you know what real
00:41:54
journalism looks like not a bunch of New York Times the reporters covering for powerful people
00:41:58
but asking them tough questions what do you think of the question is it legit or not you got you guys are about
00:42:07
to get us down ranked on YouTube and Spotify we're about to get warning labels for this sort of thing yeah look
00:42:15
by the way you're right that YouTube banned that video we had to watch it on Twitter because Elon Musk Twitter is
00:42:22
still free okay listen she's actually protecting why hold on why is YouTube abridging freedom of the press in order
00:42:29
to protect the powerful CEO of Pfizer foreign did they cover up the fact that the
00:42:43
vaccines didn't transmit I think it's like a legitimate question that I would actually want to know the answer to I
00:42:47
don't know why you didn't just answer that no we didn't cover it up Freeburg what are you you're asking me
00:42:54
if I know what whether Pfizer did a cover-up is that what you're asking the legitimate question is what I'm getting
00:43:00
at why are you unwilling to question the Pfizer CEO oh no I'm not I'm not unwilling to question at all but I'm not
00:43:06
I don't think that this is a fight look first of all Pfizer is uh commercial Enterprise so they have
00:43:13
the incentive to make money 100 right so their objective is to sell a vaccine I think they're making 10 to 15 billion
00:43:19
dollars on this vaccine this year you're absolutely right that the economic incentive is there for Pfizer
00:43:26
to continue to push and rationalize the sales of this vaccine the efficacy of the vaccine weighing
00:43:32
very quickly as this virus evolved and mutated it became pretty evident pretty fast that
00:43:38
the uh the rate of Transmission in vaccinated people continue to go up and you know this may be a function of
00:43:48
the quality of the vaccine or the efficacy of the vaccine more likely a function of the fact that the virus as
00:43:54
predicted evolved and therefore the antibodies that that are produced and the T Cell response that that's induced
00:44:00
by the original vaccine becomes less efficacious over time so the real question is a policy question a
00:44:07
behavioral question but look Pfizer didn't have another product to sell so it certainly makes sense for them to
00:44:11
continue to sell their product and there is still good data that represents that
00:44:15
there is some immune response and some benefit in certain populations to continuing to get a booster and all the
00:44:22
stuff with the original yeah let me ask you about the data the fact that that Pfizer only has this product to sell is
00:44:27
not exactly a ringing endorsement of their behavior but but let's stay on the data for a second there was a study in
00:44:33
nature which is you know one of the most preeminent scientific journals about the
00:44:37
risks of myocarditis and pericarditis which is basically inflammation of the heart tissue which can basically lead to
00:44:44
heart attacks saying that the risk among young people especially young men in 18
00:44:50
to 24 years was elevated if they got thought the vaccine this was a study out of France
00:44:57
so it's pretty clear that the there are yes efficacious as we thought but is it less safe than we thought as well I I
00:45:06
generally I don't know the answer to this I would like to know it's an important question and there's a lot of
00:45:11
work being done to uncover it and here's a link to a paper that was published in the Journal circulation
00:45:18
is the name of the journal not too long ago by a team led by a researcher at math General and
00:45:26
um what this and so just to address the myocarditis question and and just so everyone that's
00:45:33
listening knows I take a very objective view on all this stuff I don't have a strong bias one way or the other
00:45:38
so the Mass General team identified 16 people that had myocarditis that were vaccinated and 45 people that didn't
00:45:44
were part of their control group and they tried to understand what the difference was between these two groups
00:45:49
there have historically been three kind of theories about why there is incidence
00:45:54
of myocarditis in certain populations that get the uh the covid vaccine and by the way the incidence rate is still
00:46:00
typically less than a two out of every hundred thousand people that get the vaccine but as you saw in the paper you
00:46:06
just shared and others have validated it it can be as high as 30 times more likely to happen in young people that
00:46:12
take the the moderna vaccine which is still a low incidence but but 30 times higher is is significant worth
00:46:18
understanding so the three kind of reasons or the three ideas 30 times higher that sounds like a lot yeah so
00:46:24
the reason and off a small base but yes and so the three ideas or the three theories around why this is happening
00:46:31
number one is what's called protein mimicry where certain people the protein on their their heart tissue for example
00:46:37
or certain proteins found in the cells in their heart tissue maybe look like the um some element of the spike Protein
00:46:44
that's created by the vaccine therefore when you make antibodies to bind to and clear your body of Spike protein it's
00:46:50
also binding to your own cells and causing an autoimmune response and those are called
00:46:56
kind of Auto antibodies the second is just general immune system activation that maybe genetically some people are
00:47:01
predisposed to having a very active immune system in response to the vaccine and therefore with a very active immune
00:47:06
system they get inflammation and damage and then the third is this idea that there's just massive proliferation of
00:47:11
your B cells some of which have Auto antibodies and some of which therefore destroy your heart tissue and cause this
00:47:16
inflammation so what this team did is they looked at the blood difference between people that had myocarditis and
00:47:22
people that didn't they found no Auto antibodies they found no big changes in the T or B cell populations meaning that
00:47:28
there isn't a big immune system activation difference the big difference that they found was that the people that
00:47:33
had myocarditis actually had a lot of the spike protein floating around in their
00:47:40
blood whereas the people that didn't did not have the spike protein floating around in their blood so this answers
00:47:45
one question but but opens up many more doors which is what's really going on so
00:47:49
if you have Spike protein in your blood and your body is not clearing it right well how how long after getting
00:47:55
vaccinated where the spike protein still floating around because I remember when
00:47:58
the MRNA vaccine first came out they said the spike proteins would go away after a couple of days three weeks
00:48:05
have they done a study like you know six months after or year after not yet but that's that's being done right now so
00:48:12
what they're identifying is what's going on with the immune system of these this
00:48:15
population where their body's not able to clear the spike protein and when their body doesn't clear the spike
00:48:21
protein a bunch of cytokines and other inflammatory things start to get released and it causes inflammation on
00:48:26
the heart tissue because you know there's a particular reasons let me ask you I remember I remember when you know
00:48:34
the vaccine first came out I remember Rogan almost got canceled for saying that if
00:48:40
he was a young person a young man he's like 50 so he got vaccinated but he said that if I was a young person in my 20s I
00:48:47
would not get vaccinated because I don't think the risk return makes sense and he
00:48:52
almost got canceled for that was right about that so you know I have been thinking a lot about
00:49:01
this decision to get vaccinated or not and how we came to that decision and then I think what Friedberg said earlier
00:49:07
is super interesting be because the virus mutated the efficacy of these vaccines obviously uh
00:49:16
changed and wasn't necessary and so I think it was a moving Target to understand if you should take it or not
00:49:23
it was a very personal decision clearly for people who were over 65 years old the chances of dying were pretty
00:49:29
significant uh for people under that a certain age it was lower so everybody had to make a very personal decision
00:49:35
here was it a personal decision when you had vaccine mandates and then on top of that on top of that
00:49:44
you had the media were dunking on anti-vaxxers throughout 2021 remember that I mean they were saying about
00:49:52
anti-vaxxers that that if you didn't get the vaccine you got sick there wouldn't
00:49:55
be a hospital bed for you there was you know a lot of like dancing on the graves
00:49:59
of these people yeah where you know there were like all these articles that you know there'd be
00:50:03
like some preacher who you know said don't get vaccinated and then they would die of covet and there's a lot of like
00:50:09
morbid sort of ghoulish like articles dancing on their graves I mean it was not this objective personal decision
00:50:15
there was tremendous social and legal pressure to get vaccinated you're right you're right there was and I think
00:50:23
part of the reason I myself got vaccinated is because I wanted to be able to travel again I wanted to be able
00:50:27
to go to Madison Square Garden and watch the Knicks and I also thought well I don't want to be if I'm overweight like
00:50:33
one of the people who dies from this so you know we all sat here we all got vaccinated do we regret our decision to
00:50:39
get vaccinated now that we see this you know studies like maybe it wasn't necessary
00:50:44
it also it was apparently oversold so when the Pfizer CEO would say when they knew it wasn't going to stop
00:50:50
transmission I think it's a valid question to investigate what Pfizer knew and when uh and just keep everybody
00:50:56
accountable for this uh for future things that happen because right now we're in a position where if Pfizer is
00:51:03
not being honest with us if the origin story of covet isn't being honest with us these conspiracy theories are now
00:51:09
starting to start to look like reality let me go to YouTube moth I mean so we were all felt this tremendous pressure
00:51:16
in 2021 to get the vaccine right we all care about our health you care a lot about your health we all thought we
00:51:25
could trust the experts that the vaccine was both efficacious and safe we know it
00:51:30
was not efficacious in the sense that they're telling us that we have to get revaccinated every two months for it to
00:51:36
work on safety I don't want to get over my skis because we only have some data but clearly like this myocarditis data
00:51:43
is not good so were we basically stampeded into making a decision right that was not
00:51:50
actually good for us and would you make that same decision today let's just lay the foundation for
00:51:57
understanding how we got here so there are these Pathways inside the FDA to get drugs approved
00:52:05
and if you take a normal pathway for a normal drug you're going to spend nine or ten years
00:52:10
maybe more 12 13 in some cases and more than a billion dollars to get a drug approved and the way that it works is in
00:52:18
Phase One you do a study on toxicology effectively like is this safe or not safe
00:52:24
and you have to have enough people take it and you need to observe them for enough time where that phase one outcome
00:52:30
essentially says this won't hurt people it's benign we don't know the mechanism of action we don't know whether it's
00:52:37
going to solve the problem but we know that it's safe and then in phase two you then try to really understand the
00:52:45
mechanism of action and if that works you go into phase three where you actually scale it out you create a
00:52:52
double arm study you may do a control group you may do an open label companion you may overpower it with thousands of
00:52:58
people and the FDA is incredibly rigorous okay even down to like it's incredible by the
00:53:04
way like how you're allowed to open the results and they have all of these services that make sure that you can't
00:53:09
influence the results or manipulate them it's incredible the FDA has an incredible process
00:53:15
the thing is that they also have a way to jump around that fence and that is what we use for the covid-19
00:53:22
vaccines so in a molecule 13 years if it's for a really important drug you can shorten it to six or seven
00:53:31
with this thing called breakthrough designation for a biologic 12 or 13 years but if you get this thing
00:53:39
called rmat six or seven years so you're still talking years and thousands of people David but then there's this one
00:53:47
special asterisk that exists inside the FDA called emergency use authorization and in moments of deemed emergency
00:53:55
you can shorten even six years down to in some cases six seven nine months a year two years right are you you're
00:54:02
describing operation warp speed so that emergency use authorization fast tracked these vaccines to market
00:54:10
now the thing to keep in mind is there are still two classes of vaccines they are the messenger RNA vaccines
00:54:16
that's the Bion Tech and Pfizer ones and then there are the more regular ones that in many cases the West was dumping
00:54:22
on AstraZeneca and Johnson Johnson we used to ship those to developing countries and say we'll just keep the
00:54:28
MRNA wants you guys think Dave Chappelle had this funny joke he's like I took the
00:54:32
J J vaccine right but it turns out that now when we're looking back the long tail of issues may actually
00:54:41
apply to these things that were fast tracked these mRNA vaccines that were fast-tracked under emergency use why
00:54:46
because of what Friedberg said this protein mimicry thing is something we don't understand now why don't we
00:54:51
understand it it's because our tools are not precise enough to exactly know when we engineer
00:54:59
these solutions that it only binds to this specific protein and what we're learning is that there
00:55:08
these proteins are some they're so similar that there can be a little collateral
00:55:13
damage that this other thing that looks 99 will also all of a sudden attract this
00:55:21
this antigen so this is a very complicated body of problem and because we didn't give it enough
00:55:28
time to bake in the wild we're learning about this thing in real time if you if we had gone to what you
00:55:34
had suggested which is a massive masking mandate while this stuff played out could the outcome be different well we
00:55:42
don't know because we didn't make those decisions but I think that's what people
00:55:45
will be debating the last thing I'll say on this is specifically to myocarditis I have an Interventional cardiologist in
00:55:52
La I've seen him every three years ever since Goldie passed away out of respect for Goldie and Cheryl who
00:55:59
initially asked me to go but it's been a great thing that I've done I've learned
00:56:03
a lot from him he introduced me to pcsk9 Inhibitors and a bunch of things he called me two years ago and such mouth I
00:56:10
want to do a study that were a year ago I want to do a study that looks at actually myocarditis and the the effects
00:56:17
of this vaccine and Nick I don't know if you can just throw it up but we publish
00:56:20
something and basically you know what we see David is that for folks with myocarditis
00:56:26
you're releasing troponin and this is a Sim this is a A protein that you would otherwise use to figure out whether
00:56:32
you're having a heart attack or severe you know some sort of heart abnormality and so it just goes to show you that
00:56:40
there is some collateral damage in some cases in this example this is one case that we published which is a 63 year old
00:56:46
white woman I'm saying that implicitly so that people understand that these things really matter on age gender and
00:56:52
race all of the data that comes out of France really was focused on I think it was 18
00:56:58
to 34 year old males of all racial Persuasions and we've thought that it this issue is prevalent only in males
00:57:06
but we've had a few cases that we've talked about now that that touch women as well
00:57:11
so it's a complicated set of things because our tools are not fine-grained enough
00:57:18
to engineer the drug for incredible specificity and I think that's the thing that we're dealing with now and by the
00:57:26
way last thing because of all this it probably is reasonable to take a step back and have
00:57:33
a commission that just uncovers all of this stuff look we've had commissions usage in baseball like if we need an
00:57:41
investigation this goes back this goes back to Rebel news asking berla a very simple question
00:57:48
which is what did you know and what did you know with respect to the efficacy and safety of these vaccines if they did
00:57:53
not tell the public that these vaccines did not work the way they were supposed to because they want to keep minting
00:57:58
money that is a legitimate Scandal we have a right to know but Freeburg let me ask you a question here I think you know
00:58:04
Chamas talked about this sort of sped up process to cut through red tape and get a vaccine to Market
00:58:11
more quickly I personally actually think that that kind of process is fine for patients who want to assume the risk you
00:58:18
know as as sort of a Libertarian I support that but I go back to the fact that people in many places were not
00:58:25
given a choice they had to get vaccinated or they could lose their job or their freedom participate in society
00:58:34
and now we're finding out that they may have been forced to do something that in
00:58:38
their particular case may not really have been a great cost benefit decision for them what do you think that the sort
00:58:46
of impact is going to be of this just like socially I mean you've talked about I think that there's a
00:58:53
decline in Trust of institutional Authority in the U.S and that's a huge problem I mean isn't
00:59:00
this going to contribute to that yeah look I mean I think that there's been institutional Authority overreach
00:59:07
that's been building for quite some time and you know look I mean you guys can go
00:59:11
back to our first episode in our earliest episodes and I wasn't and haven't been and I I think the first
00:59:17
time I tweeted I tweeted about the adverse impact that lockdowns could have and we should be
00:59:23
weighing the cost of the lockdowns against the benefit and ultimately the benefit was Zero because we ended up
00:59:29
accumulating call it 10 trillion dollars of of you know four trillion dollars of
00:59:34
net costs that we have to pay off at some point and not to mention the economic uh consequences of the
00:59:40
lockdowns and uh you know the benefit was negligible because the the virus continued to spread and evolve and there
00:59:48
was no way to really stop the virus in its tracks hindsight is 2020 fog of War lawmakers made decisions was
00:59:57
it the right decision would you have made the same decision it's really hard to say you feel like you're saving the
01:00:00
world when the world is ending uh it's easy to kind of act with some degree of what is now viewed as overreach I do
01:00:07
think that the mass vaccination requirement may have also been deemed overreach given the limited data that
01:00:13
was available and the rapid Evolution that was pretty apparent in the virus at the time as well
01:00:18
but vaccines are required for a number of other illnesses in a number of school systems
01:00:25
around the country you know you start to question I I think we will start to see people question
01:00:31
whether those are appropriate but again those are longer studied better understood
01:00:36
the the cost benefit analysis is is much there yeah actually I think I think you're right that one of the costs of
01:00:42
this policy is going to be that people will stop trusting vaccination in general even though I think that these
01:00:50
coveted vaccines I'm not even sure you can really call them vaccines I mean every other vaccine that I've ever heard
01:00:56
of completely prevents that disease the polio vaccine ended polio the MMR vaccine ended measle mumps rubella the
01:01:05
covid vaccine just didn't work I don't think it was a vaccine but I think now what's going to happen is people are
01:01:10
going to have a lot more distrust is it tremendous there's a there's a tremendous amount of post-activity
01:01:17
rationalization going on where once you kind of made a statement that the vaccine will stop transmission of the
01:01:23
virus or stop hospitalizations and suddenly it doesn't and you've made that statement with such Surety and brevity
01:01:30
and funded it with so much money and caused such cost in doing so at that point you're too far removed to go back
01:01:38
and say you know what it doesn't and as we're seeing now the consequences of not
01:01:42
being willing to say that you were wrong may be far greater then the consequences of kind of
01:01:48
continuing or kind of you know making this change so it's uh actually that's a good point all right final question to
01:01:54
Jay Calvin on that point yeah so I mean Jake out look you were dunking or at least concerned trolling on anti-vaxxers
01:02:01
during this time period do you reconsider that at all I mean in other words everybody was saying that the
01:02:07
anti-vaxxers were these stupid unsophisticated people wow yeah I I think but maybe but maybe it was the
01:02:15
elites who were the ones suffering from group think I mean look and I put myself
01:02:18
in this bucket we were all herded into this idea yeah we all took that being an early adopter of a product and now we're
01:02:26
finding out yeah we In fairness we said we knew this was experimental we knew this was the
01:02:32
first time mRNA but we also knew like a billion people had gotten them or we when we got ours we knew hundreds of
01:02:38
millions hold on let me just you have some questions so let me finish and so I think people made a risk
01:02:45
assessment knowing this was an experimental vaccine knowing that the covid was mutating at the time
01:02:52
and yeah it could have been oversold of course that that seems to be the case all right Nick pull up this tweet but
01:02:59
you know we need to I I think we have to look at because we had this conversation
01:03:04
you and I of you were very much in favor of everybody getting the Mandate and everybody being forced to
01:03:13
get the the no no I never supported the Mandate you did we had a conversation about that like if should people be able
01:03:18
to work should people do it on trains and your position was no I I did not support a mandate I
01:03:25
thought it should always see people's choice I did but yeah hold on I made the mistake I made the mistake of believing
01:03:32
the experts in the mainstream media I think if the last couple years have taught us anything it's that they can't
01:03:37
be trusted the level of distrust we should have is even greater than we thought I never supported a mandate so I
01:03:43
thought it should be People's Choice yeah um and I certainly wasn't I don't think I was dunking on the anti-vaxxers
01:03:49
let's pull up this tweet Nick yeah my Lord Trump history Fox News are killing their own constituents with this
01:03:57
anti-vaxx nonsense yeah uh do you retract that do I retract it um I'm trying to look at the date by the
01:04:08
way this is this is a tweet that um Jason put out what was the date Danforth 2022 that sax pulled up just so yeah
01:04:16
yeah that was only a year ago yeah I know at this point people were saying that uh no I get it I get it this is not
01:04:25
so rare this is not a rare sentiment but I'm sorry hold on hold just to give this
01:04:28
just stand by this well hold on a second I'm just reading it this was showing the deaths of uh from
01:04:35
covid were happening at a magnitude more by people who didn't take the vaccine and we know the vaccine was
01:04:43
had reduced deaths so we still know that correct freeberg the the vaccine reduced
01:04:48
reduces the cases of deaths correct yeah the the this new bivalent booster um Eric Topol put out a tweet I gave you
01:04:55
guys the link here where he covered a paper that was done recently and the paper
01:05:00
shows a reduction in hospitalization rate and death rate for folks that are getting this new bivalent booster so but
01:05:07
again that is a benefit that is the benefit yeah in one's own kind of personal safety and there's a
01:05:13
risk profile associated with that as taxes pointing out but this notion that the vaccines stop the virus and are a
01:05:19
true vaccine in the sense of how we talk about polio and chickenpox or uh smallpox and this other stuff
01:05:25
not equivalent very good for free Burger wait that data how long after vaccination was that data
01:05:31
because I thought that with respect to the vaccine one of the big problems is that the the benefits only last for two
01:05:37
months unless you're willing to get re-vaccinated every two months no that's yeah look it's not really realistic
01:05:43
generally speaking this is not like a vaccine in the sense of a uh smallpox or all right it's just a shot
01:05:52
it's a treat it's a it's a it's a modest muting of the effects and it's one that
01:05:57
people need to take kind of a risk-based decision on for one's personal thing but
01:06:01
having mandates on whether or not you can go to school and whether or not you can you know be in places and whether or
01:06:07
not it's appropriate for for workplace setting there's still high degrees of infectiousness with this ever-evolving
01:06:13
virus the virus that we have today is not the virus that we had in February of 2020. it's a very different virus and
01:06:21
it has evolved to such an extent now and it's continuing to evolve that it's very
01:06:25
difficult to say there's a vaccine for this virus it's uh it's uh why won't you just say this the that this the
01:06:32
so-called vaccine has been a failure we don't know hold on I'm gonna it's a failure we don't we don't know the full
01:06:39
safety implications like I said I don't want to get too far out of my skis on that however yeah we know the
01:06:44
efficaciousness of it has been a failure unless you're willing to get reducing unless you're willing to get jabbed six
01:06:52
times a year which I don't think anybody here would do that and something that's
01:06:56
not necessary because it's we hold on there was a time period where it was effective correct Friedberg and it did
01:07:04
reduce deaths massively so I think that's the the issue that we're talking about here is that now the kovich
01:07:09
strains are so weak that maybe it's not as necessary but there was a time period
01:07:13
where people were not taking the vaccine and Republicans specifically weren't taking the vaccine and they were dying
01:07:19
at a much higher percentage so it didn't if you're defining the vaccine as not getting not transferring the disease
01:07:25
sure it was a failure it didn't block like we thought it would in terms of reducing debt but reducing death it did
01:07:32
work for a period of time if it only lasted for two months and covet is still around and it's basically endemic it's
01:07:38
everywhere how did the vaccine make any difference whatsoever I think now it's too much but back then it wasn't but you
01:07:44
know free burglary Freeburg is that true what's the question I'm I'm losing track
01:07:49
at this point how long does the the lowering the percentage of deaths the benefits of it yes of reducing what
01:07:57
you've learned is they only last two months is that true yeah it depends on the population and yes there is a
01:08:03
decline in the benefit over time as well as the fact that the virus is evolving those are both two yeah kind of
01:08:09
independent things and as a result over time you know like yeah we got to keep getting boosted or shots and Pfizer's
01:08:15
making a great business out of it you're right there's a massive economic incentive here for them and moderna to
01:08:20
keep this great gravy train rolling and there's a massive incentive for government officials politicians to
01:08:26
continue to stand by what they said before because otherwise they're going to be called wrong and they're going to
01:08:30
get beat up honestly I feel like I feel like you're making an effort you're making an effort to stand by what you
01:08:36
previously said yeah I think we should just come out and say that look regardless of where the
01:08:41
safety data ultimately comes out just based on efficaciousness we can say that this thing didn't work and therefore
01:08:47
mandating it was an even worse thing because hold on we put every we put the drug through this rapid process and we
01:08:54
didn't let people make an individual cost benefit decision we basically herded them into this and at best it
01:09:01
didn't do very much I don't think that that decision if you come if you make that conclusion I'm not sure that it
01:09:07
gives us a toolkit to do better the next time and I think we've all said this and Friedberg was
01:09:13
the one that first really taught us about this there will be a next time unfortunately
01:09:17
so I think that we have to focus our energy here in acknowledging that the tools that we have
01:09:26
to create these messenger RNA vaccines and other types of solutions we are pushing the boundaries of Science and
01:09:33
the body is still very poorly understood and so the sensitivity and specificity of these drugs may not be what we think
01:09:40
up front and as a result of that maybe we need to find a different way of using emergency use authorization in the
01:09:49
future and I don't know David to your point I'm beyond my ski tips on scientific
01:09:56
knowledge to know how right I would say as a minimum that if we're going to do emergency use it shouldn't
01:10:03
be mandated let patients okay let's move on so we have a moment of agreement one question for free birds
01:10:09
yeah would you advise or in your life would you can would you continue to get a booster or
01:10:15
are you going to consider getting a booster every year no if they keep about them and now would you advise parents or
01:10:22
you know adults over 65 or 70 to get one because those seem to be the high risk group right so if your parents said
01:10:28
should I get it or not I would advise advise them to talk to their doctor and their doctor would advise them to to do
01:10:33
it what do you think most doctors would tell somebody above 65 or 70 at this point it depends what state they're in
01:10:39
at this point but basically would be split on political ones unless this virus turns into Ebola
01:10:46
I'm never getting boosted again I'll tell you that right now what about you guys I'm not getting
01:10:52
boosted again I think that speaks volumes right there that's it like we could have discovered
01:11:00
here for 10 seconds guys we are literally not this sure let's move on hold on Freeburg but the
01:11:07
fact that all of us can arrive at that and then we're worried about getting banned to tell you how screwed up you're
01:11:14
right you're right he is like you're right what we can't like have an honest conversation about this by the way the
01:11:19
other thing this is going to do it's going to inflame a large number of people just hearing us say this and
01:11:23
because people have these deep what's happened is this has now become a sense of identity a sense of tribalism and a
01:11:29
sense of it's a belief system it's no longer about an objective decision well we saw this with the mass the mass
01:11:34
became the blue became the blue woman of the redness so the vaccine is basically
01:11:39
uh you know it's become tribal but but people need to move beyond that because this is a scientific question of of
01:11:47
constant benefits related to this medical treatment okay let's just move on there's too much other stuff doctors
01:11:53
not for Venture capitalists about your vaccine yeah please don't listen to us all right
01:12:04
by the way by the way speak to your doctor and just remember uh vaccine manufacturers have a business to run and
01:12:10
politicians have to get reelected all right let's move on because we've gotten stuck on this okay look there's been
01:12:15
some important developments in Ukraine I think we should just cover quickly this
01:12:18
week there are a bunch of things the by Administration said they're going to send Abrams Tanks as well as Bradley's
01:12:24
and leopard twos the Abrams tank in particular is our best most expensive tank at the
01:12:31
beginning of the war they said they would not send them so they reversed their decision on that now the
01:12:35
ukrainians are saying they want Jets as well that's sort of the next issue that's going to come up the by
01:12:40
Administration also in a New York Times article that came out earlier this week said that they were warming to the idea
01:12:47
of of supporting an invasion of Crimea some Europeans like Peter Hitchens are getting very nervous about this level of
01:12:54
escalation he had a pretty amazing piece talking about the risk of this creating
01:12:58
nuclear war and even if the ukrainians Prevail in this war there was a really interesting statement by Larry Fink at
01:13:07
Davos last week saying that he estimated the cost of reconstruction at 750 billion dollars and Fitch ratings agency
01:13:15
says that Ukraine is headed towards default so major major developments I think in the war this week I want to get
01:13:22
your guys opinion on this we know from history that Wars tend to escalate and to be far more costly than
01:13:30
the participants ever thought is that the track we're on now and in hindsight knowing what we know
01:13:35
now should we regret that we didn't use every diplomatic tool we had to prevent the war most notably taking NATO
01:13:41
expansion off the table Friedberg I'll go to you it's such a tough situation is the situation escalating
01:13:52
to a point where we should be concerned you know there's a lot of information we
01:13:56
don't have and there's a lot of intelligence gathering and conversations and chatter that we're
01:14:03
not privy to so to sit here and kind of be an armed chairman I I don't know what diplomatic
01:14:12
conversations have gone on or are going on uh all I know is what we're reading on the internet right so I I I'm not I
01:14:19
don't know this this war is extremely well covered and there are no diplomatic conversations going on yeah so we're
01:14:28
escalating the War I mean here do you guys have any concerns about the direction this is headed at all yes I'm
01:14:36
concerned I also agree with Freeburg that I don't think we have all the information
01:14:41
but I'm not exactly sure what we can do right now it's it seems like they have decided
01:14:49
that there is a play to exert a lot of pressure come the spring and that's something that you've mentioned as a
01:14:56
very likely thing and so I guess the calculus on the ground is that there's a way to really push Russia into a corner
01:15:03
and the only way to do that is with more military support and then on the heels of that David the link that you sent is
01:15:13
then it's not just the war machine that is now spinning up but it's the aftermarket
01:15:18
Financial Services infrastructure that's also spinning up or Larry Larry Fink you
01:15:22
mean the grift aspect of this war well yeah where Larry Fink was like hey they're gonna need three quarters of a
01:15:28
trillion dollars of reconstruction support we saw that play out in Iraq as well where at first it was the War Machine
01:15:35
and then it was the Reconstruction machine and together it was trillions and trillions by the way you know what
01:15:39
that's called they're called infrastructure funds and those infrastructure funds raise
01:15:44
hundreds of billions of dollars to make investments to build new infrastructure in markets that need it that are willing
01:15:50
to pay for it and it will likely end up being kind of long-term debt assumed by that region to pay to do this work and
01:15:57
the beneficiaries will be the investors and owners of those infrastructure funds
01:16:01
I think there's two sides to the sacks that are worth kind of noting one is the telegraphing of this decision because
01:16:06
it's not being done secretly it's being done out in the open there's certainly a calculus to that why
01:16:12
are they telegraphing this and what do they intend to do with that messaging being put out there like this and it may
01:16:19
be that it's uh to assert or assume a stronger negotiating position certainly to go into some sort of you know mild
01:16:26
modest exit or settlement coming out of this thing but you're right the flip side is and the cost here is one of
01:16:32
extreme outcome which is there may be a France Ferdinand moment here where one thing goes too far and triggers a
01:16:40
cataclysmic outcome and in this case the cataclysmic outcome is tactical nuclear
01:16:46
weapons and tactical nuclear weapons as we've talked about and I think I've I I had some
01:16:52
conversations and some dinners I shared with you guys with some folks in the intelligence community and this has been
01:16:57
talked about by uh ex-intelligence Community folks publicly are a key part of the Russian war Playbook that this is
01:17:04
um there is a tactical nuclear weapon response system that is in place and you know these are
01:17:12
very possible paths that we could find ourselves kind of walking down obviously were that to happen it would be a
01:17:18
massive escalation and you're right there could be a France Ferdinand kind of moment that emerges by shaking the
01:17:24
cage and and lighting a fire and there may be a stronger negotiating position to get to a settlement Faster by doing
01:17:31
this I I don't have a strong point of view on the probability of either of those and and why but I think you know
01:17:37
maybe both are certainly in play here yeah it was interesting to me that the Wall Street Journal on the heels of all
01:17:43
of this stuff also published an article about Roman abramsic and the interesting
01:17:48
thing about it was a quote in the article that effectively said something tantamount to well now that he's
01:17:54
proven not as useful we need to Target him with sanctions so I just think that what all of this is
01:18:04
is now sort of they're entering the end game David to use a chess analogy and it looks like they're setting
01:18:12
the wheels in motion to kind of put all the pieces together for a negotiated settlement
01:18:19
do we know that I mean what but is that yeah or is it continual escalation I mean Jacob I actually at the beginning
01:18:25
of the war we didn't want to give the ukrainians Abrams Tanks because they were that was considered too provocative
01:18:30
now we're giving them to them I think what's going on here is and I I suspected this you know from the
01:18:37
beginning is that we are trying to engage them in a war of attrition and it's working and so I think the West
01:18:45
collectively is trying to further that goal of just making Russia economically politically militarily culturally
01:18:53
irrelevant or angled in some way and if you think about what's now happening with uh energy you know his primary
01:19:01
export he is going to lose those customers and his customers will be you know bottom feeding India China low-cost
01:19:08
you know oil and he is going to be a pariah so what I'm looking at is if there's going to be a negotiated
01:19:13
settlement this year what is the next five or ten years going to look like for Russia what is their place in the world
01:19:18
going to be the West is never going to trust them again the Germans are never going to buy their oil again everybody
01:19:23
is going to be looking for ways to distance themselves from them so how does he have an exit ramp and we talked
01:19:28
about this from the the get-go here on this podcast is what's the golden bridge for him to retreat across
01:19:34
and and we really need to find that golden bridge quickly because I do think this is starting to look desperate for
01:19:40
him the West keeps giving better and better Munitions he keeps losing economically he's going to keep losing
01:19:46
and and politically who would ever want to engage Putin in anything with you know any kind of cultural or
01:19:53
International Trade it's going to be a disaster for him so this war of attrition
01:20:00
has to resolve itself with a some sort of settlement but we kids can't go on for two or three years can it I mean it
01:20:07
has to settle at some point I think that it certainly can go on and I think that history proves that Wars
01:20:14
tend to escalate and the costs incurred are much greater in many cases than participants ever dreamed of and that
01:20:21
they had to go and do it all over again they wouldn't have gone into it in the first place
01:20:25
so yeah I think this is concerning I think you know the the crazy thing is the war
01:20:31
of attrition strategy I think I think it has developed into a war of attrition and I think you're right that
01:20:39
I think there's two possibilities Jay Cal I think that the maybe the more cynical or realistic members of the
01:20:46
administration think there's benefit in wearing Russia down and grinding them down however I also think there's kind
01:20:52
of a True Believer camp that sees pushing Russia out of Ukraine nothing less than that will do and we have to
01:20:59
punish their aggression maybe they want regime change I think there's dueling factions in the administration remember
01:21:04
General milley several months ago said that everything that the ukrainians could achieve militarily just about had
01:21:10
been done and they should negotiate and even Jake Sullivan had said that they should take Crimea off the table that
01:21:16
was just the leaks a few months ago now the administration is leaking that they're going to support a Korean
01:21:22
Invasion so I think there's these both schools within the administration the True Believers the more cynical
01:21:29
folks and it feels to me like the True Believers are on top right now because we just keep escalating this war more
01:21:36
and more and I think that's dangerous that polarizes the outcomes right so I think jaycal if you had your way it
01:21:43
sounds like you had grind the Russians down but at a certain point you would say enough is enough and like a poker
01:21:49
player like you do it at the poker table you'd say have on my I won my Prius for
01:21:54
the night I don't need to risk that to win a Tesla so I'm going to cash in my chips and get away and Walk Up Walk Away
01:22:00
right yeah I wish I could do that I wish I could do that consistently yeah exactly
01:22:06
getting up from the table is a rare skill that's right but I'm not sure the administration is getting up from the
01:22:12
table I mean I think we've achieved the American position on this I think has largely been achieved we've prevented
01:22:19
Russia from taking over Ukraine we've prevented we've basically shifted Europe onto American Natural Gas we've
01:22:27
destroyed Nordstrom I think we're close to achieving our major objectives but I'm not sure we're going to stop
01:22:34
there yeah all right anyway all right let's move on Friedberg you have a science
01:22:38
corner I was going to share the this was last week I think we talked about uh talking about it this week so
01:22:46
um there was a paper that is a pretty um compelling paper published by a team uh
01:22:51
LED out of Harvard on identifying what may be the the core driver of Aging and demonstration on an
01:23:01
ability to kind of reverse aging so I'll just start really quickly that you know
01:23:06
in the human body we have many different types of cells right we have 200 roughly
01:23:11
different kinds of cells and I sell a skin cell a brain cell a heart cell they all have the same DNA the same
01:23:17
genetic code the same genome at the nucleus of that cell what makes those cells different and the reason they act
01:23:23
and behave differently is they have different gene expression meaning different genes in that cell are turned
01:23:29
on and off and when a gene is turned on the protein that that Gene codes for is expressed and made in the cell and the
01:23:37
genes that are off those proteins are not made and remember proteins are the biochemical machines in biology so when
01:23:43
certain proteins are produced they do stuff and other proteins don't do stuff and the cell acts and behaves very
01:23:48
differently so some cells when you turn genes on and off you get a neuron some cells you turn them on and off you get a
01:23:53
muscle cell in your bicep some of them you get a heart cell and so all of these cells are
01:23:58
differentiated by the genes that are expressed the general term for the expression of genes is the
01:24:05
epigenome and an epigenome basically refers to these these systems whereby the certain
01:24:12
parts of the DNA certain segments of genes are uncoiled a little bit so if you zoom in on DNA you know there's 23
01:24:21
chromosomes they're tightly wrapped in these coils and when you go even closer you see that there's these segments
01:24:27
called nucleosomes and a nucleosome means it's like a bead and a bunch of DNA is wrapped around the bead and how
01:24:33
closely those beads are together how much of the DNA is wrapped allows a segment of the DNA to be opened up and
01:24:40
then expressed meaning copies of the DNA are turned into RNA which floats into this thing called the ribosome and the
01:24:46
ribosome is the protein printer so the more these little segments of genome are exposed the more they're expressed and
01:24:52
there are certain chemicals these methyls and acetyls that kind of attach to the genome and certain elements that
01:24:58
allow parts of the the chromosome to wrap up and get really tightly bound or to unwrap and to express the gene so the
01:25:06
epigenome is almost you can think about it like the software and and the genome or the DNA is the hardware
01:25:12
and so the hardware basically defines what you can make the epigenome defines what is being made what stuff is turned
01:25:18
on and what stuff is turned off so this paper and this work that was done historically we've always thought that
01:25:24
aging meant that over time the DNA in our cells was mutating and errors were accumulating in the DNA and as a result
01:25:30
of those errors the cells start to dysfunction and what these guys really did a good job of proving with this
01:25:37
paper is that it may not be mutations in the DNA that's causing aging but actually changes in the epigenome and
01:25:43
that the DNA remains pretty stable and pretty consistent over time and the way they did this is they broke the DNA and
01:25:50
just so you guys know every second of your life about a million breaks in DNA in cells throughout your body are
01:25:56
happening your DNA is being broken up and then there's all this Machinery in your cell that fixes the DNA when it
01:26:02
breaks now what happens when it fixes that it turns out it's actually really good at fixing it and the DNA doesn't
01:26:07
change and we historically thought that the DNA changed a lot and mutations accumulate over time but in reality what
01:26:13
may be happening is as your DNA gets fixed the epigenome the acetyl and methyl groups on the Gene uh on on the
01:26:21
um the chromosome don't get put in the right place and over time what happens is the epigenome
01:26:28
degrades and this is considered and a lot of people refer to this now as the information Theory of Aging you can kind
01:26:34
of think about making a lot of copies of software a lot of copies of a photo and
01:26:37
a photo printer over time and every time you make a copy there's a little error a
01:26:41
little error and those errors accumulate and the errors that accumulate cause the
01:26:45
epigenome to change and as a result certain genes are turned on that are supposed to be off and certain genes are
01:26:51
turned off that are supposed to be turned on and then those cells start to get dysfunctional because the wrong
01:26:57
proteins are being made and the cell can no longer do what it's supposed to do so
01:27:00
what these guys should be the could it be the ribosome as well that gets screwed up over time the printer the
01:27:06
ribosome is um a pretty you know uh static protein it just does its thing and there's hundreds of
01:27:12
ribosomes in a Cell so you know if one of them's dysfunctional it just doesn't do anything and then the other ones kind
01:27:17
of step in and do it so the ribosomes are constantly running what these guys did is they basically
01:27:22
took two mice two populations of mice and they gave the one population of Maui a certain thing that caused its DNA to
01:27:29
break at three times the rate of the other population and then as the DNA broke they could they could see that
01:27:36
this mouse population got older and older faster and by a bunch of measures on how do you measure age but what they
01:27:43
did is they then measured they then sequenced the DNA of the two populations of mice and what they showed is that the
01:27:49
older mice the ones that had their DNA changing a lot by the way these were genetically identical mice
01:27:55
um the ones that had their DNA broken a lot more they had the correct genome their genome was the exact same as the
01:28:01
other mice that that stayed Young and so what that tells us is that it's the epigenome and not the the DNA itself
01:28:07
that's changing so then here's what they did remember last year we talked about yamanaka factors which are these four
01:28:14
proteins these four molecules that can be applied to to DNA to a cell and they cause all of the gene expression to
01:28:21
reset back to looking like a stem cell remember all of those differentiated cells come from a stem cell and when
01:28:27
they did that the older population of mice suddenly started to act younger and all of the measures of age reversed and
01:28:35
they did this across different tissue types they measured this in a lot of different ways cognitive function uh
01:28:40
Health cellular Health Etc and so it is not just a fantastic new proof point of how yamanaka factors can
01:28:48
actually reverse age but it demonstrates that the epigenome itself is what is the
01:28:53
core driver of aging and you guys remember Altos Labs raised three billion dollars in a sea ground last year and
01:28:59
remember at the end of 21 I said like yamanaka Factor as an aging research is going to be kind of the next thought
01:29:04
thing I think this paper is going to be one of the seminal papers that really kind of illustrates and proves the point
01:29:10
that this epigenome is the driver of aging and as we now are investing a lot of money in figuring out how yamanaka
01:29:17
factors and other transcription factors like the yamanaka factors can be applied
01:29:21
in specific ways to actually reverse aging and cause the cells to start functioning correctly again and then
01:29:27
people will start to act and resolve in a healthy way once again there's a lot of work to go between here and there but
01:29:34
now we have a much more kind of definitive proof point that this information Theory of Aging may be real
01:29:38
that it's tied to the epigenome and that there are solutions that can work and we
01:29:42
we have to figure out how to put them together and how to engineer a fantastic outcomes so really great paper
01:29:48
by a team led out of Harvard I think really validates a lot of the work and the money that's going into the space
01:29:53
both in the public and the private sector and obviously a lot of new startups kind
01:29:58
of chasing this opportunity to figure out how we can use these transcription factors to reverse aging and that this
01:30:03
may end up leading us to uh you know a much kind of healthier life and by the way when they applied those yamanaka
01:30:09
factors to the mice the mice lived 107 percent longer than they were supposed to but more
01:30:15
importantly the health span as it's defined improved so the mice not only lived longer but they actually lived
01:30:21
healthier they're all the measures of healthiness in the body improved so it's a really kind of is this going to help
01:30:27
us in the next 10 years it may yeah it very well made there are now some therapists
01:30:35
in this corner I feel like science corners should only discuss things that can happen in the next few years let's
01:30:42
put it that way to look at it I'll tell you I'll tell you one way one thing for sure you can make you can make money as
01:30:47
an investor over the next 10 years in finding the right teams that are going to have the highest likelihood of
01:30:51
progressing clinical trials in this space I will say that there may be clinical trials that can come to Market
01:30:55
really fast particularly with kind of these ex-vivo Therapeutics where you take cells out of your body apply the
01:31:01
yamanaka factors and then put them back in your body for certain tissue types like eye cells for example or T cells in
01:31:07
your blood there's a lot of ways that this may come to Market faster and it's not just about reversing your age
01:31:11
overall but reversing the age of certain cell types in your body that can then have profound Health impacts in the near
01:31:17
term so that's the kind of stuff that's going to start to come through clinical stage sooner than later and then maybe
01:31:22
you know some number of years down the road we figure out a way to reverse the age and all the cells in our body and
01:31:27
the whole body becomes more youthful but for now it's going to be targeted cells
01:31:30
in a very specific way to reverse aging and improve health very powerful very interesting lots of
01:31:37
investment opportunity and you know certainly some some very smart folks yeah the realistic time frame is
01:31:44
for like you know reversing aging because I mean we need that 30 years yeah but I think I think it'll be
01:31:53
80. does that mean we're gonna be able to like live to 100 because we'll be able
01:32:05
to like reverse age is can you live well to a hundred I think that's the question we don't know
01:32:12
but if you could reverse aging yeah but we don't know what that means because there's all kinds of things that you
01:32:18
inherit over time that this may not for example like if you have long-term heart
01:32:22
disease I could see how the cells could get healthier but it can't eliminate the
01:32:27
plaque in your arteries right you know that's totally different calcium that shit's there so right you
01:32:35
you have to leave the same with Alzheimer's like Alzheimer's has pla there's a plaque element but the the the
01:32:40
cause of that and the cellular dysfunction may be reversible it could definitely be that like injury rates of
01:32:46
older people hips knees shoulders arms all the sort of like soft musculoskeletal stuff you can you can
01:32:54
really do a good job of because at the same time as you get older like people to intake less protein they
01:33:00
process it less well you lose a lot of muscle mass as you get older those are things that I think are like short-term
01:33:05
Solutions but no to be honest with you socks the stuff that really can screw you which is heart disease and brain
01:33:12
function this probably won't do much for a long time so check it out screwed yeah yeah I'm in
01:33:18
the best shape I've been in 20 years I feel great I'm getting irreverse whatever is wrong with Jayco or is that
01:33:23
in the plot category can I do a quality of life shout out can I do a quality I got an email we all got it from a guy
01:33:31
who I won't say just about not to violate his privacy privacy but he's in Saskatchewan he listens to
01:33:39
the Pod where his father is and made him get a pre-nuval scan oh flew the father
01:33:45
to Vancouver they found a five centimeter cancerous tumor on his kidney and uh three days ago had it removed and
01:33:52
looks like guys totally healthy and well eliminated he was saying so another live
01:33:57
saved but I but I wanted to show you guys a picture so yesterday I went to Los Angeles to see my Interventional
01:34:05
cardiologist and what they do is they do What's called the contrast CT scan so they put
01:34:11
you into an IV and they put this contrast inside of your neck you want to put throw the picture up please
01:34:17
and then they use all the software to actually create an extremely accurate 3D model of your heart and what they can do
01:34:24
is go inside of your arteries and actually measure the calcium buildup I've mentioned this before this this is
01:34:29
a service called heart flow h-e-a-r-t-f-l-o-w [Music] in any event my calcium score is still
01:34:39
zero thank God touch wood keep grinding but I just wanted to put this out there for anybody who has a history of heart
01:34:48
disease in their family for them or for their parents or what have you if you go and ask your doctor this is a
01:34:54
third party service that they can do it you go get a contrast CT and you can get a very accurate sense of
01:35:01
your heart health this is amazing they they found it's incredible they found that you have a heart
01:35:07
they did find that I have a heart this is this is a practical technology because all of us we would try to find
01:35:13
if you had a heart for all this 112 episodes Dr Carlsberg was shot they found a heart it looked huge it looked
01:35:22
like secretariately yeah I do have a big heart boys as you guys know no I mean this is shocking for the
01:35:30
audience it's a natural size that can't be actual size it's bigger than its brain it's got a big part well glad
01:35:37
you're healthy bestie that's fantastic so go get go get a hard flow if anybody has heart disease go talk to your doctor
01:35:42
all right well for David sacks was was the moderation okay uh yeah I mean listen it was interesting funny as
01:35:50
if you were doing a j Calvin all right fairness I'll come back to moderate next week I'll moderate this I'll be honest
01:35:55
with you I would give both The Davids a robotic b-minus C plus I think they're better off opining than
01:36:04
moderating okay and I think that Jason really doesn't have anything interesting to say so he's better off moderating
01:36:12
audience liked my comments last week and then we can minimize the number of times
01:36:17
he finds any random way to take it back to Virtue signaling and genuflecting about China I was gonna ask Jason what
01:36:24
he thought about the Cowboys 49ers game where Kittle was an ineligible downfield
01:36:30
receiver and they didn't call a penalty very important catch for that game that again the Cowboys now losing every
01:36:36
single time they get to the playoffs but I didn't want to ask you because I was I
01:36:40
thought that you'd Veer it towards Xi Jinping in some China comments no why no any genuflecting would you like to do
01:36:49
before you go back to your I will admit that the moderation thing is harder than
01:36:52
it looks well it's harder than it looks to be entertaining I think that's that's
01:36:58
that's the thing entertaining thank you plus a plus moderator get back to your job Jacob
01:37:06
yeah I will I will come back next week and moderate I I have been under the weather if passed the ball and let and
01:37:13
let us put the ball in the basket I will put the ball exactly where you each like
01:37:17
it perfectly look for some great assist coming next week when Jake I was back at
01:37:21
100 strength thanks uh to The Davids for filling information the last two weeks and we'll see you all next time on the
01:37:27
island boys we'll let your winners ride Rain Man [Music] we open source it to the fans and
01:37:40
they've just gone crazy [Music] besties [Music] where did you get Mercies [Music]