in

Lex Fridman on the failure of leadership around COVID

Lex Fridman Podcast full episode: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G433fa01oMU
Please support this podcast by checking out our sponsors:
– Privacy: https://privacy.com/lex to get $5 added to your account
– Justworks: https://justworks.com
– Sun Basket: https://sunbasket.com/lex and use code LEX to get $35 off
– The Information: https://theinformation.com/lex to get 75% off first month
– Athletic Greens: https://athleticgreens.com/lex and use code LEX to get 1 month of fish oil

GUEST BIO:
Vincent Racaniello is a virologist, immunologist, and microbiologist at Columbia. He is a co-author of the textbook Principles of Virology and co-host of This Week in Virology podcast.

PODCAST INFO:
Podcast website: https://lexfridman.com/podcast
Apple Podcasts: https://apple.co/2lwqZIr
Spotify: https://spoti.fi/2nEwCF8
RSS: https://lexfridman.com/feed/podcast/
Full episodes playlist: https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLrAXtmErZgOdP_8GztsuKi9nrraNbKKp4
Clips playlist: https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLrAXtmErZgOeciFP3CBCIEElOJeitOr41

SOCIAL:
– Twitter: https://twitter.com/lexfridman
– LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/lexfridman
– Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/lexfridman
– Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/lexfridman
– Medium: https://medium.com/@lexfridman
– Reddit: https://reddit.com/r/lexfridman
– Support on Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/lexfridman

Written by Lex Clips

Comments

Leave a Reply
  1. This was the best segment of this show. So glad he covered this. But saving the kids? They have a fractional chance of serious disease, yet a life ahead of them with potential harm from a vaccine. This virus will reach all of us eventually…and it does not stop infection.

  2. He also was caught in a lie about whether the NIH indirectly funded gain of function research in Wuhan, on this specific virus. There’s a non zero probability that had his organization followed federal law and not funded this research that we may not have lost 660,000 lives and counting. He’s compromised, regardless and should be replaced.

  3. This might be one of the only things that I agree on with the COVID vaccine skeptics (people who oppose only the COVID vaccines). In my mind I gave him a pass on the masks story, because you saw what happened with the toilet paper. Dr. Fauci should have resigned when he said that Wuhan lab wasn't doing gaining function research, which by his definition did. Whether is ok to do gaining function research or not, it's a different story, but in this case that's what they were doing.

  4. Wow you really got it you really hit me that's exactly how people need to be talking to people about the vaccine that it is not a sure thing but the best thing you got in authenticity is the worst

  5. For those who say 'follow the science' you say that like science is immune to bias.. possesses superior ethics..is politically nuetral..impossible to manipulate by the worlds politicians and Gov't ..is unselfish..never greedy..and is above reproach or question.

    Education, in the minds of many, sits on the same unassailable perch.

    "Science" is not the keeper nor the last word in truth. Science is the nice word for pharmaceuticals. Since when has that industry had a lock on perfection?!

    Science does alot of good but science also buries alot of "mistakes"..literally.

    No. Time is the only clinical trial that will tell the story on these covid vax & boosters. How long before irreversible side effects or worse show up and you see class action lawsuits splashed all over your tv against these untested drugs. Prove me wrong!

    No jab..not THIS one!

  6. We can follow Lex’s American way, if the people who get ill afterward not getting the vaccine don’t get treatment if in anyway their treatment affects someone else’s. But if course the heroic contrarians will not actually like to live by their selfish decisions, they will be the first in there blocking access to healthy care that people who took the vaccines need. The guest should have pushed back against this fucking bullshit, and hard.

  7. As to not trusting science, you think most people want to hear all the details? Most people can’t follow anything for more than a minute. Give them broad brush strokes information that best keeps the public safe. Those who are interested in the details can read the scientific articles on line. And you know why science isn’t trusted? Because idiots like this spend all their time denigrating the albeit imperfect response, in the face of a novel virus. If we hadn’t flattened the curve how many people could have perished? If we had take the steps we did? Would the economy be better now if we had just wiped out 2-3million people quickly? The is so asinine. If we had overrun all the hospitals disabled all transportation, food delivery, grocery stores, by doing nothing. There would be nothing fucking left. You want to think outside the box, think about those knock on effects! FFS!

  8. What was the interviewees position on kids? It wasn’t clear. They’re not allowed to be vaccinated and should be? They should have the right to choose as a minor or should be forced to?

    Whatever he said was slightly alarming but I couldn’t quite decipher his message.

    Yes small small percentage of kids have complications with Covid but it appears to be similar lower than influenza. I’m quite concerned of erosion of liberty and forcing Americans and children for an annual “flu shot”. And further equating Covid to one time vaccination high impact illnesses

  9. You're off the point. It's not about trusting SCIENCE, but the half-political, half-big-corp bodies that want to be door keepers for us. They want us believe without proof that what they say is based on science. They want us take for science what is none, and they want us never learn about actual science if it's against their business. The 2 big examples are the "pandemic" and "global warming" agendas based on lies, bad science, fake science, skewed some real data and hiding the rest of actual science, and on gagging, shaming and shunning anyone who dares to even ask about the proof.

    Do you understand that case and death rate data is fake, because the SCIENTIFIC procedures have been intentionally changed?
    1) The "pandemic" is now a not deadly disease too. Case is now with no symptoms (while in real medicine no symptoms means: no illness).
    2) "Death case" is now both due and with the virus (are you getting the point?). So: you had positive test, then you died in an accident = you a covud death case.
    3) "Vaccine" is now a substance of unknown content and unknown side effects (the animal phase was skipped – it is done on us); vaccine is now a jab that doesn't prevent getting it or spreading it or getting ill or die – like a placebo (how can it make any difference if according to own Pfizer study the same % of the vaccinated and unvaccinated got the SYMPTOMS after the 1st and 2nd doses – and even if they tested the participants, they hid the data).
    4) "Test" is now not calibrated on a pure, isated, contagious sample (at best the database admins compared RNA profile of the raw fluids of multiple patients – and made a bet that among many repeating strings some belong to the virus. Is it sure like science? No.) This time they run even >40 PCR cycles (while the real medicine says that the result >15 is meaningless). They also take the samples from the back of the throat to further enlarge the result (while in real medicine matters what you cough or sneeze out – so the tested patiens should just split to the test tube).
    5) A lot of people would live if now the early treatment wasn't forbidden (opposite to the real medicine, which tries to cure the patient). A lot of them would live if the therapy was less forceful (they were treated as sure-deaths, so quickly we had a log of finished clinical trials of a lot of drugs. If that's not enough, the ventilators attributed to the lung destruction. The room-temperature air us pumped under higher and higher pressure – and it abruptly expands in lungs warmed up to the body temperature – and gradually turns lungs into a mash. If that's not enough, patients who can breathe, are paralyzed to not fight with the tube – but it weakens their heart too and slowly kills.)
    6) Easy to check – there's no proper science not only behind these "tests" and "vaccines", but also behind the lockdowns and masks. All trials has show that all of the official measures are meaningless. But the "expert" bodies say the opposite to the real science and claim their words are the actual science, and run unprecedented censorship. (In real science a scientist or and MD can decide and speak for himself – and if something is against the line of certain body, only the employees of this body can't speak in the name of this body.)
    7) Easy to check – the proper science has proven the importance of vit. D3, zinc, antihistamines, Ivrmctn and other old drugs – but the bodies of "experts" try to hid it from us or fool us that what works us dangerous and that the real science is fake.
    8) Like in case of AIDS, like now the press announcements go before the science, "because the science is settled". Like then like now the real story is about the new costly research and drug that failed (then it was the AZT against cancer and about failed research on retroviruses causing cancer – this time it's about the mRNA vaccine against cancer – check what happened to the animals it was tested on), but miraculously has a new use. Then and now the unsymptomatic must use it regularly for the rest of their life. Then and now it's forced on us. Then and now it's about the virus absent in the ill and illness absent in the test-positive. Then and now it's about unsymptomatic spreaders. Then and now it's about being afraid of what never killed us in the real world (the sex and the social encounters). Then it was about a wall of a condom – then a wall of a mask. Like then like now it's Fauci. No surprise – people don't change, simple as that.

    And you say that people don't trust science? SCIENCE? What are you talking about?

  10. While agree on the “buck stops at the top” point. Windy opening society not only has the kids issue that was correctly brought up. But as we have seen in more open areas the health system begins to buckle. So then the health system stops functioning for the rest of society. I truly see a risk for everyone here. It’s like a speed limit. We could not have any but then there is a high probability of more fatal accidents. So the personal choice of one who chooses not to abide by a suggested compromise can risk others in society. It’s complicated for sure. And it’s tricky to navigate but long term. Having limits to the opening until we get transmissions down seems like the correct choice.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Loading…

0