Skip to content

Podcast

DOGE vs USAID, Crypto Framework, Google's $75B AI Spend, US Sovereign Wealth Fund, GLP-1s

All-In with Chamath, Jason, Sacks & Friedberg

Source ↗ ← All highlights
  • Four Pieces of Advice
    • Get good sleep, exercise, eat well, and meditate.
    • Jason suggests using Calm, Eight Sleep, FitBod, and Nutrisense. Transcript: Jason Calacanis I have four pieces of advice for people. Number one, get good sleep. Number two, exercise. Number three, diet. Number four, meditation. And if you want to do that, it’s very simple. You get the calm meditation app. You get the eight sleep sleep. You get the FitBod for fitness. David Sacks And then you get Nutrisense for your… What a grifter. He’s just talking (Time 0:00:00)
  • Twitter Takeover
    • Twitter was a disaster before Elon Musk took over; bathrooms were stocked with tampons, and woke mind virus was rampant.
    • The company was barely breaking even, with $12.5B in debt and $1.5B in interest costs, but a massive turnaround ensued. Transcript: Jason Calacanis Twitter during the takeover, where I think a lot of these techniques were first put into action. Your thoughts on what’s happening with Doge? Antonio Gracias I mean, look, Jason, first of all, thank you guys for having me. It’s great to see everyone. Chamath Palihapitiya You can see the musical. Antonio Gracias Like to see the musical. No, I booked it. We’re all going to the musical. What is it called? Jason Calacanis Is there actually a name of the musical? Yeah. Yeah. DEI comma the musical. Oh, man. Chamath Palihapitiya It’s a heartwarming story. I apologize. Getting a job that you’re not qualified for. I apologize. Antonio Gracias Yes. I think the Doge story maybe starts with the Twitter takeover. Yeah. Right. So Twitter was spewing the woke mind virus into the world, which is why Elon did it to begin with. And when we got there, as you know, it was basically breaking even. And there was going to be $12.5 billion of debt to the company. So a billion and a half dollars in interest costs that there was no money to pay which led to the turnaround i think which was the biggest turnaround like of all time it’s literally biggest Turn i think ever in history second biggest tech deal ever done 80 of the people gone that doesn’t include all the contractors that were there and you know the company’s not servicing Its debt and they just priced yesterday their but one of their bank deals at 97 cents so this is a huge win means the company’s doing extremely well other people bought the bank debt and Then the bank did trade it up to a little over 98 so 98.5 you know a giant business success a rousing business success and jason you were there for part of it you saw it it was a disaster uh This place was you know it was tampons in the bathrooms and every walk thing you could possibly imagine and no one in the office uh that the it was so bad that the pens had gone dry in the conference Rooms it was just incredible and i think that you know that’s how the so you mean the pens had gone dry because they were never being used or because they were being used so much they were Jason Calacanis Never been used yeah We got there on the Halloween weekend and we started whiteboarding and, you know, no ink. Antonio Gracias Next time, no ink. Yeah, yeah. I mean, everything. It’s incredible. But flowers were impeccable, food being made fresh every day for thousands of people and thrown away three times a day, tossed in the garbage, wouldn’t give it to the homeless. It was just, it was shockingly bad. Bureaucracy gone mad, bad incentives, people don’t care. So it was both, I think this turned into two things. One was just stop the wolf mine virus. You know, the interesting thing is they do external brand safety checks there now, and they have 99% rating in brand safety now, right? (Time 0:05:19)
  • DOGE’s Mandate
    • DOGE’s efforts aim to fix government inefficiency, mirroring the Twitter turnaround.
    • The US government’s $2T deficit and $1T interest costs necessitate a major overhaul, and DOGE’s focus on fraud, waste, and abuse offers a solution. Transcript: Antonio Gracias So stop the wolf mine virus going in the world, number one. Number two, fix the company. And both have happened. It’s been a couple of years now, right? Three years now. And both have happened. Not even three years, two and a half years, really. And both have happened. And I think you take that, that was sort of a warmup act for what’s going on at DOGE, which is, you know, the president of the United States, President Trump wants to make America great Again. And that, I think, begins with making the government great. And you got to fix it. It’s a turnaround. This is the biggest turnaround of all time. And President Trump has the courage to do it. And he’s got a great ally in Elon to make it happen in Doge. And so the numbers are pretty easy, right? We’re spending $6.5 trillion. We bring in $4.5 trillion. We got to find $2 trillion somewhere. Interest costs $1 trillion a year. The bond markets were going up. The bond bond was going up a lot because people didn’t believe that you couldn’t stop spending, creating inflation. You see those trading down now as Doge is starting to take effect. We’ll see it’s real. The stuff you’re talking about, it’s sort of extraordinary what’s happening. And, you know, Elon said this probably the right fraud, waste, and abuse. He’s got a 10% of the budget. It’s probably fraud. I think it might be low, actually. So you’re talking about you know six 650 billion a trillion in waste i think that’s probably about right that alone fixes the problem but it’s really serious about it jason for me and What scared me when i when we first started thinking about this look and i’m not there full time you know i’m uh in and out a little bit and trying to help where i can but i’m not there full Time um when i thought when this started i thought we had a democracy that had turned into a bureaucracy. Okay. What I’m afraid of now is we have a bureaucracy that is about to turn into a kleptocracy. I mean, a Latin American style kleptocracy. Okay. The stuff you’re talking about, that is pure fraud. And you’re making, we’re making some jokes out of it, the DA musical. But if you go into the data that’s coming out of USAID, what you find is, you know, there’s a lot of political contributions going on there, Politico itself being funded by USAID. I mean, that is pure corruption. That’s like a Latin American style autocracy. And we cannot let it go there. I mean, I think we’ve I think this happened just in the good time. And I’m super grateful to all the people there. There’s, you know, 80 plus people there, all patriots gone full time. (Time 0:07:52)
  • Historical Precedents for DOGE
    • Historical parallels exist for DOGE, such as the Truman Committee (1941), which saved billions by uncovering wartime spending waste.
    • The National Partnership for Reinventing Government under President Clinton also targeted government inefficiency, proving that such efforts are not unprecedented. Transcript: Chamath Palihapitiya So let me try to give you a little bit of historical context, because I think that that’s important. I think whenever I hear so many people breathlessly saying some version of WTF as if this is totally new, it’s not new. And I’ll give you two examples, but one that I really want to double click on. The two examples I’ll give you is that in 1941, the Truman Committee was formed because there was a fear that the spending by the Defense Department was completely out of whack. And this is really what gave Truman the credibility to then become Roosevelt’s vice president, was they found incredible levels of waste, fraud, and abuse during the war, before the War effort, and then after Pearl Harbor, during the war process. Over seven years, that committee, and this is in 1941 dollars, they were tasked and budgeted with only 20 or 30 thousand dollars. Okay. Over the next six years, they spent less than a million. Inflation adjusted to 2023, this is where I found the data, was about six and a half million they spent. You know how much they saved? It’s estimated they saved somewhere between $10 to $15 billion in 1941. That’s a quarter of a trillion $2023. The second example is we did this under President Clinton, and that was called the National Partnership for Reinventing Government. So the first thing that I think it’s important to acknowledge is this is not new. We’ve done Doge twice before. Both have been successful. The Harry Truman one was incredibly important because it really set guardrails for how this can be done. Everything in that committee was a Senate committee was unanimous. So it was Republicans and Democrats that found waste, fraud, and abuse everywhere. They saved an enormous amount of money. The second, which is interesting, is these last two versions of Doge were driven and led by Democrats, the same people today who are basically saying, hey, hold on a second, we have congressional Committees or we have inspector generals. And they lack the awareness to know that their own party was the driving force for this two times before. And I think it’s important to just acknowledge that those methods are not good anymore, right? (Time 0:10:08)
  • DOGE and Zero-Based Budgeting
    • DOGE’s approach resembles zero-based budgeting, scrutinizing every expense item from first principles rather than simply adding to the previous year’s budget.
    • This process prompts crucial questions about the essential role of government and fosters a vital debate about its scope. Transcript: Jason Calacanis Magnificent. Okay. Magnificent. David Friedberg I mean, what else is there to say? Eggplant emoji. Yeah, this is the eggplant emoji. It’s what we needed. If you zoom out on what Doge is doing, I think the best way to describe it is zero-based budgeting. And in organizations that go through zero-based budgeting, you do a cycle, typically annually, where you take all of your op-acts, all of your expenses in running a company or running An organization down to the studs. You take it down to zero and you rebuild it up and you say, what are we trying to achieve this year from first principles? Based on that set of objectives, those goals, what do we need to do? What’s the minimal expense we need to run? You don’t start with last year’s numbers and say, what else do we need to do and start to add on top of that? You really do a hard level, high degree of scrutiny on every dollar moving out. And that’s what Doge is effectively doing. They’re doing a zero-based budgeting on the federal government. They’re looking at every line item, and they’re asking the fundamental question, which I don’t think we talk about in the public discourse enough, which is what is the essential role Of government? And there is a great debate to be had around that point. Should government be providing humanitarian aid in international markets? That’s a good debate to be had. Should the government be providing security to nations that can’t provide security for themselves? Does the US government have a role in that? Should the government be providing loans for people to go to universities? Should the government be providing loans for people to buy homes that are overpriced, etc, etc, etc. And as we start to ask the questions of how we’re spending money, I think it ends up leading to the most important questions, which is what is the essential role of government, which I Think is the debate that needs to be had in order for the democracy to last. So I’m very happy to see the effort of Doge. And I think that it’s the beginning of what I hope will be kind of a long term process of asking the fundamental questions about essential government. (Time 0:17:46)
  • Zero-Based Budgeting at Twitter
    • Zero-based budgeting at Twitter involved halting payments to identify unnecessary expenses, revealing wasteful spending on unused software and services.
    • The biggest complainers often turned out to be the biggest fraudsters. Transcript: Jason Calacanis And Antonio, zero based budgeting was the first thing you sort of introduced when the Twitter takeover happened. Just what do we need in terms of design? What does the sales team need to hit these sales numbers? How many servers do we need? They had buildings that were $100 a square foot, if I remember correctly, that were used for storage of the furniture from the previous building that had been upgraded and were storing Them in Class A office space. Had never ratcheted down the amount of food they were making. So each meal was about $800 on average when you did the math for those 20 meals just in the San Francisco office. Maybe you could talk a little bit about how the shock and awe campaign of just freezing spending and then seeing, hey, what actually is necessary to accomplish this task worked out at Twitter, and then how you see that being executed, you know, inside of our government. Antonio Gracias Yeah, thanks, Jason. It was pretty extraordinary, actually, the, you know, the Twitter experience, the first thing you do in a journal like that is try and get the checkbook and just turn payments off and Then see what happens because there are lots of people that shouldn’t be getting paid. And sometimes they complain and sometimes you find that people that complain the loudest are the ones who are committing the worst fraud they’re the worst fraudsters in the whole in The whole game right the worst crifters the ones who are saying they’re crying uh the most amount of foul and the problem at least in twitter there were financial statements like we could Actually there was an audit financial statement and they were basically you some ways correct, I would say. There were some issues with the user growth, the DAOs, et cetera, and the incentive plans, but the actual cash flow numbers were pretty much correct. Here, the problem is much, much deeper. And it makes this zero-day budgeting question much harder, which is the way the government works, a department just basically asks for money from Treasury, and they send it out. We all run businesses. There’s a reconciliation process. You have a contract. You issue a PO against it. Something comes in. You check that it came in. Service is rendered. And then you issue a payable. And then a month later, you pay it, right? That doesn’t happen to the US government. That process is broken. It used to happen. It’s broken now. And so literally, money’s flowing out. I used to ask myself this question, why are the numbers always revised? Why are they always wrong? How can the government know how much money it’s paying? Just hit the button on the computer and figure it out. Problem is, that button doesn’t exist. We spent time early on. I was at Mar-a with Elon trying to track through, like, how does the money actually flow? No one could tell us how it actually flows. Where is it going out? People didn’t know. And totally crazy and it’s the reason he has go through (Time 0:19:30)
  • Crypto Framework
    • Support responsible digital asset and blockchain growth across all sectors.
    • Establish clear regulatory frameworks for cryptocurrencies, securities, commodities, and NFTs. Transcript: Jason Calacanis Crazy. So you did a big announcement this week on crypto and creating a framework. Finally, I caught some of it. Maybe you could just tell us, you know, from the bottom up, what is the mandate from the president? And what is your advice to him on how to make crypto move out of the shadows offshore ICOs craziness to legitimacy? What’s the plan here to legitimize and regulate crypto? David Sacks Well, the plan was really spelled out by President Trump in his week one EO on crypto, and it’s all spelled out in there. The principles of the administration on crypto, the president said he wants to support the responsible use and growth of digital assets and blockchains across every sector of the Economy. So the principles are all there. And yesterday I was invited up to Capitol Hill to meet with the chairman of the important committees that will be, that basically govern crypto. And so we had a press conference there to announce the legislative plan. You can see there, there’s Chairman Tim Scott, who’s the chair of the Senate Banking Committee. To my left and then to my right is French Hill, who’s the chairman of the House Financial Services Committee. And then to his right is John Bozeman, who’s the chair of the Senate Agriculture Committee. And then to the left of Tim Scott is G.T. Thompson, who’s the chair of the House Agriculture Committee. He’s out of frame right now. But those are the four committees that govern crypto. And you may ask, why is the Agriculture Committee involved in crypto? And the reason is because the Ag Committee supervises the CFTC, the Commodities Futures Trading Commission, because commodities all came out of agriculture. So it’s interesting. You need four committees across the House and Senate to get legislation done on crypto. It’s not just House and Senate. It’s actually two committees in each of the House and Senate. And so this is the first time where we’ve had four chairmen of the four key committees all come together and say that they’re ready to support crypto legislation. There were a lot of people on X who felt like this wasn’t a mind-blowing announcement. They wanted something that they could trade on right away. That’s not what this was. This was basically a statement of commitment from the chairs, the four committees that we’re gonna get legislation done this year, maybe in the next six months. I mean, that’s really the goal. And we’ve never had that before. So that is pretty monumental. I (Time 0:33:59)
  • Shrinking Democratic Base
    • Democrats risk shrinking their base by opposing DOGE and focusing on social issues over kitchen table issues.
    • Their focus on social issues over kitchen table issues like inflation and the economy will further alienate their traditional, pro-labor base. Transcript: David Friedberg You guys think the Democrats are going to lose people over their opposition to Doge? Is Doge really viewed as oppositional to Democrat party interests for the average person? It’s a Rorschach task. Chamath Palihapitiya I think the thing is that there was a coalition that the Democrats had, and there was a coalition that the Republicans had. The Republicans did a better job of reforming that coalition. And now I think what you’re going to see is a shrinking. I actually got this totally wrong. I don’t know if you remember a couple of years ago, but my thought at the time was if the Republicans don’t figure out how to fix themselves, they were going to go and lose for the next 10 Or 15 years. They figured it out that this is sort of this thing that I’ve been thinking about a lot is there’s a fight in Western societies and it’s a pendulum between labor and capital. And it used to be the thought, the conventional wisdom was that the Republicans were pro-capital and Democrats were pro-labor. And the brilliance of Trump is he took over the Republican Party and made it totally populist, which is to say pro-labor. And the crazy thing about the Democrats is that they are the most sophisticated liars. You had record high stock markets. So it was purely in favor of asset owners, record high deficits, record high illegal immigration, record high wage suppression. All of these things are massively pro-capital, but they tried to present themselves as pro-labor. Done. And all of this data, what that does is it’ll consolidate the Democrats to a shell of their former self. It’ll take a year or 18 months. But I think unless they figure out how to totally hard reset, they’re going to be in a really difficult struggle to find a cohort of people beyond 15 or 20% of the population for a long time. (Time 0:46:41)
  • Sovereign Wealth Fund
    • A US sovereign wealth fund, potentially anchored by TikTok shares, could serve as a stealthy industrial policy.
    • Instead of government bureaucrats, experienced investors could guide investments in key American industries. Transcript: Jason Calacanis So the Democratic Party is lost. They’ll continue to be lost. Interesting thing came up this week. On Monday, President Trump signed an executive order laying out a plan to establish the first sovereign wealth fund for the United States. For those of you who don’t know, a sovereign wealth fund is essentially an investment fund for a country. It’s almost universally based on natural resources. So Norway, Saudi, UAE, they all have Australia sovereign wealth funds based upon minerals or typically oil. The United States is not known for having the oil reserves of the Saudis or UAE or Norway. This public investment fund would be apparently anchored by potentially the TikTok shares that Trump said he wanted to get half of by giving a license. A lot of that is unclear what this license would be. It’s never existed. But this is the concept. The Treasury Secretary and Commerce Secretary have been tasked with developing a plan over the next 90 days. And the plan should include, quote, recommendations for funding mechanisms, investment strategies, fund structure, and a governance model. Chamath, you were tweeting about this. What is the point of having a sovereign wealth fund in the United States if we’re $36 trillion in debt and we just pay down? Chamath Palihapitiya I think it’s not- Where’s this money going to come from? Yeah. Well, it’s not an either or thing. And I think the point is that if there are assets that are minted effectively overnight, which I think the 50% share of TikTok would be, so call it $100, $150 billion. The question is, what should you do with it and who should govern it? I think this idea that if you had a group of five elder statesmen, so I’m just going to throw some names out there, David Tepper, Stan Druckenmiller, Ken Griffin, John Doerr or Mike Moritz, Bill Gross or some other bond guy. My point is, what you get are five people that are very sophisticated across all market categories. One of them could be the rotating CEO for some number of years. People should rotate in and rotate out. These are unpaid jobs because everybody that has these slots should be mega billionaires. So they shouldn’t be doing it for their own personal advancement. And they should deploy that capital. So as you sell down the TikTok shares, maybe as you sell federal lands and you generate more oil revenue, take it all and invest it on behalf of America into American companies. I think that’s a great, incredible idea. Antonio, you think the government should (Time 0:52:28)
  • Google’s AI Investment
    • Google’s $75B CapEx investment in 2025 signals confidence in AI’s potential.
    • While seemingly large, it represents a manageable portion of their profits and aligns with their history of strategic infrastructure investments. Transcript: Jason Calacanis We interpreting this in real time. The facts will come out over time. Let’s wrap up on Google. Google dropped 7% after reporting earnings on Tuesday, Chamath. Revenue up 12% year over year to $96.5 billion. Wow. Cloud revenue is up 30% year over year, 12 billion. YouTube ads surging 14% to $10.5 billion. Net profit was around $26.5 billion, up 28% year over year. So they are really focusing on profitability, obviously. Full-year numbers, this is just extraordinary. Total revenue, $350 billion with $100 billion in net profit. Cloud and YouTube finished 2024 with a combined run rate of $110 billion. YouTube is basically Netflix inside of Google, and their Google Cloud is essentially AWS inside of Google. The thing that made investors get concerned, Chamath, is that Google said it would invest $75 billion in CapEx in 2025, 42% jump over 2024, 29% more than analysts expect. Think about that number 75 billion, obviously, in relation to what we saw with DeepSeek doing it with maybe a little bit less, maybe they’re lying. Is this just an absolute waste of money or gargantuan number? Or is it something they can easily with that amount of profitability and cash they have absorb and use in the future? Chamath Palihapitiya I think I should stipulate that Google’s models are probably the best of all the models across a broad base of capabilities if you test for them. And so let’s start there, which is whatever they’re doing is working. The thing that they need to do is be able to translate those models now into better products. And I think that that will happen Like, for example, if you look at deep research, most of the people online that are evaluating deep research would now say that open AI is both faster And just better on the margins. All of these things can be improved. I don’t think that’s a comment on the base model. I think it’s a comment on post-training and how they’re attempting to productize these things. So the other thing that Google has is a money machine that directly benefits from these AI-driven optimizations on ad targeting. The only other company that has anywhere close to the same credibility is Meta. So I think what both of these two companies need to do is do a better job of explaining how that $ billion gets segregated. How much of that goes to these AI enabled models that actually do better ads optimization. There’s a really interesting discussion by a former meta machine learning engineer on X about how they did it. It’s pretty amazing. It’s staggering. But if they could say half the money goes to that and the other half goes to more speculative, you know, pre-training and post-training, I think the market would have eaten it up. So it’s probably more of a disclosure issue for Google because I would say right now their model quality is the best. You have (Time 1:09:03)
  • Navigating Job Displacement
    • Embrace American agility and creativity to navigate job displacement caused by AI.
    • Reduce regulation and empower individuals to start new businesses and adapt to the changing economy. Transcript: Jason Calacanis Tony, I don’t know if you’ve been watching the agent space or deep research that came out from Google and then closed AI, I mean, OpenAI launched their copycat version of this product. Sorry, I don’t have feelings on it. I’m curious your thoughts on job displacement. We’re looking at self-driving. Obviously, Waymo’s got cars on the road. Obviously, Tesla, which you were previously on the board of. And I know you were the first institutional investor in Tesla. Self-driving’s pretty good. I only get like one or two disengagements per hour, and they tend to be the ones where I just want to take the turn a little sharper kind of thing. So that’s getting pretty close. BYD is very close. You got a lot of job displacement that occur. Millions and millions of drivers in 10 years could lose their jobs. Researchers working at Gartner Group, whatever, Boston Consulting Group, like it feels like there could be massive job displacement. Do you have concerns about that in the American economy and globally? Antonio Gracias There’s a lot of handling about this, and it’s real. In prior moments of large disruption, there have been job displacements because there’s no generous people to get retrained for something else to get retrained. You know i think uh there were studies montana freeway did of the steel industry in pittsburgh in the 70s that the cost of each steel worker job loss was about a million dollars to the economy Because these people couldn’t be retrained and that might happen here but i’m gonna i have a more benign outlook personally what i think is going to happen is that you will have job loss Uh but the amount of productivity that will be released in the u.s economy is going to be extraordinary, right? So, GDP growth is a function of the number of people working times productivity. It’s very simple. Economists want to make it more complex than that, but it’s the number of people working times productivity. If productivity goes up to 5, 6, 7, 8%, you get a massive boost in GDP growth. And then what happens? Well, people can get retrained. They can get different jobs. Different services happen. People start companies. The application layer of LLMs is just starting. The barrier to start a company is quite low. Things like launch probably explode because there’s all these people who don’t have jobs anymore that were accountants and want to start something. It’s hard to know what happens. I believe in American agility. I believe in this country. I believe that we will figure out a way to make this all work. And if there’s enough productivity and money in the economy that’s flowing, people will find new jobs. They will find new businesses to start. They will find new things to do. We have to get out of the way, take regulation down, let Americans be creative and unleash the American productivity machine. Let’s make that happen. (Time 1:17:10)
  • GLP-1 Study
    • A macro study using VA data reveals GLP-1 agonists’ positive health impacts beyond weight loss, including reduced cardiac arrest risk.
    • Increased nausea and vomiting were noted, but benefits included reduced risks of shock, liver failure, and respiratory failure. Transcript: David Friedberg No, the one I wanted to do is that new macro study on GLP ones, which I think is super interesting. Oh, tell us. You guys remember, I talked a while ago about how they were able to mine VA data. So the VA, right, they they take care of veterans, and they have all the medical records. And on an anonymized basis, they can make that data available to researchers. And so if you guys remember this, this is how they identified that the Epstein-Barr virus or the virus that causes mono as being statistically certain to be the trigger for multiple Sclerosis. In the cohort of hundreds of thousands of patients that were in this data set, no one got MS that didn’t get Epstein-Barr virus. If you did not get Epstein-Barr virus, you did not get MS. I don’t know if you guys remember, I did the Science Corner a while ago. Anyway, so the data set that you can mine at the VA is incredible. So they pulled all the data from everyone that’s been on the GLP-1 agonists, and they identified all of the health effects across multiple indications, the statistical difference Between the cohorts. Okay, so this research team out of St. Louis pulled all the data from the VA database. And basically, they looked at, you know, 1.2 million people with diabetes that didn’t take anything compared to 215,000 that took the GLP-1 receptor agonists and another 600,000 People that took other for diabetes. So basically this cohort segmentation allows them to isolate the effect of the GLP-1 drugs. And as you can see here, this shows across hundreds of thousands of patients, the effect of the GLP-1 on a hazard ratio, which means like how likely are you to have the following health Condition versus the population that’s not taking the GLP-1s. And then on the right, if you scroll to the right, Nick, are the increase in risk and on the left are the things that go down. So the increase, the only thing that increased is like, you know, 8% or 10% increase in nausea and vomiting. Yeah, can confirm. Musculoskeletal complications, GRD, which is, you know, gastric reflux from sleep, obviously indigestion. Yeah, and sleep disturbance is probably related to indigestion. So it’s all abdominal stuff. Now, if you go over here to the benefit side, so the benefit side is what conditions did you see a decrease in? So you have a decrease in shock, decrease in hepatic failure, so liver failure, respiratory failure, cardiac arrest. In fact, on cardiac arrest, you see a 30% decrease in the probability of having cardiac arrest from the cohort that’s on the GLP-1 versus the alternatives. Jason Calacanis Schizophrenia? Bulimia? Wow. Schizophrenia. David Friedberg So this goes to the point, if you guys remember the interview I did a couple months ago with the CEO of Eli Lilly, that they have all these clinical trials going on right now for different Indications for the GLP-1 receptor agonists, that they’re seeing that there’s health benefits beyond just the weight loss in reducing things like kidney disease, obviously liver Problems, mental problems, and so on. Chamath Palihapitiya Do we know why? And if we don’t know why, do you think it’s because this is suppressing the food and it’s the lack of food or the change in the food consumption that’s creating this? Do you know what I’m asking? Like, do you think the drug is actually, yeah. Yep. David Friedberg So you should watch the interview I did with Ricks in fact this is a good moment to call it out if you haven’t seen it it’s actually yeah i think he highlights that this class of drugs there Are you know genes get turned on and off so there’s a you know what’s called a gene expression cascade that occurs with certain compounds so we know that the glp1 receptor agonist means That it binds to these glp1 sites and there’s a cascading effect of genes that then get expressed. And what that seems to do is turn off things like inflammatory markers, it turns on things like CERC-2 genes, which can actually increase cellular repair. So there seem to be other benefits from these drugs beyond just the appetite control. And it’s not the appetite control itself, but there seems to be other effects. Let me ask you a question from these uh these receptors being activated would you put your kids on this no okay would you put your wife on this i would consider it and i would consider it For myself too just for the anti-inflammatory effects how will you make that decision well for me personally and the thing that i weigh against is the muscle loss and the bone density Loss. So I think that if you look at the biggest kind of effect on these on the downside basis is you should increase your protein in your diet. You have to do weightlifting. There’s things that you would do. And frankly, if you do those things anyway, if you increase protein in your diet and do more weightlifting, you’re actually going to see very good health benefits from just doing those Things that may actually outweigh the benefits you get from being on the GLP-1. Antonio Gracias I have a question for you, Dave, which is, and this is the question, is when you look at that data and you talk to the COs, how much do you think really long-term, when the long-term sides Are out, is going to be that it was the drug or just that being obese is very bad for you? And so when you take your body fat down dramatically, all these other gene expressions happen anyway, right? So which one will it be? David Friedberg Well, this is what they’re starting to isolate. And I will say, Antonio, they are starting to see that there are other expressions that are not related to the obesity in people that don’t have obesity that they’re using, that are using These drugs. So they’re seeing that cohort data now. Clinical studies, phase two were published, and I think we’re going to see phase three and some of these indications soon. But it is looking very positive that it’s not just the loss of obesity. Now, to your point, being obese, not exercising, eating poorly destroys your health. You stop that. Right, right. Everything gets better if you lift weights. Freebrook, (Time 1:23:21)