The Philip DeFranco Show - Scumbag Streamers Harassing People Are Just Getting Worse... & Today’s News

Episode Date: April 4, 2024

Visit  https://www.cozyearth.com/defranco and use my code DEFRANCO to get up to 35% off your purchase! Go to  https://prizepicks.onelink.me/LME0/DEFRANCO to download the PrizePicks app today for a first deposit match up to $100! ==== ✩ TODAY’S STORIES ✩ – 00:00 - Public Nuisance Streamers Are Out of Control 03:22 - YouTuber Fighting to Change Ownership Laws As Physical Media Gets Eradicated 07:48 - Sponsored by Cozy Earth 08:48 - The U.S. Campaign to Undercut Baby Formula Regulations Worldwide 17:45 - Sponsored by Prize Picks 18:50 - Botswana Threatens to Set 20K Elephants Free in Germany Amid Dispute 22:34 - Man Who Received First Pig Kidney Transplant Leaves Hospital in Good Condition 26:02 - Your Thoughts on Yesterday’s Show Accursed Farms’ Game Ownership Resource: https://www.stopkillinggames.com/ ——————————   Produced by: Cory Ray Edited by: James Girardier, Maxwell Enright, Julie Goldberg, Christian Meeks Art Department: William Crespo Writing/Research: Philip DeFranco, Brian Espinoza, Lili Stenn, Maddie Crichton, Star Pralle, Chris Tolve, Jared Paolino Associate Producer on Baby Formula: Lili Stenn ———————————— #DeFranco #Gaming #AndrewTate ———————————— Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Sup, you beautiful bastards. You're watching the Philip DeFranco Show. We got a big Thursday dive in the news today, so let's just jump into it. Starting with... We should talk about this growing problem of so-called public nuisance streamers, or I mean, let's just call it what it is. Assholes who have found out a way to monetize being assholes by streaming themselves being assholes. And it is what happens and grows when you have platforms that do not properly moderate. With some platforms doing such a shitty job, some people might argue that they're doing not properly moderate. With some platforms doing such a shitty job,

some people might argue that they're doing it on purpose. With specifically many pointing their fingers at the platform Kik, and most recently, the creator Kizzy, who reportedly is around 14 years old, and yesterday, a clip of his livestream went viral. You see him walking past an outdoor patio restaurant, he dips his hands into a woman's nachos, and then walks away while eating one.

But then, one of the women from the table gets up, she follows him, and it leads to this extremely cringey confrontation. I will. I will. I want to know how old are you, five? Do you guys have a fight? Do you guys have a fight? Do you? Do you? All right, hold up. Do you? Don't do that again. Hold up. Yeah, shut the up. And you've also got clips from that day showcasing more of his bullshit. Like one where he's seen getting into a fist fight

with someone. While you had some fellow trash cheering this stuff on, this struck a nerve with a lot of people. There being a mountain of comments like, with social media, respect has become something we used to know in the past, like the dinosaurs. It's extinguished. As well as might be time to raise the streaming age requirements. As well as a lot of people trying to tie this to the culture fostered by Aiden Ross and Andrew Tate types. Although I would personally say that the Tate connection here, I think that

that's a stretch. It's a bit forced. This is definitely more connected to the Aiden Ross beat, specifically because of the kick connection. But then even more so to like the old school Fousey streams, as well as creators like Neon and Jack Doherty, who you've probably never heard of, but they're big in their section of the internet. You know, with all this, unsurprisingly, this was a big topic in the streaming space. So that's why we ended up seeing a lot of streamers reacting to Kizzy as well. He's trying to do what all of the other public nuisance streamers do by just being a societal hemorrhoid. He just graduated from suckling milk out of his mother's bosom and now he's trying to suckle milk out of jack doherty's titties here the problem is that a lot

of the platforms don't ban you for this activity and also like if you're a little kid this is what's going to seem cool to you there's nobody that um has gone through puberty who laughs at this i don't justify and like I'm not a fan of violence, but I'm as close as you can be to a fan of violence in this situation. Now, I will say, while there's constant criticism of Kick not really properly moderating their platform, and even when they do crack down on people, it's pretty short-lived. Currently, it does look like Kick took action against Gizzy

because his profile is no longer available. It was unclear whether that was taken down for yesterday's stream or for another clip that's resurfaced of him smoking a joint. But ultimately, that's where we are here. And we'll have to wait to see how this plays out, not only to see if like this, this ban or whatever the heck this is, if it sticks or how long it's for, but also if this problem in general continues to grow. Because in no way is the problem limited to this one asshole. What he is doing is a copy of a copy of a copy of people that are popular on this platform. And anyone who's even glanced at the IRL streaming space has seen this. You got

people harassing others, fights just breaking out into the streets. To a lesser extent, people driving cars at 150 fucking miles an hour. And it's just going to be a matter of time before a person or people get killed during one of these live streams in the public streets or roads. And then let's talk about physical media, digital media, and what it means to actually own something. And that's a broader general question, but specifically we're talking about this today because the gaming world is at this boiling point right now,

grappling with that topic of what it means to actually own a game. And this issue has gotten even more attention lately after a video by the YouTube channel A Cursed Farm started blowing up. Because in it, he details how games have shifted to a digital-only buying model and how the publishers also run all the services for the game. So what happens when the publisher takes over the responsibility of running the game? Well, it's usually pretty good while they support the game. Then when they stop, it's a complete nightmare and it's responsible for destroying more video games than any other practice. That's a big shift because the industry

is trying to get users to go from a model where they get to keep their game regardless of when support ends to one where the game dies forever. I'm not a fan. Right, and this isn't like some sort of abstract issue. With his video in particular voicing frustrations with Ubisoft's decision this month to completely shut down The Crew,

which has sold 12 million copies. Because you know, if you spent the 60-ish dollars to buy the game, too bad, so sad. Because even if you had a physical copy, you still need Ubisoft servers to play. And this is really different from how many online games used to be, as they allowed individuals to host their own servers. So that even if a developer stopped servicing a game, you could still play it with your buddies or on your own. And then it feels even worse when you're talking about a single-player game. Because you have a lot of people going, why would I even need to connect to a server? With people looking back going, you know, I should just buy a disc for my

PS2 or a cartridge for my N64. Hell, I can still jam those in today and play. Also, to be clear, this is not an exclusively Ubisoft problem. Tons of companies do this. Square Enix shut down its Final Fantasy VII-inspired Battle Royale title last year. So did EA with their mobile version of Apex Legends. And in fact, this is so widespread, studies show that only 13% of games are still available commercially from their publishers. And most of those are because studios have shut down, or there's just not a commercial market for them anymore.

But you can at least get most of the older stuff secondhand and you still play it. Which brings us to the biggest thing. When the game is 100% digital, you're kind of screwed. And this isn't an issue just in the gaming space. The shift to not physically owning goods has happened across the entertainment industry. Like, I don't even, I don't remember the last time I bought a physical piece of media. It was however many years ago I falsely convinced myself, I'm definitely going to watch a Blu-ray this time. I mean, sometimes even getting a Blu-ray or a physical CD, like, that's a hassle.

And it's also led to weird trends like vinyl suddenly becoming even bigger and popular. Like, there's a cool factor to actually owning a physical thing. You know, gaming really wants that shift to happen in their space, with Ubisoft's director of subscriptions recently saying, One of the things we saw is that gamers are used to, a little bit like DVDs, having and owning their games. That's a consumership that needs to happen. They got comfortable not owning their CD collection or DVD collection. That's a transformation that's been a bit slower to happen in games. As gamers grow comfortable in that aspect, you don't lose your progress. If you resume your game at another time, your progress file is still there. That's

not been deleted. You don't lose what you've built in the game or the engagement with the game. So it's about feeling comfortable with not owning your game. And so it's because of all this that Accursed Farms has decided to try and make a change with the Stop Killing Games initiative, with a group pushing for legislative changes that prevent studios from selling games and then shutting them down with no way for you to access what you bought. And so to combat that, they want these changes to be made for when a company decides that it's going to end support for a game. The first is any game sold or licensed, for those of you who want to be pedantic, will be required to be left in a functional state when support ends.

This does not mean a 100% perfect state, but it means a hell of a lot better than completely inoperable. It would also require no connection to the publisher or affiliated parties in order for it to continue functioning. So it would need to be patched to either be offline or have private hosting only. It's the only way. Anything less and the game dies. So this would also apply to games with microtransactions. Except we didn't say microtransactions since these were in plain English. So this would cover free-to-play games.

Because if you've been sold something like a virtual horse, but then the publisher destroys the game, well, now you can't access your horse. And finally, these rules cannot be superseded by end-user license agreements. You know, with this, they recognize that this is an uphill battle, especially here in the States. But, you know, a ton of people have complained about this problem across the entertainment landscape. Because as convenient as it is to have everything online, you're kind of just inherently trusting a company to not screw you over in the long run. And honestly, it feels like more and more these days. That is specifically what they do. Once your money transfers from your pocket to their pocket, they're like, thank you. Why do you look so familiar? Have we met

before? But hey, that's a story. Of course, I'd love to know your thoughts. Also, if you want to support Stop Killing Games, I'll link to them down below. While the first petition focuses on the crew, it offers ways that you can pressure your local officials and lawmakers to make changes that you want to see. And then, so I was recently asked, what is your favorite thing on Cozy Earth? And I found myself just not being able to stop at one thing to say about the fantastic partner of today's show. I mean, from the first time I felt those sheets, they blew my mind with their superior softness. And I'm not kidding when I say I felt like I was hugged all night long sleeping on these sheets. Because we got to talk about the quality of Cozy Earth's materials. Made with

viscous from bamboo, wash after wash. They just feel as amazing as they did the first night that we slept on them. They still look pristine. And equally as important, they're crafted with temperature regulating technology, adapting to your body's needs to ensure a sleep experience tailored to you, no matter if you run hot or cold, which also makes them perfect all year round. If you got commitment issues, you're worried about commitment, Cozy Earth stands by the quality and We'll see you next time. and enter DeFranco to get up to 35% off at checkout. Upgrade your nights and transform your days with Cozy Earth at CozyEarth.com slash DeFranco and enter code DeFranco. And then, you've very likely not heard about this, and understandably so, but we need to talk about

how the United States has waged this dirty, underhanded global campaign to advance the corporate interests of baby formula makers, all while fighting regulations and undermining the efforts of developing nations to protect the health of their children. Because that's what was just exposed in this absolutely stunning investigation by ProPublica. They reviewed emails and memos by U.S. officials, correspondents to foreign ministries, letters from industry groups and academic research,

as well as then conducting interviews with dozens of experts and government officials in almost two dozen countries. And the final product we're left with is an unprecedented look into America's decades-long effort to protect the $47 billion formula industry at all costs. Since the 1980s, countries and international groups have been trying to discourage the promotion of drinks intended to replace breast milk, particularly formula, which you see sold globally by huge companies like Mead Johnson, Abbott, and Nestle. And that first came after reports in the 70s that hundreds of thousands of babies in developing countries were getting sick and dying after drinking formula, with one study finding that during the peak of that controversy, an average of 212,000 babies in low and middle

income nations died every year from preventable deaths linked to formula. And there were a number of reasons for this. Some parents lived in places with contaminated water that babies were exposed to when formula powder was mixed with it. Also, over diluted formula caused serious malnutrition. But at the very top level, breast milk is simply healthier than formula. It provides essential antibodies that can help prevent babies from getting sick. Even the U.S. Agency for International Development, USAID, promotes breastfeeding for the first six months after birth because of its well-established health and economic benefits, saying on its website that breastfeeding is one of the highest returns on investment of any development activity. And then on the flip side, a lack of adequate breastfeeding is associated with economic losses of about $302 billion each year,

as well as annual preventable deaths of 823,000 children under five years old and 20,000 women. Now, all that said, it is true that formula is absolutely essential for babies who don't have access to breast milk. But public health experts have long said that aggressive marketing by formula companies encourages mothers to give their babies formula instead of breast milk, even when they have the option. One report by the World Health Organization and UNICEF explaining, the evidence is strong. Formula milk marketing, not the product itself, disrupts informed decision-making and undermines breastfeeding and child health. So with all this, in 1981, the WHO passed the International Code of Marketing of Breast Milk Substitutes. And here's a fun fact you might not

know. Because of that decision, formula is actually one of two products that have international recommendations for marketing, with literally the only other one being tobacco. The U.S. voted against that code, making it the only member country to do so. But still, 144 countries adopted those voluntary restrictions, and while they're poorly enforced in many places, and because they're not mandatory, there have still been some major benefits, with studies showing that breastfeeding rates

rose in countries that embraced the marketing ban. But money's gonna money. With baby formula sales falling, the big corporations in the industry found a loophole, instead creating products for older babies and toddlers that weren't covered under most regulations. To grow the market for that branch of formula, which they called toddler milk, companies started adding nutritional supplements like the omega-3 fatty acid DHA. While the industry claimed that DHA helped brain and eye health, that hasn't been

proven, and studies have shown no links to brain and eye development. Beyond that, nutrition experts have noted that there are big doses of sweeteners and sodium in some brands of toddler milk, with studies showing that babies who breastfeed longer aren't as likely to become obese and develop diabetes as babies who drink formula. So many public health experts have criticized these companies' marketing tactics. Like last year, we saw the American Academy of Pediatrics

publishing a report warning about the advertising for toddler formula. With that, the lead author of the study saying these products are, quote, misleadingly promoted as a necessary part of a healthy child's diet. Also adding that they're actually worse than infant formula for kids under one

and offer no benefit over much less expensive cow's milk in most children older than the age of 12 months. But despite all that, these marketing ploys have worked fantastically. Not only have toddler milk sales grown, they have surpassed baby formula sales worldwide, skyrocketing 25% over the last decade at nearly $20 billion, even though they're way more expensive than milk. Two gallons of toddler milk can cost as much as $30.

And the high sales there also benefited the sales of infant formula. Because by marketing toddler milk, these companies also indirectly promoted baby formula. And that's even in places that prevented them from explicitly doing so, via cross-promotion. With regular infant formula sales also growing about 10% worldwide to $15 billion in the same period. And for the big formula companies, expanding to developing economies is even more beneficial for sales because it creates this positive feedback loop. For example, the CEO of Mead Johnson explaining during a 2013 earnings call that mothers who give their babies formula instead of breastfeeding can enter the workforce earlier, which then gives them more money to continue buying expensive formula products.

And all the while this is happening, as formula sales were thriving, the big multinational manufacturers were forcefully fighting efforts by developing countries to regulate formula. And all of that with the backing and muscle of the U.S. government. And yes, that's even though it goes against the government's own stated position and efforts on breastfeeding as stated by USAID. And according to ProPublica, the Office of the United States Trade Representative was at the center of many of these efforts, with emails showing that USTR staff was, quote, in regular contact with formula makers and their industry groups through meetings, calls, and position papers, which the industry used to hammer its objections to regulations around the world. Documents also show that USTR officials and others and other trade-focused agencies would then echo those claims and, quote,

communications with other countries or in international forums like the World Trade Organization. And as ProPublica noted, these endeavors were first made public back in 2018 when it was reported that Trump administration officials threatened to withhold military aid to Ecuador unless the country dropped a WHO resolution supporting breastfeeding. And while U.S. officials denied those allegations, ProPublica wrote that its investigation has discovered that the scope of the interference far exceeded that incident and continues today under the Biden administration. And describing this as a worldwide crusade against regulation that has spanned Republican and Democratic presidential administrations and touched more than a dozen countries, including South Africa, Guatemala,

and Kenya, as well as Southeast Asian nations such as the Philippines, Malaysia, and Vietnam. And in many of those places, those efforts have worked. Like in Hong Kong, for example, where authorities ended up watering down proposed formula regulations after U.S. officials sent a letter saying that the rules could result in a significant commercial loss for U.S. companies. Similarly, a proposal in Indonesia was also stalled after the U.S. questioned it at the WTO. But the most egregious and detailed example in this investigation is Thailand, which notably is the seventh biggest formula market in the world. And Thailand actually adopted the WHO's code on marketing for breast milk alternatives.

But that's had very little impact because manufacturers just don't care about violating it. With a 2022 study identifying as many as 227 instances of formula marketing that went against the law. And a Thai doctor telling ProPublica about a meeting two decades ago where health experts begged formula companies to comply with the voluntary regulations that they regularly broke, but saying instead they refused and adding, one company said, if I do not violate, I cannot compete with other companies. And explaining the tactic is I will violate your law and prepare the budget for the fine. Also beyond that, Thailand's restrictions haven't done much to limit practices like cross-promoting infant formula through toddler milk marketing. And there's been a very

real impact, right? In 2022, just one in three mothers in Thailand exclusively breastfed their babies during the first six months. And the worst part of all this is that Thai officials have actively tried to address these issues. But again, the U.S. government intervened, preventing the country from taking steps to help their own kids. Right back in 2017, when Thailand's breastfeeding rate was among the lowest in the world, health officials tried to put an end to aggressive formula marketing, arguing that it misled parents and even persuaded them not to breastfeed, contributing to the nation's low breastfeeding rate. But according to ProPublica, U.S. trade officials worked closely with formula makers to wage a diplomatic and political pressure campaign

to weaken Thailand's proposed ban on formula marketing. They wrote pointed letters to Bangkok asking questions like whether the proposal was more trade restrictive than necessary. They also criticized the bill of bilateral trade meetings at the WTO, where those kinds of complaints can result in expensive legal battles. When the government ultimately did pass the legislation, oh shocker, the parts that the U.S. had complained about the loudest, they got watered down or removed entirely. While the law banned advertising infant formula and outlawed cross-promotion, it still allowed marketing toddler milk products for one to three-year-olds. And also with this, wouldn't you know it, there's even more. Because the U.S. is meddling in other countries' efforts to safeguard the health of their own population,

it goes beyond just fucking up individual nations. They've also done it at the international rulemaking level. For example, back in 2016, the World Health Organization released recommendations on ending the promotion of formula products for toddlers and infants. But almost immediately, the formula industry launched a massive lobbying campaign, with companies and trade groups spending nearly $7 million lobbying U.S. officials about who matters just that year. And that's after they hadn't lobbied the government on who matters for the last decade.

And so as a result, U.S. trade officials repeatedly questioned science. Setting up fights with health officials, including the CDC, which pushed against removing language from the guidance that the trade officials ignored. And in the end, the U.S. delegation successfully convinced two nations not to endorse their own staff's recommendations. Instead, just voting on a watered-down version of the guidance that seriously undercut any utility. And that had a very tangible impact on the ability of countries to set their own staff's recommendations, instead just voting on a watered-down version of the guidance that seriously undercut any utility. And that had a very tangible impact on the ability of countries to set their own regulations. Right, just after that, when Thailand first proposed its new regulations, the U.S. and other big dairy producers accused the country

of trying to obstruct trade. And when Thailand countered by pointing to the WHO's own guidance, the U.S. hit back by arguing that the guidance wasn't an international standard. Though, of course, that was because they had fought to make sure the guidance lacked enforcement. Right, and all these efforts are still ongoing today, despite the fact that the Biden administration told ProPublica that it was respecting the role of foreign governments to make their own regulatory decisions. Clemming the USTR under Biden has moved away from efforts that

give power to corporate players over foreign governments. But there, the outlet found that in 2021, Biden admin officials pushed back against stricter formula marketing rules in the Philippines, saying they had fears about regulatory spillover in Southeast Asia. They also tried to remove some language from a proposed ad ban in Kenya. And in fact, just last year, during a conference in Germany, U.S. officials opposed a reference to formula ad bans in a new international food standard for toddler milk, noting that the move came after industry lobbying. But ultimately, that is where I'm going to end this segment today,

which I guess is your semi-daily example of corporate interests interfering in other countries. Again, news. And then, the final four in PrizePix are making this season even more exciting for me, because PrizePix is a skill-based fantasy game where it's just you against the numbers, and I'm pumped to be partnered with their team. You just pick more or less on two to six players' stat projections. You adjust your entry based on the potential payout displayed in. You watch the winnings roll in when you're right. And for additional assistance, you can type in the name of your selected player and find their stats from their last five games and their averages during that span. This week, I'm selecting Steph Curry,

more than 26 and a half points. Draymond Green, less than eight points. And my man, Dean Murray, more than 19 and a half points. Personally, I always pick less on Green because there's always a chance he's going to punch someone in the back of the head and get ejected. You know, PrizePix is the largest independently owned daily fantasy sports platform in North America with something for everyone. Basketball, hockey, League of Legends, and everything in between. You know, PrizePix is the largest independently owned daily fantasy sports platform in North America with something for everyone. Basketball, hockey, League of Legends, and everything in between. You can pick LeBron, Kaitlin Clark, Connor McDavid, and Jude Bellingham all in the same entry. And with injury insurance, if your pick exits a game in the first half and doesn't return in the second, PrizePix won't count that as a loss. Which means it's no wonder

PrizePix is the number one fantasy sports app. Easy gameplay, quick withdrawals, and an enormous selection of players and stat type. So get in on the action and up to $100 first deposit match by clicking the link in the description to download the PrizePix app today. And then... You know, countries threatening one another,

it is not entirely uncommon in international politics, but how they do it is usually unique. You know, the United States, if it doesn't get its way, sometimes they're like, smells like there's oil under your capital. Or in the case of Russia, they're like, maybe we have to use no, cool no.

Is that, that's not the accent. But easily the most unique threat I've seen is that Botswana has threatened to send 20,000 African elephants to Germany. And according to Botswana's president, Moholy-Nagy Masisi, the one who made this threat, this is not a joke. Right, so basically what had happened

was that the German government has been floating the idea of putting stricter limits on the import of hunting trophies because they have concerns about poaching. But Massisi says that this would just impoverish ordinary Botswanans and limit their ability to deal with what he says is overpopulation of elephants in the country. And saying to German media, it is very easy to sit in Berlin and have an opinion about our affairs in Botswana, but we are paying the price for preserving these animals for the world. And as far as what the situation looks like on the ground, while elephants remain endangered globally,

they're like everywhere in Botswana. The country has roughly 130,000 elephants, including 6,000 calves born every year, living across an estimated 40% of the country's land. And that's in part because of the country's successful conservation efforts. Dan Challender, a conservation scientist at Oxford University, saying to the BBC, Botswana's...

When does fast grocery delivery through Instacart matter most? When your famous grainy mustard potato salad isn't so famous without the grainy mustard. When the barbecue's lit, but there's nothing to grill. When the in-laws decide that, actually, they will stay for dinner. Instacart has all your groceries covered this summer. So download the app and get delivery

in as fast as 60 minutes. Plus enjoy $0 delivery fees on your first three orders. Service fees, exclusions, and terms apply. Instacart, groceries that over-deliver. Ranked first in the world for conserving megafauna, including African elephants. So it's got a really successful conservation model, and that happens to include trophy hunting. And with that, part of this is arguably because a lot of the revenue from trophy hunting goes to funding conservation efforts for vulnerable species. And to that point, Germans are actually

among the largest importers of hunting trophies in Europe, with a lot of that money then reportedly being used to fund sustainable conservation in many African nations. And as I mentioned before, according to Massisi, the success of the conservation efforts has actually led to overpopulation, which has in turn threatened the lives and livelihoods of Botswanans. And that's actually a point that Challenger agreed with. But I think the president of Botswana is seeking to highlight the high cost of conserving megafauna species, including elephants. The people of Botswana incur those costs through loss of life in some cases, damage to crops and damage to property. And I think it's important that we consider the high cost that people pay to conserve and live alongside species such as

elephants. And you know, notably, African countries have long accused Western groups and governments of pushing for conservation policies that limit their ability to deal with these large elephant populations. With Botswana's wildlife minister just last month threatening to send 10,000 elephants to London after the UK proposed a ban on the import of hunting trophies. And at that point, Challenger also told the BBC that Germany, the UK, and most other Western countries manage their wildlife in much the same way as Botswana,

allowing animals to be hunted when they start messing with people. And also saying the idea that proposed import bans would help protect threatened or endangered species is essentially unfounded. But of course this, is there are a whole lot of people who disagree. For one, of course, many animal are a whole lot of people who disagree.

For one, of course many animal rights activists simply argue that hunting is cruel and should be banned no matter what the numbers are. And on top of that, many conservation and animal rights groups argue that the alleged benefits of trophy hunting are lies spread by the hunting lobby. For example, while Botswana has a quota system for trophy hunting meant to ensure

that the animals aren't over hunted, poaching remains a major problem. For example, the Telegraph reporting in February that a poaching surge had seen 60 elephants killed in just three months, with poachers specifically targeting so-called big tusker elephants, of which there are actually only a few dozen left in the world. And many conservationists also say that one of the big arguments for trophy hunting, that it brings money in for the country and the local communities, that that's unfounded. With Kitty Block, CEO of the Humane Society of the U.S., saying in an

interview with CBS last year, Well, it couldn't be further from the truth that killing these animals, trophy hunting these animals, brings in more money than ecotourism. It doesn't compare. A living elephant can be seen over and over again. It's been estimated over $1.6 million in wildlife ecotourism alone.

With all that said, I gotta pass the question off to you. What are your thoughts with this? And then this news could be a game changer that saves hundreds of thousands of lives. Because we just got the news that the first person to receive a genetically modified pig kidney transplant just left the hospital in good condition.

Because two weeks ago, doctors at Massachusetts General Hospital performed this landmark first of its kind procedure on 62-year-old Richard Slayman. And according to reports, Slayman has had kidney disease for more than a decade. In the past, he had gone on dialysis, which is just a nightmare. He already received a human kidney transplant back in 2018, but since then he had become seriously ill. So with very few choices left for him, he opted for this experimental procedure,

which I mean, a lot had to be done for this transplant to go forward. Doctors at Mass General spending a year planning and getting the necessary approval, including from the FDA, which allowed the surgery under its compassionate use rules for cases where a patient has a serious or immediately life-threatening disease or condition and there are no other alternatives. And then, of course, there was the kidney itself, which had to be genetically altered by scientists to increase compatibility and decrease the chances of rejection. But all of this fell into place, they did the surgery, and yesterday, Mass General announced that Slayman had been discharged and is recovering well. Doctors saying the kidney appears to be functioning properly, producing urine, removing waste products from the blood,

and carrying out other functions. And then a statement shared by the hospital, Slayman himself said, this moment leaving the hospital today with one of the cleanest bills of health I've had in a long time is one I wish would come for many years. Now it's a reality

and one of the happiest moments of my life. And adding, I'm excited to resume spending time with my family, friends, and loved ones free from the burden of dialysis that has affected my quality of life for many years. Now, notably, with all this, Sleiman's still going to have to take several medicines and receive close monitoring through multiple weekly tests and doctor's visits. And while everyone obviously is hoping that this is going to be successful and Sleiman continues to heal in good health, it's of course unclear right now if his

body will eventually reject the organ. Because while this is the first pig kidney transplant, two patients had previously received genetically modified pig heart transplants, and unfortunately, both of those failed. But the first patient, who was the first in the world to receive a genetically modified pig's heart, dying two months later, they're being reported that he suffered several complications and traces of a virus that infects pigs being found in his heart. And then the second patient dying about six weeks after his procedure. And while he showed significant signs of progress early, the heart eventually began to show signs of rejection in later weeks. And so with these transplants, it's more of a long game rather than a short game. But regardless, this kidney transplant is a huge deal, with the New York Times even explaining, the transplant and its encouraging

outcome represent a remarkable moment in medicine, possibly heralding an era of cross-species organ transplantation. And one expert telling them that this brings the possibility of animal-to-human organ transplants significantly closer to reality. You know, the fact that this was done with a kidney is also super significant, because those in need of kidney transplants make up the vast majority of people waiting for organs. Four out of every five people in the organ transplant waitlist need a kidney. That's nearly 90,000. And one day, hopefully later rather than sooner, I mean, I'm going to be one of those. I got botched genes. I have polycystic kidney disease, just a fun little thing. And while you see 90,000 people needing a kidney, like in 2022,

only 25,000 people actually received kidney transplants. And while you see 90,000 people needing a kidney, like in 2022, only 25,000 people actually received kidney transplants. And for kidneys, that was actually a good number. That was a record number of transplants. And all this is according to the National Kidney Foundation, 12 people die every day just while waiting for a kidney transplant. And that's just considering the people on the list.

There are also more than half a million people in the US who are on dialysis. Well, that might be enough to keep many of them alive for now, or at least a little bit longer. One, talk to pretty much anyone on dialysis and they'll tell you it's just fucking miserable. But also, two, it would be absolutely life-changing for them to have a chance to get kidney transplants so they don't have to undergo the expensive and time-consuming treatments. You know, we're gonna have to wait to see what happens because a lot has to happen before we get to a point where this gets better. Right, pig kidneys would have to be successfully

transplanted in numerous patients and researched in clinical trials before they'd be made widely available. And then there's also questions about the logistics of scaling and integrating these genetically modified pig kidneys into the current medical system. But hey, there's a glimmer of hope now that wasn't here yesterday. And then finally, today we have yesterday today where I dive into those comments on yesterday's show and see what y'all had to say yesterday. Not a surprise. There was a lot of conversation around the global monkey tortureure Network. With Chrisip saying, Rocker saying, With people like Minotaur even going as far to say,

It should be along the same lines as CP. If you possess it or make it, you should be jailed for it. Because as we talked about yesterday, the focus is on the actual killings and or the distribution. Because among those being charged, we didn't see people just possessing it getting charged. And also one of you beautiful bastards saying, this is the first Philip DeFranco show to ever make me cry.

I consistently can't believe the horrible nature of quote human beings, seeing how big of a contrast there is between saviors and villains there is when it comes to innocence, whether human or animal. My heart breaks for every creature submitted to the terror and cruelty capable of man. There was also a decent chunk of conversation around the anti-diet movement being co-opted by big food. Cleo saying, the anti-diet movement story frustrates me. As someone with an eating disorder, it's hard enough

as it is just trying to reframe and heal so many problems that diet culture has shoved down our throats for decades. I've tried to reach a point where I can just feel comfortable eating without worrying about these false stigmas that continue to be promoted so much in our society. So to know these companies are coming in and wanting to try and fuck things up even more just angers me. It leaves me feeling like I can't have any trust in any food, which just makes matters feel worse for my eating disorder. Also, shame on the dieticians that decided to promote products with these companies. Like, they're supposed to be scientists helping people with things like eating disorders challenge and recover from their problems, not add to them.

They're supposed to be using science to show how diet culture talk is false, not be leaning into companies that helped promote slanted dialogues that lead to many of the diet culture stigmas we have today. And Shane Tapp adding, regarding the General Mills movement to call the truth about food shaming, I was just explaining to someone tonight how most people don't realize how we were all victims of social engineering to support big money's causes. There was a time when there were advertisements claiming cigarette smoking was good for you too. This is simply the newest, more scientific approach to get people to believe whatever they want you to believe. And then finally, there were a lot of people talking about that guy that pulled a gun on that Burger King employee, who did nothing wrong. He literally was just explaining that, hey, you got a discount.

But Tallness saying, the patience Mr. Howard has is literally inspiring. Gun violence is something I have expected to potentially run into in any public setting. The fact that he can calmly talk about having a gun pulled for such a backward reasons beyond me. Props to that guy for mindfulness. And FlowWolf saying, As someone who has years of customer service experience, the general population has zero compassion, rationality, and patience. I wish people would defend workers when people dehumanize workers.

With GamesFromSpace adding, Our species really shouldn't be allowed outside without a guardian. And Mr. Bryson sharing his experience saying, My local BK told me about a breakfast deal i was grateful i partake twice a month folks please recognize that our face-to-face employees do not decide policy it's nothing personal they're just trying to make a living they are us stand with them please pretty please fine but only because you said pretty please i was this close but you said the magic words yeah but the the main thing i got from a lot of the comments,

because yesterday's show had a lot of negative news, is maybe I need to just make three extra large shows a week so you guys get a little breather instead of just four days back to back, because I feel like I may be ruining your mental health. Actually, I don't know. I'll think about it. Everything's staying as is for now. And that is where your dive into the news is going to end today. Thank you for watching. I love your faces, and I'll see you right back here on Monday.