Andy Wakefield, MD IAOMT - International Academy of Oral Medicine and Toxicology

Video Transcript:

Mary's Hospital Medical School University of London in 1981, he qualified as Fellow of the Royal College of Surgeons in 1985 and was awarded a fellowship of the Royal College of Pathologists in 2001. He has published over 140 original scientific articles, book chapters, and invited scientific commentaries and pursued in pursuit of a possible link between childhood vaccines, intestinal inflammation, and neurological injury in children. Dr. Wakefield lost his job, his career, his fellowships, and his medical license. Say what? He is the author of the National Bestseller, Calus Disregard, and an award-winning film director and co-founder of the Autism Media Channel. Please give a warm welcome to Dr. Andy Wakefield. Thank you very much. Thank you. Thank you guys. Thank you. Thank you so much. What a great pleasure to be here. Two medical groups cooperating in the interests of their patients. How unusual that is, I think. You don't see that very much anymore, but it's a great pleasure to be here. First of all, a huge shout out for two people first is Kelly Gallagher, who is a co-producer on the movie Bax. Kelly took time out from making her own movie on dental malgums to help with Bax, which we are most grateful and to Stuart and Unleaf, Stuart, are you here for helping with this movie? Thank you very much, Stuart. This is the Bax Bus. It looks better. It actually is better standing still. It's broken down so many times. It's currently on tour. The film went out in April. As you probably know, it was accepted as an official selection for the Tribe Back of Film Festival, run by Robert De Niro. We were absolutely delighted. Robert De Niro and his wife Grace have an autistic son who was vaccine injured. Then there was pressure put on them immediately. It was announced by the Sloan Foundation and Pharmaceutical Connections. The film was withdrawn. This is an extraordinary situation. The last bastion of free artistic expression for independent filmmakers gets infiltrated by pharmaceutical interests. Absolutely astonishing that censorship is rife in this country in the film industry. Not as surprised to many people, but Robert De Niro, a few days later, went on to the deletio and talked about nothing but the film that did not play at Tribe Back of That Is Vaxed. Everybody should see this film. We should never have done that. It launched across the country. We were given three days to launch a theatre, an independent theatre in New York. We had about $5,000 in the bank, absolutely no advertising. Suddenly the film exploded. It's now played in over 100 cities across America. It's number one documentary on Amazon. It's number two on Amazon films behind Walking Dead, which is something of an irony. It's now going abroad. It will go down in the history of advertising as there is no such thing as bad publicity. It has been reviewed multiple times by, on the basis of the trailer only, by the New York Times, by the L.A. Times, by the Washington Post. People who have never seen the film and yet feel able to give an opinion. It always struck me in uncalled me all of fashion that you would have to see the film before writing a review. Clearly it's no longer the case. So, Pauli Tommy, the producer of the film is out on the road at the moment. Del, Big Tree, the producer from L.A. is joining her. They're going up the East Coast. They're done the West Coast. And the bus will remain on the road. God willing, until the election. But one thing has struck me when I've been on the bus tour and doing Q&A with the film. But as a clinician looking after children with autism and investigating their problems, we were focused on autism and vaccine injury. What became abundantly clear when we got on the road and talked to people is that this was about vaccine injury. It wasn't about autism. That there were, for what struck me most of all, were the number of deaths. And you will know, as clinicians, you don't see parents after the child dies. There is no clinic. There is no support group looking at gluten-casing free diets for their children. People are left to grieve. They are left with their tragedy. And they go away. You do not see them. The doctor does not acknowledge that the death of the child was due to a vaccine. It was a sudden infant death syndrome. And they left for grieve. So people would come to us and say, I have not talked about this for 20 years. I haven't talked about this for five years. My husband has never talked about this. And they came and they told their stories. Gareth Hill, the number of teenagers. When I first got involved in this, the medical solution for this problem was this is coincidence. Autism symptoms just start around the time that children have their MMR vaccine. So it is coincidence without any due diligence, without any investigation whatsoever. They leap to the notion that this is just coincidence. Well, that is not the case because historically autism was there from the beginning. There was no such thing as regressive autism, but then there was. But for a 16 year old girl who was a cheerleader, suddenly paralyzed or dead. That argument of coincidence. That's just when girls become paralyzed. Doesn't work anymore. Doesn't work. Yet medicine has dismissed these stories and it's been extraordinary and heartbreaking to be on that tour and to listen to so many stories of vaccine injury. It is far, far, far more pervasive than I ever imagined before. So where will this all end? How will this end? A line from Shakespeare in love? I don't know. It's a mystery. And I've been looking at the world through the lens of the camera in making this movie and have moved more and more into that field. So what I want to do now is to just create a movie with you. Let's create the outline, the structure of a movie script that kind of tells this story. Here is Aristotle. Over 2,000 years ago he really defined the characteristics of every story, that every successful story that was told since the structure of story. And so we looked at Aristotle to begin our journey. And a comedy and a tragedy. What do we mean? What did Aristotle mean when he described comedy and a tragedy? Well, in by doing a film, a screenplay, a tragedy is a story. We always think of term things in terms of the protagonist. Not from your position of the audience, but from the protagonist. That is how we have to understand the structure of story, the main character. A tragedy is a story where the protagonist fails to overcome a flaw. So the key is we have to define his flaw and falls from good fortune to bad. And that usually means, but not inevitably, that the film has a sad ending. A comedy is essentially the opposite. A comedy is a story where the protagonist is able to overcome their flaw. They're confronted, they address it, they overcome it, and they learn its opposite. They go from flaw to strength. And the protagonist sees their fortune go from good to bad. Sorry, from bad to good, which usually means it has a happy ending. So those are the terms that we apply to tragedy and comedy. So if I say to you that the godfather is a comedy, in Aristotleian terms, it is a comedy. It may not seem that way from your perspective, the audience, but from Michael Corleone's perspective, whose flaw was naivety. I'm not going to be my father. Of course, he could not avoid the legacy of what his father had done. And he did become his father. And so it was a comedy because he had a flaw. He addressed that flaw and he became the new Don Corleone. So we start with the protagonist and I've struggled in trying to define the protagonist for this particular film, The Screenplay. Who would it be? Who are we going to tell this story about? Well, I believe the protagonist and their flaw, I think the most, this is, I was looking for this, and this is really the most telling statement of all in defining the protagonist. We're going to make the protagonist in this case public health. We're going to make it public health. This is an extraordinary line. This came from Simpsonwood. Boyd Holywell, Haley will know. So well about Simpsonwood. Simpsonwood was where they took the data on Fimerisol exposure in childhood vaccines. And with the industry and scientists from the CDC and FDA and elsewhere, they manipulated the data four times until they got rid of an excess seven-fold increase risk for Fimerisol exposure. They committed fraud. The problem with that is they had no one who, from the inside, who admitted to that fraud. But this is from Dr. Johnson who was present at that meeting and this for me defines the flaw. We found a cultural difference between vaccinologists and environmental health people. Many of us in the vaccine arena had never thought about uncertainty factors. We tend to be relatively concrete in our thinking. We had never thought about uncertainty factors. The flaw is certainty. They were certain that what they were doing was right. And because in screenplays, because we are for the most part human, then we need a protagonist who is also human. You can't have public health as your protagonist doesn't work. You don't empathize in any way with public health. So let's make Dr. Johnson public health. Let's make this the story about the protagonist, Dr. Johnson. And his flaw is certainty. And his flaw is belief is that vaccines are safe and effective with certainty, with absolute certainty. Let me just give you an example of where in a film this really comes into play. You'll recognize this from Jurassic Park. And they're in the laboratory at the beginning of the movie and they're looking at the eggs hatching. You'll remember this. And the doctor picks up an egg and he says it's a velociraptor. Oh my God, what have you done? And the Chinese scientist says, don't worry. They are all female. They cannot reproduce. It's going to be okay. And the mathematician says you do not understand. Nature will find a way. There was uncertainty. Scientists were absolutely certain that what they were doing was going to have no consequence whatsoever. And that is the essence of the film. That is absolutely captures the essence of that film. The certainty versus the uncertainty. And the uncertainty being the truth and being the reality. Nature will find a way. And nature does. When you offend nature, when you alter nature by small degrees, if you change the way in which the human being sees an infectious agent, for example, then nature will exact a huge price and it may not do it immediately. If you change the ecosystem, if you put mercury into people's mouths, nature will exact a huge price on your health. It may not do it immediately. It will do it over time, but believe me, it will do it. That is the problem for people who are certain about what they are doing. That is right. Then their thinking is fundamentally flawed. So Dr Johnson's floor is certainty. And these are the kind of statements that characterize that belief system. This is from the Institute of Medicine 2004. Will you see papers about vaccine safety starting with statements like these. Almost apologizing for doing the study in the first place. Vaccines are among the greatest public health accomplishment of the past century. You have Dr Paul Offit, who goes even further. Child immunizations are one of the greatest achievements of all time. These kinds of statements do not countenance uncertainty. They are absolutely certain in their position. Now, the protagonist in the first act has to have a set up one. Something that he wants. It does not have to be the main one. Something happens as we move towards the end of the act one in his first dialogue scene that he expresses his want. Now, let us take Michael in Tootsie, Dustin Hoffman. Michael's floor is that he does not respect women. He wants a job. He wants a job. Bear that in mind. His want is to work. He wants to act. His floor is that he does not respect women. The belief, the certainty, the set up want, based upon the belief that vaccines are the best thing that we have ever done and that they are safe and effective, is universal vaccination to eradicate infectious disease. That is what what Johnson's want. That is what public health wants and believes it can achieve. Now, there was an impediment to this. I can give you two examples. One was the reaction to the original swine flu vaccine. The big problem with transverse myelitis, in particular, that caused public alarm about vaccine safety. There were several incidents with polio vaccines, particularly the kill polio vaccine, the cutter incident that had to problems. The legal cases, the cases in court, when the drug companies could be sued for vaccine injury caused by DPP, deaths and permanent neurological disability. This led the industry to say, we don't want to be in this business anymore. It is a small backwater where fragmented, we are not making a lot of money. These are not high-price vaccines. You want us to give them. You have to give us indemnity. The impediment was the public fear of universal vaccination. It was going to be rejected. Towards the end of the first act, the protagonist gets his want. He gets his want. Getting that want came with the passage of the National Childhood Injury Vaccination Act in 1986, signed into law by Ronald Reagan, who did not want to sign it. He had major reservations about signing that act. That came into law. That had the effect of indemnifying the industry against vaccine injuries caused by their products for vaccines that were recommended by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. There was no liability whatsoever. All claims had to go through vaccine court before they could proceed to federal or state court. They got their want. He got his want because now the impediment had been removed. Firstly, the one-in-a-million children damaged that they estimated were catered for. It did not believe that these vaccines were causing damage, but they said it is dealt with. That collateral injury is, we can now compensate those children, and there was no problem with supply. The industry now was free to supply these vaccines unconstrained by the risk of litigation if their vaccines caused injury. Dr Johnson got his wish. As we move to the end of Act 1, there is a catch. In every great movie, there is a catch for Dustin Hoffman in Tootsie. He had to dress up as a woman. He got the job. He got to act, but he had to dress up as a woman. So he now had to address his fundamental flaw that he did not respect women. All of this happens in the first act. That is the catch. The public health and the job of Dr Johnson is uncertainty. Stephen Erickson, a quote from this writer, He argued that every certainty is an empty throne. For those who knew, but one path would come to worship it, even as it led to the cliff's edge. I want to talk briefly about uncertainty. Heisenberg's uncertainty principle, and this applies to quantum mechanics. In quantum mechanics, the uncertainty principle asserts a fundamental limit to the precision with which certain pairs of properties of particles called complementary variables, such as, for example, the position of a particle in its momentum can be known. And what it says in effect is that the closer you know to defining one variable, the further you get from defining the complementary variable. The closer you come to knowing the position, the further you get from precisely knowing the momentum. So does, is there an uncertainty principle that applies to vaccines and vaccine safety? Yes. The first thing to bear in mind is that uncertainty is far, far greater in biological systems than in quantum mechanics. Let's just look at virulence. The virulence of an organism, for example, depends upon the dose, the strain, the root, that it's given by the age which is given the health of the individual who's receiving it at the time, and competing unsinigistic variables. So competing variables, another vaccine given at the same time. Competing with the immune system, this phenomenon of immunological interference, or synergistic giving mercury at the same time, or aluminum at the same time, that can pervert and potentiate an adverse immune response to an agent. In other words, there are a very, very large number of variables, each of which influences the other. And so the uncertainty principle in vaccine safety, remember, the floor is the certainty. The certainty of the system, Dr. Johnson, that these are safe and effective, and it's been proven, and we all know it. Therefore, it's safe to have them. It's safe to give them to everybody. The methodology, the uncertainty principle asserts a fundamental limit to the precision with which certain properties of a vaccine, when administered, complementary variables such as dose and strain can be known. The large number of complementary variables, four vaccines, any one of which, may influence another, creates an infinite uncertainty for this very reason. Vaccine safety is predicated upon infinite uncertainty. And so the only certainty in vaccines and vaccine safety is uncertainty. And so the fundamental floor and the catch, which must be exactly address that fundamental floor, the catch in the movie must address the fundamental floor, is that it's a lie. The certainty, the very foundation of the belief that vaccines are safe and effective, and we're certain of it, is a lie. We simply don't know. So, and as I say, the lie has to be, or directly address the certainty, the floor. And as we come right to the end of Act One, we reach a point of no return. The protagonist, Dr. Johnson, is now on his journey to death or glory. The stage is set. And here in Act Two, the being apt to really defines when we come to the difference between a comedy and a tragedy, which trajectory is this going to follow? In a comedy, the protagonist confronts his floor, or his floor confronts him in the passive sense, by virtue of the choices that he makes. And this confrontation in the drama leads him to his very lowest point. He goes against the system. He comes down to his lowest point at the end of Act Two. And in contrast, in a tragedy, then he reaches the moment of triumph at the end of the second act. And then it all changes. Now, I wonder something else in here, another player, that influences the story we're telling profoundly. And that is the parasite, the pharmaceutical industry. The industry is not the protagonist. It's public health in this particular scenario. But the parasite, who it's seemingly at first is a saprified, there's a mutual benefit, a commensal to these, to this relationship. It's not bad at all. The industry is actually a parasite in this case. It pretends to be the friend of the system that is actually simply manipulating it and benefiting from it. Lady Macbeth comes to mind in this instance, that she drove the fundamental floor of Macbeth, that is ambition, to his final destruction. She benefited by proxy from his position. The end, she couldn't handle it either. And our story I'm afraid is a tragedy. The tragedy formed the minor number, maybe 5% of Hollywood scripts, of Hollywood film plays. Nonetheless, they are extremely important in our understanding. And the tragedy here is that the decision that Johnson makes is not to confront his floor and address it and deal with it and act for the real greater good. He decides to go on a different course. He decides to reinforce the floor, to do everything he can to pursue the utilitarian principle that what he's doing is for the greater good. So, what does he do? There is a dramatic increase in the vaccine schedule. From the passage of the act, from 1983 it goes from but a few vaccines to a huge number of vaccines, with a total of 70 doses by the age of 18. Absolutely extraordinary expansion, because there is no constraint anymore on the industry. There is no risk of litigation. They can put any number of vaccines onto the market and all they can do is profit. What kind of business model is that? The parasite is doing extremely well now based upon the certainty of the protagonist that he is doing the right thing. Vaccine mandate laws are passed. They give you exemptions. They give you in certain states, a burried belief philosophical, religious or medical exemptions, but they are passed across the country because the belief is the greater truth excludes the lesser. The greater good is served by these vaccines which we know to be safe and effective. And so the problem escalates. As we come into act two, what we have are accumulating injuries and deaths, the appearance of new disease syndromes, public unrest and professional concerns. How is that dealt with by the protagonist, by denial, by claiming that they operate on the side of science versus anti-science, crushing scientific dissent and accumulation of immense power in the case of the CDC and immense power and wealth in the case of the parasite, the industry. And so as we move towards the end of act two, then Dr. Johnson is reinforced in his behavior. He is moving towards triumph. And there it is, triumph. Act three, we now come to what Aristotle called reversal. This is the moment which the whole thing turns around. And in the tragedy, you go from triumph to catastrophe. Because the protagonist, Dr. Johnson, failed to address his flaw because he did everything to actually increase the flaw. To make the flaw worse, then he is destined for a fall by the end of this. He made a climactic choice. And the climactic choice meant that now he is destined to fail. He fails to acknowledge uncertainty by committing, well, let's move to how that happens. Johnson is forced to confront his flaw. Why is he forced to confront his flaw? What happens? And I'll come to that in a moment. But it is one that worsens his flaw. As he moves, as we move through act three and there are now, we move into things like, for example, SB277, mandatory vaccine laws in California. It is not good enough that the system has simply created these laws that mandate vaccine to get into school, but there are exemptions. That no longer works because people are seeing through the problem. They realize these vaccines aren't safe. They're seeing injuries in their schools, their communities, in their homes, in their families, and they're saying no. Actually, this is real. We weren't anti-vaccine. We took our children to get vaccinated. Now look what's happening to us. We're falling apart. We've never seen a sicker nation of children ever in this country. This is the first population of children, this first group of children who will not outlive their parents. They will not live as long as their parents. The first in the history of the world. So what is going on here? And there is unrest and so the response in enhancing the floor is not to back off. But to make it worse and say, right, we are going to take away those exemptions that you have. We are going to limit medical exemptions to the bare minimum. We are going to take away religious and philosophical exemptions to hell with the Constitution, to kill with your individual rights. We know better. And so we have SB277. We have 29 states now that by 2015 had tried to pass mandatory vaccination act. In Virginia, they're trying to take away the rights of home schoolers, not just public and private school children, to have an education but home schoolers to have an education without vaccination as well. This is what is happening in the country right now and it's going to be adult mandatory vaccination soon. It's going to be adults. It's going to start with the vets. You will not get your welfare benefits unless you are fully vaccinated. It's going to be everybody. It's going to be you in this room. If you're not to update on your vaccines, it will be you and it will be by force of law. And it's already happened. They're already written. And of course, there is this law now which allows the CDC to apprehend, detain anyone, individual groups, anywhere at any time for any duration without due process or right of appeal and administer forced vaccines if they believe is there is a risk of contagion. That is going through now. Modifications to that law. They are usurping power so they are not moving away from their floor. They are reinforcing their floor to an extraordinary degree and they are frightening us in the meantime. So because they have captured because the industry in particular has captured the media with a lot of money, they own the media, then you can read about Zika on the front page of every newspaper every day. And this happened for Ebola and it happened for Ebola every day until President Obama stood up and awarded $8 billion and it was gone off the front page immediately. The next day it was gone and Ebola was no longer a problem because the industry and the system had got what it wanted. They will go after doctors who offer vaccine exemptions. This is Dr Bob Sears from California who is currently fighting a case on exactly the spaces for giving a child a previous vaccine reaction. And I have a reaction, a medical exemption and now they are trying to take away his license. This is going to become an everyday occurrence in this country, the United States of America. What is the reversal? What is the result of the reversal that happened at the end of Act 3? Why was Johnson forced to confront his floor? Never mind the fact that he took the wrong decision and reinforced the floor by doing all those things. I just spelled out what caused him to what forced him to confront that. And the fact is the realization that his certainty, his certain belief that vaccines are safe and effective, that universal vaccination is right. Everyone he realized that it was a lie. He realized that it was a lie. Now this may operate in our protagonist at various levels. He may deny the lie but he knows the lie is there. It keeps him awake at night. There is a problem. Why is there a problem? There is a problem because one man. One man by the name of Dr William Thompson from the CDC, a senior scientist highly respected, highly awarded and decorated, who designed the study. And if this were a money laundering ring for this study, he would be the accountant. He had the hardware, the software, he had the data, he had the skills, he was the accountant. He knew where the bodies were buried and he could no longer live with the fact that they had hidden the fact that MMR vaccine was associated with a highly increased risk of autism in children who were developmentally normal to 12 months of age. In other words, the kind of children with regressive autism that we see and African American boys. If given the vaccine on the CDC schedule between 12 and 18 months, that was the period of greatest risk. They had made a terrible, terrible mistake. The CDC, let's say Dr Johnson again, the system, although Dr Johnson wasn't part of this, it's still problematic. It's still systemic within this particular structure. Rather than saying we made a mistake, we're going to address our floor. The movie wouldn't work if they did. We're going to address our floor. We made a mistake. We're going to delay this vaccine. We're going to do a bigger better study and see if we can reproduce this effect. But in the meantime, with an abundance of caution, we're going to delay the MMR until after three years. We know from our study it appears to be safe, but they decided to lie, to hide the information, and to destroy the documents that led back to this lie. And this is the decision that was taken by the authors of this paper in public health. And you will see later, if you're coming to this movie, the facts behind that story. It took one man. We have an image that was not in the movie, but was trying to capture this in a metaphorical sense. And it was a red square during the height of the Soviet Empire. And there are tens and tens of thousands of troops marching through Red Square, goose stepping in perfect unison. There are tanks, there are nuclear missiles, there is the polyp bureau saluting them. And this empire is so massive and so powerful, it will never fall. It is inviolable. And yet in the blinking of an evolutionary eye, it was gone. It collapsed. Why? Because its certainty was a lie. There was never going to be a black president of South Africa. Never. Nelson Mandela had been in prison for 27 years, solitary confinement. It was never going to happen. And then it did in the blinking of an eye. The certainty was shown to be a lie. And just as that was a lie, these are lies. And they cannot be sustained. Disposition, the certainty, the inherently flawed belief that vaccines are safe and effective. And therefore, universal vaccination is great for everybody. It is so flawed. It defies belief that biological systems can be corrupted. Where you change the age that dose the strain, the root of exposure, what's concurrent exposed, ignore the health of the child, and believe that you know that you can mutate and exploit these agents because you, homo sapien is superior to the massive collective intelligence of these organisms, particularly live viruses to survive, to adapt and to survive because that is what they will do. That is what they are geared to do. That is what they are destined to do. That is their function on this earth. It is to survive. And they will come back and haunt you in some way. And when they do, believe me, it's a nightmare. The prediction is that autism will affect one in two children by 2032 if nothing is done. And that comes from the CDC's own data, the extent to which those can be believed, of course. So I'm going to finish with addressing one issue that really goes to this. And that is in terms of evolutionary biology. There are many competing theories, but there are two that I find particularly interesting. The first one is called philetic gradualism. And that would have it that over vast tracts of geological time, species evolve at a very, very, very slow and consistent rate. That there is very little change over time, but it does occur and it occurs in a sufficient number of cases to allow the survival of the fittest. And that is the competing theory of punctuated equilibrium. And that essentially goes to the fact that over huge tracts of geological time, there is no change. There is no pressure on the genome of a species to mutate or to adapt or for new forms of that species that may be better suited to come because they don't need to be better suited because the environment hasn't changed. So genetic pressure, no selective pressure on the gene to do that until something catastrophic happens. Like for example, a meteorite hits the earth and creates an ice age. And that happens. There is a dramatic pressure on the genome of species to to species eight and to produce different, different genetic variants phenotypes from those variants that then have a differential ability to survive and some will survive. And I believe that philetic gradualism doesn't account for what's happened in the evolution of species on this planet. And I think that fire that punctuated equilibrium comes much closer to doing that. And I do believe right now in the world, we are going through a punctuated equilibrium. Within three generations, the immune system, the conditioning, the education of the immune system of children has changed in a way that is very, very dramatic. We've seen things as infectious agents before. Major conditioners, major educators of our immune system. We no longer see them by the same route, the same strain, the same dose, the same age or in the same combinations. We get three viruses, MMR once four viruses, MMR and chickenpox at once. Nature has never seen these things in this way in its entire history. And so I believe we are going through a punctuated equilibrium where we are defining public health. Dr Johnson is now defining who will live and who will die. And what's interesting that unlike a meteorite strike in the earth and creating an ice age, this is entirely preventable. Never has there been a more preventable catastrophe than this. But the first thing that we need to do is have the humility to acknowledge uncertainty for public health to address that flaw or get out the way. Because your arrogance, your belief in your superiority, your knowledge that you are greater intellectually superior to these organisms, fundamentally flawed, your certainty is a flaw. How will our play end? I don't know, some history. As I say, never was there a more preventable disaster. I believe that how it ends depends largely upon people like you, people who are highly educated and enlightened and who also I believe have the humility to understand. A lack of a flaw or have addressed your flaw that what you were told historically in your dental training was a certainty that still remains to this day in the minds of many people, but was fundamentally flawed. It was wrong. Some of you have come to that understanding through your own injuries. Some through injuries that you have perpetrated on your patients historically and some of you have come to it simply through insight and education. But you are the people now with the intelligence and the integrity to make this change, to stop this happening, to spread the word. And I believe that facts is a tool, the film is a tool. No one who watches it is the same when they come out. And I put that challenge to you tonight, to those who are going to the movie. No one is quite the same because it's not my opinion. It's not the producer's opinion. It's facts delivered to you by a senior scientist from inside the system. A scientist who did address the flaw, who if he had done the right thing or been allowed to do the right thing at the right time would have turned our tragedy into a comedy, both in an academic sense, an Aristotelian sense, and also of course in terms of common parlance of what we understand by tragedy. And comedy. So please join me tonight. The DVD is actually available just come out with all of the additional interviews that did not make it into the movie and there are some fascinating cuts in there. So I do have some copies of the DVD here. Now I would ask if you do buy one, don't keep it to yourself. Pass it on to someone who doesn't believe you. Pass it on to your doctor, your children's pediatrician. Pass it on to the family member who's mocked you for taking the position you've taken on a Malgum fillings. Take it to those who are certain in their belief and make them uncertain. Thank you very much.