commission is in fact against the manifest weight of the evidence and secondly whether the decision of the circuit court of cook county in affirming that decision that you defendants bilateral hands in hand and wrist condition was in fact related to the march sixth two thousand and three it was not hard by the doctrine of rescue to conduct the first i would go forth with the issue relative to defend his left knee now it's clear based on the heard before and after indicated to him that he had some very early signs of arthritis and he may need a total knee replacement in the future so obviously they are watching issues on going tires on march sixth two thousand and three accident that would lead us to believe that complaints following march sixth two thousand and three accident he didn't indicate any specific need pain you know kate had some pain that went down to steer your part of his leg down into his ankle what do you mean when you say looks thought it was from a different source not necessarily to the source i think i thousand and six where his you know what was the basis of his complaints and what that was the cause of that giving out on him well but why would he do that why would he indicate that he he didn't know where it was coming from why would he indicate if you knew were  was covering what these treating the condition correct you read a lot of worry about what god condition technically i guess that would be correct and i guess he doesn't really care exactly what the cause of it was from but i think and it does indicate that since he didn't know where it was coming from and he obviously was aware of his preexisting conditions his prior surgery as well as the accident he didn't for it in really indicate whether or not it was coming from the accident but well but bet aside we do have  the ailment for which you have already recovered workers compensation yes if there is if it is proven that there is another subsequent accident that's costly connected to you know some sort of work activity accident and during the subsequent treatment he received he would see the diagnosis of bilateral carpal tunnel syndrome so obviously this was known at the time of the injury known at the time during treatment the entry and  subsequent case that he filed against american airlines was settled may second of two thousand and three so that's approximately two months after the march sixth two thousand and three accident that we're here for today now as as a result of his that  this american airlines an expert relative to the by a lot of our hands he examined it and reviewed the m g m reports in the medical records through from two thousand and one the resulting treatment from two thousand and one as well as two thousand and three  t studies moved before the march sixth two thousand and three accident and after there was no change and you don't want to essentially there's what i would certainly say continue treatment or continued at least conditional bilateral carpal certain from our standpoint based on the totality of the evidence from the two thousand and one all the way up until two thousand and three when he's alleging this accident there is a surgical recommendation before the march sixth two thousand and three accident  described records the day after the accident documenting acne complaints you have dr whoops testimony that given his clinical exams the m r i findings and the lack of thousand and one claim for which he got which was done and was compensated for shoulder whether the pact that he had a bilateral hand condition was known at the time that's not on is a spurious argument he didn't recover specifically for that in t for the employer tries to point to the fact that there was testimony or hearing that at the time of the hearing is going to not have any particular backing plates that doesn't go to the issue of causation between the injury and the treatment on the back