questions was repetitive trauma and one was for sport certain all that time if you're analyzing the one it would be you look at the risk issues when you're doing repetitive trauma i don't think you do what was the rep there for plexus twisted with his knees up around his ears for years sitting in that position so that's that's the position resume for that time and so if you look at it from a risk standpoint he is an employee doing his job at the time and this is a unless you throw out the science of ergonomics this is a risk associated with his job and so i think you have to analyze it that way  sitting in that position for long periods of time repetitively is one of the worst things you could possibly do for your back doctor pain said it is only second to caring side work bricklayer and so the risk is very significant and he took that risk for his employer he sat at his desk every day and especially on leave for his employer to further his employer's interests by making sales he was on a mission but to do that that's what he did so he ended up taking a significant risk that quite frankly he did not appreciate at the time to further his employer's interest and so that is why if you look at what is the nature of the risk of serious while he was sitting for flexed twisted it in a position where he really couldn't move it around which unless he knew that it was a risk with his and he's a real big guy and so his the one expert said he couldn't get it he couldn't fit under the desk one expert one person said he had his ears around is knees around his ears so what's the nature of chair it's not general no i think that's right generally speaking you guys are all sitting in chairs i suppose you could be standing if you wish and people can normally stand up when they wish but he was required specially on leeds day to sit in that chair and be on the computer all day while he made leads and if he didn't it affected his compensation so that makes it to me and employment related arrests now if you analyze it as a neutral risk in other words he's got  office and he complained about it and they did liberty mutual requires ergonomic assessments because they do appreciate a risk but they didn't do one for him they didn't send him money out of the way and so the employee doesn't know what they're doing and they sat in the wrong position but that's not the right way to approach this the science is clear that sitting in the wrong position causes injury and this guy did that first work not just that day  he sat there he said and that at the trial he felt bad he started feeling his back hurt him as the day progressed and when he tried to get up he couldn't get up and he had to call his wife what happened is both repetitive trauma and that it is a single incident and i argued both of those in there and i said that you know that i've said i argued manifest weight and i argued the evidence is now and then twelve days later that and he goes to the emergency room three days later and then he has an m r i twelve days later that shows a honey your desk and you know he said after that he could not return to work he could barely stand for quite a bit of time i mean his is pain level skyrocket there's no word what put it he had a surgery within thirty days of that and and this doctor said he was ready to admit him to the hospital for pain control where do we have the nine seventy three evidence the question it balck in this case is whether or not the activity of setting at work is rich composable rather create a compatible risk of work injury and it does not  sitting except in rather extreme circumstances has always been considered a mutual rest shared by the general public but he's not arguing that merely sitting at that test it is a risk  repetitive activity from a caused by this chair that he was getting in and out of we have to save up that the physical therapist who stand in the chair following the work injury testified that is a normal chair with already testimony offered by anyone but there was a problem with this sheriff specifically the petitioner testified heard i'm going problem with the chair and while he absolutely come requested information from the lawyer tried to two thousand and seven that shown by e mails there are no documentation of any complaint after two thousand and seven about any additional problems with the chair so there is evidence in the record case has to go back with what was actually reported by the petitioner as his cause of the incident at the time of his injury dr payne who saw the petitioner about a week after the accident wrote in his medical record towards his home environment and his morbid obesity he is in a greater likelihood in my estimation of sustaining an injury to displace why attempting to referee in the soccer game in sydney you work off will record to suggest he was having a gradual i was a pain as he was sitting there so you're saying that's where i'm having a lot so you're saying that the ordinary daily activity of this arising from a share to what he would be doing and in regular day at work one out of thirty does it matter ok there's a look at other words i believe day is something that there's more than one time i think i believe they were monthly or the time they sit down for ten minutes while they're eating dinner so if you're going to eat big mission would have to did you consider all the different exposures that he has to spread i want to go back to my reference to the c purse question i asked you was vaclav record established here and whether or not that statement was supported by evidence in the record i'm not sure that you actually answered that but there is evidence to support that statement credible because there was no evidence in the record that paine understood exactly off how much time this me and spent sitting compared to how much time he spent standing if you read the  which may or may not have manifested itself with pain immediately pain is not what we're giving him the commissions giving the money for the mission would give him money for the condition of ill being that's the back prob twisting could have caused the breakdown of the respective structures in the spine over time resulting in this really nation edition also spent a lot of time talking about his work station set up but didn't spend much time providing evidence concern we had it that's why we have here he and darling say that that is an improper question for the the courts tickets to for the commission is it's not when you're talking about a neutral risk it's one of the two things that has to be introduced if you're how she knows that that was a problem so that what is the first morning about we've he said he sat there all day didn't get up and he said he started getting feeling some requires that position like i said ergonomically it's clear that sitting in that position for a long period of time costs that he had to sit there all day that one day and he had to sit there as part of his job three to six hours a day for what the job description says and he dr payne talks about that in his deposition he said he had to sit there for long periods of time he said he had to sit there for long periods of time and he had to talk on the phone for long periods of time we didn't say how many hours a day because it