while the overwhelming majority do not as got to be due to genetic susceptibility and or the status of their immune system of the time of the actual nation those are the only two reasons that we can have for explaining why some children react because medicine as your other just pointed out changes constantly we were not allowed to have a hearing in this case even though we asked for a hearing this case is a case where the special master decided that this was echoed a most awful she basically was stop it without mentioning it without mentioning the words no but you know not the words but you can yes there are cases i'm not sure what they are but in this case it's a very clear come on cal i don't know that cases i don't know  ago wasn't available that ended because the child had this problem and it was bound to come out and this is a very i think interesting and curious aspect in terms because a few years ago this would certainly have been attributed to the vaccinations because of the way things worked in time the vaccination immediately followed by fever immediately followed by the syringe it's because when you have families and the friends and some of the articles talk about extensive families where they all have the same mutation some of them had some severe seizures some had mild seizure some had no seizures at all and if you look at the last article that we provide in our reply brief which should have been allowed in the case because we've got a very that case that article perfectly demonstrates that you cannot that timing is a so important if you don't have the first seizure until after twelve months if you don't have any twenty seventeen which does point out significantly what we're talking about in that case i think emily well this is the point you that your i was making is that medicine changes when we are it is no longer inevitable that says that we can take judicial notice of a scientific article wasn't put foundation as we pointed out in our brief if we had been granted a hearing a hearing would have been scheduled the end of twenty seventeen by that time the article would have come out about the judicial notice if i'm not the only argument i have on that your honor is that if we have been granted a hearing which we were denied and i was denied the hearing i didn't have a chance to cross examine arraignment i didn't have a chance to present the evidence of my witness a waste of time out the cost of article for instance talks about the fact that and that's one of the articles the government does rely on talks about the fact that when i when i see jerry we know that seizures in thirty five percent of the cases where seizures occur in s c l and a a a d p t vaccine occur than forty eight hours before that so we know that the p p vaccines are substantial trigger for drive a syndrome that's highly significant that's really high the point we're making is that if this is avoided and all these articles point out that the earlier the onset dervaes the more severe it is and the more likely it is to if they had they look at early onset cases and late onset case vaccine the vaccine caused a seizure the same day the child got a vaccination eleven thirty that night the child was seizing no one's going to say that that vaccine wasn't a trigger for that seizure what they're saying though is that this was inevitable this trial would have had whether it would really with that if you agree with that then you have to go to the articles and the article say of the seizures if you don't have the first thing that provokes a seizure then six months you're reduced to fifty one percent to six months if that child had got past one year the article show that it would have been zero chance of the child developing drugs that the family article that you look at if you look at the family article the goldberg stern article which is on page thirty six of our brief that article looked at families an extensive family that took the history and they took the genetics of the heart whole family they found some had mild seizures some had severe seizures some didn't have any seizures or all some made it all the way through adulthood with never having seizures if this child had not had a seizure provoked by the actually at the time cause if this child would have made it to twelve months without having a seizure without having something that provoked the seizure the child would have likely never had row innocent never had a seizure disorder that so this is not the sole cause and it's not unrelated to vaccination how placating factor propensity whatever you want to call it well but genetic predisposition i don't know if that's the right word but anyway genetic flaw that has the seizure disorder and it's not in the record but even in epilepsy cases i believe there the science is now progressing to the question whether that's a result of an underlying disorder that has got to be identified in this case we have the specific approximate temple relationship between the vaccination and the alleged condition but even where a question i stated a prima fascia case under oath and compensation must be denied where the government has shown by preponderance of the evidence that the condition was caused by factors mutations and benign polymorphisms the nature of this variation precludes player interpretation therefore it is not possible to conclude any reasonable degree of the nicoll certainly at this time whether or not this variant is associated with being a type in question  i saw that to my mind i focus on me at this time aspect this info and your other know you have to understand what i'm trying to say and that is i agree with you wholeheartedly that medicine has changed have now they're trying to say that's a sole factor unrelated to vaccination impossible it cannot be the sole factor unrelated to the actual nation first of all an essay on why not mutation is not an underlying disease it's not an underlying seizure disorder it's simply a a genetic finding period and you don't have driven a syndrome and tell you have seizure disorder and the senior disorder is triggered by something station the baby might very well be alive and sitting here in this courtroom today normal with no no problems no dovey or anything if that child had made it well might want nothing  occurred it could have it could not either way we don't have a crystal ball it's like saying i had a case one time where they hit the expert no other side i said he agreed that the vaccination probably triggered the seizure he says but it didn't have to be that it could've been something else it could have been an infection could have been a divorced parents message but those things didn't happen what happened in this case was a vaccine so yes are there other potential triggers of seizures and drive a syndrome probably because only thirty five percent appear to be due to vaccine that's a huge percentage incidentally that's like a relative risk of seventeen as we pointed out in our brief the relative risk that if you have a drug that is that you had a vaccination than forty eight hours before that is over seventeen we normally think of relative risk in this program as being above two seventeen is huge so we know that the d p t vaccination is a huge factor in triggering drive a syndrome it's not the only one  yes and that's all pure speculation that's not an alternate because this was clearly related to the vaccination it was not the sole cause the two things together are the cause you have a genetic risk factor a susceptibility the vaccine triggers the onset of the seizure disorder the two of them work together because that we've known that forever now we're starting to identify some of the specific genes involved and maybe some day god willing will be able to look at a child's profile and say you shouldn't