set of workers. >> what does it do to particular jobs, or you can look at it as what it does to many jobs. what you're saying is that even if we thought this and factories, the increase in productivity nevertheless created bigger companies and complex design requirements. >> the factory workers themselves became more highly skilled. this notion that you're putting out there is a little bit dire and simplistic. the last time that we hopped on an airplane to go to a fight, how many of us were hoping that the pilot had a for filling experience on that flight. >> if it's born for the pilot,

that's good news for us. >> let me respond that there are two different ways to look at this as i said. or you can assume that we're going to create a rich level of jobs. and as you writing write in your own book, that richer level of jobs is the need away and there's no sign that there is this huge big further increase and are taking it on faith that it's going to spring magically from all of that. and when you introduce sophisticated software, people began to have more homogenized jobs and become more reliant on computers and push it up to a higher level. >> as for the pilot, for a hundred years the story of automation in air flight has

been about increasing safety and efficiency and if you look at what is happening in recent years, we see that now the pilot are playing for about three minutes and a flight and what happened to them is what happens to all of us, they lose situational awareness, the skills get rusty, and we are seeing this new kind of accident began to emerge, automation related accidents where something goes wrong because the skills are rusty and we see the plane crash. plaster the faa said that you really have to get pilot to be more engaged and practice their manual skills while flying. and so the story of automation in the airlines is a good story up to a point and then it shows that you can take too much responsibility and have too much skill and have too much control be taken away from a person and then you get the opposite effect. if we back up a little bit and

actually respect the skill of pilots and give them more control and responsibility, i predict that we would have would have even safer flying than we would today. >> you can watch this and other programs online at the tv.org. >> from the 2014 book festival held in virginia, eula biss talks about her book on immunity. her book is "on immunity: an inoculation." she was the recipient of an award for a woman writer specializing in nonfiction. this is a little under one hour. >> we started encouraging reading and the sussex price for the lifetime achievement in fiction and now we are getting

an award for someone who writes in nonfiction. the goal to create the awards is to try to focus attention on what is important and on writers whose work is important and bring writers and readers together, this is celebratory and very much part and parcel about the festival is about. she has one numerous awards and that includes the national book critics circle awards as well and we thank you very much for coming and accepting a humble price compared to some of the others that you have one. the previous books include this one came out in 2002 and tonight we will have for sale or newest

one on immunity. and despite her credits is the beginning point is a writer. what i noted in her work was just a positions in the self-contained irony that fills our lives. she focuses the bright light of her writing and attention on them in ways that make us aware of them and makes it impossible for us to ignore them. she's engaged and entertaining at the same time in her work. and in her first book she says that anecdotes and others, this

navigate through complex relationships with one important distinction, that she offers no pre-john conclusions. instead it's a continuation of these arguments. and so this includes keen insights and we are all connected and she began with a history that was put out by city council members and other public officials and if you think today's battles about obamacare are kind of like weird, imagine the officials cutting down telephone poles because they

didn't want a phone coming into their community. and the telephone company had to go to extreme measures of putting guys on the top of the polls is that they are to keep them from being cut down until the lines actually got stretched, and then they became protected by law. and so it's fascinating. and so here we are, how can you live without a cell phone and when it first came out they couldn't sell at. that kind of juxtaposition that i find compelling about the work. she talks about being held when she first moved to new york.

and she says before i could get downstairs and get into my apartment, she says that truth is that she was painfully lonely during her first days in new york. she didn't know anyone who could help her get it up to her apartment and so she couldn't move it. she asked the landlord about this and she said she had nowhere else to go. and so she's a truth teller in this way and she makes the truth with which we can make our vital connections. the newest book starts with her own motherhood and has a desire to protect things. she leaves that to the myth and

fairy tales to provide happy lives for them and instead be somewhat an unprotected heel or unwittingly gives them to the devil instead of protecting them. she writes of the consequences of the unknowing act. including the belief that public health measures are widely held by many people like me. and the simple fact that we need this to become functional so we couldn't completely sanitize ourselves even if we could. this includes compelling immunizations with too much government authority that they don't trust. but she also knows how that actually grows out of the state easily translating to a kind of body of the state which is armed

and has a head of government and you can see how the body and the government become mixed and in the final paragraph she writes that we might imagine ourselves as a garden with in the garden. and it is a strange in her garden and we host this in good and bad dispositions during both fruit and thorns. perhaps community is sufficient. and immunity is a shared space, a garden that we can together and the criteria for calling someone smart ways by charlie's

measure that she is a uniquely and power empowering person. and she enables us to hold them all in our head at the same time. and i'm very happy and pleased to be able to present to you the mary roberts reinhart award for a woman working in nonfiction. [applause] >> thank you for that, it's incredibly generous for an introduction. this is a tremendous honor for me and one that is particularly meaningful because of who she

was. she was a working mother and grandmother and a nurse and a prolific writer and the author of a work that inspired and spoke publicly about having breast cancer when it was still unmentionable. i hope that something of her legacy might be reflected in the book that i'm about to talk about today. this is due in two weeks. and i'm going to read a few passages from the beginning because you know the end now. so i will start at the very beginning and then skip around a bit. and the first story that i ever heard about immunity was told to me by my father, a doctor, when i was very young. his mother tried to make him immortal and she burned away

mortality and she said achilles was left to injury were a poisoned arrow would you kill him. he was immersed in the river that divides the world from the underworld and his mother held her baby by his heels to dip them in the water leaving him to fatal vulnerability. the river is where he began and that is why across the sky in the distance he dangled from his mother's hands by one leg with his hand and head and shoulders under water. this is clearly no ordinary bath. the three headed hound crow that the base of the painting where the baby's body matt the river as if it was being plunged into

the water. it suggests paralyzing the task. to prepare children for the hazards of life, my mother read grimm's fairy tales every night before bed and i don't remember the brutalities to which those are famous i just remember their magic. void no bigger than a him, 12 others that became 12 swans, and it didn't escape my notice as a child but the parents and those tales had a maddening habit of getting tricked into making bad gambles with their children's lives and in one story the man agreed to trade with the devil ismail and he takes away he's giving his appletree and he sees his daughter standing on beyond the mail. in another story a woman who has been longing for a child becomes pregnant and craves a plant

called rapunzel that grows in the garden. the woman sent her husband to steal the plant and when he's caught, he promises to take the girl away in a tall tower with no door. her latest greek myth was an ominous prophecy by locking her in a tower. and this included leaving her pregnant with a the child a later kill the king. when the edifice was left on on the mountainside to die was shaved by a shepherd, he was not saved from the prophecy foretold that he would kill his father and married his mother. he could neither burned or drowned this mentality. and the child cannot be kept from its fate. though this does not stop the

gods themselves from trying. his mother very immortal and heard a prophecy that her son would die young and she made every effort to defy this, including after he was discovered to be a boy, she asked the god of fire to make a shield for him and it was emblazoned in the earth and ocean and the universe was the shield. and the story my father told me when i was young was not the myth of achilles but another ancient story and as my father relates this, i understand why a confused the two and it leaves a small spot on his back where he is unprotected.

after having been victorious in many battles, he was killed by one blow to that spot area and immunity is a myth these stories suggest and no mortal can ever be made invulnerable. the truth of this was much easier for me to grasp before i became a mother. it includes an exaggerated sense of my own power and powerlessness and i found myself bargaining with fate so frequently that my husband and i made a game of it, asking each other what disease we would give our child for prevention against another. and the terry of the impossible decision. when my son was an infant i heard many variations of all that matters is that he is safe and i'm wondering if that is all that mattered as often as he wondered if i could keep them safe and i was certain that i didn't have the power no matter what it might be.

but i was determined to avoid the bad gambles of these tales and i would not let them because by stupidity. .. metaphor for the vaccinator is who inflict a wound on infants. bloodsucking monsters of the engine folklore word hideous but victorian vampires could be seductive. the, cobb said to loud emt vampire dramatize the fear that

there was something sexual in the act of vaccination. jennings idea that was reinforced when sexually transmitted diseases were spread from arm to arm vaccination. victorian vampires like victorian doctors work associated not just with corruption of the blood, but also with economic corruption. having virtually invented a paid profession in been almost exclusively available to the rich doctors were suspect to the working class. bram stoker's count dracula keeps dusty piles of gold coins in his castle and gold coins poor from his cloak when he is dead but it is difficult to read in asset vaccinator. of all the metaphors suggested within the plentiful pages of directed the disease is one of the most obvious. temecula arrives in england just as a new disease might arrive, on a boat.

he summoned rats and is ineffective evils spreads from the first woman he bites to the children she feeds on unwittingly at night. what makes dracula particularly terrifying and what ticks the plot of the story so long to resolve is that he is not monster whose monstrosity is contagious. germ theory was widely expect -- accepted when dracula was published but only after having been ridiculed her earlier in the century. the suspicion that microorganisms of some sort cause disease had been around for so long that the theory was already considered outdated by the time louis pasteur demonstrated the presence of germs in the air with his corked and uncorked flasks. among the vampire hunters who to dracula sterilizing his coffin so he cannot take refuge in them are two doctors who initially disagree on their diagnosis. the younger doctor can't bring himself to believe in vampires

despite the evidence so the older doctor delivers an impassioned speech on the intersection of science and faith. let me tell you, my friend, he says, that there are things done to date in electrical science which would have been deemed on wholly by the very men who discovered electricity, who would themselves not so long before have been burned as wizards. he goes on to evoke mark twain. i heard once of an american who said the final phase, that which enables us to believe things which we know to be untrue. he meant that we shall have an open mind and not let a little bit of truth check the rush of the big truth like a small rock does railroad track. dracula is as much about this problem, the problem of evidence and truth as it is about vampires. in proposing one truth may derail another, this invites

enduring question. do we believe vaccination to the more monstrous than disease? deep within every man there lies the dread of being alone in the world, forgotten by god, overlooked among the tremendous household of millions upon millions, in 1847. that was the year he finished works of love in which he insists that love is known not through words but only by its fruits. i read the first 50 pages of works of love in college before giving it up out of exhaustion. in those pages kierkegaard unfolds the command and you shall love your neighbor as yourself, parsing it almost word by word so that after exploring the nature of love he asks what is meant by as yourself. and then what is meant by your neighbor and then what is meant by you shall. overwhelmed, i stopped reading shortly after kirk a guard asked

who, then, is one's dnieper, which he entered in part with neighbor is what philosophers would call the other. that by which the selfishness and self love is to be tested. i had read enough at that point to be troubled by the idea that one must enact one's believe sen even embodied them. from somewhere deep in my childhood i can remember my father explaining with enthusiasm the principle behind the doppler effect as an ambulance sped past our car. when we watched the sun set over the river where we lived he described wildlife scattering, the shorter wavelengths of light by the atmosphere that resulting red clouds and grass that looks more intensely green at dusk. in the woods he dissected and hold public and reassembled from it the time he skeleton of the mouse. my father marveled at the natural world far more often than he talked about the human body. but blood types were the subject on which he spoke with some

passion. people with the blood type of negative can only receive a transfusion of blood that is 0-but people with a 0-blood can give people blood of any other type. that is why a person with type o negative is known as a universal donor. my father would then revealed that his blood type was 0-that he himself was a universal donor. he gave blood, my father explained, as often as he was allowed because blood of his type was always in demand for emergency transfusions. i suspect my father may have already known then what i would only discover later, that my blood too is tight the negative. i understood the universal donor high did not think of that is his forces and to medical training. i was not raised in the church

and never took communion. i was not reminded of jesus offering his blood the we all might live when my father spoke of the universal donor. but i believe even then that we owe each other at orebodies. every time i father went out in the boat throughout my childhood he took the life preserver with his name and organ donor printed hugely on it in permanent ink. it was a joke in which he believed quite sincerely. when he taught me to drive he gave me this advice from his own father. irresponsible not just for the car you are driving but for the car ahead of you and the car behind you. learning to drive all three cards was daunting and inspired an occasional paralysis that plagues my driving to this day but when i earned my license i find my name under organ donor. the first decision i made for my son, a decision enacted within

moments of his body coming free of mine was the donation of his umbilical cord blood to a public bank. at 30 i had only donated blood once. back in college when i was reading care could guard. i wanted my son to start his life with a credit to the bank. not the debt i already felt. this was before i, a universal donor, would become the sole recipient of two units of blood in transfusions after my son's birth, but of the most precious type drawn from a public bank. if we imagine the action of a vaccine not just in terms of how affects a single body but also in terms of how affects the collective body of a community is fair to think of vaccination is the kind of banking of immunity. contributions to this bank are donations to those who cannot or will not be protected by their own in unity. this is the principle of herd immunity and it is through heard immunity that mass vaccination

becomes far more affecting than individual vaccination. any given vaccine can fail to produce immunity in an individual and some vaccines like the influenza vaccine are less effective than others but when enough people are vaccinated with a relatively ineffective vaccine virus is have trouble moving from host to host and ceased to spread. sparing the and vaccinated and those in whom vaccination has not produced immunity. this is why chances of contracting measles can be higher for a vaccinated person living in a largely unvaccinated community than they are foreign and vaccinated person living in a largely vaccinated community. the and vaccinated person is protected by the bodies are around her, bodies through which disease is not circulating but of vaccinated person surrounded by bodies that host disease is left vulnerable to vaccine failure or fading in unity.

we are protected not so much by our own skin but by what is beyond it. the boundaries between our bodies begin to dissolve here. donations of blood and organs move between the sexes in one body and entering another and so too with immunity which is a common trust as much as it is a private account. those of us who draw on collective immunity of our health to our neighbors. i think i will do one more excerpt and then take some questions. the belief that public health measures are not intended for people like us is widely held by many people like me. public health, we assume, is for people with less, less education, less healthy habits, less access to quality health care, less time and money. i have heard mothers of my class and just for instance that the standard childhood immunization

schedule groups together multiple shots because poor mothers will not visit the doctor frequently enough to get the 26 recommended shot separately. no matter that any mother, myself included, might find so many visits daunting. that, we seem to be saying of the standard schedule is for people like them. in the article from mothering magazine the journalist jennifer margolis expresses outrage the newborn infants are routinely vaccinated against hepatitis b and wonders why she was encouraged to vaccinate her daughter against a, quote, sexually transmitted disease she had no chance of catching coin. hepatitis b is transmitted not only by sex but through bodily fluids of the most common way infants contract it is from their mothers. babies born to women who are infected with hepatitis b and mothers can carry the virus without their knowledge, but almost certainly be infected there not vaccinated within 12 hours of birth.

the virus can also be passed through close contact between children and people of any age can carry it without symptoms. like the human virus and a number of other viruses hepatitis-b is a carcinogen and it is most likely to cause cancer in people who contract it when they are young. one of the mysteries of hepatitis b immunization is vaccinating only high risk groups, which was the original public health strategy did not bring down rates of infection. when the vaccine was introduced in 1981 it was recommended for prisoners, health care workers, gave men and iv drug users. rates of infection remained unchanged until the vaccine was recommended for all newborns the decade later. only mass vaccination brought down rates of infection and it is now virtually eliminated the disease in children. the concept of a risk group

citizens on tag rights revives the archaic idea of a tainted community. the risk in the case of hepatitis b turns out to be a complicated assessment. there is risk in having sex with just one partner or traveling through the of birth canal. in many cases the source of infection is never known. i decided before i knew how much blood i would lose in childbirth that i didn't want my son to be vaccinated against hepatitis b. i did not belong to a risk group at the moment he was born, but by the time i put him to my breast i had received a blood transfusion and my status . when the last nationwide smallpox epidemic began in 1898 some people believe the whites were not susceptible to the disease. it was associated with immigrants or mexican, when smallpox broke out in new york

city police officers were sent to enforce the vaccination of italian and irish immigrants in the tenements. when smallpox arrived in kentucky everyone in the black section of town who resisted vaccination was vaccinated at gunpoint. these campaigns did limit the spread of the disease but all the risk of vaccination which at that time could lead to infection with tetanus and other diseases was absorbed by the most vulnerable groups. the poor were enlisted in the protection of the privileged. the dates over vaccinations then as now are often cast as debate over the integrity of science though they could just as easily be understood as conversations about power. the working class people who resisted britain's 1853 provision for free mandatory vaccination were concerned in part with their own freedom. faced with fines, imprisonment and seizure of their property if

they did not vaccinate their infants they sometimes compare their predicament to slavery. vaccination, like slavery, race is pressing questions about one's rights to one's own body but as historians have noted anti vaccine was more interested in abolition as a metaphor for individual liberties and they were in the cause of the shared purpose. it was not in the recklessly selfish spirit of john brown who was caned with his sons for their doomed effort to free slaves that white workers resisted vaccination. anti vaccinator is were quick to draw on the political, e motive or rhetorical value of the slaves or the colonized african, they were quicker still to claim that the suffering of white english citizens took precedence over that of the oppressed elsewhere. their primary concern, in other words, was with people like them. in her history of that movement,

dare back returns to the idea that vaccine resistors saw their bodies not as potentially contagious and less dangerous to the social body but as highly vulnerable to contamination and violation. their bodies were of course both contagious and vulnerable but in a time and place where the bodies of the 4 were seen as a liability to public health, as dangerous to others, it fell to the poor to articulate their vulnerability. if it was meaningful for the fourth to assert they were not your the dangerous, i suspect it might be as meaningful now for the rest of us to accept the we are not purely vulnerable. the middle-class may be threatened but we are still just by virtue of having bodies dangerous. even the little bodies of children which our time encourages us to imagine as absolutely vulnerable are dangerous in their ability to

spread disease. think of the unvaccinated bully in san diego for instance who returned from a trip to switzerland in 2008 with a case of measles, three of the victims were too young to be vaccinated and one was hospitalized. unvaccinated children according to cdc data reveals are more likely to be white, to have an older married mother with a college education and to live in a household with an income of $75,000 or more, like my child. unvaccinated children tend to be clustered in the same areas, raising the probability that they will contract and illness that can then be passed once it is in circulation to undervaccinated children. undervaccinated children meaning children who receive some but not all of their recommended immunizations are more likely to be black, to have a younger

unmarried mother, to have moved across state lines and to live in poverty. vaccination works, my father explained, by enlisting a majority in the protection of a minority. team means the minority of the population that is particularly vulnerable to a given disease, the elderly in the case of influenza. newborns in the case of profs, pregnant women in the case of rubella but when relatively women vaccinate our children we may also be participating in the protection of some poor black children whose single mothers have recently moved and have not as a product of circumstance rather than choice fully vaccinated them. this is a radical inversion of the historical application of vaccination which was once just another form of bodily servitude extracted fr the benefit of the privileged. there is some truth to the idea

that public health is not strictly for people like me but it is through us, literally through our bodies that certain public health measures are enacted. i am going to stop their. [applause] >> thanks very much. if there is time and patience i am happy to answer questions. >> come to the microphone. >> i don't blame you if you don't want to be on c-span. >> how long did it take you to research your book and where did you find the major sources of information?

>> it took about five years. i started shortly before my son was born and he is 5-1/2 now. and for the first several years all i did was research. i didn't write very much for the first two or three years. my sources of information came from all over. i started by talking with other parents and reading what other parents were reading, what people were recommending to me. i moved from there into reading articles in medical journals, reading histories of vaccinations, you heard some of that evidence in there. reading anthropological works, looking at vaccination, reading a textbook on immunology which was harder than i expected and then i moved to doing interviews

and talked to immunologists and toxicologists and pediatricians and medical emphasis so i talked -- that was the most gratifying and interesting part of my research, talking to people who held expertise in this wide range of areas. vaccination is interesting to me because it brushes up against all of these other areas and so i find myself thinking of environmental issues and issues of pollution and chemical pollution and issues of governance and what it means to be a citizen. i was talking to philosophers and people who helped me think about the conscience and what it means to have a conscience though the research was really wide ranging from me. some of it was very technical

and based in medicine and required that i get a lot of help from people who had expertise in medicine and a lot of it was -- was more kind of social in nature and historical. >> that is my students, my former students all grown up now. >> by three months. i was wondering about another question. how did you, go through and make sure all the research was still accurate after you went through? >> that is a great question and i expect nothing less from you. how did i make sure everything was still correct when i

finished? partly i had helped in that there was a copy editor doing some fact checking and i also went back myself and double checked all my sources. i also had two separate scientists read the book, one of the scientists was a source of mine but i also found a scientist who was not a source of mine to read the book for accuracy. despite all that effort, not everything that is in this book is absolutely accurate. i know that because some of the things that i was writing about changed so quickly that even those this book is only going to come out two weeks from now the situation with polio for instance in the middle east is changed so quickly that much of what i said about polio in here it is no longer true. most everything that i said is a

vast understatement of what is now actually going on with polio because in the six months since the text was finalize a lot has changed. i made reference to ebola, a talk about the last round of ebola that happened in a high school, i am not sure that will read the way i mean it to read now that this new crisis has emerged. those are the kinds of things that are the inevitable fallout of writing about something that is still happening. i did everything i could do to make sure the information i was using in here was accurate to my knowledge and to the knowledge of the people that i showed the book to. i don't for a minute doubt that i probably got something wrong. even just today i was going

through a fact checking process with the new york times magazine that was revealing to me how much judgment is involved in fact checking and how many people have to wear a sometimes contradictory information and on a deadline kind of decide what is going to be the fact that appears in this piece so there is a gray area at third that is difficult and challenging. thanks for that question. >> before i forget my question when i get up here. so it is a huge topic and the lot of research and is used and so my thoughts are there's also the personal aspect. your father was a physician and you talked about obviously you feel strongly about immunization as you do, so i am thinking, how did you, in your writing process or in your mind before you wrote, did you kind of have and

narrative story like my father was a physician who believes in it or you have a son who believes in immunization and try to incorporate all that research and apply to the story or did research inform the narrative? >> that is the great question. i am trying to think about what actually happened. i think the process for this book was that i was living a lot of questions and those questions drove the inquiries that i was engaged in and the form and structure of the book. it was less that i decided to work with that narrative forward with some information then i decided to work with some questions and those questions drove me sometimes into narrative. one of the questions i had at

some point in this research, at my research was in complete yet. i had done enough to see that as far as i could tell there was no compelling reason i had yet turned out not to vaccinate my son, but there questions that i had and i've vaccinated him and vaccinated him on schedule. little part of me was still nervous and one question that i had to continue to propel me through the research into this book was why am i doing this? why my vaccinating him on schedule if i am not going to be 100% certain the honda shadow of a doubt that there is nothing that that could happen to him? ..

>> i would have trouble facing my father in my heart and mind, acing him if i hadn't turned up and extraordinarily compelling reason not to do the things that i knew were not just important to him but also it way beyond the importance. it ranged into a territory that was in line with the morality that i have been raised to

understand and to act from. if i was going to step out with that kind of moral action, i felt that i needed a good reason to do it. a question that drove me into areas that i didn't know that i was going to go area some of those areas involved talking about my father. this section that i read reflecting about blood types and some of the conversations that we had about learning to drive. that was coming out of the question that i had, okay, what is it about my upbringing or moral sense or the ethics that i have been trained in making me uncomfortable with not engaging with what i had come to see is a civic duty. then there is another section that is also driven by the same question. but it is much more research-based. there are narrative sections and there is one where i researched

the anti-vaccination movement. so the people that resisted vaccination during that timeframe call themselves conscientious objectors and it was the first widespread use of that term. so the first widespread usage in the context of the vaccination. so i was really interested in the fact that that term conscience had appeared in his very early movement and i wanted to figure out if what i am feeling i am calling conscience and if what they are feeling they are calling conscience and the leading to two different decisions of what is going on, are we working with two different decisions of conscience or are we just talking about historical time frames or what is happening. that is another question that drove me deeper into researching the information. does that answer your question?

>> yes. [inaudible conversations] >> you find the questions of ethics and the reality tend to drive a lot of your choices or topics? >> i seem to not be able to get away from them. and i don't necessarily intend to go there but i guess the questions find me or i find them. i was a little bit surprised when i started working on the book and i felt that it would be a real departure from my last book and i was writing about racism and racial identity in my last book. and in many ways that was an exhausting subject to work with for as long as i worked with it. and it did raise a lot of difficult questions and provoked a lot of self-examination and is

difficult self-examination. and i think that i was under the delusion when i started writing this book that because i was writing in this new subject matter territory because i was writing about science and medicine that i would somehow escape that kind of inquiry or those kinds of questions, those kinds of moral and ethical issues. but that delusion did not last incredibly long. it didn't take me very far into writing this book a four i started coming up against some of the same questions that have emerged. even sometimes in a similar context. there are issues of race and religion that come up around vaccination as well. and the whole history in this is very steep in this class. and so not only did i not escape

those questions, but i realized toward the end of writing this book than in many ways it was picking up on some of the issues that my last book had left off and the way i see it, a little bit further sometimes it's more specific territory. so i think one of the last books about was suggested to me is the possibility that one can be born into privilege and one acquire privilege and one can still choose to live that privilege in redemptive way. and that was a kind of wide and vague knowledge that emerged out of that book and i think that this forced me to look at a specific instance where someone might be in a position of privilege where they could make a choice where they could help or hurt another person and those

were the terms that i were was looking at. i don't think that this book would be what it was about the book before and i think a lot of it thinking about morality and ethics was done in the first book and primed me for this one. at some point i would like to get away on it because it is always tricky territory to be in. and i think it's the reason that nobody ever laughs at my reasoning and writing. so i never get to talk about how to be good. are there any other questions? [inaudible conversations] >> did you get to the part where the containment of the disease is not really based upon maximization, like ebola, were

it seems to be sanitary control or isolation. is that something you also dealt with? >> yes, i looked at some of that historically. i looked at some of the ways that we contained diseases before we had vaccines for certain diseases. the disease that i really became interested in and there was quite a bit of research on was malaria. this kills hundreds of thousands of children in africa and we have many other children better disabled as well. and that we have no effective vaccine for it. there's a couple of in the works but there's not yet one that is available for practical use. and one of the things that is upsetting about looking at how malaria is delicate and treated is that