court two. >> david cartwright. he's in the story and it takes all back two centuries but brings it right to the present. i would not point to one person as the addiction expert. there's an enormous literature on this. i do know that there is a considerable amount of research going on and there should be a lot more funded in terms of the nature of addiction and the very idea of an exit diction vaccine interesting enough for some drugs is a possibility down the road but i don't have a name for you unfortunately. >> i meant to recognize and it's been answered in the last question which is satisfying but very grateful for that. there was one other bit and the effect of the opium war on china in looking at the causality of opium is common but there seems to be like more if anything it was the cause that would event the war and would've been warned not drugs would have been the cause and war through drugs and then it seems that most drug war in the last lasted by saying war is a dog instead of saying i remember it coming

. >> and to say david cartwright's new book is better known drug historian has a new book called the age of addiction. but it does take a big ambitious sweep so i don't go there but it is provocative. and to others but i do conclude and with that between war and drugs but also think of war itself and war as a drug. and to be considered drug like with the adrenaline rush. that is a case of addiction back in suburbia. and those that were journalists. and then to describe the rush of war as a drug. and then to describe the effect and to describe that addiction. >>. >> was anybody doing anything with addiction science. where you can find something else. and generally written about. >> the age of addiction he is a historian and takes it all the way back centuries. but i would not point i to one person so why do know there is a considerable amount of research and more should be funded with the nature of addiction. and with that addiction vaccine interestingly enough is a possibility down the road. but i don't have a name for you. >> so that has been answered with your last question. and th