additional studies confirm this and as hill & nolten explained in their own sales pitch, of the year about the future cost fluorocarbon users to look to an alternative. there we're asked by dupont to calm fears and gain to three years before the government took action. they did. that is exactly they were successful to put off action until dupont could come up with a replacement chemical and we had to three years of the ozone layer. the scientists said did that work received the nobel prize. it was not bad science but it was actually showing chlorofluorocarbons cause the problem. but the public-relations industry figure how they could sell this elsewhere but i believe scientists themselves saw this was a lucrative in denver, rather than let hill & nolten figure out how to do this but now we have a new industry they call themselves the product defense industry they understand how the regulatory system works out to produce studies that defense products and regulation or in court. they will produce literature reviews, there will occasionally do studies themselves but in my view it is qui