Asbestos Exposure: The Deadly Aftermath You’re Not Prepared For

If you've been exposed to asbestos or other heavy environmental toxins, then today's storytelling episode is for you. I'm joined by Dr. Duncan Graham, a medical doctor, barrister, and author of the novel Where the Dust Settles, a powerful legal drama rooted in Australia's real-life asbestos crisis, shedding light on how industrial harm has shaped countless lives. With deep expertise in both medicine and law, Duncan writes not to inform but to ignite justice and awareness for those still living with health effects. Welcome, Duncan.

Hi, Rita. Thank you for having me on your show.

Well, you're welcome. And this is a really interesting topic. I mean, asbestos has been huge in Australia, but you're— you know, your book is fictional, but it is rooted, like deeply rooted in fact. What motivated you to tell this story? And how do you see it helping people?

I was motivated to write it essentially because through my professional work, when I had changed careers from a doctor to a lawyer, luckily or unluckily enough, I ended up at a big end-of-town law firm. One of the clients was James Hardie. There are other clients, industrial companies, manufacturers, and so forth. And I got to learn a lot about asbestos. And I've always wanted to write fiction rather than nonfiction. I thought people would be interested in hearing some of the realities of asbestos industry and conduct and legal proceedings rather than hear directly from somebody who knew rather than indirectly from books written by journalists, generally speaking, on a narrow issue or somewhat alarmist based upon James Hardie being in the spotlight or CSR being in the spotlight for blue asbestos, which have occurred before. I wanted something that was historically relevant and accurate. But I also really wanted to write a story about ordinary people who I knew from my experience had been exposed to asbestos and the travails they went through as a result of that exposure, so that people whose loved ones tragically have died or are suffering from asbestos diseases could relate to the story and understand how it got to be the way it was and how this silent killer ended up pervading all of society and in particular brought home into the homes of so many men and women and children in Australia.

It's an incredible thing. It's been huge for, you know, the industry, for people like yourself, and for those suffering. And for the people who are not in Australia, uh, James Hardie is—

James Hardie was the manufacturer of asbestos—

Oh, the manufacturer.

Products, either insulation products, but famously fibro. Asbestos cement sheets, which played such an important part in the housing boom and the growth of cities to accommodate people, the baby boom after the Second World War. I mean, it was there beforehand, but that was the main use because it was a cheap and practical product, and people really turned largely a blind eye to the dangers involved in the asbestos. But that's where it was used. And the mining company was CSR, famous for sugar. It, through a subsidiary, exploited the Wittenoom Blue Asbestos Mine from 1946 to 1966.

You know, it's an interesting thing that you write this book now because It's not really a talked about topic anymore, yet so many people still have the health effects from the fallout of all of this asbestos. And this kind of feels like it's largely forgotten. Do you feel that, that it's— that a lot of people are still suffering, yet the subject of asbestos in the general community isn't really spoken about?

Uh, yes, I think it is There's 2 actual aspects to that. The first is, yes, I do think it's forgotten about in the sense that you've just said. And that is, there are still numerous people who are affected by asbestos diseases, whether it's scarring involving the lungs, asbestosis, or around the outside of their lungs, or who have malignancies. For example, mesothelioma. It has what's known as a latency period of about 37 years from the time of first exposure. So it can be sitting there for decades before it unfortunately causes somebody's death and suffering. It can occur in shorter periods, but it has a very long latency. And so there are people who have been exposed decades ago who are still diagnosed with the condition today. Most of them find their way to experienced lawyers in this area and get compensation. The other thing about asbestos is— and before I get to that, an example of it still being relevant and people being affected by it is only last year in Sydney, there was the furore about the use of asbestos waste found in the mulch in children's playgrounds in the Inner West.

That was near me.

And so, and as you would be aware, then it was a big cleanup operation. There was also a story earlier this year, I think, from about 2 ABC journalists who developed mesothelioma from decades past exposure. And I think only last year there were calls by the unions to undertake complete removal of asbestos-containing products because that was the only safe thing to do to prevent incidental exposure or workplace exposure to workers in Australia demolishing old factory sites or that sort of thing. So it's still relevant. And going back to the second aspect, and that is— and one reason why I wrote about it now, and I always get the question, why asbestos? That's old. That's ancient history. Why bring that up?

Yeah.

And the reason why I think it's important to bring it up also is that the lessons that we should have learned about asbestos continue to be missed or not appreciated across different industries such as tunnelling, silicosis, man-made stone, Caesarstone. There's been recent stories in current affairs television programs last year about those sort of things and the tragedy of a silicosis epidemic. So it's still relevant, but also across industries with different industrial products, but also medical devices, pharmaceuticals, things that I do a lot of litigation about in class actions. The lessons learned about the commercial imperative to get products, new wonderful products out onto the market to solve whatever the problem is, just turn a blind eye to any risks or don't even assess what the risks are before you put it on the market because the commercial drive is more important than slowing the rush to market to consider risks. Properly. And that has been the story. An example is vaginal mesh, uh, and the class action that was decided a couple of years ago by Justice Katzmann in the federal court, where she essentially said specifically, with very limited evidence, uh, and knowledge about the problem. The surgery using polypropylene plastic mesh in women's bodies was used universally, and there wasn't much evidence that it was any better and certainly not safer than traditional forms of surgery without mesh. And she found basically commercial imperatives were much more important than patient safety. And that's why the asbestos story is still relevant today. The sort of people that are the characters in my novel are exactly the type of people who are the victims of other types of tortious behaviour by not considering safety first and the repercussions, because it's just members of the public without any sophisticated knowledge about medicine or indeed law who put their trust in governments and companies to do the right thing by them, only to have that trust abused.

They can seem to get away with this negligence because even now with Like you were saying, the implants, the asbestos, there just doesn't seem to be enough education around it for either the worker going into the place where this asbestos was, working with it. Like you say, these medical devices or implants or whatever, there's just not enough education for the consumer, for the patient, for the worker. So this negligence happens. Because people don't know what they're getting into, and basically they don't know how to stand up for themselves either, or even what to question.

I think both of those things. The point I make in the novel is one of the characters complains about— it's one thing to be told that there is a risk of some health hazard associated with an activity. such as cigarette smoking or some other workplace situation, and to be given the choice about whether you want to actually accept that risk, even if it's a low risk, or whether you want to run a mile from it.

Mm.

In the asbestos case, there wasn't any choice given to people. They were exposed to dust. They were given, in some cases, dust money or danger money. The danger money was simply because you're going to cough a lot and it's going to be very unpleasant to work in dusty conditions. But you're not really told anything more than that. If you get affected by, say, asbestosis, a doctor might say you've been dusted, but you're not actually given any information about what that actually means. So you end up suffering from it with the fibres stuck in your lungs producing a chronic inflammatory response for the rest of your days. And you weren't actually given the choice. And there's something wrong between a situation where you are warned of dangers and situations where you're not. And the choice to determine your own life and what you're going to be exposed to is taken away from you. And as you know, Rita, in medical situations, informed consent is, is a big deal.

It is.

And the law, the, the courts have enforced that right to self-determination, that you can make up your own mind what you want to do or expose your body to. But that wasn't the case in the industrial context of asbestos.

Even though asbestos was heavily used, I think, correct me if I'm wrong, in the years there, like post-war. So we're looking at, you know, what, late, you know, the late '40s, the '50s, '60s, '70s, building the homes here in Australia. There are still so many people living in homes now with asbestos in their roof, asbestos in their walls. Et cetera. And still, I just spoke to someone recently, actually, who has asbestos walls, about to do a renovation, but they have asbestos walls and still felt quite confident and safe saying, I'm not going to remove them. It's okay as long as you just don't break it.

Yes. Well, you're right. It's everywhere. And it's not just the obvious. places like fibro homes that are scattered around, particularly the western suburbs, which incidentally is where James and Jenny Henderson, the characters in the book, settled down in Sydney to bring up their family in Bankstown. It's not those sort of obvious places. Plenty of people live in brick homes and think, oh, it can't be any asbestos. But you'll find it in the eaves or on the internal walls. There might be some insulation, particularly in the ACT. There was the— I can't remember what the company was made, but there was a lot of asbestos-containing insulation sprayed into the roofs of Canberra houses. But it is everywhere, and it could be in the bathroom. It could be anywhere. So it's still there or in the garage. And it's true, or the accepted wisdom is, so long as it's in good repair and you don't do anything to it, break it, drill it, sand it, saw it, and generate dust particles that you can inhale, you should be at a low risk. Having said that, there is evidence in some cases that small quantities of asbestos fibres are airborne even from asbestos-containing products in good condition. But the same could be said as if you stand at an intersection, maybe not these days, but because cars have advanced, but it used to be the situation if you stand at an intersection for a while, you would be exposed to asbestos. Being generated from asbestos-containing brake linings used by trucks.

That's interesting. Yeah.

But you know, that's in older, older vehicles.

Yeah. Duncan, you were a barrister on the— in the beginning, a barrister on the side of big industry. You would defend big, big, big industry in the beginning. Until you actually went into the homes of people who were actually suffering or dying from the effects of asbestos, and then you realised, am I on the wrong— did you realise then that you were on the wrong side?

Maybe not then, but it was a bit of a slow process in that there are a couple of things or a few things at play. The first thing is a barrister— there's a thing called the cab rank rule, which you're expected, because you're independent of solicitors and your first duty is to the court, is to accept briefs in areas of which you have the capacity to act. So if I get work from a defendant, then I should be accepting that work unless I can't, as in I'm too busy or so forth. And so that's what I did. The second thing is having developed a whole lot of expertise, particularly scientific expertise, by reading literally thousands of medical journal articles about asbestos medicine, was interested in the scientific issues about causation. Which was something largely that defendants were interested in. And from my point of view, not really interested in whether there'd been negligence or not. That was sort of what I'd say was a sort of more of a technical ambit. And I think in those days, I was fairly much what would be described as a black-letter lawyer.

A black what?

Black letter lawyer. So I'd look at the law rather than, say, the emotional or human aspect. But I can tell you, going into people's homes, you try the best you can to preserve their dignity despite having to ask questions that are uncomfortable. And you try to do that job. And I don't profess to have been perfect or infallible. Essentially, over time, it became obvious to me, especially as I was offered increasing numbers of medical negligence briefs acting for plaintiffs, that the fit was much better acting for injured people, victims, Whether I am in fact too soft and easily affected emotionally by the struggles of individuals, I don't know. But my natural inclination is to act for the underdog.

That's great.

That is essentially people who've been affected. And essentially, that's been my my whole career since I got out of doing asbestos has been for that. And in retrospect, I would like there to have been really only legal arguments about certain points that were either legally or scientifically valid rather than having to fight things about whether a company breached its duty of care or not. And in fact, that's what happens in the book. Some characters, lo and behold, have the mindset that I've just described to you.

Yeah.

But there are other sorts of characters in the book legally who reflect different types of ways of looking at legal issues.

Well, I think you've taken the right side, and, you know, to actually advocate for the underdog is always an admirable thing, I honestly believe. Also, you know, you've had a career as a medical doctor, so if you had to name some of the common but misunderstood asbestos symptoms, especially for our listeners who are older. They maybe have— they've been in an asbestos home, or they've had friends who have worked around asbestos, and they do have some like lung issues or other issues. What would they be? Help them recognize what some of these asbestos—

some of these issues, health concerns that they may have that you think would be related back to So it's often a difficult situation because unsurprisingly, a lot of the people who, at least, you know, a few decades ago, were the ones that got asbestos-related diseases were also smokers. And so you get a situation where a lot of people might have shortness of breath or coughing. And it's got nothing to do with asbestos at all. And they might find that they have difficulties doing activities because shortness of breath stops them in their track. There are many reasons for being short of breath. But one of the things that I think is important is pain. And it is something that I deal with in the book about the diagnosis of mesothelioma. One of the distinguishing aspects of involvement of the lining of the lungs, the pleura, is that if that is inflamed or is involved by some disease process, you get pain. Pain, particularly when you Take a deep breath in, or on activity. Now, of course, there are plenty of reasons why that might happen. And in the book, there is the concern that it was just a pulled muscle, but there was no tenderness where the so-called pulled muscle was, which is a telltale sign that it's something involving more internal, as in the lining of the lung. So essentially, for malignancies, if there's pain, pain on breathing in, that could be due to a malignancy, or it could be due to inflammation involving the outside of the lungs. And not so much with distant exposure, but you can get inflammation, pleural thickening on the outside of the lungs from asbestos exposure, but not a malignancy. You can have what are known as pleural effusions and some other complicated names, which is fluid building up between the layers, 2 outer layers of the lungs that can cause pain on breathing in as well. But there are also the other problems With any malignancy, unexplained or unintentional weight loss is always something of concern. And particularly, say, in medical negligence cases, I've had many cases of delays in diagnosis of malignancies of various types. And one of the telltale signs is weight loss that can't be explained. By say being on a diet, and that certainly is always a concern. And I think a lot of people might have seen people where they say they haven't seen somebody for some time, and they look as though they've lost a lot of weight. And you might say, "Oh, you're looking good. Have you been on a diet?" And they say, "No." Oh, you you know you might think. Oh, you've lost a lot of weight, and you just wonder what else is going on there. But the other thing with, say, mesothelioma, as I touched on before, because it happens decades later, it's sort of— you could be literally in really good physical health, and then one day you start getting pain. or a bit of shortness of breath, or you start feeling as though you might be coming down with the flu and you just, you know, got a few aches and pains and just something's not right, or you might lose some weight. And they're the actual signs and symptoms of mesothelioma. And I borrowed a lot in the book in describing it from my experience being on a respiratory ward as a doctor in a hospital where I was in a repatriation general hospital as an intern and resident. And a lot of our veterans were smokers. So there were quite a few cases of lung cancer. There were cases of mesothelioma too, because Most of the warships were sprayed with blue asbestos or asbestos.

Oh, wow.

And that's how— that's a big source of exposure. It's an interesting situation about shipbuilding and being on ships at one of the worst possible phases in human history and what you do in terms of getting warships out of the dock and into the water to Fight the enemy, but that's a different story. So how people presented with malignancy, how they progressed, and how they died—I used that experience in this story. As sad as it is, I wanted to actually describe what it's like to have a malignancy. And the process that families and the individual go through from the time of diagnosis through to the deterioration, the phases of treatment, and how brutal that can be— surgery or chemotherapy or radiotherapy.

I was going to say, because I read a bit about it in your book, and it is Not a pleasant thing to have. It's not a pleasant way to die. You know, it's, it's really shocking. I think it also is, which is kind of leading me to my next question around, you know, misdiagnosis, etc. But if you've had a partner or a family member who worked around asbestos, it does— it can— your— the little fibers, etc., on clothes that men brought home and, you know, into the house, etc., can affect your family members as well. How common is it for asbestos-related illness to be misdiagnosed or overlooked in the medical system, especially if it's your partner presenting with it and they say, well, no, I never worked around asbestos? You know, so it must be something for the medical doctors, especially now, to sort of go down the path of asbestos poisoning.

Yes. Well, I think we're talking about respiratory diseases and illnesses here. So these days, those specialists who are respiratory or thoracic physicians would get sent somebody who might have some of the things that I've described, would know about asbestos-related diseases, which wasn't always the case. And so they would ask people about it, but not everyone's going to remember whether they've had exposure or not. And strangely, after a diagnosis, it's often due to the forensic abilities of a lawyer that a person may end up being referred to. And I'm talking about experienced asbestos litigators, their forensic skills are very good at actually locating where the exposure to asbestos may be. But at the stage of specialist referral, that can happen. But often— and there might be a history of smoking— but if that's not there, there can be delays in diagnosis because It can start off, say, a mesothelioma or what's euphemistically known as a benign asbestos-related disease, scarring of the outside. They won't know what the reason is. And there's plenty of cases where— and these are people who end up suing for asbestos-related disease— where there might have been a delay in the diagnosis because The pleural effusion that I was talking about, or the scarring on the outside of the lungs, might be thought to be due to some unknown episode of pneumonia when they were younger, or some weird and wonderful inflammatory condition. And so they don't know that it's actually due to asbestos, and they're not put on alert for the prospect that they might end up having a mesothelioma. At some point, but and often there's a there might be a dispute about the diagnosis of mesothelioma, as in it's not unusual for a defendant lawyer to get the biopsy material looked at by a pathologist to see whether in fact it's lung cancer rather than mesothelioma because there are. Effectively other causes of lung cancer when essentially there's only one known cause of mesothelioma, and that's asbestos, particularly blue asbestos.

For anyone who's listening to this and they're kind of thinking, you know what, this has sparked something in me, maybe this is something I need to investigate because I feel all this and I've worked around asbestos, or I've known people and I've seen— I've been around people who worked asbestos. What— but then maybe they're not being heard and they want to advocate for themselves. So what kind of tests or imaging or whatever would they ask for, you know, with their GP? If their GP say no, no, no, it's not, they, they just feel it inside that there is something more, what could they say to advocate for themselves?

Uh, what they could say, for example, A listener or a person has shortness of breath or a cough, exercise activity is down a bit, and let's even say that they were a former smoker and they may or may not have a little bit of pain when they breathe in. They go to a GP and the GP says, oh, you probably got, you know, a bit of a flu, or it's probably due to your smoking and They try to pass it off like that, or they, as is often the case, rather than working out the cause, just treat the symptoms. Yeah. And hopefully it goes away because nine times out of ten that is the way it happens. They say, "Oh, we'll do a chest x-ray." I would, I would say, "Look, a chest x-ray is okay, but it's a pretty crude instrument." I'd be. And strangely enough, I have been in this position of recommending to somebody what they might say. And I'd say what you want to do is you want to have lung function tests and you want to have a high-resolution CT scan of the thorax, which is thin slice, high resolution, and that can pick up what's happening in the lungs, particularly fibrosis. And that will get it— that will assist in differentiating between possible causes of shortness of breath or cough and ask to be sent to a respiratory physician. That's what I would be, would be doing. And as I've said, I have been— I have actually advised outside of the context of law various things that should be done. My advice generally in relation to medicine is possibly reasonable to think that what you present with to a doctor, from the medical practitioner's point of view, is likely to be a common condition which is generally benign. Therefore, we can treat the symptoms rather than work out why you've got the symptoms. That might be okay in some circumstances, but you've got to be alert to the fact that there could be a sinister explanation for common symptoms. And don't accept that it's a benign cause until you've worked out or excluded a sinister possibility. And that, I think, is a principle of medical practice or a lesson that needs to be appreciated, which doesn't mean over-servicing and sending patients for investigations every time they come in with a stubbed toe or runny nose. There's a matter of clinical judgment. And as I said, it might be reasonable for, you know, initially to think of common conditions. But at some point in time, if somebody's re-presenting, don't fob them off with the same spiel. And to advocate from the patient point of view is to basically be informed. Unfortunately, a lot of patients go to Dr. Google as he or she has known, which may be annoying for a lot of doctors to have questions that may or may not be relevant or think that their expertise is being intruded upon. But there is a right to ask questions. Unfortunately, not everyone has a doctor in the family or a friend who's a doctor. Or somebody who knows. So it's a difficult situation, but if you're not getting the right answers and you're repeatedly going back, then you need to ask questions and you need to ask to be referred.

Or even change your doctor. Yes, that's the option as well. Do you see, in your opinion— this is because it's a little bit different— but do you see any parallels between asbestos and what we're seeing today with other environmental toxins like mold, heavy metals, and industrial chemicals having the same sort of effect? Like before, it was like this— well, even now still this huge thing around asbestos. But are we seeing the same sort of parallel now with a lot of these industrial chemicals and everything that people are dealing with or have ill health around?

Uh, yes, I think there, there is always There should always be concern about the use of artificial products. Mind you, asbestos is a naturally occurring fibre.

Mm-hmm.

But there is always an issue with putting out there in the environment, including the human environment, not just the land, chemicals, and products that are man-made or that have been adjusted through some industrial process. And the analogy with asbestos remains the same. A lot of these things go out into the environment on the belief that they're gonna solve a problem. For example, the forever Chemicals. Forever chemicals, which are right through the environment, and people are investigating whether they have health effects. Now, they were on the market because they were good at sealing in or preventing the escape of water. Now they're everywhere, like plastics, plastics in the ocean and so forth. Somebody might have come up with a good idea to address climate change, assuming I'm leaving to one side the deniers. But somebody might come up with a great idea for climate change and it gets traction and then everyone starts getting on board and it gets out there. whatever it might be, and then with no concern about the effect either on the environment or human beings until it's too late. And if there is evidence even at the outset that there could be a risk, most people, and this is the way certainly most human beings think, if something sounds like a good idea and particularly if it's going to make money or be of political advantage, you're going to not think that the risk that might be present is ever going to materialize. You just imagine, oh no, it's not gonna happen in this case, or it's the science is not really valid. It's not sufficient to draw conclusions so we can ignore it. And you hope for the best and you hope for the best and you make as much money as possible and you try to assuage all the concerns about people for various things. So you remain in, you get elected and you remain in power. And then lo and behold, all of that ostrich in the hole type of way of thinking comes back to bite you later on. And the evidence was there all along. You just pretended or hoped it wasn't going to be there. And so I see that as being still a problem. There are plenty of cases of contamination of certain environment waterways and so forth, and one is mystified why things are not done. And of course, there's always the argument about jobs, money, uh, and so forth, all of which are important. But I would have thought it's not above ensuring that the health of both people and the planet is in order.

Because both feel the devastating effects of these decisions. What would you say to the people who keep searching for answers despite being told there's nothing wrong?

As in Nothing wrong with them physically and it's all in their heads.

Yes. Yes.

Yes. There is always and has always been a lag between medical knowledge being obtained to meet either symptoms, exposures, and so forth. It would've been, you know, relatively recent that some conditions were not recognized as being an actual physical condition that was caused by some sort of autoimmune response or some immunological problem and so forth, or indeed from an infection. And that people who were complaining about something like brain fog, it was all in their head and that they should go and see a psychiatrist. More and more people and investigation and scientific endeavor comes up with answers. And so one should persevere. For example, some— it used to be the case with breast implants, silicone breast implants decades ago, that people became generally unwell. And if, you know, there was theories about migration of Silicon and some sort of systemic problem. And people, you know, dismissed that. And lo and behold, there are recognized syndromes. Same goes for a type of metal-on-metal hip replacement, which has chromium and cadmium and molybdenum particles in it. people got generally systemically unwell, including brain fog. And everybody said, oh, the levels in your blood are not high enough to cause any of this. And but again, there is some degree of acceptance that circulating particles that are not meant to be in your body can cause systemic problems. And the same is likely to be the case For polypropylene mesh in the body and also other chemicals. So don't. If people know intrinsically, or most do, when something is wrong, and the job of a doctor is to listen, and if they listen carefully, most of the time they'll be told the answer to the question: What is wrong with the person? And if you listen carefully, then you'll get somewhere. But if you dismiss somebody as being, um, it being in the head, then that is the wrong thing to do. And if I could just relate this personal story.

Yes.

Cement that. When was it? 2002. My mother, my mother, I'm she's not with, with us anymore, but I'm sure she wouldn't mind me talking about this. She was having strange feelings that she was forgetting things, or just sort of zoning out. She went to the GP, the GP ordered a CT scan, and it came back as nothing. And she, she was told she had early Alzheimer's and just get used to it and, you know, tell your family. And, but she, she did, that didn't feel right. And she spoke to me about it and I was aghast and thought, no, something else is there happening. And short, long story short, she actually had a brain cancer, and it was diagnosed with MRI. And one might argue that if she had been listened to and not fobbed off as being told she had early dementia, she might still be with us. That's uncertain, but that's not the point. Too often, people don't listen and fob people off As though there's nothing really wrong with them. And, but people know intrinsically when something is amiss. And if you don't get any answers from the doctor you're talking to initially, go somewhere else.

We know our bodies. People know it and they feel it. You know, people, you know, go woo woo to intuition, but it is, you intuitively know. And unfortunately, I think for a lot of people, it's the, uh, way that they advocate for themselves is how they express it, whether they're taken seriously or not. You know, some people can be a little bit more, um, emotional. Other people can be quite logical. It just depends on the person you're speaking to. And I can tell you, I know you don't practice as a doctor anymore, but what a shame because you would be amazing to go and see because you just—

Thank you.

really have such an understanding of what the patient needs and how to hear and listen to them. But I'm sure you're making an amazing barrister. It's been an incredible—

Very nice of you to say both of those things.

No, it's been an incredible pleasure having you on, Duncan, and listening to all this. And I really do hope that a lot of our listeners do take away all these points that you've pointed out and how important it is to recognize whether you've been exposed to asbestos or even now, just in our last bit, exposed to heavy metals or environmental toxins, whatever it is. And if you do feel that you're having symptoms, that you do have the right to speak up for yourself. And if you're not being heard, go to someone else. It's your right to do so. And your book is an amazing read. And the link for everyone to buy Duncan's book will be in the show notes. It's on his website, so go there, buy it. It's great. Thank you so much for being on the show, Duncan.

Thank you for having me on your show, Rita.

You're welcome. You're welcome.