Today is the 6th of August 1945, people used to remember it more clearly was when the United States dropped an atom bomb, the first use of the atom bomb against human beings. This was on the city of Hiroshima, a catastrophic event 76 years ago. We remember the US bombing on Hiroshima on give the people what they want, which is your show and why you're here with Zoe Prashant from People's Dispatch, that's peoplesdispatch.org and me Vijay from Globetrotter. We remember the bombing of Hiroshima on give the people what they want because of course the scourge of nuclear weapons continues. It's not something that took place on the 6th of August 1945, the US dropping an atom bomb on the city of Hiroshima in Japan. It's not just that we remember it for historical reasons, but of course nuclear weapons continue to be developed, nuclear weapons continue to proliferate. It's I think spectacular something to keep in mind that the administration of Joe Biden of the United States has decided to maintain Trump level nuclear weapons spending. This is very important for people to recognize last year Trump lifted up the US spending towards nuclear weapons, including so called battlefield nuclear weapons. And the United States under the administration of Joe Biden is not rolling back on battlefield nuclear weapons. Now what this does of course, and it's important to bear this in mind is the proliferation or the increase of battlefield, even the potential of battlefield nuclear weapons sends a message to other nuclear weapons powers. For instance, Russia or China and encourages them to also develop either battlefield nuclear weapons or missile defense systems. You know, there's two things that the UN Secretary General Antonio Gutierrez put on the table on his speech earlier today. He put two things on the table. Number one, the actual threat of war and the actual threat of the use once more of nuclear weapons. Again, 76 years ago, a bomb was dropped on Hiroshima. A few days later, a bomb was dropped on Nagasaki. It's not like this is a theoretical question. So Antonio Gutierrez saying the intensification or increase of nuclear weapons systems spending on nuclear weapons simply creates the sense that these weapons could be used again. And I think that's the first thing to keep in mind. The second thing, of course, is that this is an outrageous waste of money. We're going to talk in a little bit about vaccines. We're going to talk in a little bit about hunger. I want you to bear in mind billions of dollars spent on nuclear weapons. This amount of money, obscene amount of money could of course be used for other purposes. Bridging the digital divide, allowing children who have been out of school as a consequence of the pandemic to get some form of education at home. This could be used to bridge the hunger divide. Three billion people hungry will come back to that. As I said, Prashant will be reporting on the WHO's plea regarding vaccines. All of this could be settled if nuclear weapons funding was immediately abolished. And that's what the UN Secretary General Antonio Gutierrez hinted at in his statement. I want to put a third thing on the table, which is also often forgotten. On giving the people what they want and at people's dispatch, you've seen reporting about nuclear weapons testing. We've talked about the French testing in Polynesia. In Tahiti, for instance, I reported that President Emmanuel Macron arrived there and didn't have the decency to apologize directly to the people of Tahiti and French Polynesia. And secondly, the French have simply not used their own wealth to compensate the people of that region. Last week, we also talked about billionaires who have gone into space. I want to bring something to your attention, friends. Those of you who watch, listen to, give the people what they want, I want to bring something to your attention. It's not widely known that the United States in 1962 actually exploded a nuclear weapon in space. It's not well known that this occurred. It was visible from the Pacific and so on. It was in 1962 that the United States nuclear test took place in space. Let's bear this in mind. Let's not forget the people who died on the 6th of August 1945 in Hiroshima. Let's not forget the very brave people who took photographs and sent those photographs out to the world. Journalists like Wilfrid Burchett, who broke through the attempted censorship by the US government to write a very brave story about what he saw directly in Hiroshima. John Hershey later in the New Yorker and so on, bringing the silence. These really brave journalists who went to ground zero and covered the story. Yes, today is the 6th of August 1945. It's Hiroshima Day. Welcome to give the people what they want. Let's go directly into our stories because, I mean, I'd mentioned already Antonio Guterres talking about the expense of nuclear weapons. If you add it all together, trillions of dollars, the United States military budget itself, a trillion dollars. And yet the WHO had to make a special plea about vaccines. Prashant, what's been happening with vaccines and what has the WTO been saying? Right Vijay, the World Health Organization, the Director General actually made a very strict, it was actually a very surprising request which shows a lot about the situation the world is in right now. He asked for something, he asked for a moratorium on booster shots.  But at the heart of this request for a booster moratorium is a very simple fact that the vaccine inequality today is at staggering levels. And this is a topic we have addressed a number of times on this show. And this is a trend that has been building over the months. We all saw it coming. It does not, and the sudden emergency does not, almost this air of inevitability around which it happened. So what's the scene right now we have, you know, the richer countries, maybe 50 people for every 100 have been vaccinated in the poorer countries. It's about 1.5%. Now, that actually reveals the horrible extent to which and we're talking the number for the rich countries is in May. So by now it is definitely increased. I think in the US it's close to 70%. So we're talking about a horrifying level of inequality in terms of how vaccines have been distributed. The WHO had some months ago had given a very simple call. He said that, you know, somewhere down May, whether we can give 10% of every country's population the vaccine by September. Now, this is nothing massive. It's a very, very basic requirement. Yet we see countries, especially in sub-Saharan Africa, which are really struggling to even provide basic doses. Some weeks ago we did a story on Bosnia and Herzegovina in Europe very close to the rich European countries again struggling. Same situation perhaps in Latin America as well. In South Asia, for instance, India is showing progress but a long way to go. Many of the other countries not so. So we have this situation where there's a horrifying amount of inequality in vaccines and what stands out is the inability of the world community to come together, which really stems down to the question of the richer countries, the G20 countries, failing to actually live up to the responsibility they have. So this is nothing, we've seen this is the number of instances. Of course, nuclear weapons, very good example. But I think as a similar crisis of our times, a crisis which has bought so much death, a crisis which has caused so much displacement. That the world, the global community as a whole cannot ensure even 10% of every country's population being vaccinated nearly a year and a half into the pandemic. I think it really says a lot about where we are today. You see the issue that you raise about the vaccine and vaccine nationalism is so central. Equally, of course, we've seen at the same time, Prashant, the countries of the so-called international community, countries that have authority and power over global institutions. Not only are they not funding COVAX and so on, the vaccine program. At the same time, they seem to be suffocating a lot of countries. We've seen at the UN discussions about sanctions being placed upon countries, tightened on countries. We've talked about Cuba, Venezuela, Zimbabwe experiencing sanctions. Iran, Syria, the list is very, very long. 30 plus countries experiencing unilateral sanctions by the United States. And since the US dollar plays such a significant role in world affairs, this suffocates a lot of general activity for countries. We haven't talked much about Nicaragua, which we know is coming into a presidential election cycle. Zoe, what's happening with Nicaragua and the sanctions regime? Well, in November, Nicaragua will hold presidential elections. We've seen kind of an increase in destabilization efforts on behalf of the United States, but also their allies in the European Union and other international institutions. And so what happened is on August 2, the European Union announced new sanctions on several officials of the Nicaraguan government. The vice president, Murillo, who's the wife of Daniel Ortega, the president, the president of the National Assembly, an attorney general, and several other officials. And these sanctions are allegedly in response to what mainstream media, mainstream media like CNN and NPR to Human Rights Watch, which, I mean, as we know, is quite partial in Latin America, often taking the side of the US State Department against Cuba, against Venezuela. Nicaragua is no exception against what they're calling a political crackdown on the opposition. And so I think it's kind of confusing to unpack really what's happening right now in Nicaragua, but essentially several opposition activists are under investigation. A couple of them were arrested in June. And essentially these arrests stem from accusations that they've been receiving funding from US agencies, such as USAID, and working with agencies of the US to kind of destabilize the country and promote de-stabilizing actions. For those of you who weren't following in 2018, there was, you know, a series of violent protests that happened in Nicaragua.  And as we've seen in Cuba, as we've seen, you know, in Venezuela in 2017, these protests often get capitalized on by forces that are really looking to, you know, change the government that's in power, that has powerful allies in the United States, has powerful allies internationally. You know, of course, we see human rights watch has been, you know, a key player in a lot of what's been happening, you know. But essentially, in these protests in 2018, there was a series of violent actions against government supporters. I mean, I encourage people to check out Gloria Lariva and other US political activists were on a delegation a couple of weeks ago in Nicaragua speaking to survivors of this violent uprising that happened in Nicaragua in 2018. These attacks against people who support the Sandinista Revolution. I mean, there's a lot to say there. I won't really go into it. But what we're seeing now is the US, the European Union and other institutions kind of trying to squeeze down on Nicaragua to impose these economic sanctions, which as we've spoken about several times in this show, you know, they claim it's to, you know, attack the, to try to bring political pressure down to, you know, encourage human rights. But at the end of the day, we know that sanctions affect all people. Sanctions affect people's ability to get health care. They affect people's ability to get food, electricity. So while the US claims that the end, you know, the European Union now claims these sanctions are about human rights, restoration of political order, I think what we really need to kind of think clearly about why this is happening. We have the, the presidential elections happening in November. President Ortega is set to win because of, you know, what they've been able to provide for the Nicaraguan people, health care, access to food. It's one of the countries in Central America that has kind of the highest rates of stability in terms of access to basic needs. I mean, we can only look at Honduras and Salvador Guatemala, which are mired in corruption and violence and extreme poverty to really see the difference here. You see, the whole issue of sanctions is so important for so many countries around the world. We've reported on the fact that the United Nations, a new group has been created, group of friends in defense of the UN Charter led by the Venezuelans, but has about 18 to 20 odd members of it, including countries like China and so on. It's important to remember that these sanctions are impacting countries that are trying to dig out of quite severe problems. We are now on the year anniversary of the blast in Beirut at the Beirut port. Just past a year since that blast took place, 218 people killed. That blast was about 120th of the Hiroshima bomb. Friends, that's very significant. The Hiroshima bomb was catastrophic, destroyed the city. The explosion of the ammonium nitrate was 120th of the blast from Hiroshima. It's very hard to reconstruct the city of Beirut. Lebanon facing the knock-on effects of sanctions, the so-called Caesar sanctions against Syria, for instance, still in place. Half the population of Lebanon in poverty is important to bear this in mind. Just south of Lebanon, just south of Lebanon in Jerusalem and in northern parts of Palestine, something atrocious is happening. A war crime, a serious war crime taking place just south of Lebanon. Prashant, take us into this most recent war crime conducted by the government of Israel. Right, which we are of course talking about something at a locality, a community region which has become for in many ways the heart of resistance across the world in the year 2021. A few days ago, we saw an Israeli court come up with possibly the most insulting kind of compromise, so-called compromise offer, which the beleaguered residents of Sheikh Jarrah are facing. As we know, these residents have been staying in this locality for decades. Before occupied Israel, they came under Israeli occupation. We know that Israeli courts, for instance, did not have jurisdiction over the place in which these people are staying because it is an occupying power. And we also know the extent, legalities aside, we also know the extent of popular anger on this issue, because we do remember that it was Sheikh Jarrah, which was one of the starting points to a mass Palestinian resistance against which the Israelis cracked down even more harshly than in recent times in May and we saw hundreds of deaths, so many injuries. So Sheikh Jarrah in many ways was one of the starting points, one of the core issues around which a lot of this took place. And the most disturbing fact is that despite the extent of resistance that we saw inside Israel, inside the occupied Palestinian territories across the world, across West Asia, despite all that, we see that Israel and its authorities and the settler groups nonetheless continue to try to apply pressure in Sheikh Jarrah to get these residents out. So this is the larger context and on this issue, now these people who have been living there for decades have been offered a compromise solution, according to which they need to, if they pay rent to a settler organization which is claiming that land, they can stay there for, they can stay on rent for three generations. Now I think this is in a nutshell is basically illustrates what Israeli policy towards Palestinians has been, because your land has been taken over and you are being offered the chance to basically be a tenant, basically you have to pay to that to a completely random organization. So that is where we are right now. It's a very, very disturbing scenario. The only interesting thing is that despite all this, the legal battle continues. The residents have been very clear that they're not going to give up their demands and these are not the only families. This is the case of four families. There are 28 such families which are facing evictions. So we're going to be seeing a lot of resistance. We know that a young generation of Palestinians came out onto the streets on this issue, that it has transformed the way protest and resistance happened in Palestine across West Asia. So really looking to see how developments will take place in the coming weeks. Before you reported and it's a very significant story about the demolitions, the International Criminal Court has an open file looking clearly at issues like the apartheid wall, looking at the demolitions at the warfare and so on. Each of these treated as a war crime because of course these demolitions are a violation of the Geneva Convention and I hope that Prosecutor Ben Souda is paying close attention to this. Before you report that, I mentioned that half the population in Lebanon lives in poverty, is having a hard time making ends meet. New report, new government data out of Mexico shows that poverty rate now is 44% in Mexico. People have slipped into poverty as a result of the pandemic. Meanwhile, there was an election recently about corruption. Zoe, what's the latest from the referendum held in Mexico around corruption? Well, on August 1st, you know, millions of Mexicans had the opportunity to go to the polls and vote in a referendum, which was kind of a consultation about whether former presidents should be brought to trial and investigated for several crimes including human rights violations, corruption, electoral fraud, and others. And so the exact question was, do you agree on undertaking a process of clarification of the political decisions and past political actors? So essentially this, the referendum, which was promoted by Andrés Manuel López Obrador, the current president of Mexico, this was to create a mechanism of truth and justice to investigate former political actors. Unfortunately, the referendum did not meet quorum. Not enough people participated. They needed, you know, over 40% of the participating voting population to vote in the election, either yes or no, and they did not meet that quorum. I mean, there's several reasons for why this didn't happen, holding elections during COVID. There were also, you know, multiple kind of messaging going out to say that people shouldn't go out and vote because it's not safe because of COVID, etc. However, I think what's important about this referendum and what it really brings to the table is how do the people of Mexico bring forward the struggle for truth and justice in a country where there are, you know, anywhere between 80,000 and 90,000 disappeared people.  You know, many people say this number could even be a low ball number. And I think it's really, it's really hard to imagine 80,000, 90,000 people who their families have no idea, you know, where they are, what happened to them. And so, you know, this referendum is part of a process that human rights organizations have been pushing for, which is to be able to find out what happened to their family members, find out about these crimes, who is responsible. I think many of us will remember in 2014, the 43 students from the rural teachers college in Ayote Napa, from Iguala Guerrero, Mexico, who were, you know, kidnapped and disappeared. And in this, this is one of the emblematic crimes because we really see and saw how, you know, the president of Mexico at the time, Enrique Peña Nieto, you know, was influenced the investigation. Manipulated the investigation, tried to close the case, you know, said that, no, this was a time of drug cartels, there's nothing here, you know, these are the remains, case closed. And the families of the students, you know, have been constantly, you know, mobilizing on all of the anniversaries, going to every single, you know, international institution, every national institution in Mexico to try to demand justice. Because, you know, there's a lot of, there have been multiple independent commissions that have been in Mexico, but they don't have the official authority, you know, of the Mexican government to be able to, you know, get access to what was happening between the national government and the army. There's, you know, significant evidence to point to the fact that the army was directly involved in the disappearance of these students. And, you know, Ayotinapa is one crime, and there have been, sadly in Mexico, thousands of other crimes which involve the forced disappearance of activists, you know, of community members, of people for, you know, whatever reason, whether it be by the government, drug cartels, and there has been direct, you know, participation and influence by the government. And so, you know, this referendum was not able to pass. But what's happened since then is that the people who have been promoting the referendum have called for the installation of the People's Tribunal in Mexico. They're going to create a chapter of the People's Tribunal. And essentially, it's just in an effort to continue this search and this struggle for justice in a country where it's so deeply needed. And we, of course, would be remiss to not, you know, mention that, of course, the U.S. has not been helping hands in this. When we're talking about sanctioning countries for human rights violations, their next door neighbor, one of the biggest trade partners, you know, has been consistently implicated in the mass violation of human rights. I think we're seeing a change right now with Andrés Manuel López Obrador. He's been open. He's been pushing this process of truth and justice, and hopefully it will continue to advance. You say, Zoe, and we'll keep an eye on this because, I mean, the question of these truth and reconciliation commissions, the question of impunity, I think is something important for journalists to pay attention to. I fear it's something we don't cover as much as we should. Cover as much as we should. There's something about give the people what they want and people's dispatch, you know, those who watch us regularly and sometimes send us good wishes, sometimes bring their families along to watch with them. Well, you notice that we pay very close attention to the reports from the United Nations and the reason we do so is these are very credible documents of human suffering, very credible documents of human suffering. I want to call attention to two particular documents released in the recent period, which I think people should pay attention to. The first of them is the annual food and agriculture organizations document on state of food insecurity. Now, very startling finding in the food and agriculture organization document, they say that last year was the single largest slip of people into hunger. Hunger is precisely defined. People don't know where their next meal is coming from. It's a very, very difficult thing to acknowledge that we have 320 million people joining the ranks of the already hungry in one year. It's the largest single calendar year, largest single slip of people into hunger. Total count of hunger as far as the food and agriculture organization is concerned, 2.37 billion people. Friends, that's one in three people on the planet. This show is with Zoe, Prashant and myself. We are three people. One of us would be hungry statistically in the world, one in three people, 2.3 billion people. Now there are many authors for hunger. If you look at the UN environment program, they released a very important study recently. They do this study also annually. This is their study on food waste. Now, I don't want to make any mistakes here. The numbers are precise. The United Nations environment program says 931 million tons of food, 931 million tons of food going to waste bins every single year. 931 million tons. This includes food thrown in households, food thrown at restaurants and food that is thrown away rather than given to people to eat. Food that has not been sold in the market and so on, just tossed into bins, 931 million tons. Add this up. Put this 931 million tons in 40 ton trucks. You would need 23 million 40 ton trucks, 23 million 40 ton trucks at bumper to bumper. Line them up. They would circle the earth seven times. They would circle the earth seven times. So we have one in three people on the planet living with terrible, terrible hunger at the same time. We have enough food that these people could eat, but that food is thrown away. A lot of it into landfills, some of it into the ocean, seven times around the earth of 40 ton trucks carrying food that nobody can eat. Food, there are hungry people. What prevents hungry people from getting the food is that they don't have money. I want you to think about that. This is give the people what they want comes to you from People's Dispatch. If you go to the People's Dispatch website, you're going to see stories such as and I'm going to share with you four quick stories that I think you should go and read.  One of them is on a teacher strike in Ecuador. Another is on Nigerian doctors on strike in the middle of an industrial action because the working conditions for doctors deteriorated in Nigeria. You have a story on protest movements in the United States, which led to an extension on the eviction auditorium very important. Teachers of Ecuador, the protesters in the United States, the doctors in Nigeria, they demonstrate for us that the more you struggle, the more you win. If you don't struggle, you still have 2.3 billion people go hungry. Finally, there's a very nice story on the socialist movement of Ghana and their recently concluded Congress by Baban Kulkarni. Very much recommend that you go immediately to peoplesdispatch.org. Have a look at the stories. You've been listening to give the people what they want. You've got to watch next week because we have a surprise for you. Next week, we have a surprise for you. You have to watch. Zoe Prashant, it's a pleasure to be with you every Friday. Have a great week, people.


Hello everyone, I am Professor Krishna Kaliapan from IIT Bombay. I shall be delivering a course on Classics in Total Synthesis. This is actually part one of this series and here I will talk about Total Synthesis of many natural products in this course. The contents are, as you know, Total Synthesis is a very important topic in organic chemistry. Early 20th century, Total Synthesis was used to confirm the structure of natural product isolated from nature. Later, whenever a new reagent, new catalyst, new reactions were discovered, the versatility of that were tested on Total Synthesis of natural products. So, what we will do in this course is to discuss Total Synthesis of many natural products about 75 to 80 Total Synthesis we will try to cover in this course and who all can attend this course. As this course is slightly on the advanced level, MSC and PhD students will get maximum benefit by attending this course. And those who are already exposed to various organic reactions, rearrangements and initial introduction to Retro Synthesis can attend this course and they will be benefited. And what will they gain by attending this course? As I mentioned, we will talk about 75 Total Synthesis and each Total Synthesis will have at least 2 to 3 key reactions. That means you will get an opportunity to learn about 200 key reactions which are used in the Total Synthesis of natural products and how they use these key reactions in Total Synthesis of many natural products and also you will learn many strategies used in Total Synthesis of natural products. So, looking forward to discussing classics in Total Synthesis with all of you in the forthcoming semester. Thank you.


Okay, moving along our next speaker. You've seen him on the Colbert report. We were just talking about that, you know, that's funny talking about using humor as a delivery system for information and I realized probably 90% of the history and philosophy and I don't know even religion that I know I learned from money python like you know the Philosophers playing soccer You ever seen that that that little clip, you know where where like Confucius is the referee and stuff It's like I realized wow that why did that stick with me when I was 11 or 12 years old? So it's it's really it's really interesting that you can communicate sort of information through humor in a light way that is often We'll stay with the person much longer Stephen Colbert and John Stewart are great examples of that Stephen Colbert especially because he is so ironically funny Speaking of Colbert our next guest has been on Colbert. It was awesome It's so it's so nice to see one of us doing good work in that kind of a medium So it's Paul off it. He's he's been on Colbert his talk is the 1991 Philadelphia measles epidemic Lessons from the past and here's the limerick the cheese steak the Phillies the mall Ben Franklin and Independence Hall Philadelphia's got great things and a lot. Let's not mention the outbreak at all Please welcome Paul off it So as of July 3rd of this year the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention reported that there were 545 measles cases. That's more than anything we've had in 20 years The reason that there is that there is this huge outbreak is because people are choosing not to vaccinate their children more than 90% Of those who've gotten measles are children and they are they are unvaccinated But it's their parents made that choice and the reason that the parents made that choice is because they don't remember what measles Looks like or what measles can do But I remember I mean I lived through a Philadelphia measles epidemic that showed me exactly what measles could do and that's what I want to talk about today It started on April 20th 1989 at the spectrum After returning from a trip to Spain a teenager with a blotchy rash attends an REM concert a couple of weeks later Several other teenagers got sick measles at this point had entered our city Now on on May 21st this headline appeared in the Philadelphia Inquirer Its title suggests that measles is no big deal But in fact measles was a big deal the vaccine was first introduced in the United States in 1963 prior to the vaccine every year measles caused about three million cases 48,000 hospitalizations and 500 deaths almost everyone was infected by 15 years of age when you died You died typically of pneumonia encephalitis, which is inflammation of the brain or dehydration Now the measles vaccine worked by 1978 only 27,000 cases were reported and the CDC was optimistic that measles could be eliminated From the US so they launched something called the measles elimination program with a goal to eliminate measles by 1982 in 1983 only 1500 cases reported but in 1989 measles came back When June 2nd of 1990 this headline appeared in the Philadelphia Inquirer and it was it was Discussing what had been recent trends as of May 19th 1990 There were 35 deaths for measles reported in the US and there were had been 41 measles deaths already reported for all of 1989 even though you're only halfway through 1989 so the CDC reacted and what they did was they they Recommended a second dose of vaccine so which gave children for the most part a second chance to get a first dose And it also increased the efficacy for those who got two doses from 95 percent to 99 point five percent But in in the case of Philadelphia it didn't matter by November 29th 1990 There were 96 children who've been infected with measles by December 7th that number increased to 124 and by December 31st It increased to 258 in December of 1990 an 18-month-old boy died from measles pneumonia That was the first measles death in our city in 20 years When January 16th of 1990 on the north Philadelphia baby died of measles It was the second death and also occurred like the first in an unimmunized child The Philadelphia Health Commissioner recommended that the first dose of measles vaccine should now be given at six months of age Figuring that that would be a time at which the the Transplantal immunity from the mother would have faded enough so that at least you could have an effective vaccine Seven weeks after that the city health officials did something that has never been done before and never been done since I'll get to that The Philadelphia Health Commissioner was dr. Robert Ross He on January 16th received an anonymous phone call from a woman whose daughter belonged to the faith Tabernacle Church in north Philadelphia The woman warned Ross that church members don't believe in medical care No one had died yet said Ross But for the first time we worried that we might not hear about a case of measles until a church member calls the police or calls The coroner to pick up the body Now in the faith Tabernacle Church the doctrine of the members believe that the Bible is opposed to all means of healing Apart from God's way if I go to God and ask him to heal my body said church member Gordon corn I can't go to a doctor for medicine. You either trust God or you trust man The church school contained hundreds of children none of whom were immunized That's that's a sign it actually exists outside the faith Tabernacle Church, which is alive and well in the city of Philadelphia today On February 11th. This headline appeared in the Philadelphia inquires two more children died On February the 7th days before that headline Karen still a nine-year-old girl is pronounced dead for measles on February 10th Monica Johnson a classmate is also pronounced dead Monic is one of 11 children in the home all of whom are unimmunized Monica's father is a teacher at the school I feel very confident in my belief in that way that I've raised my child He says Monica is something that God has given us and now it's taken away After Karen stills death Ross meets with the Reverend Charles Reiner who was a pastor of faith Tabernacle He was soft-spoken the consummate gentleman says Ross, but he drove me nuts We told him we needed to vaccinate everyone in the school, but he said the families wouldn't let us do it On February 12th this headline appeared in the inquire now as we're starting to try and get into the area of these these into the Homes of the children who who are part of this this church Ross obtained this is Philadelphia This is one of several steps that was taken by the Philadelphia courts The first is Ross obtains a court order to visit the families who refused to let him touch their children All you can do is look through the doorway and try and determine whether or not The children are severely dehydrated or whether they have pneumonia Most of the families had six eight ten or twelve kids because they didn't believe in birth control says Ross There were many there were also a lot of kids who were physically or mentally Disabled because they all had in-house deliveries. Even if the kids were born breached. They didn't do a C-section It was like the old days Ross found the children appeared well these kids had a rash They were lying in bed, but they were alert conversant and well hydrated He said but he pleads with the parents to please let him know if any of their children gets sicker On February 15th the next child died On the or the headline said the next child died that had reported to death It occurred the day before police were called to the home of Lynette Milne's who is pronounced dead Milne's doesn't attend the Faith Tabernacle Church But her sister does Lynette's seven brothers and sisters are also all unimmunized quote when another kid turned up the morgue I checked my list and realized she was on it said Ross. I had just called the mother and she told me her kids were fine She lied to me Ross refers the case to district attorney Ron Castile who considers filing criminal charges, but demures Unfortunately when the parent is willing to risk the death of their children because of religious belief says Castile It's unlikely that the threat of prosecution will in any way act as a deterrent Then Ross takes the next step Realizing that the information he's getting is inaccurate from the parents He gets a court order to physically examine children and he had list enlist residents at our hospital I was at the hospital at the time children's hospital Philadelphia and St. Christopher's children hospital Which are the two major hospitals in the city to go door-to-door and go into those homes and into the rooms and examine the children Quote it was one of the more inspiring moments in my 30 years in health care says Ross These are busy people on call every third night yet. They were happy to do it On February 15th this headline appeared in the Daily News In the early morning of February 15th Nancy Evans a 15 year old from North Central Philadelphia dies from measles Nancy doesn't belong to the Faith Tabernacle Church rather. She belongs to the 1st century Gospel Church Another large faith healing group in this in our city Also on February 15th Tina Louise Johnson who was the 13 year old sister of Monica Johnson who had previously died dies on the day of Monica's funeral neither Nancy Evans nor Tina Louise Johnson were taken to a doctor when their illness is worsened Five children have now died in ten days. I don't know if I can put this in perspective. This is 1991 this is about 30 years into development of a measles vaccine and although Medicine has its limits. I mean there is much that we don't know and much that we can't do This was one thing we can do we can prevent measles We have had a had a measles vaccine at this point for 28 years And yet these parents chose not to use that vaccine thus putting their children at risk and and ultimately killing them Philadelphia is now in the midst of the worst epidemic in the United States Of interest in the US about one in a thousand infected children will die from measles That was true in the pre-vaccine era is about a point one percent in some developing world countries that that Mortality rate can reach as high as one in three hundred, but in Philadelphia in night in February of 1991 Four of a hundred and fifty children with measles who attend the Faith Tabernacle Church are dead That is a mortality rate of one in thirty five So the CDC sent a team to investigate the team was headed by Bill Atkinson Atkinson and his group were concerned that there was something unique about the Philadelphia measles strain Perhaps it was more virulent and that that's what was going on But they found that the the deaths had nothing to do with the circulating strain and everything to do with the parents Children were dying not because they weren't getting intravenous not not Children were dying because they aren't getting intravenous fluids for their severe dehydration or oxygen for their pneumonia antibiotics for the bacterial super infection on top of their viral pneumonia in February 18th 1991 This headline appeared in the Philadelphia inquire when finally Charles Reinhardt spoke out The devil has tried to put fear in people's hearts. He said Job was robbed of everything he had as he went through the trial. He learned from it There is no fear when you can see God on your side Reinhardt sees these deaths of children in his church as a test of His faith a test. He has every intention of passing. It's drawing us all together. He says Now we go to the third step in the Philadelphia courts Which is Ross asks the mayor who was Wilson good at the time to obtain a court order to hospitalize children who are critically ill With the telephone a number of judge in hand residents Meaning residents of the the hospital interns and residents to Children's Hospital Philadelphia and St. Chris's Examine children from the Faith Tabernacle Church quote It was like entering a time warp said Mark Jaffe who headed the St. Chris's team with the exception of the fact that they stay at home and watch their children die from measles They seem like wonderful people When February 18th this headline appears in the Philadelphia inquire Daniel Kern a four-year-old developed me developed measles pneumonia a healthcare worker insists on admitting the child to the hospital the parents Politely but firmly refused Ross calls city solicitor Sharice Lilly who calls family court judge Edward Summers Who gets an emergency order to hospitalize the boy a second child One-year-old girl named Bianca Carpina is also hospitalized against her parents will The Philadelphia measles epidemic is now at its peak at Children's Hospital Philadelphia We were admitting eight and we had seen 82 children our emergency department in 28 have been hospitalized at St. Chris's 250 children are seen in the emergency department and three are being hospitalized every week Ross and his team have visited 80 families and 500 children but predicts correctly There will be more measles deaths in the city of Philadelphia On February 21st this headline appeared in the Daily News Philadelphia is now a fear destination to nearby schools to cancel trips to the city It's the city prints 50,000 educational pamphlets and is vaccinating hundreds of school children every week Pennsylvania sends a hundred thousand dollars in federal funds to help on February 27th 1991 Mayor Wilson Goods asked the city solicitor's office to obtain an order to forcibly Vaccinate children now I should put this in some perspective There's a distinction between a legal distinction between mandatory vaccination and compulsory vaccination with mandatory Vaccination you are asked to vaccinate your child if you don't you will pay some sort of price a societal price You won't be able to get to go to the school You'll you want to go to you may not be able to work in the hospital You want to work in that's the price compulsory vaccination is you bring a child in pin them down and vaccinate them against their parents Will it's something that has never happened in this country in a hundred years, but happened that one February in Philadelphia 1991 now now the question was was this Constitutional was it constitutional to compel vaccination in the case of an outbreak like this one now according to the Supreme Court's interpretation of the Constitution States are Permitted through their police power to compel vaccination of their citizens it really centered that case Centered on a Lutheran minister named Henning Jacobson who during a smallpox epidemic in Cambridge, Massachusetts Refused vaccination his key and in addition he refused to pay the five dollar fine It came with that refusal that he believed that that that God would protect him and that he did not need the smallpox vaccine That case worked its way up from district courts to the state Supreme Court and ultimately up to the United States Supreme Court We're Chief Justice John Marshall Harlan writing for the majority wrote the following The Liberty secured by the Constitution of the United States does not import an absolute right to be wholly freed from restraint There are manifold restraints to which every person is necessarily subject for the common good Society based on the rule that each one is a law unto himself would soon be confronted with anarchy and disorder So at this point this this headline appeared in the Philadelphia Inquirer that the Philadelphia was now Philadelphia was now going to obtain a court order to forcibly vaccinate children against their parents will now the the the the parents of the of the Faith Tabernacle Church along with the church Pastor Charles Reinhardt sought out the help of the the Pennsylvania chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union believing that they would represent them now remember at this point Although it is not your constitutional right to To avoid vaccines to choose not to get vaccines a state can decide That that that state is now going to allow a religious exemption to vaccination In fact, there are 41 states in the United States that now frankly allow Religious exemptions to vaccination Nevada's one of them Pennsylvania's one of them So it was it seemed like a slam dunk that the American Civil Liberties Union who is certainly willing to represent Unpopular causes would be willing to take the side of the parents here I mean it in Pennsylvania in 1991 we had had a law in the books allowing religious exemptions of vaccination for more than 10 years This is just to make the point that the ACLU is willing to represent unpopular causes They represented the neo-Nazis in their March in Skokie, Illinois in 1977 Skokie is a town which had a number of Jewish people including Holocaust survivors that lived there and in fact They ultimately prompted this This headline in the onion which said ACLU defends neo-Nazis right to burn down ACLU headquarters I've never saw that but Interestingly on March 2nd 1991 this headline appeared in the Philadelphia inquire as the ACLU declined to help the parents in this measles case Which frankly was a surprise to all of us There is certainly a free exercise of religious claim by parents said Deborah Levy of the Philadelphia chapter of the ACLU But there is also a competing claim that parents don't have the right to martyr their children I don't think we've walked away from our principles here When March 2nd 1991 this headline appears as the judge permitted the city to vaccinate Objectors now the Jerome Balter was a lawyer for the parents of the Faith Tabernacle Church and he protested that decision Quote their healing is dependent on their faith. He says they believe that's the right thing to do for their children But the judge rejected that and ruled in favor of the city So Balter took his case then to the Pennsylvania the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania Superior Court of Appeals The State Superior Court judge was Vincent Cirillo who heard that appeal now while Balter represented the parents It was actually Sean Lacey that rep was the public defender representing the children at one point during the meeting the hearing Cirillo noticed a pained expression on Lacey's face and asked are you ill? Lacey had just been handed a note concerning a 20 month old boy named Jones Jones who were members of the Faith Tabernacle Church and That precipitated what was this headline on March 9th The boy had had a measles encephalitis from which he ultimately succumbed At this point now that that next child had died Balter argued that parents are now willing to allow sick children to be admitted to the hospital But they still refuse to be vaccinated He's implying that treatment is as good as prevention a statement that has clearly been contradicted by events of the previous month When March 9th, this headline appeared in the Daily News and on June the 7th this headline appeared You know, I should make a point here actually while I can Measles is a is a winter and spring disease that measles is gone by April or May We are still seeing cases in July in this country and the reason is is that that? The source of measles is coming from other countries. So in other words the Philippines is the main source Philippines is in a major epidemic. They had they had 32,000 cases of measles last year and 41 deaths from measles last year And so what will happen and this is true in that Ohio part of this epidemic the current epidemic where there's been more than 150 cases Amish person goes to unvaccinated goes to the Philippines comes back comes into an unvaccinated Community and spreads the disease now now in the Philippines measles is endemic year-round So I think that's why we're continuing to see cases even into the summer months Which is was never seen even in the in the pre-vaccine era because we're bringing it in from other countries But remember we live in a sea of measles I mean there are 20 million cases of measles every year in the world and 122,000 deaths every year in the world and you know it's a global travels common The difference sorry the difference between then and now is that the for the what's happened is you know We had say and by 2000 we really eliminated endemic measles from the United States But what's happened over the last say 15 years is there's been a gradual decline in in measles immunization rates So as there's been a decline in herd immunity and when there's a decline in herd immunity The first thing you see come back are the most contagious diseases And that's exactly what you're seeing now measles mumps Hooping cough to some extent bacterial meningitis You would have to have a further erosion in herd immunity to start to see diseases like polio Deferia come back those are more emotional diseases And I think if they did come back you would it would have an even greater effect in the current outbreaks, but that's that's the way it works So as I said typically means this is from Robert Levinson who was director of disease control in Philadelphia Typically measles a disease of the late winter and early spring when the warm weather Comes the cases disappear Reiner has a different interpretation of what's happening at this point focusing on the children in his church Who had survived the infection without medical care. He said we believe God has provided his faithfulness The the CDC's report actually came out in in in late In 1993 it was filed on December 3rd 1992, but what they found was that among church members There were 486 people who were infected and six killed among non-church members 938 people were infected in three killed. That's one city in one winter Period all nine deaths were in children the attack rate in church members was about a thousand fold greater Than in the surrounding community and you know, I think just as a side I mean when Jenny McCarthy who's my personal go-to person for health care advice She may not be yours, but you know when she gets on On larry king live and says or an opress and says as she does so eloquently I'll take the freaking measles every time as if the choice is between getting an mmr vaccine and thus risking autism or getting measles That's not the choice mmr vaccine doesn't cause autism, but What that tells you is is the success of the vaccine You know that it's not just that we've largely eliminated measles. We've largely eliminated the memory of measles I mean those of us who live through this philadelphia outbreak saw what measles can do We had several children in our hospital who died of measles. I'm not sure they would have died today I mean today we have advances in ICU Care that include things like oscillators and heart lung machines that we didn't have then But you know to watch a child come in and over a five or seven day period die of measles stays with you And when when when mccarthy says that that on the on on national television It it just reminds me of how how much we don't remember what this virus could do But this hopefully will Will educate people certainly this event educated me about what this virus could do I'm into the cdc in 2000 looked at sort of immunization rates in in 2013 have found that that About 30,000 children whose parents had chosen not to vaccinate them for religious reasons given under reporting I think the insular nature of some of these faith healing groups I think the number is probably far greater than that and and just as i'll leave you with this last note and us save time You know I would argue that although i'm not a particularly religious person I would argue that if religious or religious at all But I think that if religion teaches us anything it teaches us to care about our children to care about our neighbors to care about Our families I did the notion of a religious exemption to vaccination to me is a contradiction in terms It seems to me that it is a profoundly unreligious act I mean in addition there are religious exemptions to child abuse neglect laws if it's child abuse and neglect I just think that's not religion So i'll close you close with why do we allow such a profoundly unreligious act to be performed in the name of religion? Thanks for your attention


A non-governmental organization, Global Peace Foundation, is advocating non-violent communications as a means of ensuring peaceful coexistence among Nigerians. The organization kick-started a campaign in Abuja to push for a peaceful nation. Emmanuel Ehigene has the report. Not a few Nigerians are on the search for peace as the country deals with insecurity. As a result, a non-governmental organization says it has a solution that will guarantee lasting peace and unity. That is one of the reasons for this awareness program led by Kaduna State's Chairman of Christen, Association of Nigeria and a Country Director of Global Peace Foundation, Nigeria, Reverend Joseph Hayab. He emphasizes the need for attitudinal change in Nigerians. One of the key challenges we have in Nigeria today is communication. The way we communicate with neighbors, the way we communicate with our bosses or subordinates, the way our security agencies communicate with us, the way our leaders communicate with us and the way we do communicate with them, the fact is that there is no communication. What we do is we are fighting, we are shouting at each other, so can we cultivate such spirit of non-violence communication where people talk to each other more from a friendly and civil point of view, airing their view without necessarily causing any harm. Another member of the organization adds that the awareness program is for the benefit of the peaceful coexistence of Nigerians. There are a lot of contributing factors on how we communicate. People are suffering, there is a lot of tension going on. It's natural that people become aggressive because of the things that are happening in their environment. Participants talk about the desired impact on the country as it concerns the youth. The reason I'm taking you from here is that I as a person, when I'm communicating as you have an understanding of what I am saying to the next person, because everybody's feelings matter, don't just come up and say something to somebody, but the person will understand what you are saying and the tune of which you are using to communicate that thing is very important to that person. Non-violence communication is still, I'm to encourage myself first to know the importance of me telling somebody things at the right time or on the right platform, not to just say it the way I feel, but to also see the other part of the other person, to see how he or she may take it. The theme of the event is non-violent communication upon a seer for a peaceful nation. It is a one-day advocacy program organized for youths in Abuja as a pilot program that will eventually spread to other parts of the country.


I've been working in the Float Clinic and Research Center at the Laureate Institute for Brain Research since I joined the lab as an engineering intern about four years ago.  So a little bit about me, when I was a junior electrical engineering student, the main career paths ahead of me in Tulsa are usually either oil and gas or aerospace, which are exciting but not exactly my cup of tea. So Justin Feinstein came to the engineering department with an interesting presentation. He was looking to build a float center, a research float center in Tulsa, and he needed engineering support. So my first thought was, what the heck is a float? And my second thought was, that's interesting. Sign me up. How do I get on board? So I met up with Justin after the presentation was over, and then I joined the lab as an intern, and I had no idea what I was getting myself into. And I know that you all see those stars and know what those mean. This is my third presentation, and I'm so excited to be up here on the stage. So before we can get into the development of the squeeze ball, we need to learn more about cardiac interoception and our hypothesis on the perception of the heart and why it is so important, especially in the float tank. Once we know exactly what biological signals we want to measure, I'll take us through the process of the hardware and the software development that makes it happen. And finally a conclusion that shares some preliminary results from the squeeze ball. So cardiac interoception, we'll take this word apart. Cardiac is relating to the heart. So out of all the wonderful organs in the body, we're going to be focusing on the heart. And then intero is relating to your internal body, your internal sensations. Andception would be your awareness or your perception. So we put it all together. Cardiac interoception is to feel and understand your heart. We can dive a little bit deeper and look at accuracy, which would be the hit or miss in recognizing a heartbeat, and then precision, which would be how quickly you can perceive that heartbeat. So why cardiac interoception? Because performance is affected by mental health. Anxiety, depression, PTSD all have some influence on how the heart is perceived. The float tank is a perfect environment to measure this because in the floating environment your heart more easily enters your awareness. It could be the flow of blood from your heart to your extremities, or it could be your ability to hear your heartbeat reverberate through the water. Over the course of a float, a single float, or multiple floats of mental health changes, we also want to monitor the perception of their heart to see if that changes as well. Our hypothesis is that we predict that floating exposes and reinforces pathways used for cardiac interoception and will be evident in increased cardiac interoceptive performance. Also to measure cardiac interoception, we need two data streams. The first data stream is when your heart is actually beating, and we can determine that through an electrical cardiogram, or ECG, and then we'll need response, which will come through in the form of squeezes. So we put those two together, and that's all we need. And so for accuracy, we would look at the data, we'd see a heartbeat, and we'd see if there's a squeeze that follows it. For precision, we would measure the time delay between the heartbeat and the recognition. So into the experiment. This will put the physical limitations on the device. We can't have any devices to be wired, because if someone's trying to float around and be free, we don't want to anchor them down, and the devices have to be safe. It would be bad if we were to shock the people we were trying to help. And of course it has to survive the float environment.  We even have a, I've been maintaining a sort of graveyard. Every time a piece of equipment fails or gets salty, it goes into the graveyard. And as someone float, we spend so much time to sound proof these rooms, to lie proof these rooms, to remove as much stimuli as possible. So how tragic would it be if we put a device on something that lights up or that vibrates, and then we ruin the float experience and we destroy the measures that we're hoping to take? So when we design devices and look for devices, we have to think about how the device is going to impact the float experience, or more precisely, how it does not. And for collecting ECG, a commercial device exists called the Biopatch. It sticks onto your chest with two electrodes near your heart, and it needs a little modification, a little adaptation to survive the float tank. So we put a waterproof protective layer, and it also has some lights. So we put tape on the lights, so that way the subject isn't woken up by flashing lights during the float. But for the squeeze response data, no devices existed. So with my understanding of cardiac interception and the floating environment, I designed and built the squeeze ball. So of course, waterproof and salt proof, it has to survive being used, survive being cleaned, survive being dropped, survive being handled roughly.  So if we're trying to send signals back and forth out of the float tank, we need to make sure those signals are strong enough to get out of the float tank. And then battery life, efficient power use, so that way we're collecting data throughout the entire experiment. And last would be a sensitive pressure recording circuit, so while the subject's floating and they're concentrating on their heart, we want them to maintain that concentration on their heart. So they only need to squeeze just a little bit to get that recognition across, because the more they squeeze, the more we're going to interrupt that float experience. And so the cute monster down there was the very first prototype. And after several revisions, we have the working models over there that are in use right now. And so here's just a little snip of data. We have our ECG in red and our squeeze data in blue. In red we have the 98th heartbeat, 99th, 100, 101st, and then we have the 18th squeeze, 19th, and the 20th. And here's a good way to look at the latency between heartbeats. So you have about one second from one heartbeat to the next, so the subject has about one second to respond to that heartbeat before the next one occurs. So we're on a very, very short time scale. And the two devices, the ECG, the biopatch, and the squeeze response data from the squeeze ball need an additional setup to synchronize their data. So imagine you and your friend just bought new watches and you set them at exactly the same time. No matter how quick you are, you can never get both clocks, both watches, to start at exactly the same time. And we have the same problem with the biopatch and the squeeze ball, because they both have their own clocks. So what we do is to wire both devices together, send time pulses to them. Once the experiment is done, once the data is collected, we can look at those time pulses and synchronize the device. Without synchronization, we have a zero to two second error. And so if we have heartbeats that happen every second, and our time error is two seconds, the data is just uncomparable. So here's another bit of data that's been synchronized. So we have a pair of a heartbeat occurring in red, and then the squeeze that follows it in blue. So the first one, we have a 241 millisecond delay for the second, 194 seconds for the next, 579, and then for the last one, 596. So with our devices working, with our synchronization working, we can flow participants and collect data through structured experiments. And so here's a very brief glimpse into some results from our current R34 study, the first NIH flip flood and study. We have our participant ID over there, what condition they're in, and then heartbeat detections during a one-minute heartbeat detection task. And I've included in here the dry float condition, which is very similar to the float.  So the water keeps you buoyant, but the water never comes in contact with your skin. So we've dry float data, and then wet float data in the float tank. And included these, so that way we know the squeeze ball and the tile patch are working correctly in both conditions. So that way when we collect the rest of the half of our data sets, we'll be able to confidently analyze the data. So for the conclusion, cardiac interception is an attractive measurement for float research because of the increased heart sensations during a float and the relationship with mental illness. Devices created for the float tanks need special design to survive the environment and not interfere with the float. Time-sensitive measurements requires additional synchronization processes, and based on our preliminary results, our devices are working and collecting reliable data. And I'd like to thank everyone in our lab, Justin, myself, Cindy, McKenna, Laura, Hikyung, Obada, and Jessica. Jessica's not in this picture, but she was there in spirit. Oh, I want to thank you of all of you for coming out. That's awesome. You all are beautiful. And all of the interns and graduate students in the past, the president, and that will be there in the future. Thank you guys.


That's turning again. Okay, this time it's done. Good. Okay. Thank you so much for that of me. Yeah All right, we'll begin so we Finished first John last week. So this week we will look into second John and third John and be able to complete the portion So, you know, if we can turn in our Bibles to second John right now we'll Begin with the opening verse before we do that just to give an introduction This particular letter is written as a warning because there are traveling preachers going from church to church and They are teaching wrong doctrine and yeah, it's mainly doctrine, you know related to Gnosticism the false teachings which were coming in and so this is a warning not to entertain such people so it's a very brief letter and John is, you know asking the people to be careful whom they invite into the churches into their homes So that they will not be deceived. So that's the basic crux of this entire letter and we'll very briefly go through the verses. So The opening verse if we could have someone read out verse one. Yes second John chapter one verse one The elder to the elect lady and her children whom I love in truth and not only I But also all who know the truth Yes, so these are the opening lines and there's a lot of debate regarding this because Generally letters are not written like this or at least were not written like this in at that time So they wonder whether it's really being spoken to one specific person or whether it is just term that is being used for the church You know, so why is the church being referred to as a lady? They're not very sure so different commentaries have different views regarding this It could be that they're addressing the lady in whose home the house church is meeting Because at that time they didn't have you know institutionalized churches where you'd have it your own Campus and you're building and all of that the church basically were the people and so they would just meet in Whichever home has been opened up for them So they would meet in homes So is he addressing is John addressing the lady who runs this particular? House church or at least the house in which her home is you know the other house church Which is running in her home? We're not very sure Most commentaries will just say that The church is being Personalized as a woman and being addressed as a lady so It could either be the letter is being given to a specific woman who is Or who has opened up her home for the church or it can refer to all of the All of the people in a local church and the local church itself is being called a lady not very sure If we look at verse 4 in verse 4 it talks about a way He says it has given me great joy to find some of your children walking in the truth The you're over there is singular as though he's addressing one single lady and You know her children But on the other hand when we look at the rest of the verses there, he's you know wherever he says you You know he's talking about the plural you As in as though he's addressing all of the believers meeting in that church So let's just leave it at that it's he's probably just referring to a house church and Maybe he's speaking to the in charge of the house the letter has been formally addressed to the lady in whose home that church meets But this letter is not basically to her. It's basically to the house church as such. So This letter would have been passed on from one house to the from one house church to the other because you know Generally in those times the Apostles would write to one church and then whatever information is over there would be passed on to the other house Churches as well so that everyone gets to learn whatever teaching is contained in that particular letter So in the same way, you know, this is a letter of warning and so after how it was You know read out in this particular house church I'm sure these this church would have passed it on to the other house churches as well So that they took you know can stand want and they took and take care so that they don't entertain the wrong kind of preaching traveling preachers in their homes So Yeah, it says over here To the lady chosen by God and to her children whom I love in the truth So he says that he loves these people this this church in the truth so he's basically referring to the believers who have chosen to stay true to the you know correct teaching of Jesus Christ and They genuinely believe that Jesus Christ came in the flesh So he's he affirms here that he is addressing such people and that he loves them in the truth and He's clearly, you know separating this congregation from the other false From from the other fake Christians who have now gone into Gnosticism so he says I love them in the truth and not only I but also all who know the truth So he's very very clearly referring to the wrong teachings which have crept in and he's saying that we who stand in the truth Are not like this. We are apart from the others So he segregates and makes it very clear that there's a distinction between the right teaching and the wrong teaching The followers of the right teaching and the followers of the wrong teaching And then in inverse to he goes on to say because of the truth which lives in us and will be with us forever So why do we have this love among us? It is because we are you know Based on the truth on the other hand if you look at the the you know the the fake Christians who have gone into Gnosticism They seem to have a superiority complex. They seem to be speaking to the as though they are superior to the others They they do not have the love and the and that feeling of fellowship which These people hold in their hearts. Why because they are not based on the truth So he makes that point. He says over here, you know, I love Your children in the truth and not only I but all who know the truth Why because the truth lives in us and will be with us forever So this is not just truth which they which you know, john and the other believers have just Learned at a mind level intellectual level, but this is a truth which they are literally living out You know, it's been internalized absorbed inside them to such an extent that they are literally living out the truth So the question to us would be Uh, how do we approach our christian walk? Is it just a lot of information that we have gathered in our minds? Or have we internalized and absorbed this truth? Of scripture to such an extent that it is affecting the way we talk it affects the way we think It it influences our interactions. So it has it been internalized to that extent because over here He talks about a truth which is not just truth Which you know as information Which even the demons know even the demons are aware that you know of the truth at an intellectual level But these people know the truth in in an experiential way Where they are literally living it out in their everyday lives. Okay, so He's so he says that because of the truth which lives in us and will be with us forever So here there is also An implication towards jesus christ himself as the truth So he too lives in us and he too will be with us forever so Moving on to the third verse he is you know pronouncing a blessing upon them and He says grace mercy and peace from god the father and from jesus christ the father's son Will be with us in truth and love Now generally we have this kind of a statement at the beginning of most letters, right? where Some kind of blessing is spoken over the people who are you know receiving the letter But we see a difference over here If you were to compare it with the other letters where you have a you know A word of blessing being spoken there It's more like you know may the lord be with you You know or may his grace rest upon you, you know, it's more like a wish But over here It's not really so much a wish that john is expressing over here But rather it almost sounds like as if he's making a statement and he's making a Teaching over here. So it's not just a Wish that is being expressed, you know in the way that was customary in those letters But rather he's actually making a teaching statement over here So let's actually look at another you know a letter where and look at how this kind of wording would have been used over there And then compare it with the way it is used over here So that we can see that john is actually trying to bring out something in you know in making this statement over here So if someone could read out for us romans chapter one Verse seven where you have a similar kind of you know Um Introductory blessing being made by paul But then look at the wording over there and look at the wording over here So romans chapter one verse seven if someone could read out, please To all those in rome who are loved by god and called to be saints Grace and grace to you and peace from god our father and the lord jesus christ Okay, so it's like a wish that he's saying, you know May grace and peace be with you from god our father and from the lord jesus christ So it's a wish that he's expressing that this is what he desires for them that grace and peace from god The father and jesus christ would rest upon them But here if you look at the wording being used by john He says grace mercy and peace from god the father and jesus christ will be with us It's like a statement. Okay. There's no wishing may it rest upon you nothing of the kind He's making the statement and saying it will be with us And so if you actually take apart this um introductory blessing you see many many Points that he is making The first thing that we see is that uh, he says it will be with us He includes himself, you know in the statement. It's not he's not just saying may grace be upon you He's saying this grace this peace It's going to be with all of us and he includes himself as part of that And he also where he makes a point over here where he specifically says and from jesus christ the father's son Because um, you know of all this no stick teaching where different things were being said the the The truth of who exactly jesus is was not being clearly accepted. So he kind of um Re you know affirms here that jesus christ is the father's son. He's divine He you know points out that aspect and then he also says That he will be with us in truth and love so The lord is with us when we continue to hold on to the truth And we continue to practice the love that he has taught us to you know hold on to so All of these statements show that this is not just an introductory blessing that is being given It's more like a statement of doctrine Uh a statement of theology that is being made by john over here Okay, so those are your introductory verses and then he goes on into the main content And uh, so he talks about walking in the truth. Uh, if we can have someone read out verse four Second john verse four I rejoice greatly that I have found some of your children walking in truth As we receive commandment from the father Verse five And now I plead with you lady not as though I wrote a new commandment to you But that which we had I've had from the beginning that we love one another Yes, so, you know again over here. He brings up that introductory, you know term Saying, you know lady So it does seem as though he is speaking to an actual person Um, you know, it it would be rather strange to say, you know, uh, dear lady all people's church We would really not use that kind of terminology even back then they did not use that kind of terminology So yes, it seems to be an actual person in whose home the house church is meeting. Uh, so He again brings up this term and now he uh, he says I'm not writing you a new command But one we have had from the beginning and he says, you know, love one another So he's basically saying I'm full of joy. I'm so happy to learn that, you know, many of your spiritual children All the you know people who are meeting in that local church all of you are walking in the truth and this brings me joy He says why because a lot of people have now been influenced and have been led away by stray I know by by false teachers But these people have not strayed these people are holding on to the truth and this brings him joy And so he says it's very good that you are walking in the truth But also remember there's another part to it. You must also walk in love So, um, it's not enough to just simply Know the truth. Um, you must also express it In your actions and over here, you know, the grammar of this particular Phase where he says I asked that we love one another That's supposed to be in the present subjunctive form. It just basically means it's like a continuous thing You are supposed to continue walking in love. Okay is is the way you would word it So because you are walking in the truth and because you're saying that you have That you're holding on to the right doctrine The one which was originally imparted by jesus christ because you are making that claim now prove it through your actions Prove it by on in an ongoing manner You know walking in love and expressing this truth in actual action Because that's that's something which the fake christians were not doing So they were only they were they were big with words, but very poor in action But here he says we should not be like that. We should be able to express this truth in our actions all right Moving on into verse six and this is love That we walk in obedience to his commands as you have heard from the beginning his command is that you walk in love so, uh, he's just you know Confirming that that love and truth are connected Love in action and truth are connected moving into verse seven um Yeah, I someone could read out verse seven Someone could please read out verse seven second john So many deceivers have gone out into the world who do not confess this is christ as coming in the flesh This is a deceiver and antichrist Yes, uh, so here he says, um, many, um, okay who do not acknowledge have gone out into the world Uh in all the other places where they talk about deceivers and antichrists These are people who are outside the church and from the outside. They're attacking the church They're persecuting the church and in that sense they are antichrists. Uh, you know, they are Uh persecuting god's church Here you have antichrists being the term antichrists being used in a different sense These are people who have pretended to be part of the church They have pretended to be part of the flock and from inside the church. They have gone out into the world Okay, so that's the contrast that we see between the antichrist the kind of antichrist mentioned over here in john and the general antichrists who are mentioned in the other You know other new testament books so When it comes to the other antichrist figures, there's usually political connotations They are people who have established themselves in power You know, including the final antichrist who will come in the end So these are all more political figures And they use their political power to take a stand against god and his kingdom And so it's it's a different kind of antichrist the one that he this john is talking about is so subtle These are people who have pretended to be part of the flock. They're claiming to be the true church They are claiming that they know the truth about jesus christ And so this is a more dangerous kind of antichrist That john is referring to because these people are coming to their door steps and saying, you know, we've come with good teaching You know, can we stay in your home for a few days and you know meet with your church members and and you know, let's discuss these truths So they're being very very subtle about it. And so, um, you know, he's warning and saying this people who are coming Uh, they're actually Deceivers and antichrists. So, you know, they need to be very careful about such people So he that is why he says in verse eight watch out That you do not lose what we have worked for But that you may be rewarded fully What did john work for what did all the apostles work for?  They've gone through a lot of persecution, uh, they've You know given up everything else in life to be able to do this ministry work They have invested everything All the work that they have put in It will be wasted if these believers are now led away by something that is false And so he says watch out that you do not lose what we have worked for we have worked so hard So that christ can be formed in you. We have worked so hard so that you know, you can get your full reward So do not lose out on what you can actually get By being led away at this late stage, you know by these false teachers who have now come on the scene So that's the point that he is Making over here. Uh, and then he says something very, you know, um important He says anyone who runs ahead and does not continue in the teaching of christ Does not have god whoever continues in the teaching has both the father and the son So, uh, he says anyone who runs ahead And does not continue in the teaching of christ because that's exactly what the diagnostics were doing They were saying you see Jesus christ revealed some things But now we are running ahead beyond that we now have fresh new truths You know, we have one stage beyond what was spoken what jesus said was fine to an extent Uh, but now we have been given a full revelation by him So now they are adding new things to what has been taught and they are running ahead of what was already taught um I keep getting all these windows on my things screen Yo, yo, I mean everything is fine, right the video and the audio and all are fine. I'm assuming because um I don't know. I'm getting everything is fine today. There is a network issue. So we all are struggling getting in and out Out of okay. Okay. Okay fine. Maybe it's just that all right Yeah, so there are people who are you know running ahead of the truth adding to it And the danger with them is that even though they are running ahead and you know presenting new teachings on christ The sad thing is that they do not even have christ That's the danger. So if you say that you have coming up with, you know, new Fancy teachings and you say that you are receiving new revelations and it sounds very interesting and it sounds very creative, you know Gospel is so simple gospel is so basic and so you have teachers and preachers who come up with fancy teachings Which make it make this which take the simple gospel and try to make it more um more, you know, um intellectual and fancy and More pleasing and then people will say wow, what a sermon, you know I never even saw this passage from this angle Now were you actually meant at all to see that passage from that angle? Is it something that is part of scripture? Does it agree with the rest of scripture or is it something which is being added on? Which is not really gelling with the what the rest of the of scripture is saying So you see it may sound very interesting. It may sound very creative and original But what is creative and original, you know, um to our years may not really be What has been established from the foundation of the world because from the foundation of the world the lord has been teaching only one single um truth So whatever he says in any part of the old testament or any part of the new testament has to gel with the rest of the scripture And if it is not if it's not in line with the rest of scripture And it's something which is completely new and apart Then however creative it sounds it's just somebody who is running ahead of what has already been taught And the danger is that such people do not even have god. They're talking about god They're talking about new revelations from god, but they do not even have god. So that is a danger that we need to watch out John faced this you know dangerous issue back in his times and we still face that even now When people, you know are coming up with all kinds of new ideas, especially now with this whole New age philosophy that is coming in now people are trying to christianize some of it And they tend to bring in aspects of that new age teaching and attaching it to the teachings of the bible And that's so dangerous Because such people even though they talk about spirituality and whatnot They do not even have god and here it says in verse nine on the other hand Over continues in the teaching you know the simple teaching which which which is presented in the bible The very basic teaching which sounds foolish to the people of the world, you know So even though it is so simple even though say it is so basic This is the teaching which will help us to have both the father and the son And what exactly does this mean, you know having both the father and the son it reminds us of john 14 23, you know where the lord's You know says if anyone loves me he will obey my teaching not some other teaching my teaching He will obey my teaching and what would be a result of that My father will love him and we will come to him and make our home with him So through the holy spirit, we not only just have the holy spirit in us We literally have even the father and the son in us, you know through the presence of the holy spirit We literally have the triune god in us And that's the privilege we have if we are holding on to that simple teaching Which is there in the bible, which does not sound very intellectual or clever or very Superior or mysterious, but it's the truth. It's the fact So we should hold on to that rather than being led away by all kinds of You know false doctrines, just because they sound pleasing to our ears. So this is the main thing Which is trying to bring out over here um Moving on from there to the next verse If someone could read out verse 10 If anyone comes to you and does not bring this teaching Do not receive him into your house or give him any greeting Okay, there are two things mentioned here Uh, do not, you know invite him into your home.  Okay, so, um Uh, to understand this better, we would have to have a, you know, better idea of the way hospitality functioned in those days. Uh, so, um When people would go from town to town as, you know preaching, you know as as traveling preachers They would generally not go and stay in a public inn because Even though public inns and lodging places were available. They were not very safe You could get, you know robbed over there, uh, and, um Each town would have its own, you know, local governing bodies You know, some some some governing body to look after the law and the order So they would be more interested in catering to the people of that town rather than to strangers So if a stranger comes into the town, they would in fact look up on that person with suspicion Because they don't know really why that person has come and for what he has come And uh, so even the the law the local law agency over there would not be very much in favor of a stranger So if you go place yourself in a inn or some lodging place, um, you're at risk You're not really safe over there And so mainly, you know, these traveling preachers would approach, uh, the homes of people and seek shelter over there Because then the people of that home, you know, can provide them with protection and and and you know, take care of them And uh, so over here, um If you are actually, uh welcoming someone into your home, you're You're in a way, uh, you know declaring and saying I trust this person. I vouch for this person And uh, you know, whatever happens, I will take care of this person. So you're actually taking on responsibility It's not that you're just giving a meal and you know a bed to sleep on you're actually vouching for that person So if you do that with false teachers That would be dangerous because it will send out the wrong message that this person is Correct in their doctrine and it's all right to welcome them and listen to them. So, uh, there are larger implications here Yeah, you're not just being nice to a person.  We are now in second john Okay, um So uh over here when he says, um Do not take them into your house It could refer to an individual believer taking a traveling preacher into their house or it could also refer to um The house church accepting someone into their House church, you know to to be the preacher and bring the word and share with them The teachings so That would have even more serious implications Because it's not just one individual believer saying okay fine. I'm sheltering this person But rather the house church is affirming and saying see we approve of this person's teachings We have you know accepted this person uh into our group and now he's ministering to us He's imparting teaching to us and we are accepting it as the Truth so all these you know implications were involved and so John over here says you know do not do that and that is why he says in verse 11 Anyone who welcomes them shares in their wicked work. So it's not just that you're being you know Kind and offering them shelter. What indirectly happens is that you actually become a participant in their wicked work of spreading false doctrine and um All these things are being told to these believers and it sounds very strange to us because we think yeah, of course in its common sense You don't really need a letter to be written for this. But you see these people were so um Young in the faith in those days, uh, the church was still new They had been taught about love. They had been taught about you know hospitality and kindness and uh, so They probably were thinking that it would be impolite You know to say no to someone who's coming turning up on their doorstep and saying you know, please You know, let us stay over here Because the church is supposed to be the church of love. It's supposed to be the church which accepts people and uh, so Maybe you know in their innocence in their naivety. They were Opening their homes up to people who are now bringing in wrong teachings and so john says Yes, we need to walk in love We need to walk in truth But make sure that your love and your truth are in sync So if you're showing love to someone who is not following the truth Then that kind of a love is not really love. It is just a risk a danger that you are That you're putting the entire church at you know So because of that wrong act of false love that you have shown The entire church is going to now get the wrong message. This person is alright and that his teachings are okay So he's addressing an issue which can be you know more easily understood uh by by you know, um People here in I know West Asia, you know in in our in our regions where you know, we have this hospitality thing It's considered rather rude rather impolite to say no when someone turns up at your doorstep It's it's part of our culture. We are supposed to open up our doors. We are supposed to welcome them in Uh And then once we welcome them in then how does the rest of the community look at that person now? They consider that person as part of our household, you know under our covering and uh, so they accept that person The same way they accept us So the same the same credibility which they give to us, you know, after all they've known us for so many years Uh, the rest of the community They start giving that same credibility to this person whom we have taken into our home So all of these social implications are involved and that is why he is saying be very careful about this Do not welcome them in because if you do that, it's like almost as if you're indirectly participating in their Wicked work um, okay Yeah, yes, brother go ahead. Yeah. Yes. Thank you pastor. I just wanted to understand with the relation to the you know dealing with the false false teachers and people who Do not follow uh, you know, there are the correct doctrine What comes to mind also is, you know, when Jesus encountered um, Pharisees for example, you know, he was He was quite strong.  So should we as as believers? um You know just not you know Tolerate them at all and you know, just, you know You know be be as strong as you know, uh, you know against them Not not have anything to do with them. What what should be the way the current approach In the in the current context. Yeah, I just wanted to understand that Yeah, in our current context We would probably meet them in social settings I mean because I'm I'm just thinking, you know in terms of Just my own experiences, you know, you go to a Kind of a pastoral meeting where you know, we have people from different churches meeting together And then you know, there are some people over there who come for the occasion, you know And you know that the teachings which they have been spreading are not really in line with the gospel You stand over there and then you they come up to you and they talk to you So then, you know, we all just interact with one another Sometimes they do bring up their view and then we express our view and then there's a there's a hot Which takes place all of those interactions do happen. So we um We you know when someone like that walks up to us We don't you know turn our face away and say I refuse to talk to you because you know, you are holding onto a wrong doctrine In a very polite way we speak to them and we say, you know these things which you are saying Are they're not in line with scripture? So, you know, um, why why do you believe these things? So maybe we could start a discussion with them. We would talk to them In those social settings where we meet with them But it's quite another thing if you know, if I were to invite that person to my church and say, you know, I know Why don't you come and you know and attend one of our services? Then it becomes risky because immediately The congregation which is watching will think oh if this person has been invited to attend our church this week does that mean The pastor and the elders agree with what this person is teaching. It'll make them wonder it'll make them think twice so Inviting that person to my church To attend the service or in fact even maybe stand up and speak would be highly dangerous and highly foolish It would be what these people were doing over here, you know So where i'm sending out a wrong message to the entire church saying this is okay. These teachings are all right so We would never invite such a person Uh to the church and give them a speaking opportunity or invite them as a special guest Now if the person walks in on their own We would uh in our present context not say, you know, please, you know, leave That would probably be very very rude again. See it's all these social implications that are involved So we would not want to say, you know leave But at the same time we would definitely take a stand and say This is what we believe in brother what you are, you know, saying is something that we do not believe in We would have to kind of at least make that You know clear so that people are not led away so To what extent do you cut off a person like that? um It would be Good to be polite It would be good to you know, um Not be rude because that would be very un-christian As long as we make it very very clear that we do not believe in the teachings of this person and make it very clear to that person To saying that brother, we don't believe in what you are saying Uh, I we strongly believe that what you are saying is is not in line with what the bible is teaching So we would make that very very clear But at the same time, there's really no need to be outright rude and rough in our speech and in our conduct um I guess Does that help at all? Uh, because I mean there have been occasions when such things have happened. Yeah Does that help, uh, brother or would you like any other any follow-up questions? Yes, I think that that that definitely helped um I'm just thinking the in the in the In the occasion that you know a person like that, um You know comes to our comes to our APC church of his own accord um Not sure if they have been says, you know situations where that person has Not been encouraged to You know come again in case you know, he starts trying to you know talk to some of the other other parishioners who who are coming to the church um So I think you know something to something that probably what needs to be What carefully I'm sure you'll you'll must be doing that in some form or the other because You know it can it can create a lot of discord in the church also having someone like that come there Yeah, I mean Usually if someone comes in to the church, they there's usually no issue in the sense They just come sit there quietly and then they interact with a few people and they go away Uh, but if such people come into the you know, uh cell groups, uh, there you have discussion, right? Because then they bring up their views as well and over there. There's more, um, you know danger And so yes in such cases if that person is very Valuable and what they are saying and they are refusing to accept what we are presenting from the bible Then we would probably have to take a step and say, uh, you know, you really cannot attend our cell groups simply because Your doctrine is not matching with our doctrine and we need to you know, uh, teach our members What we believe is the truth. So yes, you know, please do not attend our cell group anymore We would actually have to take a stand and say that But generally in the church when they come it is usually not an issue because uh, they just simply have you know The tea and the biscuits and they just say a few sentences and they leave But if they're pulling people away, you know, you know, they come over there with the intention of you know influencing people and pulling them to their False groups which are meeting somewhere else now that of course would be risky And then of course we would have to take a stand and say, you know, you're not welcome in this church That would be in extreme cases that generally things. They generally don't go to that level. Uh, so yeah, yes all right, um Yes, so we will take our break now. Uh, so at 10 o'clock, uh, let's come back and we'll continue with this letter Thank you