The story of Dr. Kildare. What's where the house I enter, there will I go for the benefit of the sick. What's where the things I see or hear concerning the life of men, I will keep silence thereon, counting such things to be held as sacred trust. I will exercise my art solely for the cure. The story of Dr. Kildare, starring Lou Ayers and Lionel Barrymore. Metro-Goldwyn-Mare brought you those famous motion pictures. Now this exciting, heartwarming series is heard on radio. In just a moment, the story of Dr. Kildare. Ayers as Dr. Kildare and Lionel Barrymore as Dr. Gillespie. Player General Hospital, one of the great citadels of American medicine. A clump of gray-white buildings is planted deep in the heart of New York. The nerve center of medical progress where great minds and skilled hands wage man's everlasting battle against death and disease. Player General Hospital, where life begins, where life ends, where life goes on. It's like sentimentalism, Dr. Gillespie, but well, the best I'd hoped for was a chance to work with you on these betatron treatments, and when instead you put me in full charge of the project. Ah, now, Kildare, don't start gushing around like an old maid in the pretel. Anyway, thanks. We're living in a high-speed age, Jimmy, and it affects medicine along with everything else. You younger men are the ones who have to keep up with it. It was only a few years ago that the sulfur drugs came along. And the cellar, and the other antibiotics. Little later, the radioactive compounds, and now the betatron. Well, every one of those has meant another big step forward in medicine and a lot of new problems and new techniques to be learned. By most of the formulas and calculations Miller has used in designing this machine come from a branch of mathematics I've never even heard of. Well, the further science advances, the more specialized it becomes, and the more interdependent. All you can do is take a fellow scientist's results on faith.  I'm willing to do that in this case. Bart Miller is one of the best mathematicians and physicists in the country. So my main concern now is the fact we can treat cancers lying close to the brain. Those we couldn't touch before with surgery, x-rays, or anything else. As you know, that's as important as... Pardon me, Dr. Kildare, but the specimen lab called. They've isolated the six guinea pigs. You ought to have them ready for you. Go ahead, Parker. Well, you have them sent down to the new lab in the basement. I'll be there later. All right, Dr. Kildare. I've scheduled the first test run with the machine for three o'clock this afternoon. What about the first human test? Oh, that won't be a test, Dr. Gillespie. It'll be a treatment. And the patient is Janet Dane. Maybe you remember her. Yeah, yeah. She's a young artist who was in here for a diagnosis about a month ago. She had a throat cancer high up on the left side, well advanced, and not treatable. Until now. She's coming in for consultation in an hour. I just talked with her on the phone. You know, I'm worried about her mental condition now. She's got to want to get well. But apparently, she doesn't even care. When we told her she had cancer, she seemed to lose all her belief in everything. Well, that's one problem you younger doctors still have to deal with, Jimmy. The problem of the human mind and heart and soul. There's no machine for that one. You'll have to solve that all. Then, as I understand it, Dr. Kildare, I'll be fastened in some sort of chair in a small room down in the basement while this atom smasher shoots a narrow beam of high-frequency radiation through my throat. Yes, that's essentially correct, Miss Dane. Each treatment lasts about three minutes and it'll take several of them before we know the results. You'll be able to hear the batatron running, of course, but you'll have no other sensation and no pain. Nevertheless, I take it there is some danger involved. Well, not as far as we know. You'll be the first patient to be treated here at Blair, of course, but similar machines have been used successfully in other places. Well, then why all these precautions you told me about? Three foot concrete walls on the room I'll be in and with lead shields around it. You and the other operators looking in at me through portholes. Well, there's quite a lot of difference between the careful controlling and focusing of that beam where you want it to go and just turning the radiation loose and permitting indiscriminate exposure to it. But with proper handling of the machine, there's nothing to be frightened about. Oh, don't misunderstand me, Dr. Kildare. There's no question of being frightened of. Stop being frightened of anything. I know. I almost wish you were a little frightened.  Care? About what, my life? Why should I? When you told me a month ago, I was going to lose it. No, not quite that. I said that without treatment, you had around six months to live. But we're ready now to start treatment. But there's nothing really certain about this million-dollar gadget, is there? It's still only a chance. A very good chance, though. That's true. There are types of cancer that don't respond particularly to betatron radiation, but I'm confident yours will. Would you still be as confident if you were in my place, Dr. Kildare? I know how it would sound if I said your life is more important to me than mine, so we'll let that go. But all our lives depend on chance. I could be killed by an automobile tomorrow, and you might live to be 90. Of course, there's some chance involved in this treatment, but all the odds are with us. You've got to believe, and I have faith. Then what? I had faith in myself until this came along. So what can you put faith in? Well, if nothing else, why not me? I mean, in whatever knowledge and ability I have as a doctor, in the confidence I feel about the treatment. Suppose the treatment doesn't work? It will. You're so... you're so sincere and convincing. A person could believe in you easily, could want to believe in you. Then give it a try, will you? You won't let me down, Dr. Kildare? No, Miss Dane. I won't let you down. There's no doubt about it.  The conclusions are non-insufficient evidence. I know the symptoms, Jimmy. And under the circumstances, it was inevitable. Every woman falls in love with her doctor at least once. It's a psychological fact. Well, not Janet Dane. She isn't the type. Well, maybe she's not your type, but every woman is the type. Well, I hope you're wrong. I've been through that particular patient problem before. Oh, in fact, I know you're wrong. Okay, Kildare. We'll have to go ahead on the test whenever you are. All right, Bart, let's get started. Wayman, you can bring that first cage over now. Got you, boss.  Cute little gopher, ain't he, Doc? Bart, is it safe to go inside now?  Go ahead. Come on, Joe. This room gives me the win-win. Nothing in here but that one chair. It looks like an execution chamber. It's intended to be just the opposite. Now take that guinea pig out of the cage, Joe. I've got to strap him in place here on the head of the chair. He's under a sedative. So he'll stay quiet during the test.  No, you won't even know anything's going on. Here we are. Oh, come on, Joe. Let's get out of here. It's okay, buddy. That thing there looks like a machine gun pointing through the wall there. It's even got ring sights on it. When you fire a 30-million-volt shot, it's a good idea to know where you're aiming. I'll clear Bart. It's yours from here on. Okay. Roll him over, Jim. Right. Dr. Gillespie, you can use this porthole here if you like. Oh, thank you, thank you. I don't see nothing happening yet, boss. Speed steady at 21,000-byte. All right. Cut in the primaries. 27.53-byte. Good. Are the grids open? Yeah. Well, gentlemen, this is it. Test number one. On zero, Jim. Right. Ready. Now, I don't see nothing happening in a minute, Doc. No, and you won't see anything, Joe. The beam is invisible. Oh, that little gopher inside there sure don't seem to mind it, none. He doesn't even feel it. Well, two minutes, 43 seconds, I want to go. You've seen the whole procedure now, Miss Dane. That guinea pig in there is the eighth one we've tested this week. Three minute exposures each time, and not one has shown any ill effects. Well, this one certainly seems to feel all right. A guinea pig can go through with it. I can too. When do we start? Well, the first treatment is scheduled for nine o'clock tomorrow morning. I see. You've decided to take my advice. Yes. Whatever faith I have, it's all in you now. Guess that ought to put you on the spot. I suppose it does in a way, but thanks for doing it. Oh, Kildare. Oh, so you're still down here. Am I too late for the run? Yes, we just finished, Dr. Gillespie. Everything worked perfectly. Bart's there in the control room now, making a final check over. Ron, Kildare, I've just completed it. All okay. Oh, good. I tell you, I'll come in at 7.30 in the morning. Have it warmed up, ready to roll any time from 8.30 on. Now, then it'll work out nicely. We're scheduled for nine. Well, how do you feel, Miss Dane? Better than I have any time for the past month, Dr. Gillespie. Thanks to my physician, who's a pretty wonderful guy. In case you didn't know. Yeah. Fits in with a little theory of mine. I'm psyched now. Oh, let's not go into that, Dr. Gillespie. Chief of staff, they've been trying to call you up at the lab. You know what's happened? No, what is it, John? Them two guinea pigs you tested down here on Monday. They're both dead. What? They just now found them killed over in their cages. Cold in the marsh herring. Yeah, it looks as though you'd better do some more testing before you start your treatments, you mean. It couldn't have been caused by the machine. Their blood counts, cell structure, vasocardiac, reflexes, everything showed no damage after the tests. Now, they've died from something else. It's pure coincidence, bound to be. Well, they certainly didn't get anything from Big Betsy here, but a shot of straight high-freq radiation. I'll swear to that. Nothing else showed up on the test blocks of the recorders. Well, nevertheless, we'd better not take any chances with Miss Dane until we're sure what happened. No, I'm not afraid. Whatever Dr. Kildare says, that's all right with me. I can be confident in him. Even under the circumstances. Of course. It's a little matter of things, you know? All right, Miss Dane. We'll go ahead with the first treatment as originally scheduled. From pneumonia. I told you that three hours ago, Jimmy Woodsell had to make sure I'd better clean up this mess and get some sleep. You're still going ahead with that treatment in the morning? Yes. We don't know what caused the pneumonia, Jimmy. But I do know that it wasn't the betaton. Coincidence, then. Yes. Those two guinea pigs were left overnight in that basement lab. It's damp down there. They may come from a susceptible strain. They were new specimens, delivered only the day before. They may even have been infected when they came to the hospital. Yeah, it's a possibility. Yeah, but there's nothing sure about any one of them. No, but as far as I'm concerned, these things are sure. One, when Bart Miller says the machine is functioning perfectly, I'm sure that it is. Two, I'm sure there's no medical theory to account for high-frequency radiation causing pneumonia. Without at least some evidence of cell damage or blood deterioration or some of the other signs we've looked for tonight. Three, I'm sure that without treatment, Janet Dane will be dead in less than six months. Well, Jimmy, it's your decision. And it's a hard one anyway you look at it. The girl has a lot of confidence in you. I know. It's the one thing she's clinging to now. Plus, of course, the fact that she's in love with you. No, you're wrong about that. Well, maybe. Maybe. Anyway, what are you going to do? Cancel the treatment or go ahead? Well, Janet said her confidence was only as strong as mine. All the knowledge and skill I have tells me there's no reason for delaying that treatment. I know I'm right and I'm going ahead with it. The schedule is still nine o'clock in the morning. Roll any time Kildare gets here with the patient. Good. He's due any minute now. Jim and I have gone over big Betsy with a fine-tooth comb. Everything works perfectly. I'd stake my life on it. Well, in a way, we are staking a life on it. Dr. Gillespie, when I think what that poor child has to go through, I just get so nervous I could scream. Oh, fine, Parker. That's all we need to build up Miss Dane's courage. A screaming nurse waiting to greet her. Well, after what I heard you and Dr. Kildare saying last night, I certainly can't be very calm about this. It happened over here. Oh, sure you did. I know just how she feels, Doc.  This time it's going to be a real-life thing. Wayman, you're an ambulance driver and you've got no business down here.  Well, what if she maybe passes out, maybe, and we've got to haul her off on a stretcher or something? Oh, can't find her. This isn't an execution. It's an attempt to save a human life.  Dr. Gillespie, here she is. Well, how do you feel, Miss Dane? Oh, fine, Doc. Can someone at least smile? This isn't an execution, you know. Yes. How about it by already in your department? Sure. Roll them over, Jim. I guess there's no point in delaying things, Miss Dane. Shall we go on inside? Yes. Let's get it over with.  I salute you. I'm about to live, Miss Dane. Dr. Gillespie, if I didn't believe that, too, I wouldn't be joking about it. All right, Dr. Kierner, let's go. This room was made less scary than guinea pig was in here and I was outside. Well, you'll be outside again in a little over three minutes. Climb into that chair and we'll get you settled. Like so? That's right. Just lean back against the headrest. All right. Put your arms like that.  Don't move.   I'll be following them on recording dials outside the window there.  You got it? Yes. I won't press the button. Oh, good girl. You've got a lot of courage, Miss Dane. Believe me, Doctor. It's going to be all right. I know it is. I wonder if you know what I mean when I tell you. I love you. All right. Yes, it's... You don't know. But you will when I'm well again. Miss Dane, you're a very beautiful woman, but... Thank you, Doctor. I suppose we may as well get started, don't you think? All right. I'll be at the window. I'm not worried. All right, Bart. It's up to you. Okay. Cut in the primaries, Jim. Hold steady on those grids. All right. Kildare, will you do the siding? All right, Bart. That poor child.  It's dead on, Bart. Go ahead whenever you're ready. Second, there is a 28.25, Bart. Grids are in. Here goes. All right, Jim. I'm Carlos. Good luck, honey. She was... She's sitting there and taking it without batting an eyebrow. She's so brave. I just can't get over it. She seems nervous, you mean? Donna's starting to weather lips and nothing wrong, is it? Hot beat is steady. Butt pressure normal. No, everything's all right, Dr. Gillespie. 30 seconds. Look, Dr. Gillespie, she must be all right. She's smiling. Okay, that's the smile of a woman in love. Why, I didn't know that. With whom? With Kildare. Well... Now it's the smile of a woman who's convinced she's going to live. A woman who's just got to live. Let's get the door open and bring her out. Okay, boys. Well, she came through it okay, Dr. Gillespie. I hope so, Jimmy.  No, I'm not worried about that. All I'm hoping is that these treatments work. Plus, we realize some cancers aren't susceptible to this, but we won't know for three weeks or more. Well, as far as I could see, everything worked like a charm, Kildare. What do you plan to give her the second treatment? Well, the day after tomorrow, she's feeling all right. And, uh... Oh, nice work, boy. Thanks. Well, I could get here with her. Was I not a good patient? How do you feel? Fine. A little shaky is all. Miss Parker's going to take you up your room now. You can have breakfast whenever you want it. I'll see you a little later. Oh, and Miss Dane, you were a perfect patient. Well, you know why, Dr. Kildare. That's right, Bond. Treatment number four is scheduled for 10.30 in the morning. Right. Bye. It's not that I mind the treatments, Dr. Kildare, but when are we going to know? Still too soon to be able to tell, Miss Dane. You've just got to be patient. That's all. I don't know, Jimmy. She's had 10 treatments now, and neither the x-rays nor the measurements show any change in the size of that cancer. I just don't know. Treatment number 14, nine tomorrow morning. All right, Mr. Miller, goodbye. Do this afternoon why, Dr. Kildare? Nothing's going to happen. It's been over two months, and you told me three weeks. Yes, I know, Miss Dane. Well, all we can do is to keep trying. I'm sorry. All right, I'll be there, too. Dr. Gillespie and I just finished reading them. What did? I mean, did they? Skipping the technical details, the cancer is no longer malignant. It's starting to atrophy. Decrease size. That's also borne out by the measurements we made yesterday. So you mean that... I mean it should be completely absorbed within two months. Miss Dane, you're cured. Dr. Kildare, I love you. I think you do. Oh, I don't think I do. I know it. Well, let me put it this way. It's a psychological fact that women very often imagine themselves in love with their doctors. Of course, it's only temporary, but... Oh, silly. I'm not that sort of giddy female. When I came to you, I was lost. I was scared. I knew I was going to die and I didn't even care. But you made me care. You gave me hope and courage and faith that I loved you for it. No, I put my life in your hands. And now you've given it back to me. And that's why I say I love you. I'll never forget you. Jimmy, thank you for my life. Thank me? Why? You know, I've always believed that life is the most precious stuff on this earth. That's why I'm a doctor, Janet. So if you did put your life in my hands and if I did save it, then I'm humbly grateful for the chance. In just a moment, we will return to the story of Dr. Kildare. A graduation for me. Remember, you had quite a theory at the time. Bradley in love with me. She was in love with you. Probably still. It's a psychological fact that... I know that every woman falls in love with her doctor at least once in her life. That's a pretty ridiculous theory, Dr. Aspie. Well, now you don't know for sure just because the girl kept her feelings hidden. Why no now, all right? She called me up this afternoon. Well, now... She wanted to tell me she was married last week. So long. Oh, Parker, how would you like to do me a favor? Well, of course, Dr. Kildare. Well, Gillespie's in there tearing a pet theory to pieces with his teeth. What? And let him stew for about ten minutes and go in and tell him that the man Janet Dane married works over at the medical center. He's a research doctor.


Welcome to Toffy TV, we are going to do a final way of sorts on Saturday's second but final pre-season game ahead of the game at Spaces on Sunday. Decent run that wasn't it? Yeah, I mean considering, obviously we didn't have a full team. It was alright though, it was done alright. I pressed on it at the game Friday but it split the team anyway at the show. But I thought you don't consider young Harry Tarrer in goal or not. I thought done there he will face Scoushess and Andy Rankin to play in goal forever. I thought he done alright. I thought as a runner, as a game it was alright. Some good things, some things that a couple of people was a little bit disappointed in but other than that. It was always going to be tough wasn't it because like you said there, the internationals a week before you've lost a big chunk of midfield, defence. So it was always going to be tough but like you said the players who stepped in I thought did really well and as you said the goalkeeper done brilliantly. He was great with his feet but I imagine that shows the way football coaching is going for goalkeepers now. A lot of it is with the feet now. Obviously a big part of the game for them so. I suppose that before going into some of it the real disappointment was obviously Mason Hallgate. Silly little mistake to relax trying to be clever. And then stupidly trying to make a recovery tackle like that when you think it's only a friendly mate you don't need to put yourself in a position where you're getting hurt. I mean when you look he probably would have been better just trying to recover running alongside the lad and see if you know what I mean and getting back in and then maybe throw him a slide so he was trying to right his wrong. I mean he should have just cleared the ball anyway first trying to do me it and let it up through wasn't great but obviously he probably make that tackle loads of times and come out of it okay. We don't know what happened yesterday and hopefully it's just bruising on his toe and he'll be alright but it's a bit of a worry when you see him going off. But he did walk off and he was gingerly but he was walked off. I'm just got a hope that it's. But he left the ground on crutches. He will do the isolated and he don't do it. It's one of those isn't it. I don't know. It's not going to be able to speak. It's a difficult one because obviously you know we know about all the metatarsals and they can if there is broken it'll be about six weeks. Six weeks isn't it. Which is not ideal at the beginning of the season obviously. But hopefully it's just bruised and he took exit for course and we find out later this week. But he went off and obviously John Joe he just scored obviously on his return to Gwldersen. He goes in at centre back and Carl John comes on the right back and he acquitted himself really well I thought. He did and he started like a safe start of the game alright and obviously he had that goal really on. Ken he done really well to be filmed. I don't know why he's so far up but he done really well and following in and took the right well didn't he. He tried to get forward early on and tried to push on high and then obviously when he went to centre back Carl John come on and you were looking and think and you know made a lot of money and he was obviously sub a blackpool was he come on later blackpool didn't he in the face on but he come on and really comfortable on the ball and made some good runs going forward. So that's promising when you see in lads coming in and now this is going overboard it's pressed and it's my Premier League football now but at least he looked comfortable on the ball and he looked like he had a nice desire to get forward so yeah I thought he done well. I grew up in Dan I thought really well which was good. Drake cross in the second half to well cut. And obviously on the other side as well. He looked good he looked strong looks like he can run with the ball well. Not sure to confidence so that one's going to be interesting now as well to see whether he does or is the backup for the season. Obviously we were told that he was going to spend time with the under 23s but he's been involved in both games and there's no one else naturally to play there. Obviously he was talk of Fabian Delphine to fit in there but I mean the chances of Fabian Delphine on just on a football pitch would be incredible never mind playing left back. So I mean for the amount of times that he would probably play in a season anyway he might as well just train with the 30 and maybe they'll say you know have some games with the under 23s so you have some games but obviously we haven't seen him via Premier League opposition of course. But he looks like he's got the attributes certainly. I mean you're trying to when you're coming into the Premier League you've got to have a baseline of attributes now the teams and he's fit you know six foot he's physically strong he's quick comfortable in possession. The one thing is defensively some of his positioning isn't great at the moment and that's something that they'll have to work on and you'd expect that anyway going into that. But he did I thought he did do quite well and he has some great runs he loves to chop when he's running with the ball he does like that. But yeah he was really athletic put a couple of great crosses in so likes to bomb on forward which is what you want from your full backs. So yeah I think I was very impressed with him. Thought he was our best player overall to be fair. Yeah he looks like he's fitted straight in and it's good you know you've got him and you've got obviously Branthwaite obviously being brought in from that side of things you know young players not massive fears. Lewis Gibson can buy for them too isn't he? Yeah Lewis Gibson obviously was prior to them but for what we paid for him you've got three promising players there. What did he think at Gibson? I thought he was alright. So I think Gibson is probably like the... See this is what's going to be really interesting now because you'd imagine one of those two players and it's looking more favourably like Gibson or Glolton Lawn. Cos physically I'm not sure he's ready but at the same time he's like the more Mason Holgate type of player with Branthwaite more the Michael Keane type of player. So that's interesting as well and I don't know whether they've fully made their mind up on that but Branthwaite's got that little bit of experience as well. But Lewis Gibson's played more games on loan so it's... I don't know, I just don't know whether Lewis Gibson's physically ready for the Premier League. Branthwaite's saintly is but then the same things Branthwaite's not great at all. You know I don't know if he's brilliant in the air. I don't think Gibson's, that's my one thing looking at him on sat there was a bit like got bullied a couple of times in the middle of the box. I think centre-backs now almost don't get brought up to be like that. It's almost like they were just saying about the goalkeepers having been great to kick. It's like I'm not sure centre-backs. I don't think there's that many fully rounded. I just think she hogates the football but he's decent in the air. Lewis Gibson's just a little bit. It might just be time in that role then. He's got the art, he's good on the ball. He's made a great recovery. He tackles second half after he's been done. He really looks confident and comfortable. To me, he looks more like a natural left-back to me. Just the way he is, the way he carries himself on the ball in the centre-back. But he's certainly got the talent. It's just about time and probably his jumps and stuff. But then, if you'd said that two years ago, you'd probably say the same about Mason Hoggate. Possibly very similar. Possibly very similar. And that's maybe why Gibson will go back out on loan. And if he can get, I mean there's talk about Huddersfield isn't it? If he goes, he'll have a full season in the championship. Then he'd have to win. His majority of it doesn't go and lay in that side of his game. Where Branthwaite, while he isn't amazing in the air, is just naturally bigger anyway. So he's going to win probably more headers anyway because he's sick of it. Even if he just leans into people a little bit. Exactly, so he's easy. But then I'd say Lewis Gibson looks a little bit sharper on the turn. So there's two of them. You've got a bit of work to do with both. And you're right, it will be interesting to see which one stops at the club for another. Because obviously the Gabrielle things, well documented, but he's going to watch them. It'll be interesting to see whether they decide they need a loan just for cover or whether they think we'll keep Branthwaite back and we'll let him train with the first team and he'll be number four as the set. Because we've seen already Mason Hoggate. For all we know, he's out like you said before. If it's a mess at Arsenal, it could be fours or six weeks. He might not, it might be back at Sunday. But it just shows you how quick that go. Gerry Maynor, who was training again, he didn't risk him at the weekend. He's there. At Sunday it'd be Michael Cain and Gerry Maynor if Mason's not fit. But it just shows you one injury and with that, it's a two centre backs. And then if you're sending Branthwaite and Gibson out as well, you've got to go and get some on show. It is going to be a little bit of a juggling act. It worked okay for us till lockdown really with the centre backs. And then only then. We got Hoggate injured and we got Cain injured. And don't forget, Mason Hoggates only just coming back from an injury as well. From an injury at Spurs. And now they try to reconcile that. And that was a bit of a knock as well. Which, yeah, they're going to have to look at it. They're going to have to make them out of it. But he don't, like you said, Gibson don't well as well. Kenny don't alright, you know. So that was good. Into midfield. The area I was disappointed in, I'm disappointed in, I'm really disappointed in. Wanted to see. The one run he had in the lad, done a terrible tackle on him there. The only real time he was positive in the game. And now he's playing in a different role. Three footballers playing in the middle of the park just for numbers with Bernard. But I thought Bernard looked good. Thought he grew into the game and got on the ball a bit more. The trigger didn't do okay. But I wanted to see him a little bit more direct. Whether he just couldn't get into the game in that position or not. Wanted to see a bit more. I don't know, I don't know. It's going to be an interesting season for Anthony Gordon. Because I think a lot of people have got high expectations of him. I really don't have high expectations of him. I just see a player that has come into the squad. And needs to be, needs to get more game time. I'm not looking at him thinking he's going to suddenly go from this to being something else. I think there's a lot of promise there. But I think he knows himself physically he's got to get bigger. You get stronger, you get faster. And then maybe the talent you've got is that you unlock that a little bit more. But I'm certainly not relying on him. But you do expect sometimes when you see a game like that. I think against good professionals it's not always easy. When you are moving out of position as well. And there's maybe a little bit more asked of you. Because the ball's supposed to go through you a little bit more. I think you can get disappointed. I think if he's going to play there fine. I don't believe he's going to play in the middle of the park. I know we were just using what we had. Because obviously people were away. But I'm not delighted to have just seen him a bit higher up the pitch. Because we know that he's got that ability to go back. I must admit though. You just mentioned Bernard there. But I think Guilfe playing as well. Obviously he didn't. England obviously played Iceland and he stepped away from that. He didn't want to be involved for whatever reason. But I did think that he looked quite positive. And whether people want to wear that or not. But he does look like someone who wants to fight for his place. I think the two games. That isn't it. I said enough near the end of the season. I don't think he was good enough playing in the way we had him. And he isn't good enough to play in a team on the field in the Premier League. Not quick enough. We've liked it that already. We've got Alan in through the door. The Corey is another one on the Fadgeshine. So we've looked at that as well. But what I would say about the tickets is against Blackpool. It wasn't great. But he worked hard. It wasn't brilliant. But he was everywhere. He could see what was going on. I don't think we can question his professionalism. And can question his attitude. We can question whether he's quick enough to do the job that we're asking. But he isn't an issue in terms of you don't think he's going to try. Some games he's not. He's not just games. He's not just flying into tackles. But I thought he'd done all right at the weekend. He did. And like you say, some people won't want to wear that. But he's not someone who you go. He's not going to try for us to be playing because he isn't. He had a decent game at the weekend against them. So you know, see what happens there. But Walcott's another one. He's one for me. I know he's a good professional. And I know at times he can be, because of his pace, he can get caused sort of position problems. He's quite, isn't he? That's what I'm against them and just think. The last game you should be running. But Bellassie came on. And Bellassie showed exactly what Walcott should be doing. I don't like Bellassie on that one. I don't really care. But Bellassie's straight away. He just got the ball and run at them. And the amount of times you want Walcott to do that. And he always does something, whether he doesn't believe in his own pace anymore or whatever. Checks back to him. Yeah, Bellassie came on. And Bellassie just run at them. And I know, listen, he had the miss and it was awful. And it's a shame really, because if he'd got the goal, it would have been nice little cap. Would have capped off a nice little cameo of clearance for him. He was positive. He was involved in the build-up to what should have been his goal. And it's come across and he's just seen a goal. And he took his eye off the ball and swung and missed it. You know, he's big enough to go on Twitter in the night and own it and say his kids to give him a stick. But he did, he had a good little cameo. And that's what you want to see from Walcott. And you know, they just like breezed through the game. You know, and Kyle's y omba, mynd on that and the right. You know, we should have been taking advantage of that. Because he's seen on the others. And I know the difference between the Charlesons much better than Walcott. And he wasn't amazing the Charlesons. But he was everything that happened. He was through, it came through the Charlesons, didn't it? But you know what? He scored a really good goal in the first half of pity. It was ruled out because that was a cracking move. He finished it brilliantly. And then it was in for Dom's goal again. It was a lovely little move. You know, nice and sharp middle of pity. But I got a great ball to the Charleson. And Fizer across and Dom, whether people like him or not. He's in the right place at the right time. That's two games, two goals. Give me 15 to 20 of them a season. He's scored. He's getting better all the time. And I hope some people just don't like him. That's fine. I'm not telling people what they shouldn't like. But I don't know if he can question whether he can do it. Because he can do it. But the ball in the right area will score a goal. And if you give him, if you put more quality in there, what you haven't tried to do, the lad and the Charleson will benefit. The only thing that I'd like to see from us going forward is... I don't know where... If we're going to play this 4-3-3, then we have to get people closer to Dom. Because the reason why we were looking like we were dain to listen to scoring goals, when Auntie Lothi was coming with us, because we were playing 4-4-2, we just naturally have more people in and around the penalty area. If we're going to try to tinker it a little bit and we're playing with three up there, we have to get them a bit closer to Dom and the Charleson. Otherwise, he will be isolated and then we'll go back to when we couldn't score goals. That's the only thing, but it's pre-season. They've had the team and people are getting up to speed. It was a decent run-off. I thought they had a good goal, didn't they? Yeah, and they keep mentioning the keeper. They keep saying in the first half, made a great save at 1-0. Don't do your 1-on-1. He stayed big and then the one in the second half where he knocks her on to the crossbar, point-blank header. That was a goal. It was a good header. I felt sorry for the other keeper, Hanson, because you're thinking, just play a couple of minutes off his time. He got on, like, jogged on. I was on for about 35 seconds and he blew the whistle, but he's come on in a bit game show. He's got that under his belt. Clean sheet. It goes run-out, clean sheet. Obviously, we had a couple of goals this allowed as well. Dom had one in the second half. We've won the final pre-season game, which very, very rarely happens for us. Are you worried going into the start of the season that you've only played two games and we haven't had that? I don't know. I know other teams have played like four, five, six. I don't know. I just don't know. Every year I've been mowing our pre-seasons. I just think they're rubbish. I just think we... There has to be something in it. I look at other sides and how many games they play and the quality of them and how they get off, the blocks stay to right, players are ready to go and I look at us every year and how we just play no marks and we just sort of... It's just me mowsy. This year is different. That's what I'm saying. This year is completely different because the players are three weeks off from finishing the Premier League season. They're back in it. I almost think it's like... Obviously, we're playing spares. They've had a lot of games. But... I don't know how hard they've been training. I don't know how hard we've been training. You feel like you've only played three games, haven't you? I think. No, they've played four. Yeah, because you had two in Germany. Charity Shield. Of course, the Charity Shield. So we would have had three when we made the black man game. So I don't know how hard we've been training. I don't know whether we've been playing under 23s versus first team. Charity Shield. I can't see anyone flying out of the saps just because of the situation. So... it's a difficult one this season. It really is. It's hard to criticise anyone. The black man game we never played because their pitch was a mess. It's just a season like no other, isn't it? So we'll just have to hope that by the time... I mean, the other thing you would say is that we've gone away on international duty. Look at Dean's plate. Sadly, Shane Miss hasn't. Andre Gomez has been sent home. Pickford's plate. Michael Keane hasn't played. But the training, aren't they? It is what it is. We'll see from Sunday what the situation is. Hopefully we'll have more new players in as well to add to that. It's a decent run out. Pre-season done. That's weird. Let us know your thoughts in the comments. Who impressed? Who do you want to see more of? Are you happy with John Joe Kenny being the starting right back or are you happy with Lewis Gibson staying rather than going on loan? Let us know your thoughts in the comments. Don't forget to give this video a like. And if you want more great videos, join us all on Patreon. The link is in the description. See you later.


Hello everyone, my name is Shi Feng Sun from Monash University and the data system. Today I will give a talk on public key punctual encryption, modular and compact constructions. This is a joint work with army sector at Ron Stamfield, Joseph Liu from Monash University and Dao Gu from Shanghai Jiao Tong University. So what is public key punctual encryption, PPE for short. Informally it is a new form of public key encryption that supports the verification of the decryption capability for specific messages. It consists of four polynomial time algorithms, key generation algorithm, punctual algorithm, encryption algorithm and decryption algorithm. A user can use a key generation algorithm to generate her public key and a secret key. When some others would like to send some sensitive messages to this user, they encrypt these messages and this user's public key are the text associated with the messages, are then sent out to the self test. After receiving the self test, the user can use her own secret key to decrypt all the self tests. Additionally, she is able to selectively revoke the ability to decrypt some self tests with specific texts. This is realized by running the punctual algorithm repeatedly and sequentially. The punctual algorithm takes as input the current punctual secret key and a new text to be revoked and outputs a new punctual secret key. With a punctual secret key for a set of texts, say for text T1 and T3, we can still decrypt the self test encrypted and other texts rather than T1 and T3, but can no longer recover the messages encrypted and text T1 or T3. The security of PPE ensures that even giving a punctual secret key on a set of texts P, any efficient adversary cannot learn anything about the message encrypted at anti-tech in P. In practice, each message may be associated with a set of texts. In PPE, the message can be encrypted at the set of texts. In this work, we focused on the conversion of PPE, that is the punctual key encapsulation mechanism. It came for short. In P-CAM, the encapsulation algorithm takes as input a public key and a set of texts and outputs a self-test and un-encapsulated key. The security of P-CAM ensures that any efficient adversary are given a punctual secret key or a set of texts P and not distinguish un-encapsulated key from a random key, where the encapsulated key is generated and some tag in P. The state of the art is the bloom-fit encryption proposed by Dylan and others in 2018. Actually, it is a relaxed variant of PPE, where the relaxed message, the correctness error is allowed to be non-negligible. Beyond the concrete construction, they also presented two generic constructions, from self-test policy attribute encryption and identity-based broadcast encryption. Their constructions enjoys both efficient puncture and decreasing procedures, but support only when punctured per message. In addition, the number of punctures needs to be predetermined and responded. In contrast to the public key punctual encryption scheme proposed by Green and Myers in 2015, it was the above drawbacks, but it is constructed in the random model. Moreover, the maximum number of texts per message is predetermined as a system setup. Under the communication and computation overheads like the public key size, the self-test size, encryption time and puncture time are linear with the number D. Also, some other works were proposed, like the scheme proposed by Koho and others in 2015. Those schemes support only two punctures, and it is constructed from the indistinguishability of fast gaiting. So their construction is more a theoretical result than a practical solution. So, another question is that how to design efficient PPE or big cam schemes with as many large properties as possible, like meeting both unbounded punctures and compacted self-test. Another question is, is it possible to generically constructed PPE from other cryptography primitives, like the work on bloom fit encryption, but with negligible correctness errors? To answer these questions, we first proposed a refined form of identity-based revocable encryption, namely key homophic identity-based cam with extended correctness. Further, we present for the first time a generic construction of puncture cam from the refined primitive in the standard model. Our generic construction enjoys the following features. It supports unbounded level punctures, multi-text per message, and does not suffer from non-negligible correctness error. By instantiating the refined primitive from different number theoretical assumptions, we obtain several peak cam schemes with enough features beyond the above, such as compacted self-test and unbounded text per message. Next, let me show our main approach. Before that, let's first recall the notion of identity-based revocable cam. Actually, it is the cam version of identity-based revocable encryption. It consists of four polynomial algorithms, the master key generation algorithm, the key extraction algorithm, the encapsulation algorithm, and decapitation algorithm. In an identity-based revocation system, a trusted party with a master secret key and a master public key generates a profit key for each user in the system. When a user broadcasts a message, I would not like some specific users to access this message. So it generates an encapsulated key and a revocation list are containing those specific users. Our then broadcast the self-test. After receiving the self-test, the user not containing the revocation list can decapitate the self-test and get the metric key. The security of peak cam ensures that even the revocable users could not distinguish the un-incapitated key from a random key. Now let's into our approach. Our approach starts from the observation that peak cam supporting only one puncture can be derived directly from any R-cam. Particularly, the key generation algorithm and the encapsulation algorithm of peak cam are identical to that of R-cam. For the puncture algorithm, it is realized by the key extraction algorithm of R-cam. Particularly, to puncture the secret key at tag t, we simply run the key extraction algorithm of R-cam to get the corresponding private key, SKT. And that is as the puncture secret key. For the decapitation algorithm to decapitate a self-test with the punctured secret key as key 1. If the set of tags associated with the self-test does not contain the tag at which the secret key is punctured, which means this tag is not revoked, then the un-capitated key can be correctly recovered due to the correctness of R-cam. Now the question is, can we make it support multi-punctures? Yes. The idea is to achieve it by distributing the decapitation algorithm across all punctures. A triple solution is like this, to support impunctures. We sample any R-cam masked key pairs. Each masked secret key is used for one puncture to generate un-capitated key. We run in-times R-cam encapsulation algorithm and different masked public keys under the same tag list t. Then we will get in pair for self-test and un-capitated key from C1 key 1 to C1 key n. All the self-tests constitute the self-test of the P-cam. And the un-capitated key is set as the multiplication of key 1 to key n. Here we assume that the un-capitated key space forms a group. And this notation denotes the group operation. For puncture, we use each masked secret key to clear out a puncture. More specifically, to puncture the original secret key at tag t1, we use MSK1 to generate a corresponding private key SKT1. By ranging the key extraction algorithm of R-cam. The private key SKT1 gets with the remaining masked secret keys, constitutes the current punctured secret key. By repeating this process, we can clear out multi-punctures for the decryption process. To decrypt our self-tests with punctured secret key, we ask here is for the set of tags from t1 to ti. If the set of tags attached to the self-tested CT does not contain any tag at which the secret key has been punctured, which means each TJ is not revoked. Then we can use the private key SKTJ to decrypt the self-tested CT and recover the key share KJ. With the remaining masked secret keys, we can also recover the corresponding key shares. Then by combining all these key shares, we can recover the un-capitated key. Although these solutions support multi-punctures, its communication and computation overheads are linear with the number of punctures. So the question is how to overcome these drawbacks and get a better solution. The idea is to use only one R-cam instance to generate the un-capitated key. And then split it into multi-shears. By this way, the public key sets and the self-tested sets are independent of the number of punctures. To do so, we assume that the un-capitated key is in this form. That is, it is a function of SK and S, whereas it's the random currency used in the R-cam encapsulation algorithm. Further, we assume that F is homophobic with respect to SK. In this case, the un-capitated key can be split into as many shares as the number of punctures. Here, the MS keys are determined during the puncturing procedure. And they are used for punctures. Each one is used for one puncture. In this case, we assume that MSK is randomly chosen and the MPK can be derived from MSK. As they are density-based encryption, considered by Belial and others in 2012. For the puncture algorithm, whenever carrying out one puncture, a fresh master secret key is chosen and used for this puncture, particularly to carry out the first puncture at a tech T1, which randomly chooses a master secret key MSK1, and uses it to generate a private key SKT1. The SKT1 and the remaining master secret key constitute the current punctured secret key. Similarly, we can choose another master secret key to puncture the current punctured secret key SKT1 at a second tech T2 and get a new punctured secret key consisting of SKT1 and SKT2 at the remaining master secret key. By repeating this process, the secret key can be punctured at as many techs as we want. Before looking at the decapitation process, we first recall that process in the previous solution. In that solution, each private key SKTJ and the self-tested CJ are computed from a related master secret key and a public key pair. So if the set of a text attached to the self-test does not contain the tech TJ, at which the secret key has been punctured, then we can use the private key SKTJ to recover, to decapitate the self-test CJ and recover the corresponding share as MSKJ-SJ. However, here we only have one self-test. And the self-test and the private keys are generated from different master key pairs. So the question is, is there any method enabling us to compute the key shares from the private keys and the self-test? If so, we can buy a companion of these shares together to recover the encapsulated key. Fortunately, we found that in many existing outcome schemes, the outcome decapitation algorithm satisfies this requirement as well. Then we call the outcome scheme with this property extended correct. In other words, the property extended correctness ensures that a valid encapsulated key can be computed by decapitating other self-tests generated under the same random coins. With the identity-based revocable cam meeting these two properties, we can get a generic construction of the cam following the above approach. Our generic construction following that way features the above properties. It ensures an abundant level of punctures, multi-text per message, and negligible correctness error. Regarding security, it can be reduced to the security of the underlying outcome without additional assumptions. We also present several instantiations, which are summarized in the table below. The first construction enjoys a compact self-test. The second instruction enjoys a compacted security key. The fourth construction also enjoys a compacted self-test, but can be proved secure under standard assumptions. The third construction has both compacted public key and compacted security key. In addition, it supports an abundant level of text per message. The third construction is actually the conversion of the identity-based revocable encryption proposed by Leaco and others in 2010 with a slight modification. The others are derived from non-linear product encryption schemes by applying the embedding lemma. The detailed comparisons are shown in the following tables. We can see that our first construction enjoys a very compacted self-test, which consists of only two group elements. The third construction enjoys a compacted public key size, and it supports an abundant level of text per message. However, these two constructions can only be proved secure under non-standard assumptions. In contrast, the second and the fourth construction can be proved secure under standard assumptions. Also, we can see that the description overheads of our constructions are linear with the number of punctures. Fortunately, the decomposition algorithm of our constructions are hardly parallelized, so they can be optimized by parallelization. Here, I'm not going to explain too much here. Finally, I'll end this talk with a brief summary. In this work, we propose a refined notion of identity-based revocable encryption. Then we present a generic construction of PICCAM from the refined IRCAM. Finally, we give several concrete constructions, enjoying different distinct properties. There are still some open questions. For example, one question is how to design efficient PICCAM meeting both compact keys and self-test under standard assumptions. Another question is how to design post-quantum like lattice-based PICCAM supporting abundant number of punctures. Thanks for your attention.


The growth of bond financing for Euro-area non-financial corporates is the main motivation for this study. The causes of this aggregate growth are well understood. Several macro trends have been favorable to bond financing, such as difficulties with loans applied during the Euro-crisis, loose monetary policy and falling interest rates, as well as institutional reforms such as bankruptcy laws. This paper contributes to the big question of what are the implications for firms and financial stability. Europe is particularly interesting to study, since its financial system has historically been bank-based. Thus, the question of how the transition towards more capital market funding looks like is important. In this paper, we look at the cross-section of firms and present new stylized facts for new and smaller issuers. We start the analysis by documenting that the growth of bond financing has reached well beyond the largest firms. And then we ask the following questions. What kind of issuers enter the bond market? Which investors provide the new funds and what happens in bad times? We show that firms that enter recently the bond market are smaller in size, have higher level of leverage and are less profitable compared to historical issuers. Next, we look at the composition of the bond investors across different types of issuers. If you just look at the aggregate, you would see that a large share of corporate bonds, over 40%, is held by buy and hold investors, such as insurance companies and pension funds, as well as the ECB. However, the picture looks very different if you compare the smallest with the largest issuers. For the smaller issuers, insurance companies and pension funds hold only a very small share of their bonds, while the ECB almost zero. Naturally, the question that comes up is the following. Might the firm investor matching reinforce fragility? We contribute to this question by looking at what happens in the bond market turmoil in the spring of 2020. In particular, we focus on weaker and smaller issuers and look on how they were affected along two dimensions. First, the bond investor sell-off, and second, the bond versus bank debt financing. In the last two decades, there was a clear policy discussion to encourage firms to enter the bond market and diversify their sources of financing. However, our findings imply that policymakers may need to direct efforts in mitigating potential new risks behind this expansion. In particular, the bottom of the bond market that consists by weaker and smaller issuers looks very different compared to the top of the market. Thus, it seems important to pay attention at the composition of bond issuers and investors.


In around the year 2000, the Institute of Medicine published a really seminal text called To Air as Human. And that brought to life what was going on in the hospitals where we had so many medical errors that caused a lot of morbidity and mortality. And Chuck took this very seriously from the very beginning. And now we have committed a lot of technology to decrease errors. Most meaningful thing we've done is eliminate serious harm by 95% in the last eight years. We have reduced the number of codes or resuscitations by 85%. Most importantly, it's stayed low for the nine years since. There's a blame-free community, and we encourage the reporting of errors and even near errors because we want to learn from our mistakes. We want to learn from our near mistakes to make sure that it doesn't happen again. But transparency drives results because once you know what's happening, then things begin to change. At this hospital these days on what we call communication boards, you actually can see patient results that are up to date and available for all to look at. And when you're in a hospital, that all includes your parents and or patients. That's a very powerful motivator for wanting to get better. Here at Chuck, we really strive to practice patient-family-centered care. We do that in a variety of ways. Of course, the parent can provide feedback. And if you're willing to accept that, willing to say, hey, we're experts, but you know your child best, then you can go a long way towards really understanding the gist of the problem. We've instituted for the physicians peer review, so to have a, you know, multidisciplinary peer review process is really informative for the physicians. Those of us that went to medical school some years ago, we did not learn about collaboration. Team approaches were not encouraged. And now we know that we need to teach team approach. We need to teach collaboration, because that's how you're going to improve communication. I'm excited about what we're doing, but I'm very focused on what else we need to do to continue to improve. Being a safe organization, if you consider yourself one, you're almost certainly wrong because it's a journey. You're never there. What we can do is try to have a society, a culture within the organization that reports things that could be better. It's willing to learn from itself. It is a culture that has justice inherently in it. And lastly, it's flexible at times of stress. If you can do those things, then you'll be more likely to be an informed culture, and informed culture is the safest we can be. That's how you make change. Patient safety movement has done a great job of promoting the zero concept. I think getting to zero is great, and that's where we want to be, and that's where we expect to be. So it's just a continual drive to make sure we stay there. And it requires every single individual starting from our board directors, which they are amazingly supportive, and from the physicians, really all the way down to the individuals working in the kitchen and taking care of the room. Everybody has bought into their part of getting to zero. It's not one person, it's every single individual, and it also will include the parents and the patients. You know, I'm really proud of our organization, and I'm so pleased with the successes that we're having. It's a journey, and we've honestly been at this for decades. I'm positive that if all of us commit to that, and we work well together within our ecosystem, we'll get there. I'm absolutely certain it can be done.