(This piece is best read in conjunction with Michael’s earlier entry about the work Andrew Gayed featured him in here.)  

Can you talk about the process and camera you used to construct ‘4 Pills Once Daily‘?

Supplementary research was made to have a better understanding of the issue. I had an idea of what the series would look like, so I took some initial photos with a 'stand-in' model to decide various compositional elements. Then I interviewed my model to gage a personal account of his overall struggle with HIV, and the stigma associated with it. The recorded audio from the interview was then edited to create a loop that would be played while exhibiting the piece. As for the photos themselves, I shot the series using an old 120 medium-format film camera. This gives richness to the photos, especially when seeing the highly detailed 42x42 inch digital prints that came from a 6cm film negative."

What was it about HIV-stigma that made you want to explore it, particularly in such a challenging manner?

Well, my bodies of work focus on questioning the hetero-normative adaptation in society and the gender dynamics within that. Now, this leaves me with a lot of wiggle room to explore different realms of sexuality, gender-normatively, religious/institutional repercussions, and the list goes on. One thing I felt very passionately about was stigmatization of HIV. However it wasn't until '4 Pills Once Daily' where I decided on a series that would question many of these issues. I have had a project idea revolving around HIV stigma for over a year now, and sometimes that's what you need to make sure you are ready to handle something so delicate, but in a manner that is accessible and more importantly, memorable.

Everyone has an anus, and yet when you initially discussed photographing a gay man’s HIV-positive butt hole, you faced some opposition. Can you talk about that?

Well, originally I intended to photograph the anus as the central and only 'subject' in the scene. Some criticisms were given about being so blatant; the main critique was that I may be building more walls than bridges, conflicting with creating an open dialogue on the matter. I racked my brain to present the same shot yet more accessible, and that's when I decided to depict the anus shot as an intimate moment with another man in the background. While not detracting from the clear focus of the picture, the anus is then presented for the other man in the scene, we just happen to be on-lookers. While I am aware the audience has the front-row seat of the buttocks, the model isn't simply showing his ass-hole to us, rather presenting himself as a sexual being, or rather a COMFORTABLY sexual being. That is what people find the most threatening when thinking about an HIV positive individual, so that’s why I aimed to find a way to do just that while still opening the doors for dialogue."

There’s a genius to your title ‘4 Pills Once Daily’ which I absolutely love; the title is both dismissive and arduous depending on your perspective. Which one do you think the pictures speak more too?

That's just it; this piece is meant to be interpreted by the masses, not just by a specific gender, orientation, or HIV status. The idea is to open people’s minds and give a different perspective on the issue, bearing in mind the context in which the photos are presented (with the audio interview of my model playing simultaneously). If someone was offended by the series, the question is WHY they felt that way, for being uncomfortable is the only way you can re-examine what you are already comfortable with. I find the photos cater to both perspectives in regards to the title, yes I am exposing the harsh reality of stigma, but the fact that I include the audio interview during the exhibition of the piece is to give another realm of depth and interpretation, helping it be a didactic piece. The information is all there, it's a matter of opening your eyes and letting yourself see more than a medicalized death toll when thinking of HIV."

I find it interesting that in response to your work, the debate that has emerged on your message board is actually around the outright denial or diminishment of the role HIV-stigma has played, and continues to play, in poz gay men’s health and wellness. “There aren't HIV/AIDS memorials all over the world because of stigma, perception, ignorance, hatred, or fear” I thought was a very telling comment about how clueless people are to the issues in play. Did you anticipate that an HIV positive gay man, telling your audience that HIV stigma is a problem, would be so hotly debated by an HIV negative audience?

No, I can't say I am surprised with the reactions. Considering the highly political nature of my photographic body of work as a whole, it creates an easy target of criticism for people who are uncomfortable with different viewpoints. I have unfortunately dealt with hate-mail and various other attempts at silencing my works, but people need to understand that such hatred doesn't offend me as much as you think it does. While it's definitely upsetting that people feel the need to go out of their way to comfort themselves by sending hate mail, the fact of the matter is that I'm proud to have evoked such emotions in a viewer. Being critical is something my work is all about, and having such strong feelings about my work just means I made you at least THINK of the other side of the spectrum, regardless if it made you uncomfortable. My mission statement says 'art is to comfort the disturbed and to disturb the comforted', and I truly abide by this. Sometimes you need to be taken out of your comfort zone to see what else is out there, and for some people that idea is really threatening. Like I said before, being uncomfortable is the only way you can re-examine what you are already comfortable with.

To view the art of Andrew Gayed, visit http://andrewgayed.posterous.com and http://andrewgayed.tumblr.com or look for him on Twitter and Facebook.

People who know me know I’ve been very uncomfortable with treatment as prevention from the get go. When I was on the board at the Canadian AIDS Society I was in the forefront of the charge against it, reacting in part to concerns expressed by HIVers at The CAS HIVers Forum, but also reflecting my own views too. Since then, I’ve been increasingly concerned that treatment as prevention - or test and treat - has become mainstream. Commencing treatment right after testing has become THE standard of care in BC, and similar treatment guidelines have to varying degrees been taken up in other jurisdictions – in San Francisco, in New York, "in Washington DC, even in China.

PositiveLite has covered these issues fairly extensively in the past. For example, my column here and Brian’s here both will give newbies to the debate a sense of what the issues are.

So it’s a somewhat divisive issue. We’ve discussed at length already why some think that treatment as prevention is NOT a slam dunk way to reduce HIV infection rates. In a nutshell, treatment as prevention opponents have argued that public health does NOT trump individual health. In fact, we’ve insisted that the welfare of the patient MUST come first, before all other considerations.

In the earlry days, the notion was raised that patients, on testing positive, would be treated against their will.  (My recollection was that some doctor somewhere - I think from Montreal - said something much like that.) That’s unnaceptable, of course, but the suggestion lingered in people’s minds. Since then, supporters of treatment as prevention have made it quite clear that they are talking about treatment with the full and informed consent of the patient.

My concern remains though that this “full and informed consent” is required at a time when the newly diagnosed patient is both most vulnerable and least educated to make complex treatment decisions. In fact the newly diagnosed face an exceedingly complex conundrum which no HIV newbie is equipped to handle.

Still - and here’s the rub – it’s becoming VERY hard to ignore the successes in reducing new infection rates that jurisdictions that are supportive of a test and treat policy are recording. Sam Francisco, for instance, has seen a steady reduction in new infections over the last decade.  there is no single reason for this decline but amongst the reasons their Public Health people offer is this “ . . the health department's policy of recommending HIV-positive people begin treatment early. It is believed to have led to less viral loads among at-risk populations, reducing the risk of HIV transmission between sex partners of sero-discordant HIV status.”

This standard of care has of course, gained considerable traction in BC, with the drive led by Dr Julio Montaner , current head of the IAS (International AIDS Society , also director of the BC Centre for Excellence in HIV/AIDS. Says Dr Montaner “(Our) research has shown that the expansion of the HAART program has been a major factor in reducing HIV incidence in the province, particularly among those who use drugs by injection,” In fact BC’s annual HIV/AIDS surveillance report for 2009 confirmed that there has been a substantial reduction in new infections since 2003, when new infections that year were 408, to 338 in 2009.

Compare these figures to Ontario, where the decision on when to start treatment mostly involves waiting until the immune system shows clears signs of repression. Ontario’s HIV/AIDS surveillance report  notes: "though the number of HIV diagnoses increased steeply from 1986 to a peak in 1990, during the period from 2002 to 2008,the number of HIV diagnoses remained relatively stable with an average at 1,125 each year."

The factors which influence the annual rate of new infections are, of course, complex, and involve much more than what treatment guidelines are being followed. Demographics, for instance, play a huge part. Having said that, I’m finding it an increasingly convincing argument that the decision when to begin treatment can have a very real bearing on preventing new infections - and that's important.

So from a public health perspective getting people on treatment earlier seems to work. Some say it leads to better outcomes for the patient too, although on that I’m not convinced  My own experience is that long-time exposure to HIV drugs – and my exposure is as long as anyone's in Canada, having participated in the clinical trials of the very first protease inhibitor (saquinavir) – inevitably results in side effects which are not apparent over the shorter term.

In any event, the challenge is to arrive at a solution where both the need to curtail new infections AND the health and welfare of the patient are key components in treatment decisions. That is clearly what we have to work towards. I don’t believe we are there yet, but I’d like to see the education of newly diagnosed HIVers become more sophisticated so that they are truly able to make informed choices rather than submit to the will of their physician. This involves patient education programs which are currently not really on anyone’s agenda, but need to be. It is just too dangerous to expect that every physician will provide exactly the right counselling, free of the kind of biases we already see, and that the patient will in turn understand the complexities involved. In short, some kind of intervention is needed there for treatment as prevention to work seamlessly and transparently.

I don’t think patients’ rights have ever really flowered in Canada as a key piece of advocacy/activism. This late in the epidemic, that needs to change.

Arguments for HIV treatment as prevention are being driven by physicians and to a lesser extent by prevention experts. The collective voice of HIVers is missing in action (again), a function in part of the lack of home-grown organizations which represents HIVers' interests as their main focus. Clearly, and I’ve said this before, we need an organization like NAPWA (National Association of People with HIV/AIDS) in the States.

The other piece in the puzzle is that we need to better quantify the downside of starting treatment early. That in part involves the examination of the impact of long time exposure to HIV drugs – difficult of course to determine when our experience with them has not been long term (yet) – but research needs to get serious about this. In fact if early treatment is to be taken seriously, whether driven by prevention needs or better patient outcomes, this kind of research needs to be made high priority.

I guess what all this means is that I’m prepared to go along with the early treatment/treatment as prevention proponents, but rather than full speed ahead, with caution. My take is that we can only really move on this without reservation when channels are in place to give HIVers a better voice, to educate them on treatment options and to understand more about the impact of HIV treatments over the long haul.

If that sounds like a guarded endorsement of treatment as prevention, I suppose it is.  It is certainly more accepting than was my previous stance on the issue. Put that down in part to two things. First think of it as a mellowing that comes with age. Secondly, this modest change of heart stems from the recognition that when a tsunami of evidence approaches, it’s best to paddle with it rather than fling oneself against it, no?

Many years before we had three anti-HIV pills (ARV) in one pill or two anti-HIV pills in one, HIVers were drowning in pill fatigue. HIVers took as many as 15 to 35 ARVs, including prophylaxis, in one day. In 2000, the light bulb went on for the medical community and pharmaceutical companies alike. They realized they could not expect HIVers to take these many drugs forever. Pill fatigue was affecting many HIVers.   Pharmaceuticals and the HIV community came up with creative methods to encourage pill adherence.  HIVers meanwhile coped with the multitude of drug side effects and the infamous HIV-related diarrhea.

Pharmaceutical companies realized if they developed ARVs combined into fewer pills, it made pill taking more tolerable, it improved adherence and also increased drug sales. In the US, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) iapproved ARVs faster as HIVers’ lives depended on access to medications due to drug resistance. Drugs were approved after 28, 32 and 48 weeks of research but the long–term side effects surfaced only with long term use. (Currently FDA and European regulators have proposed extending the studies to 96 weeks.)  

Pharmas competed with each other to come up with the best drug combination in one pill; this also made stock holders happy and very rich at the expense of an epidemic that killed millions of HIVers. Out of the pharmaceutical giants arose Gilead Sciences Inc. Gilead created 3 ARVs in one pill - Atripla (sustiva, FTC and Tenofovir) in 2008. This one pill created a $15 billion market” (Cortez. M. F). Atripla is a mix of Gilead’s two-drug medicine Truvada, with Bristol-Myers’s pill Sustiva. Atripla is the most widely used anti-HIV medicine.

Gilead generated $6.3 billion from HIV drugs in 2010. Selzentry, a CCR5 inhibitor, generated $128 million last year for Pfizer and its partner GlaxoSmithKline Plc. Merck, had 2010 sales of $1.1 billion for Isentress, an integrase inhibitor” (Cortez. M. F). Disease is a very lucrative business.  

I believe HIVers who take these drugs deserve a share in the stock market. If physicians don’t prescribe the drugs, and HIVers don't consume the drugs, they do not sell and stock shares plunge. ASOs and NGOs struggling to maintain services for HIVers deserve 1% of the sales of these ARVs. This could lead to staff hiring and minimize staff burnout.   When pharmas provide “unrestricted education grants” to ASOs, this is pocket change for karmic points. This is a very simple equation which I believe the HIV community needs to rally to!  

Gilead is also conducting a comparative clinical trial, a 96 weeks study, comparing elvitegravir to Merck & Co.'s drug Isentress. And it is researching four pills in one - “a four quad” cocktail (elvitegravir, cobicstat and Truvada).  

As competition stiffens for more drugs in one pill, new drugs have to be developed and researched longer, have to be safer with less adverse effects, minimal cross resistance and/or drug resistance. For years HIV clinical trials recruited newly infected persons not on treatment (the treatment naïve). Now clinical trials have to recruit HIV treatment-experienced HIVers. It has become extraordinarily hard to show a new drug is effective in a treatment-experienced HIV patient.  

There are around 30 ARVs approved; the bar for new HIV drug combinations just got a lot higher. Only six ARVs were approved since 2004. As fewer combinations drugs are approved, HIVers living with multiple drug resistance have fewer options. This creates unnecessary stress, decrease in quality of life, increase in co-morbities, and fewer choices for physicians to offer HIVers.

Over the years, drug development has shrunk. The last drug approved was Intelence, three years ago. Currently there are seven drugs in the third phase of clinical research before FDA approval. In 2006 there were 100 drugs in research and now we have 60 drugs in research. Of the “60 drugs in the pipeline, ten have been discontinued or are on hold and seven are at the end of clinical development” (Cortez. M. F). As clinical trials cost millions of dollars and have to adhere to rigid standards of safety, ethics and efficacy, pharmas weigh the cost. Will a drug be worth the cost when it is finally approved after all these years of research?  

The exorbitant cost of drug development pits a new drug against an existing drug to see if the new drug can out-perform the older drug. Example. “In Jan. 2010 Merck ended work on vicriviroc, a drug similar to Selzentry, in previously treated patients” after it failed to outperform existing therapies. Another anti-HIV drug apricitabine, was scrapped last May after five years of development. The reason? It had to be taken twice a day, putting it at a disadvantage to Truvada, a once a day pill.  

Now one pill a day is fabulous for many HIVers. But treatment-experienced HIVers need ARVs that work against drug resistance, cross resistance - whether it is once a day or twice a day. But many pharmas choose to abandon research or not even bother with developing new drugs that are more than one a day.    

While the number of HIV-infected continues to rise (currently at 33 million globally) the drug research and development sector (R &D), needs to focus on the ethics of ARV development.  It is an ethical issue based on human rights; access to ARVs for treatment experienced HIVers, R & D towards a preventative and therapeutic vaccine(s), or a cure and must NOT always be based on the profit margin.  

 Sources: Michelle Fay Cortez , HIV Drug Development Falters as Merck, Bristol-Myers Struggle With Success. Gilead Sciences extends study of HIV drug,  

Following a recent vote by members, British Columbia Persons With AIDS Society is pleased to announce that it has changed its official name to "Positive Living Society of British Columbia", to be known as Positive Living BC.

Here are some upcomiung events . .

Hike The Chief 2nd Peak - Sunday May 8th

The Stawamus Chief’s three summits offer rewarding views of Howe Sound, Squamish and surrounding mountains.  This hike is approximately 8km with elevation gain of 600m and is rated intermediate in terms of difficulty. It requires good cardio and solid hiking legs. We will hike at a steady pace with occasional rests and lunch at the top. Part of the route is steep and involves ropes/chains and a ladder. The hike is about 4hrs in total.

What to bring: Solid hiking shoes, layered clothing as be cool at top, healthy snacks and lunch, lots of water/Gatorade, sunscreen as the top is full sun.

We will leave Vancouver around 9am and plan to be at trailhead with 10am start. If interested, please reply to This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. by Thursday, May 5th. Please indicate if you are able to carpool, need a lift and which part of the city you live. This hike is capped at 20 guys so going with a first come basis. Guys have option of stopping for coffee/snack after hike in Squamish.

This hike will be cancelled in case of heavy rains as too slippery/dangerous.

Healing Retreats:  Interviews for new participants happening now, if you haven't been before please sign up for an interview please call 604.893.2213. A great experience you'll be glad you went. On weekends so working people can participate.

7th Annual Sunflower Seedling Sale - Fundraiser Saturday May 7th 10am-3pm over 30 ornamental varieties 2133 East Vancouver. All proceeds to Stephen Lewis Foundation to support HIV/AIDS programs in Africa.

SUITS Dinner -  Monday May 30, Taki's Taverna 1106 Davie Street set menu $22 RSVP This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

You’ve been there right? You just have this gut feeling that whatever’s been brewing in the works may erupt at any minute. We call it different names…inspiration, paradigm shift, a fork in the road… an “aha” moment. It’s not a common occurrence, and most times it’s never planned. It creeps up on you before you even know it’s there, and a new energy and flow comes to the surface… new ideas and even a new dream or two.

Recently, I’ve been hittin’ the gym in the mornings before work, only to find out that my post-med, morning brain-fog lifts as I sweat it out. My mind is sharper and more alert…and to my surprise, the Sustiva hangover is minimized. I tried something new and it made a difference to my day. I hate dealing with retention of small details that I should know better than to forget. It’s either an HIV induced change in the brain, or aging is doing its predictable trickery. What I do know is that HIV meds transport me to a vacuumed reality that is difficult for me to relay or explain to others. I just fight through and use my mental tool-kit to cope or overcome.

What I am realizing is that if you find one small solution, it often clears the way for more insight for what’s just ahead.

It’s a breath of fresh air to experience change without it requiring extensive effort and energy. Small rewards can happen as well. I drove into the city today and was given an unused parking stub for my car by someone exiting the garage…only to be followed by a free coffee at Starbucks at no cost. These small perks remind me that little adjustments and surprises can make way for spontaneous combustion.

Paul’s first interview with me was one of our most read posts ever. It’s here if you haven’t read it. Clearly his unique dedication to HIV work touched a lot of people, so I contacted him again, to see if he would expand on one of the themes we had touched on earlier. I wanted to explore his prison years, and the realities of living with HIV behind bars.  So I contacted Paul again, and as before he couldn’t have been more cooperative.

I gave Paul the option of skipping any questions that made him at all uncomfortable, but he answered them all like a trooper.  Here is the interview in its entirety

Bob Leahy Paul You mentioned in your last interview with PositiveLite that you had spent some time in prison and that conditions for people with HIV were not good.  Are you OK talking about that?

Paul Gallegos Yes, I am.

BL Tell us in as much or as little detail as you want how you ended up in prison

PG I tried killing some FUCKING guy I HATED by shooting at him with a .45 (handgun)

BL And you were incarcerated for how long?

PG He didn't want to testify against me, so I took a deal for 2 1/2 years.

BLThis was in California?

PG Yes.

BL You were HIV Positive at the time, correct? Do you know how you became HIV positive?

PG I was a junkie, so I would share needles with anyone. I didn't give a FUCK! I just wanted to fuckin get high. I started putting a needle in my arm at 15.

BL How did you find out you were (HIV) positive?

PG Getting ready for a big construction job, I had to take a physical and blood work.

BL What’s the process for disclosing your status in prison? Do they give you an HIV test, or ask you, or what? How do they know you’re HIV positive I guess is what I’m asking?

PG You let them know during the booking process; for some reason they don't believe you. Then you move on to a physical, blood work, and see a doctor. The doctor makes you wait for your blood work to come back before giving you any meds. It's a long process, weeks and months go by before getting your meds. Then the doctor will ask you what meds were you taking on the streets.

BL Is there any pretence of confidentiality?

PG Hell no!  

BL So who knows (in the prison) that you are HIV positive and how?

PG Everybody knows, the staff makes sure that everybody knows.

BL I think you said earlier that HIV-positive prisoners are segregated from other prisoners, right?

PG They house you in a special unit. It even has another gate around it to keep you away from other inmates. Everybody knows what type of inmates are in those cells.

BL Do poz and non-poz prisoners ever meet?

PG Not always, sometimes going to medical or sometimes during yard.

BL Do people who find out that someone is poz assume they are gay or use gay insults?

PG Shit, these MOTHERFUCKERS would call us all kinds of names. No respect; it's a good thing they were in their cells when doing it. You got to say shit back, if not you can get hurt. It's not a gay disease, I get tired of that shit. HIV/AIDS doesn't always mean a person is gay, people need to get over that shit. IT'S HIV NOT GIV!

 BL Do you think the guards treat you any differently when they know you are poz?

PG Fuck yeah, they are uneducated when it comes to HIV/AIDS.

BL Do they treat you any differently if you are from a particular ethnic background?

PG I don't know if I should answer this one, but some of them, if not a lot of them do. They do tend to stick together.

BL How do people with addictions to various substances cope while in prison?

PG No doctor will help with detox, so we help one another out and if there is drugs around, which there usually is, it's gonna be ok.

BL Can they in fact obtain drugs if they try?

PG Whatever you want you can get, it's like being on the streets, a lot of drugs on the inside.

BL Do they share needles?

PG Oh yeah.

BL So do people who share needles know or care about the risk involved?

PG I don't think so; you’re more worried about getting caught by a C.O.(correctional officer) and you want to get high so everything is done in a hurry.

BL Were you aware of much unsafe sex going on between inmates?

PG Yes, I've also seen some guys get raped.

BL  How is this viewed by prison authorities?

PG Sex is illegal in prison, so you can get written up. Some C.O.s cared, some didn't.

Bl  How is sex between two inmates viewed by other inmates?

PG When it comes to that we mind our own business. 

BL How do other prisoners treat fellow inmates who are openly gay, or even suspected of being gay?

PG Gays try to stick together; some are afraid of being attacked or even raped. Some inmates will date gay inmates while locked-up.

BL Is there any way to get condoms while in prison?

PG Not at all.

BL How about tattooing?  Does this go on much, and how safe is it, do you think?

PG This is something that always goes on. Not very safe, you can hold on to your own tattoo needle, but the ink is made. You always run the risk of getting Hepatitis.

BL Do people know or care about the risks involved?

PG If they know, they don't care or they just don't think about it.

BL Is there any kind of HIV education while you’re in prison?

PG None.

BL What about getting treatment.  First of all, how easy is it to get to see a doctor, or say a specialist in HIV in particular?

PG To see a doctor you have to send a request, which can take a while to get a response. The doctors there don't know too much about the virus. Getting treatment can take a while.

BL Can this be done without other inmates finding out what’s going on?

PG Not usually.

BL How easy is it to get your meds?

PG It's a difficult process. It took me a few months if not a little longer before I started getting any meds, even when my lawyer gave the court my meds and doctors notes. Someone dropped the ball and I think it was the state of California.

BL Are they dispensed daily or what?

PG Yes, morning and evening.

BL How often is your health monitored - quarterly or something like that?

PG Try nothing like that. If you don't put in a request you don't get seen.

BL Don’t laugh at this question, but how easy is it to practice healthy eating in prison?

PG The doctor has to request that you get an extra bag lunch and an evening snack, usually peanut butter and jelly sandwiches.

BL If you develop HIV complications, what happens?

PG If you’re lucky, they’ll take you to the prison hospital or if they can't do anything you'll be lucky to go to an outside hospital, although heavily guarded.

BL How bad is being in prison generally, in your experience?

PG What I experienced was not good, I was a level 3-4. So I was in my cell 23 1/2 hours a day for days at a time. It's not a place you want to spend the rest of your life.

BL  Is it bad enough to keep anyone out of trouble so that they never want to go back?

PG I don't want to go back. 

BL Did being in prison teach you anything about yourself?

PG Yes, it taught me how to live a life without being a badass all the time.

BL Did you have people on the outside that supported you? How often did you have visitors?

PG Yes I did. My wife and kids would come see me every weekend. My mother would also visit me.

BL Anything else you’d like to say, Paul, on the subject of being in prison with HIV?

PG There needs to be some changes done in the prison system when it comes to HIV/AIDS. When I was in prison there was a cell they called the death cell. Anyone in that cell had AIDS and was going to pass away soon. I hated walking by that cell every day, and seeing one guy there for a while and then he was gone, but there would be someone else to take his place. You die alone. Your family is not notified until you pass. 

BL How is life treating you now? Tell me what’s going on in your life.

PG Life is great. I'm a very happy man today. I have a wife who loves and supports me in everything I do. I have another child on the way any day now, who will be born free of HIV. He won’t be my first born free of HIV. For many years my wife and I had unprotected sex; she is negative and so are our kids. We had a doctor who, before passing away, did some blood work on us to do a study on why my wife had not picked up the virus from me. We'ill never know, I guess, but if you know of any studies like that, please let me know.

PG Also, I want to thank everyone at PositiveLite for your support. I personally want to thank Bob Leahy for the interview and of course Brian Finch. Thank you again!

BL  Thank you so much, Paul, for talking to us.  And good luck with the new baby.