There's no way that is on accident because you had to purposely cut it out. It's like literally impossible to accidentally leave out a bear on the graph. The other thing that I found interesting as a non-researcher, when I looked at this, I said, okay, so five was basically less likelihood of injury than six and even seven to some extent. But then I read that actually the nine hours of sleep column is based on one child being injured out of six who reported sleeping for nine hours. So essentially, even if that linear distribution was right, the data behind it is really not reliable.