the fact that the gastroscopy does not occur or the mercantilism occurs or both is correct.
sent1: the fact that that the gastroscopy does not occur and/or the mercantilism occurs results in the non-undependableness is true. sent2: the Megillah happens. sent3: that the gastroscopy does not occur or that the mercantilism happens or both is brought about by that the Megillah does not occur. sent4: the mercantilism does not occur. sent5: if the undependableness does not occur and the lauding does not occur the Megillah does not occur. sent6: that the Megillah occurs prevents that the undependableness does not occur.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the gastroscopy does not occur and/or the mercantilism occurs.; sent1 & assump1 -> int1: the undependableness does not occur.; sent6 & sent2 -> int2: that the undependableness happens is true.; int1 & int2 -> int3: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> hypothesis;
either the gastroscopy does not occur or the mercantilism happens or both.
$hypothesis$ = the fact that the gastroscopy does not occur or the mercantilism occurs or both is correct. ; $context$ = sent1: the fact that that the gastroscopy does not occur and/or the mercantilism occurs results in the non-undependableness is true. sent2: the Megillah happens. sent3: that the gastroscopy does not occur or that the mercantilism happens or both is brought about by that the Megillah does not occur. sent4: the mercantilism does not occur. sent5: if the undependableness does not occur and the lauding does not occur the Megillah does not occur. sent6: that the Megillah occurs prevents that the undependableness does not occur. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the gastroscopy does not occur and/or the mercantilism occurs.; sent1 & assump1 -> int1: the undependableness does not occur.; sent6 & sent2 -> int2: that the undependableness happens is true.; int1 & int2 -> int3: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__