 Okay, so I just wanted to just say a couple of things about kind of where you are in time. So this is a meeting to discuss what we call the second phase in this common fund project. So common fund projects are usually five-year projects and then they come up for discussion on, you know, should they go to another five years? And in general, the idea is that 10 years they sunset or sunset may not be the right word. The idea is that these will actually move into other mechanisms, other institutes throughout the NIH over those last, at the end of those 10 years. So we're kind of in the middle here. And the idea is to think hard about what you would like to do in phase two, make a really cogent argument for what changes you wanted to make in the program as it is. And then we will kind of put those thoughts together with a proposal for the second round of the common fund project. And Jim Anderson has been mentioned. Jim runs the common fund and so he talks about what's called common fundability. And so I would keep that in mind as we go forward. So what does that mean? It means that the program has to have really high potential to make a difference in the research environment. So that's probably the most important thing. It's got to be a program that's catalytic. That they're meaning that the field is kind of percolating. It's at the right time. There's a receptive community. The science is ready so that an organized initiative such as this can really change the way research is done. And in this instance, actually how clinical care may be done. It needs to be synergistic, meaning that all the pieces have to add value to each other. And synergistic across the NIH mission. So that's clearly not a hard argument in this instance where the diseases that you're finding out about really cross the mission of multiple institutes. So cross cutting. And then unique, something that no one else is really doing. So this is something that as you put it forward to kind of underline the value of these program specific activities that are unique and have high impact for the research field. So I don't, you know the area better than I do, but the diagnosis of people with very difficult disorders has been a big problem in our country for a long time. It's probably a bigger problem now that the medical system changed so that doctors have much more limited time to see patients. And so I imagine that there are people coming in all over the country with conditions that the medical system just is not built to take care of. And that leaves problems for the patients and their families. And but it also is a research gap here that needs to be filled in because certainly with modern techniques we now have the ability in a coordinated fashion to go after some of these cases and actually find out really new important things that are potentially a value to the patient themselves but also to science in general. So I would say you want to think about how you bring value to that aspect of effect on the medical system, effect on putting out new research opportunities that could open science, that has implications on a broad basis as well as on that narrow patient that you're dealing with. And then the other thing which is the harder thing to understand is to how in our medical system thinking that this is the second phase, I can tell you that discussions always come up in the second phase is, well what happens after the 10 years are up? You know, if you have a program and it's doing great for 10 years and then it ends and then everything just disappears or goes into a file cabinet somewhere, that's really not what the Common Fund was for. The Common Fund is to stimulate something that's brand new, that's going to have long-term legs in terms of changing biomedical research and care. So how to think about moving from this phase that you're in now and the next one to something that's long-standing that can be incorporated into the medical system, into the NIH mechanisms for research funding. So sustainability, something else I think to think about. And but I certainly have been quite impressed by the organization, by the hitting the milestones. So I think from our standpoint, the leadership standpoint, we're quite impressed with the work you're doing. But this is also an important phase to start thinking about phase two because it's not just we'll just do what we were doing before. This is your chance to really kind of up the energy, try and get the most value out of the second phase. So again, I'm happy to be here. Unfortunately, I can't have other things I have to run to during the day. Mostly in this building, which is the neuroscience building. So all the neuroscience insuits are here, so I'll be in and out. So thank you very much. Thank you, Eric and Walter. And now we'll have a presentation from Dr. Gull, who's going to speak a little bit about the lessons learned from the Undiagnosed Diseases Program and now the UDN.