 Yeah, we're back. I'm Jay Fidel. This is Think Tech and here we go with global connections on a given Thursday with Carlos Juarez, who was in the University of the Americas in Pueblo, Mexico. Thank you very much for joining us today, Carlos. Aloha, Jay. Always a pleasure and happy to reconnect with you as always. And the opportunity today for us to kind of, you know, give a little attention to a different aspect of this coronavirus right now. Understandably, our focus is on the United States, on watching developments in Europe. We began with China and we saw, you know, some other interesting examples in South Korea, Taiwan. But what about the other world? What about the developing world, Latin America, Africa, other parts of Asia, the Middle East? Right now they are not on the front burner, but they are very much, you know, clearly this virus is now we're told in over 180 countries. And many of these are going to be kind of like the next wave of places where we're going to see how they play out. And obviously they present real challenges in terms of their capacity, the relative, maybe weaker public health systems. And yet in a different way also, they've also got maybe some other things that can allow them to get through it in different ways. Or, you know, you often say, you know, people that have been poor or maybe living on the margins, they are survivors and they know how to get by. But something like this, we have yet to see how it's going to play out. So a chance to talk about the other world. The interesting phenomenon along those lines is the relationship of the disparity of income in this country and the number of cases in a community where there's disparity. And particularly, you know, the African American communities. So I think that sort of tells the story locally, but it's much more accentuated in some of these developing countries, isn't it? Yeah, and, you know, it's interesting, as you know, here in Mexico, for example, one of the, actually the governor of the state of Puebla, where I live, is he made some statements a few weeks ago that were very, very, you know, criticized, basically saying that this virus is affecting the rich people. After all, it's the rich who travel and who brought it. And the poor people somehow got away. And it's interesting in the case of Africa, particularly sub-Saharan Africa, it is in fact the wealthier who have more mobility, who travel, go to Europe, et cetera, who clearly are the ones more likely to be exposed to it than, you know, those maybe largely rural communities. But nevertheless, we're going to see some real challenges in the coming weeks here, how it will play out. Moreover, as we know, the global economy is obviously taking a big hit right now. And in the developing world, and let's say poorer countries, a high percentage of the population depend on the informal economy, you know, getting by every day and sort of when that freezes up on them, they don't have a safety net. They don't have unemployment insurance. And so it presents a different challenge. And yet I go back to this, you know, the poor at any place, whether even in developed countries, but the poor have always managed to find ways to survive to get by. But, you know, we will have to see how it's going to play out, will they suffer, you know, tremendous, you know, the death or will they somehow muddle through and get by. No, Carlos, it looks to me like the developing countries are kind of behind us on the curve. They're behind the countries we hear about. I mean, they're behind Italy and Spain, UK, the US, China. Why is that? Why have they not been drawn into this crisis earlier? And again, there's no single answer to that. I mean, even in fact, reading some recent materials now, Italy, why did it why did it happen there? It turns out there was some connections there to some Chinese workers that work in Northern Italy. But also we just had reports in the last day or two that in New York where we had this massive epicenter for the US, it basically came from Europe, not from China. But in fact, it was maybe travel to and from Europe that connected there. Now, the developing world, and again, we throw that term out, of course, it means, you know, many different things. But in general, I'm speaking mostly about places like Latin America, Central and South America, Sub-Saharan Africa, North Africa, the Middle East, and other parts of, let's say Asia, South Asia. These are places that tend to be characterized by much more crowded households. You know, even in fact, even we think of Latin America as having this image of, I don't know, you know, rural communities. Most Latin Americans are living in large urban centers and places that are crowded. And so it is a recipe for potential, you know, spreading as well. You know, this ability that we see now in the US, the importance of social distancing, staying at home. Again, that can work if you have the luxury of a home. But what if you live in a massive building with, you know, thousands of people, the crowdedness, it presents a real challenge. Now, again, a lot of paradoxes, I think we have to be careful. It's not going to be the same. It's not going to play out the same. There will be places where it may be worse and places where it will be managed better. I want to add two thoughts to that, Carlos. One is we have learned scientifically that, well, you know, viruses mutate. Virus and mutation, they go hand in hand. And there's not one mutation around the world. There are a number of them. Some of them are more serious. Some of them are less serious. Some of them are more contagious. Some are less. That's one thing we've learned. And I don't know where it fits yet. We'll find out because bioinformatics and, you know, statistical analysis and AI, we'll find out over time how this has all worked on an epidemiological level. The other thing that seems clear now, although it wasn't clear a few weeks ago, is that, and this work in Japan, research in Japan on this point, I think it's already well known, is that the virus is not necessarily limited to contagion by sneezing, coughing, touching. It's micro droplets, micro globules, micro aerosol spray that stays in the air for a while. So if you have a lot of people as you have in the developing countries, they're living in a world of virus. It's hard to even escape that. If you're inside with a bunch of people and just one of them has the virus, the whole room is infected for sure because of this aerosolizing process. Yeah. And, you know, the other challenge, again, it's always hard to talk about the developing world as if it is this mass glob. There's such a wide variation. But many characteristics of these places, you often have maybe more political instability or governments that are, you know, governing maybe with weaker legitimacy. And that is a recipe also for tension if the government is seen as, you know, not doing proper things that can be a crisis for them. But let me add this, another paradox, you know, and I'm reflecting a little bit on Mexico, but also what I'm seeing in other places in South America and in places like India, you know, the public health professionals, you know, the health ministries and the doctors, they may be a smaller, you know, percentage. But there is a lot of capacity in terms of knowledge. And particularly, let's say in the case of Mexico, I mean, they're taking some criticism because of a relatively lax response. But I would say that there is expertise here and there are people who in different places in Asia, for example, they had the experience what in the early 2000s of the SARS epidemic in Mexico here, 2009, now 11 years ago, they were the center of the swine flu, the H1N1. And that experience is something that helped them understand the complexities. And so even among the population, at least those who remember it and understand it, there's an awareness that you have to do certain things, you have to change behavior. So I'm just what I'm suggesting here is that, you know, there is some knowledge, some awareness. And also just the fact that they are latecomers to this, they're watching, they're seeing it. And today's, you know, social media, people are well aware of the drama that's played out in Italy of what's happening in New York today or in other places. So that it gives them sort of like an early warning signal of some kind. And so that's interesting. You know, that's true, Carlos. We had a show with one of our hosts in Singapore yesterday, before. And of course, Singapore, you know, as usual, has its act together on this. And people do follow the rules. But I asked her to compare Singapore with the U.S. And it was clear that she watches the same programs that we watch, that I watch and that you watch. And the whole world is informed what Donald Trump is saying. The whole world is informed what's happening, you know, in the U.S. Whether it's accurate, which, you know, I don't feel it is accurate or not. You know, they're getting the same message that we are. So this is indeed a flat world on communications. And everyone else developing countries gets the same communications that we do. Sure. And again, I go back to this, you know, the expertise because those who are managing, you know, health ministries and they are very knowledgeable. Most of them in, let's say in Latin America, they have trained in Johns Hopkins University or University of Washington. Many from Africa or even India have trained in the U.K. So they have, you know, connection to the world of knowledge and understanding. They're not operating in a void. But, you know, nevertheless, I mean, we are anticipating a severe shock to this part of the world, the developing world. Just I think yesterday, the Oxfam, one of the leading, you know, NGOs that works on issues of poverty, has issued a very dramatic report indicating that probably as much as 500 million people, you know, 6 to 8 percent of the global population is at risk of falling below the poverty line. So we've had for some decades now efforts to address poverty in the worst case. And there has been significant progress. But right now there's a real risk of, you know, the last 10 years may just disappear very quickly. And in parts of Sub-Saharan Africa, North Africa, parts of the Middle East, we may very well see, you know, several decades of progress quickly slip away. What do you mean by that, Carlos? What do you mean the decades of progress? What do you mean disappear? Well, simply by the percentage of the population that has been brought out of the extreme poverty. So, you know, 30 years ago, there was a larger percentage of the poorest people living in dire conditions. There has been substantial progress in many parts of the world. So that what I'm saying is that this report from Oxfam is indicating that if action is not taken, or if the worst case plays out, we could see they indicate 6 to 8 percent of the global population. About 500 million people could suddenly be brought back down into the extreme poverty. So, again, just, you know, setting back all the progress that's been made in the last decade or two. So, you know, it's hard to measure these things. But again, it's going to play out differently in different areas. You know, many of these different places will often have a tendency to have young populations. And, you know, that can work both ways. We know or we've been told at least early on that those that are more vulnerable include older populations. And so if you have a young population, maybe you've got, you know, a little more, I don't know, safety there. But the other is that in so many parts of the world, we have crowded populations in, you know, big cities, urban areas. We've already got, you know, tensions there just from that and add to that suddenly the need to isolate the loss of job and opportunities. And you can see a recipe for more domestic violence, more, you know, social instability and chaos. And then another thing we don't think about, there are places in the world where we have hotspots, where we have wars and violence. It's in Syria and the Middle East or Iraq, you know, and maybe even a place like Venezuela that today is facing a real challenge because the political dynamic is very unstable. You add to that suddenly this crisis, people already don't trust the government and, you know, what information they're getting, conspiracy theories abound, and so it's a recipe for creating more paranoia. That's very sad when people take advantage of a crisis and, you know, see it as an opportunity. But I do want to mention that Saudi Arabia has unilaterally terminated hostilities with Yemen. Is that an event that will be repeated or is that just a one-off possibility? Well, I think in many of these conflict zones that I just mentioned, you're going to see a little bit of us holding off, slowing down. But it also presents opportunities. Again, I think I was reading a report about ISIS that, you know, we've been told in the last, you know, months and years has been eliminated, or at least, you know, its control over territory in Syria and northern Iraq has been taken away. Well, they're using it as an opportunity now to somehow, you know, regroup and not just that, you have several dynamics. Those forces, international forces that have been there, including many from different European countries and Australians, in these last few weeks, they've all basically gone home. The U.S. has a very small footprint there, but it does have a presence. It was not possible to completely leave. But I guess what I'm getting at there is that it's interesting when you look at this ISIS group, I mean, they have long been survivors living on their own, and they control their own food supply, water supply. So they are in some ways outside of, let's say, the exposure to this. And they have maybe an ability to survive a little bit longer than they might otherwise. But, you know, beyond that, it's going to be very interesting to see. I mentioned Venezuela, this South American country that, of course, you know, we've the last year, year and a half has been obviously in a strange situation. They have two leaders that claim to be presidents. In the last week, there's, you know, been a lot of paranoia down there that the U.S. is planning an invasion, mobilizing military forces in the Caribbean. And recall this past week in one of his, I'm sorry, one of his daily press conferences, President Trump suddenly turned, switched away from the pandemic to talk about anti-narcotics efforts in the Caribbean and da da da. And so in some of the social media coming out of Venezuela and circulating in Latin America, there's been a lot of alarm that somehow the U.S. is going to use this opportunity to foster a change of government, a coup d'etat. I don't see that in the cards. I think right now the last thing the U.S. needs is to somehow engage in some military action. I think he would be ill advised. I don't see that happening, but it doesn't stop. What about the other side of it, Carlos? What about the side of it in Venezuela? I mean, you know, Trump has done a really, really awful job in terms of leadership in a crisis. And every day, you can see that repeated. And he has made it worse. I think a lot of people have died because of him. I hope the voters understand that in November or whenever they can vote. But, you know, there's going to be an effect in all these countries, because as I mentioned before, they all get to see him. They all get to see him on television. They know what he's saying. They can make their own decisions. I suppose it depends whether they look at Fox News or CNBC, but, you know, they're affected by it. And I guess my question to you, not only in Venezuela, but elsewhere in the world, how are people globally? Maybe there's no easy answer. How are they being affected? But what the United States is doing? How it's making mistakes? How it's stumbling and bumbling and trying to avoid blame? And all the negative things that are happening in his press conferences. Yeah. You know, the first thought would be this. You know, Fox News is, of course, a key part of the U.S. press. It's not as widely watched outside of the U.S. People know about it, but it's not. It doesn't have the same polarization, whereas in the U.S., you know, half the population, you know, is getting their information just from that. Not quite in the world. And, you know, just in my own scanning, let's say in Latin America, the perspective there, there is an awareness that there's tensions in the U.S. And that the president is facing credibility crisis that he's using, you know, well, not he's using, but that he's clearly, let's say he's there. He's being called upon for some of his, you know, missed information and bumbling along the way. But it's interesting. I think you're going to see that play out in a lot of different places as well. Here in Mexico, for example, the president has taken a lot of criticism for being slow and responding and not taking it seriously. In Brazil, the leader there, Bolsonaro, has also been heavily criticized by his, you know, slow response. So I think individually, different countries are going to see that. Now, by contrast, you can see, you know, press conferences that say in Europe or in other places or not just press conferences, the way in which the leaders are handling it, not quite as criticized in the same way as we see here. So I think there's just an unevenness there. But this presents a challenge for all political leaders, how well they manage the communication during this crisis, building confidence. For some, it can be an opportunity to build that trust and gain it. Look at today, we can say the governors in some cases, particularly, you know, Andrew Cuomo has gained the rock star status as, you know, this is how you're supposed to do it. You know, tell the facts, show empathy. And I think other leaders are also having to confront this same thing. But again, with wide variation, you've got some countries, let's say, South Africa in the southern part of the continent there is always considered more of a leader in the region, providing some leadership, providing, you know, more, I don't know, more respect for its handling of the crisis. But a number of other places where you have authoritarian leaders that don't have, let's say, legitimacy in the same way, that presents just more opportunity for people to get skeptical and harder to mobilize support. I mean, because if you need people to cooperate and to, you know, you talk about Singapore. And in fact, what's clear now is the places that have done it so successfully, Singapore, Taiwan, South Korea, even Japan, they are places that are interestingly democracies in their own right. I mean, they've got variations of authoritarian rule, but they are good information, strong preparation, they responded early. But more importantly, they've got maybe more open societies. In a lot of places where that doesn't exist, maybe Philippines, I don't know, maybe some other authority, you know, you mentioned Saudi Arabia earlier. And I don't know if you saw this report, but a very high number of the Saudi royal family has now apparently been infected with this virus. And so that's creating its own internal dynamics there. What is that going to mean? What if the Crown Prince or what if the, you know, the King himself should die? I think in a lot of places we're going to see this crisis is going to become a political hot potato. In another report I was just reading about Pakistan, which is a very large population. You've got doctors protesting there because they don't have sufficient equipment and support. And in fact, the police beating them up, beating up the doctors because they were out trying to protest. Well, you know, Pakistan is not an open, you know, democratic society. And of course it does have, you know, a large population, but it also has an elite that is well educated and doctors who are certainly, they may have less capacity, but they're not on the margin. But there's been a lot of tensions happening in places all around the world. It's a grim picture. We don't have the medical infrastructure, the healthcare infrastructure. We have these cultures that bring people together in tight spots and we're finding out that that's a recipe for contagion. We have the possibility of violence, domestic violence, all the way up to social unrest, all the way up to revolution. We have the possibility of dictators will clamp down on people. We have governmental possibility of change and we have tremendous unfairness, disparity. What have you? I mean, it's really kind of looking, looking down a really grim tunnel. And so my question to you is, you know, in 1918, late 1918, Spanish flu went with our boys to Europe. It came, it was, it was, if patient zero was in Kansas here. It went with our boys to Europe, it festered in Europe, a lot of cases in Europe. And when our boys came back after the war in 1919 or so, so did, so did the Spanish flu. And we had a terrific reinfection, a recontagion in the US, worse than the first one. And so, you know, that's the big risk, a lack of coordination by whatever it is, United Nations, by Donald Trump, by the World Health Organization, whatever it is. There's nobody leading, coordinating the world. So the grim picture that you paint is likely, tell me I'm wrong. It's likely to result in horrendous case numbers and fatality numbers, horrendous infection in most geographical locations in the world. You know, nearly the whole world has this. And then coming right back to the US. So even if we beat it here, it'll be back. This is most concerning. I wonder what your thoughts are because, you know, the picture that we're both appreciating here is a picture that will have direct effect on this country. And it operates in many ways because again, there's tremendous mobility. I mean, right now everything is a bit on hold because of the travel. But as things get relaxed, let's say two, three, four, five, six months from now, that will have to resume. And, you know, the construction industry in the US will kind of kick back in and other things. You need workers. They're going to have to come from somewhere. And so this is going to be with us for some time. The other thing real quick that I wanted to mention is that one of the challenges in the developing world is that at this point, we really don't know. We don't have full information because there's not a lot of testing going on. They don't have the capacity. They don't have the, you know, the, well, the testing is simply not there. So we don't fully know what we see are different little nuggets of anecdotes here and there about a week ago. A very high drama played out in the port city in Ecuador in South America. The port city, it became like the epicenter of that country right now. And there was such a wave of deaths that the government couldn't even come to pick them up. That is, you know, take them to the more people began putting dead bodies in the street. And now they've come because they don't even have caskets capacity to take them away. They've put them in cardboard boxes. And it's just a very ugly, ugly example. And again, heightening the tensions a place that already has political, you know, instability and crisis and legitimacy crisis for some leaders. This is going to play out. I want to underscore that we have to appreciate there's going to be wide variations. So there will be some places, even poor developing countries that are probably going to be able to manage it better than others may not be affected in the same way. But there will be others where it could be quite ugly. We just don't know quite fully. And then I want to finish with another quick anecdote. I was reading where in France, of course, which has long, you know, historical ties with many parts of West Africa, many of its former colonies. There was a TV show in which several French doctors were commenting about, you know, the virus and the need to, you know, test for vaccines. And one of the doctors made a statement that, well, Africa presents a good laboratory for us to test because they don't have ICUs, a lot of masks, et cetera. And it was a backlash, a tremendous criticism that it was seen as a form of sort of a colonial mentality that somehow you can look to the poor developing countries as the place where you go and test all your, you know, your vaccines and so on. So there's tensions that are going to be heightened there that have always been there. But this, this is going to kind of be an opportunity for them to flare up again. Not just that, but obviously when the world economy goes into a massive decline that we're seeing now, whether it's in China and the US, it's going to impact every other place. Even Mexico today is going to suffer tremendously because its exports are to the US. And if the economy here slows down, well, it slows down the economy of our neighbor to the south and so on. So the interdependence of the world economy, as well in many developing countries, you still have a reality where the economies tend to depend on a small number of exports, if you will. And if those commodities, whatever they might be, are suddenly drastically stopped, they don't have the capacity to weather that. They don't have the safety net, they don't have the resources. And so it's going to be, again, a recipe for disaster in a lot of places. So we need leadership or at least coordination. I think the United States has demonstrated under the current administration, we cannot lead, we cannot coordinate, we can't even handle our own problem. And it's just getting worse here. And of course, Donald Trump is in a big argument now with the World Health Organization. He wants the executive to resign. He's pulling all his funds, it's a cut off funding. This is not a matter of leadership or coordination, it's destructive. So the question is, if I made you king of the universe, Carlos, what would you do to ameliorate these disparities and this tremendous risk of contagion, death, instability, chaos, a state of nature coming soon? What would you do? Well, look, I mean, this is a classic example of a global issue, a global problem that requires global solutions. In other words, and yet again, the paradox, it has to be solved at the local level, but it requires coordination and cooperation. And just as I talked, we said at the beginning, there is this knowledge awareness, the social media, and maybe people in every part of the world can see what's going on. But sadly, we live at a time right now where this multilateralism, this international cooperation has been somewhat suppressed and reflected both in Donald Trump, but even the European Union with its own crisis has not been able to maybe take on that leadership role. Interestingly, China, China is in some ways filling the void, as it has been in other ways over these past years, the relative decline of the U.S. And just as a case in point here in Mexico, I think yesterday or day before yesterday, a large plane arrives from China bringing respirators to the rescue here, medical equipment. And of course, the U.S. would in a more maybe in a different world where maybe a U.S. leader would be more inclined to cooperate and coordinate with the U.S. I'm sorry, with Mexico, you might see more of that happening here or even with Canada. But we've got President Trump stopping supplies going to Canada, obviously. And again, the paradox, Mexico is one of the leading manufacturers of medical supplies and equipment. And so you've got a country here that manufactures it, but not for its internal market. It's done for export, export to the U.S. But actually, even this plane load that just came from China that I mentioned, there's a lot of criticism that a few months ago, Mexico sent a lot of supplies to China. And now it has to buy them back at a higher price, things that were even assembled and made in Mexico. So you have examples of capitalism taking on a different dimension here. Yeah, absolutely. But again, I mentioned China. I mean, I don't see it as the savior of the world, but it's also using its own soft power. And it has deep links and connections to Africa and a very large footprint there so that it's likely to be the one country that's going to find itself coming to the rescue in some ways. No, that's true. Just last hour, Carlos, we had a show with a Chinese American researcher here at the John A. Burns School of Medicine, who's working on a drug called Zyplocone, as I recall. And this is a drug that has been demonstrated effective in saving lives with coronavirus. That is really something. And he's working in a collaboration with another Chinese doctor out of, guess where, Wuhan. Two of them are doing this really for global purposes. They are committed. They are trying so hard as individuals who have individual missions in the case to save the world. And I find that very interesting. So while the administration is criticizing the Chinese, while the administration is encouraging racism against Chinese, which is happening, there are in fact collaborations between Americans and Chinese that could have a tremendous collaborative effect. So misinformation is everywhere, but the reality is they are collaborating with us. Yeah, and China, again, I just underscore that China is so deeply connected to so much of the world now, especially the developing world. They are the largest foreign investor in Africa, in several South American countries, Bolivia and Peru, where they extract mines or basically they get a lot of the natural resources. And so they have an interest. They have a need for their own economy to keep things flowing. And they also have today maybe a growing presence in the international community in a way that 20, 30 years ago they did not, and whether it's exporting goods. Actually, before I finish, I wanted to add another curious thing that's come up here is another country that has a long history of having sort of an international presence on issues of public health is the tiny island of Cuba. Cuba, especially in the 70s and into the 80s, had a long history of exporting doctors, especially to South Africa, Angola in particular, but also other parts of Latin America. And the issue just played out here in Mexico because the Mexican president made some reference to, well, he will look into the possibility that maybe we can bring some Cuban doctors here. It's a very sensitive issue because the United States and Mexico obviously have a complex relationship, and yet this is one of the issues that has been a red line for the United States. They will allow Mexico to be sympathetic to Cuba, to have natural ties they've had, but they've made very clear, do not bring any doctors from Cuba here because it's a quirky thing. But I would say this, Cuba, which has exported again doctors for decades, it sounds on paper like, oh, they're just nice, they have all this capacity. In fact, it's a money making scheme. The Cuban government basically will send a group of doctors to even places in Europe or throughout Africa. Those governments will pay the Cuban government a pretty handsome price, 50, 60 grand per doctor. The doctors don't get that money. They get a tiny little stipend. They get sent to the country. They can't take their families. Basically, it's a form of, you know, a curious form of modern slavery. And yet for Cuba, it looks good. It looks like their, you know, their own soft power exporting these, you know, these doctors. But there's a lot more cynical perspective there because it really is the government. It's one of the major sources of export earnings that they get because they don't, they don't export a lot of, you know, trade and goods. They export doctors and they get paid for it. And here in Mexico, they've been trying to mobilize more medical professionals. And the president has kind of put a program out there to, you know, to get retired doctors to come, to retool different doctors to address this crisis. They haven't had immediate success in getting enough. So the president floated this idea of maybe bringing in some Cuban doctors. But that's not likely to go over too well with Washington. One thing is clear from this discussion is that the world, not just the U.S. I mean, clearly the U.S. is in a transformation. And we come out the other side of this, this place is going to be different. Our institutions are being tested. Our leaders are being tested. Our people right down the block across the street, they're being tested. We are all being tested. And we're finding out things about ourselves that maybe we didn't know. Some of those things are good. Some of those things are not so good, but it's more than that. It's that the whole world is being tested. That the whole world is involved in a transformation. And when you look down the other side, hopefully at the light at the end of the tunnel here and look around like Groundhogs Day, look around and hopefully it's gone. We have a vaccine that will, that will, or therapeutic medicine or a combination that will stop this thing. The world is going to be different economically. And in terms of social order, the existing social order, I mean, the one that existed a month ago is over. So how this is a game changer. What's your reaction to that, Carl? Do you agree? And what do you see at the end of the tunnel? Yeah, I mean, again, it is mind boggling. There's no question that this is a game changer in a way that in our lifetime, we will never seen the world would not be the same. If you can fast forward, you know, two years from now, five years from now, even something like travel that we took for granted, you can just go anywhere and all this mobility. I think from here on out, once we begin to gradually open it, it'll never quite be the same. And, you know, even, you know, reading some interesting things that, you know, this is a massive blow, of course, to like the restaurant industry, hospitality industry. Now, eventually people are going to want to travel in vacation. Yes, but even think about restaurants. Many of them are not going to survive. We're told probably most of them will not. So when we come back to something normal, the new normal, it will never quite be the same as the old. And I think it's pretty frightening to think of that. And so it is going to be a game changer on so many levels. And, and yet again, I would just to be the more optimistic side there. I think what we're seeing is it's bringing out the ugliness and some of what we describe here, you know, the crisis and domestic violence, et cetera. But it's also in some small ways, it's also bringing out an awareness that we have to think about others. We have to be more community minded. We have to, you know, reach out. And I think this is happening in many parts, certainly in the US where suddenly people are getting to know their neighbors for the first time. And I saw this play out and I've got some good contacts in Madrid that have been, you know, surviving the massive lockdown there where every day they go out at eight o'clock at night and they, you know, sing a song to, you know, thank the all the first responders. But for the first time, people are getting to know their neighbors in a way that didn't exist, you know, before this. So I don't know. I think we're going to see certainly the world will never quite be what it was before. And it's going to be interesting to see, you know, we, oh, it's all going to end in a month or two. No, no, no, this is going to be with us. It's going to take probably a year or two to transition. But once we do come back, it's not going to be the same. It's going to be a game changer on so many levels. I can't even begin to think every time you open up and think about it. It can be scary. Hopefully there will be some other opportunities that come out of this again. Good gestures and the work environment, for example. Now, clearly, we're going to see that some people realize in some firms and organizations realize people can work from home. They can work remotely. That works for some. It doesn't work for everything. You can't, you know, build, you know, build a construction site, you know, over the Internet. You need people to be there to assemble it. But certainly many other things are going to change how we do what we do. And even how we socialize. I think I heard a reference to this, you know, the infamous Dr. Fauci saying how we probably should never shake hands anymore. And that's a scary thought that we can no longer hug or shake hands. And, you know, especially as a Latin American, we love to hug and kiss. And the idea that, gosh, we can't do that ever again. That's a scary thought. I don't know. I think it's going to be a mixed bag. And I guess you will have to wait and see. But this is a game changer in ways that we have yet to figure out. Yeah, changes human interaction, human relationships. But generally our mission is clear, Carlos. We have to keep following it. We have to identify the issues. We have to discuss which way it's going, maybe cut to some solutions. You and me every couple of weeks, I think it's really important. And I look forward to having these discussions with you. And I also want to make sure that you're staying safe. Yes. So please stay safe, Carlos. Thank you so much.