 I'm representing, I think, one of the greatest countries, but probably the smallest today. And I'm actually very thankful to Jeff for not distributing the time to talk here, according to the size of the population. I calculated it through. It would give us Luxembourg 1.5 seconds to talk. Now, this is where Luxembourg is. So it's 80 kilometers north house and 60 kilometers east-west. And it has 500,000 people. Five hospitals, five research centers, and we have a budget of about 5 million euros per year to do genomic science medicine systems biomedicine. I think in terms of the context, it is important to know that 10 years ago, the country did not have a university. It was established in 2003. And all the young and bright students that wanted and could go to a university were actually very proud of being able to go and get scholarships to go to Brussels or Vienna or US or ever. And it's almost the culture of the country to say we need to send our young people out so they come back and they have seen the rest of the world. So there was a lot of resistance to build the university and the resistance came from the academics. 10 years later, the game has changed. The country I think is becoming proud of the university. And so there was a decision made to put, make it research oriented. And about five years ago, there was another decision made, namely to set priorities and focus because in a small country, in a small university, you can't do everything. And one of the priorities, the other one is telecommunication, security, reliability and trust. There are some banks in Luxembourg. The other one basically was to go for biomedicine. And if you just, how do I move this forward? The right one. The rationale was that Luxembourg has undergone a couple of country F-cycles in their economic development. 100 years ago, it was basically an agricultural country with some wine at the Moselle. And then about 150 years, 100 years ago, a steel industry came up, which in the 70s, 1970, reached its peak with more than 40,000 people working there out of 250,000 people at the time. That went into declines. You know, there are still 5,000 people working in the steel industry and the banking business came up. There were more than 250, 280 banks. I think there are still 150, 280, which serves the country well. But things change. And now, this is what happened in 2005. The decision was made to basically rebuild the entire steel industry. Down, this is the steel campus. These are still the furnaces here that are now more monuments to transform it into a city of a university and business. And this is where things go. There was an investment of basically in dollars of about $200 million. This is probably the biggest construction site currently in Europe. And this is where I work, right here. This is a bank. And those are student houses and private houses. This is the main building of the university. And this is the humanities building and the mathematics building is coming up here and so on and so forth. So if you come over, visit, it's worth taking a look at it. Now, there was a question about vision in terms of genomic medicine and personalized medicine. I think one of the visions and the scares is that there needs to be another future in terms of economy. That's why I was sort of a little bit sensitive about the question that my Belgian colleague asked, let's keep business out. In terms of the expectations, there isn't expectation that health insurance, wellness is not only a cost factor, but maybe also a business opportunity. Now that's not the only incentive in Luxembourg to build biomedicine and personalized medicine, but it's one. And I think it's important, at least for me, and the expectations that are built into our institute, it's in this context of what do you give back in terms of economic? It can be saving money, but can also be attracting business. So there are always two coins of this. So I was charged in 2009 as the founding director of the LC-SB, the Luxembourg Center for Systems Biomedicine. The name that they had given to me was Systems Biology and in four weeks I changed it. I said I want to work on systems biomedicine and it served as well that decision. And the concept is basically not unique. It's what I think every center in this time of age does. It's combine experimental biology with technology platforms. Make a big, that's why it's red here, make a big focus on computational biology and then reach out to clinical research and clinical implementation. Now the reason why I point this out is when you have 500,000 people in a country, you cannot compete in being a role model in terms of large number of patients. You have to have a different unique selling point or a competitive advantage or where you can contribute to the international community. So don't expect from Luxembourg big cohorts. You might expect a pilot small and beautiful because Luxembourg only has one health insurance. I come from Germany originally, 35, a zoo, competing and hating each other. So that's a very different context and I think there's a big chance in Luxembourg here. Now I had to make a focus. And a focus in terms of a disease. So we can't cover all the diseases although most of the diseases occur in Luxembourg. I made a choice and I went for neurodegenerative disease. Within neurodegenerative diseases, I went for Parkinson, not for Alzheimer. Although there was some friendly pressure for me to go into Alzheimer from the political side. I resisted that because I thought the door into understanding neurodegenerative diseases four years ago in Parkinson with 15 familial genes known in Alzheimer only three at the time is bigger and genomic and genetic medicine. I thought I had a better quick start and that's what we needed, a quick start because otherwise the politicians lose patience as you know. So I'm not going into this at all except to say the focus that we currently try to push and implement is become a strong driver and get on the map in bioinformatics, computational biology and systems analysis which is mainly network science right now. And I'm convinced, we heard this in a couple of talks today that one of the big challenges is in making sense out of genetic variation in a non-linear system, extremely complex, progressing and changing the topology and the dynamics over time. That's what we are facing with and I think climate modeling is peanuts compared to what we get into this. Maybe I shouldn't have said that. I think we can learn from them a lot. So we started just as an exercise to get on the map and create pathway maps initially. And so this is where we sort of see ourselves right now in Luxembourg and the cohort studies. So a lot of the themes that are discussed today, we need and want to tackle by international cooperation. This is where we feel at home and this is the quick way of validating genetic variation and then of course we have this back and forth and ying and yang. So this is basically, I showed this slide one more time. That's, this is where I think we would like to contribute to this international consortium make sense out of genetic variation, be it whole genome sequencing data, be it integration, be it the development of integrated maps, not just sequencing but all the other omics, clinical data, prior information, machine learning essentially. So I'm not showing any in depth here. I just want to say I also had to make a decision for which technology to go for. The first decision was not going to sequencing but invest heavily in sequence analysis. I did go for one technology which is metabolomics, headed by Carson Hiller. I think in terms of this context here and maybe in the work groups we discussed is a little bit more. We have invested and I think we're getting the first fruits from that into in vivo metabolomics. You're looking for fluxes, not just for metabolite concentrations, using stable isotopes like a challenge test, like a glucose challenge test. And I think there's information in there which we should harvest from genetic epidemiology and cohorts and we can talk more about this in the coffee or at the beer or in the workshop. We have built up a SNP validation tool and I just want to point out this was just, we are in a couple of European consults here on epilepsy because of the bioinformatics. But our fish facility, because of this we were able to make a functional validation of a genetic variation in a family that we sequenced with Travesy and Traum, genetic inherited epilepsy. And so very quickly within three months we were able to make that contribution. And we also built up IPS and have started to build up IPS from patients and so on. I'm not really going into this. So again, the question is how, what kind of know how can we bring in which I'm fully aware hasn't reached the clinic yet. But I think we are on the way. So we went into bioinformatics, recruited Rana Schneider from the EMVL facility in Heidelberg who was running some of the bioinformatics there and went into pathway analysis and network analysis as some of the focal points. And start to try now to make dynamic and kinetic models. This is about electron transfer chain in mitochondria because that seems to be one of the hallmarks in Parkinson's disease. Probably in others as well. I think it's very relevant from cancer, Warburg effect and all these issues. And I think it already brings us into some questions of co-morbidities at the model disease model level. And I come back to this in a minute. Now they recently in April this last year, we recruited Ines Thiele. And Ines has done a community-driven effort to make metabolic reconstruction worldwide. So this is the point that I want to make community-driven, worldwide curation and disease model or modeling efforts to make metabolic reconstructions. And we just published just a few months ago a community effort to develop a Parkinson's disease map in joint cooperation with Iroaki Kitano in Tokyo to use almost a wiki format to basically click in and use intuitively what you do when you want to find the NIH in Washington, DC. So those are some of the European grants where we work. We are, they're all bioinformatics computational, more or less. And now the question, what does this have to do with genomic medicine? There's just a grant in preparation, I hope we get it, looks good, to establish a national center of excellent research in early diagnosis and stratification of Parkinson's disease. And Frank Claude from the FNR, the Four Nationales Research is here who can tell you much more about it. This is a 12-year commitment in Parkinson's disease research with an extension, probably into AG and others, from the government side. And I think this is extraordinary. And we have all the players in the country. I mentioned just that there are five research centers. This is including the Biobank. It was a big investment made into the International Integrated Biobank Luxembourg. More than 60 million euro going into this. The LCSB, the hospital, and the CRP Public Research Center, Santé Health Research Center. And this is happening in the next few years. So I think the commitment from the country in terms of moving this into early diagnosis and stratification with the hospitals is a big one. And so I think we are quite privileged. But of course, I can't, I'm not sure I can convey the expectations that has put on us. Rescue the economy, change the healthcare system, by the way, bring up good science into the country. So I think I stop here. Those are the groups I'm not going into. It's an interdisciplinary under one roof. That's the key message of it. Thank you very much. Thank you, Rudy. I'd like to just ask you maybe one question. And I may have my facts wrong, but first of all, congratulations on what you've done in 10 years. It's pretty, well, okay, four years. I was going back to where there was no university. But to what extent do you attribute what you've been able to do with partnerships with other countries? And I'm thinking specifically of the investment that was made with TGen and Institute for Systems Biology. I noticed that you didn't mention them, so I'm just curious as to what role they play. Yes, I did mention them. They have run out more or less, but they were absolutely instrumental. So just for the people that don't know, there was I would say about half of the entire money that was named the American Project, which was with three different American partners. And one of them was at the Institute of Systems Biology in Seattle with Lee Hood. I think personally that was the most productive one and really delivered. Very, very well, so I don't mention the others. But that's a personal thing. Things really worked out very well. We basically, I sent over seven fellows into these institutions. And they stayed there for two years and then they came, come back for three years. We call this knowledge transfer. That worked extremely well. Now the way European institutions work in collaborations is sometimes a little bit different compared to this continent. So I feel we were very lucky, not lucky, shouldn't say that, but it happened that the increase in funding happened into the recession and it's good to invest on a stock market when everybody goes, the thing goes down. It gave us a big opportunity. So the doors internationally for us were open everywhere. We are now heavily collaborating, continuing with Hiroko Kitano, but also the other I didn't mention that we are going into imaging. Cellular imaging, IPS cells and others. We do this with the Gladstone Institute of Stephen Finkbeinach quite a lot. And immediately realize the challenge is image analysis. Again, bioinformatics, all these data. So yeah, it was absolutely essential.