 to get started here. Excellent. Hello, hello, and welcome to today's edition. It's May 25th, believe it or not, of the Cardia User Group. And we're very excited today to have a guest speaker who will introduce in just a minute. But we need to get through a little bit of housekeeping. So I do want to cover that the Cardia Working Group is covered by the Hyperledger Antitrust Policy. You can find that here in our meeting notes. I will link the meeting notes in our chat for anybody who might not have that saved. There are also community meeting notes, so feel free to chime in and make adjustments as you feel fit. Additionally, we have a Hyperledger Code of Conduct, which to paraphrase, we're going to be nice to each other. We're going to encourage collaboration and communication among our community here. And hopefully, everybody feels welcome and encouraged to have a voice in this space. If you have any concerns, you can reach out to Ken or myself as co-chairs of this committee or you can reach out to Hyperledger directly through some of these links. They give you an opportunity to chime in there. Would anybody like to introduce themselves that's new or potentially it's been a while? We'd be happy to have you introduce yourself on today's call. OK, we've got a quiet bunch. Hopefully, you're drinking your, you've got a beverage in front of you. You are ready to go. We've got an exciting speaker and presenter today. So we have Sirot joining us. Sirot Pala, Ken, you have more personal experience. Would you like to do his introduction? Sirot is an entrepreneur and has taken at least one company that I'm aware of through a successful acquisition. And the reason that we contacted him is because he has some experience in workplace drug testing in order to enlighten the Cardio community. Those who are either attending today or watching the reporting about some of the challenges and perhaps opportunities for Cardio to improve the user experience and the privacy in workplace drug testing. So we welcome Sirot today. We're glad to have you here and hope to be enlightened by your experience so that we don't have to repeat some of the lessons learned that you've already taken into account. Oh, thank you. Thank you very much, Ken. Yes, I am glad to be here. I have been an accidental entrance to the, we would call workplace drug testing market because like you said, I'm an entrepreneur. I had previously started a few different companies, some successful and unsuccessful ones, but my path to drug testing started with my former company, Conform BioScience, which was like a commercialization company in the field of point of service testing. And initially, we started early 2000s with the goal of bringing testing to individuals and corporations. And we did not necessarily tackle workplace drug testing at the beginning, but as we evolve as a company and we've decided to focus more on cash basis testing and not so much reimbursement and health care and Medicare and so forth, we found that workplace drug testing was a growing market for obvious reasons. I mean, some of them are very unfortunate, as we know. And we're still going through the epidemic of drug abuse. And I think the last time I checked almost 100,000 people a year dying from drug abuse and overdose. So maybe I'll stop there and would love to see what could be the best way I can tackle some of the questions that you think I can answer and be a resource for the panel here. Hurt for those that are unfamiliar with drug testing, you said point of service testing. What are the implications of that? Point of service testing is basically bringing the test to where the action is. And it can happen in multiple ways. It can happen in an instant way, meaning if you're using an instant test. And many of the things that I will say, maybe we're talking about it from a drug testing perspective, but it can also apply to other type of wellness test as well. But when we talk about point of service testing, it can be either a test like a lateral flow test, which is like a very standard urine test that you might know, or pregnancy tests, where you give a sample in some sort of fluid, oral, or urine, or so forth. And then the test itself will react to the fluid and will give a result right there at the time. And that will be an instant test. But then you could also collect the sample again, urine, saliva here, and take the possession of the sample with a chain of custody, and then send the sample to a laboratory where the result will come from a lab result. So point of service covers those two different use cases. Both the collection of specimens that need to be sent to a lab and those that are immediately reactive and give an indication within five, 10 minutes, a half an hour, are they all very short or some take longer than that even though they're immediate tests? They all take less than three minutes, four minutes, the tops. And when we talk about instant testing, the drug testing world, we're basically talking about just two forms, which is urine and saliva. Urine being, my numbers might be a little bit outdated, but I would say still more than 85% of all drug testing in the workplace are still urine tests. It's still the main form of testing. Or the newcomer that is growing ground is the oral fluid-based testing. And both of these tests, some pros and cons. Maybe we can talk about that too. But there is, for obvious reasons, oral testing is more convenient and easier to make sure that there is no tampering with the sample. So it has been preferred more and more. But it also comes with some disadvantages because oral fluid testing tends to be detecting shorter amounts of time. It has less acceptance in some industries. It has higher detection levels. So sometimes things that can be detected in urine cannot be detected in oral and so forth. So what those are, the two main forms of instant testing is urine and saliva. Interesting. You mentioned, I want to start kind of at the beginning and talk about how a person holds in a test or participates in a test. What is the process for their consent being gathered, if any, and typically how is the test initiated? Is it requested by a workplace? Is it requested by the employee? What are the typical flow of starting a test to be taken? It is often time. When we talk about workplace drug testing, it's important to separate pre-employment drug testing and then regular drug testing that might happen in the course of an employment because of maybe a suspicion of use or some sort of accident that might happen at the workplace that might trigger a drug testing. So the first one I'd like to talk about is the pre-employment, which seems to be still 80% of the marketplace. Oftentimes someone will apply for a job. And it's a part of that process. There is a point where it can change from company to company. But in most cases, once they are offered the position and accept the position, they are told that they have to go to a drug testing. It's one of the check items. And often in the pre-employment screening scenario, drug testing and background screening happens almost concurrently. And there are a lot of users out there, a lot of service providers out there that actually combine those two and become a service provider for both. It's not necessarily the case. I think many of the background screening providers incorporate drug testing and use different contractors. But some employers might treat them separately and might contract out to two separate service providers to do that. But once an employer requests a prospective employee to take a drug testing, oftentimes they either send them an order form or something that will enable them to go to a laboratory to get the drug testing done. Some employers that are often more blue-color type of workplaces, they might have a high number of employees that they hire on a regular basis. Some employers might have resources or a clinic on site that could do the drug testing themselves right at the workplace itself. But in most cases, you as a prospective employee get an order form that instructs you to go and provide the sample at a collection center. As a part of that order, is the determination up front that the employer will receive or the prospective employer will receive the test results? Yes, the moment that the person provides their sample, again, it can happen in different ways. It can happen where the person is a part of the paperwork that they receive is being onboarded to the workplace. They could sign a consent, which gives the employer the right to ask for the drug testing to be done and get the results of the drug testing. So that can happen. Or if this particular process of drug testing is not so incorporated into the onboarding process, but could be a standalone order, then you might be sending as an employer to this person an order form to get their drug testing done, which is very much like an order form of a lab test that you would get as a part of your health test to your doctor. It could be very well, be a very similar process too. But the moment that if that's the case, and you get an order to go and provide the sample at a laboratory collection center, then it's a part of your signing process to give the sample at the clinic. You also give the consent of your sample to be analyzed and the result to be sent to the employer. Is that an expert? Do you understand that to be explicit consent where the employee is actually signing something? So either the employer is pre-collecting that if they have an established workflow in relationship with that lab organization would be my guess. Or they're deferring that to the collection lab for them to do it at the point of capture. So they're either bringing it with them because they already signed one with their employer or the lab is going to collect it directly. But it's explicit. It is very explicit. Like it is not something that you have to look for. It is important that this consent is explicit. Because in most cases, the result will be delivered. I mean, I would say pretty much all cases, I would say. The result will not be delivered to the donor in this case, where we will not get the result. It will be the employer that will get the result. So it's one of those very, I would say, unique cases as individuals. We will give a sample from our body where we will not, in most cases, have access to the result. Is that the initial access or never access? In most cases, the never access. You will have to go through additional steps to request the results. We have rights to get that result. But it is not a standard part of the process. Interesting. That's kind of a distinction between if I go to my regular primary care physician and have a test result, the lab almost always delivers the result to me as well as or can deliver there. I guess I have to request that as well. You do. Actually, there are some lab laws that say that the lab actually needs to go to the provider and they give the provider a certain amount of time to be in touch with you as the patient. You can imagine, for example, if you test positive for HIV, you don't want to be getting that from the lab directly and not have a doctor call you to say, you have HIV, let's talk about it. So there are some, and I would think these are probably, there's some federal laws, but there's probably also additional state law in the US that dictates that delay period where they give the provider like a jumpstart on contacting you before they issue the labs to you directly. And the workplace testing, does any of the test result go to a medical provider as well or is it strictly given to the employer for their review? In the context of workplace drug testing, there is another medical provider called Medical Review Officer, MRO, which is oftentimes these are medical doctors that gets these results, they look at the results before they endorse, I mean, they finalize it and release it to the employer, but they are in the middle as someone that acts to make sure the lab results could be determined to be a positive or a negative. And that's mainly because of the cases where you could be prescribed the medicine and that medicine can make you positive for a drug test, let's say opiates and so forth. So the Medical Review Officer at this point, once they get the positive result, would contact the donor and ask to see if they have any prescription or not, because if you do have a prescription for opiates and you get a result that says opiates positive, it is the job of the Medical Review Officer to qualify that and at the end give a negative result because assuming that everything else is negative but you are opiates positive, that way you would not necessarily fail the drug test result, even though you might be positive. So there is that Medical Review Officer institution that makes sure there is no illicit drug abuse, but if there is prescription that drug use is within the framework of that prescription. Is that Medical Review Officer affiliated with the lab or affiliated with the employer or independent? They are often independent individuals that gets the result from the lab, but they can be contracted by the lab provider, they can be contracted by the third party administrator. There's another institution called third party administrator. There could be just a partner for the employer to run their workplace drug testing. So if the third party administrator rounds the drug testing program for a corporation, they might contract out the lab portion to someone else. They might have an MRO inside and they can just make sure that all pieces of this process takes place in a seamless manner and then they give the result to the employer and even third party administrators could be responsible for what will happen if there is a positive result and how to deal with that positive result. And we started talking about pre-employment screening too, but then there are many different cases of drug testing that will happen not just for pre-employment purposes, but managing your employee pool. If you're an organization that is regulated by Department of Transportation, like your trucking company or an airline, or you have a manufacturing facility and you have random testing that needs to be done in your organization and you randomly drug test your regular workforce, these third party administrators will be the people that will be managing that entire program and they can get very complicated. So when we talk about just pre-employment screening, it's a white color individual working for a bank. You might have to be drug tested only once and that's it and you will never get drug tested again. But if you're a drug driver, then you have a lot of other ways that you might encounter the workplace drug testing. As you mentioned ongoing testing like for the trucking industry or airlines, is there a consent process that's done once or does it have to be repeated with each test? Do you know the differences there? I don't know the technicality of the differences but consent, as far as I know, you have to give explicit consent each time you provide the sample. Okay. On the ongoing testing, are there scheduled intervals that can be known and scheduled in advance or is some of it random or a mixture of both? I don't think there is any pre-scheduled ongoing tests in the workplace that is a standard. I'm sure like employment drug testing is a very, it's employment at will country here and you could customize a drug testing policy that can be very unique to your organization. So there might be very well cases for some companies to have that, but that is not very standard where you have a pre-scheduled timeline of when you will get drug tested. It is either random and it's random in a sense that everybody will get drug tested once a year at some point or it can be random in a sense that 10% of your workforce will be drug tested each year. So there is a randomization that happens and it is the responsibility of either the third party administrator or some randomization software to determine who's going to be get drug tested when and it does create complications because once you get a drug testing order you have to do it in a certain amount of time and you have to show up and do the drug testing otherwise it will impact the efficacy of the test because if you have two weeks to get drug tested and in most cases with saliva the detection window is less than a week or maybe two weeks then you could just wait it out if you want to avoid being getting positive results. So the randomization and what happens after the selection done and the timeline has to be a very strict policy and the the types of tests dictated by legislation or are they at the discretion of the employer? So you might have a test also for the same type of issue that could be your and test or saliva test are any of those things dictated by legislation or are they at the discretion of the employer? Yes, there are definitely regulated by the Department of Transportation and it is very strict I mean it is a very defined process it has its own laws and regulations so if you are regulated by the Department of Transportation as an employer you have to fulfill those requirements you cannot make shortcuts I'm sure you could add on additional restrictions you can do additional testing but at minimum you have to fulfill the Department of Transportation requirements then there are some federal employers like the military or some other federal agencies might have their own regulations for their employees and similarly states might very well do that with regards to their employees and we might be talking about law enforcement you know prison you know prisons that's not really an employee relationship but the prison guards might be subject to different type of drug testing that comes from the state regulations as well so it is a very when you think about it there is federal regulations involved there are state regulations involved there are many employment law related regulations there is privacy there is healthcare and that's really what makes workplace drug testing a really complicated manner overall because you have so many different jurisdictions and so many different considerations some of them federal some of them industry some of them state they are all layered on top of each other okay another question how does the lab know that I'm the one showing up to get my test done and it's not my brother-in-law who's drug free showing up to get a clear drug test for me on my behalf they do ID checks proper ID checks at the time of specimen collection but again it is not a very robust system because physical appearance might look similar to the ID even at the checking process I've noticed that at some collection centers you check in they check an ID but by the time you go give the sample there is not as strict of a flow that ensures that the donor is who the donor is supposed to be and plus in the cases of urine sample now you have the issue of privacy and how the collection is done and you might have to be in a restroom stall and they might not even know the sample that comes with you so that kind of that stall actually belongs to you and is freshly collected so there are a lot of there are a lot of failed areas when it comes to the authenticity of the sample that is being processed I have a question and I hope that I'm going to piggyback on Helen's question from the chat as well which is and this has been great, thank you very much when we talk about the lab is doing the lab test they are obviously doing it in a more granular way they are going to have the results those results are then being interpreted by the medical review officer which is either at the lab or the employer or a third party administrator who is managing the employment testing program for people are they then turning around and saying yes they can work or no they can't work or are they then sharing the detailed lab result with the employer it becomes a checklist item in the onboarding process they can move ahead it is the employer that will determine what is going to happen again going back to the employment screening pre-employment screening or ongoing testing you could very well have employers that will maybe give another chance or have some sort of other program for example if you are an existing employee to come back and get tested again it is not up to the third party administrator or MRO to say yes this person can be hired or can go to you to work it is whatever that employer's internal workflow that determines the next action the mayor role of it is like providing a background screening test background screening results you can have whatever you have on your background screening and you could have not a clean sheet or you can have issues but that doesn't necessarily automatically mean that you are not going to be working or you are not going to have to stop working and determine what to do with that person how are results transmitted to the medical review officer or the company is it through something like e-mail or mail to them you know I am old enough to remember those things were happening but they still do I am sure that faxes are still the thing but in most cases it is a part of the employee onboarding or employee management software system that incorporates those results or if you are that manages that process it could be a digital result provided to you by a lab or by your third party administrator and it can't even be an e-mail which is not really supposed to be because we are still operating with HIPAA and other considerations but it can be just a digital result in some shape or form encrypted or not depends I guess they are mostly if you are using a third party administrator or a lab you have to have passwords they are they are supposed to be encrypted but they fail to clarify about the instant drug testing and lab process results is the fact that when we talk about instant tests oftentimes those are not really confirmatory tests they are screening tests it is possible to have a urine test done instantly at a laboratory or clinic in an employer's factory and the result comes with a negative everything will be fine and you can continue it but whenever there is a non-negative it is not called positive and you have to go through a confirmatory process through a laboratory where the test results is provided to you by a formal lab process only then you could call it a confirmatory result where you can make a decision so non-negatives has to go through a laboratory process before they can be a positive I think we have all learned the nuances of those instant tests through our COVID experiences we are all well versed in their challenges and false negatives that would warrant the more comprehensive sensitive testing to follow up testing from that perspective yes and I don't know the Department of Transportation but for good reasons the Department of Transportation has very high standards where some of these screening tests might not be efficient and it cannot be used I like that fact and I know that the pilots are well tested is this an area of growth or is this something that is tapering off or is it flat over the last 10 years and expected to be flat in the future what is the trend line for this whole area you mean a workplace testing yes I might not be as fresh with my industry numbers but it has been a constant growth area it's a growth industry and it is going to continue to grow as the drug abuse increases this has to grow unfortunately the only challenges that will come to is the growth of drug abuse and growth of workplace drug testing correlation might come from the fact of unemployment rate and employment activity what I mean by that is in the times where it is hard to find employees you the rates are very low and you are in the market very competitive market try to hire people I see employers try to make shortcuts make decreases in the requests for drug testing because they want to work with a larger audience and they do not want to discourage people from applying to jobs in the times of low unemployment you see drug testing almost as a checklist item where employers will be very hoping that results will come back negative so that they can hire and that completely switches when it is time for recessions and unemployment is high then you not only use this as a way to really screen out you get more serious about drug testing and you can not only increase the number of tests but also the quality and efficacy of your tests because you want to make sure that the results are accurate but then I have seen in the last couple of recessions cycles where employers use this to increase their nutrition and decreasing their workforce because it is way cheaper to do this than try to fire people in general I am also curious there has been a lot of change at least in the US around state regulation both around cannabis and some other states that have decriminalized so there is some nuances around decriminalization but also then legalization of some recreational drug use and I am curious if you have thoughts on how that factors into it between state, federal, et cetera in terms of regulations that is a great question I was in the drug testing the company was in the drug testing business when this whole decriminalization wave was coming from Washington state honestly we did not know what to expect because Mariana has always been the number one test requested and conducted but it was very quickly clear to us that decriminalization of certain drugs do not necessarily decrease the amount of drug testing but it does not matter if it is legal to use THC they can still use it as a way to drug test their employees some states have specific laws that prevent that there is that level of complexity but keep in mind that alcohol and quite legal things to do it is just that employers can choose to test their employees for those substances as well but again they have to have valid reason for determining this abuse or use of these substances will have impact on the employment relationship and they cannot just use it very discretionary so there are not only laws that prevent in some states to drug test and use the result you have some legal exposure about why you are doing it even though it may be legal it might not be advised for a pilot or a truck driver to be consuming a particular substance because it might impair their ability to operate heavy equipment or other safety concerns first I know the Department of Transportation it is like screening the cut off levels are very specific and the Department of Transportation is very like it is a very streamlined very specific way of doing tests and yes of course that doesn't mean that just because you are in particular state that you could use THC and operate heavy machinery which segues me to a separate question related to Department of Transportation concepts one of the scenarios that we've discussed without knowledge so hopefully you can help us think this through is most and I don't know what statistics there are on this but certainly every Uber I've been in the driver almost always works for Lyft also and they end up being dual contractors and because those are transportation based roles I believe they are also subject to a lot of drug testing and in that case it seems like there could be some economy is gained by the reuse of recent drug testing so long as the results could be certified and vetted do you have any opinion about that or do you think everybody sort of wants their own and are willing to pay for it I do have some thoughts and I actually have some experience with these type of use cases even between these large providers and background screening companies providing services to these providers and how they could want to use some economies of scale there but before that regarding Uber Lyft being Department of Transportation regulated I'm always not an attorney but just because it is a transportation vehicle doesn't necessarily automatically make a Uber driver a DOT regulated driver there are different laws that would do that I think they're not surprised if they are because if they were Department of Transportation regulated then the bar would be so high I think a lot higher than what probably is right now for providers like Uber Lyft or others going back to the economies of scale I have seen and I've talked to customers providers about that inefficiency and not just from an economies of scale purposes but even for high-pining drivers onboarding drivers and so forth you could have a person sign up for Uber get through the Uber drug testing process and then next day go to Lyft to do the same and has to go through the process again and as far as I remember and this is not for any specific service provider but I think when we have done some research in the past we saw that people that are applying to Uber Lyft type of services almost up to 10% of the time they never end up going through the process of drug testing they decide not to show up not just because they might be using but just because of its inconvenience and their scheduling issues and so forth so the big companies like Uber Lyft have decided to make the drug testing process as seamless and as sufficient possible and they would love to be able to use piggyback on each other's results as long as it is comparable because that will make their workflow easier they will improve their hiring rates as well but because the results are the results and the better term belongs to the employers or prospective employers and there is no way for those results to be to share between potential employers you have these very inefficient situations somebody getting a drug drug testing that could be done four days in a row and you have these inefficiency and cost and inconvenience the only difference might be again I'm not talking about any specific companies here if the background screening companies are incorporating drug testing under their workflow and their result management system and they are doing service for multiple of these big companies they do have the option to share these so I think that not only the companies would benefit from that and now you have five different major clients you would really be able to improve your bottom line and your profitability if you can't figure out a way to share results still charge the clients the same I'm not going to go into that interesting I've kind of dominated this set of questions I wonder if there are any questions from our audience that you can answer Helen did we get your question answered I was more interested to hear if you have any experience or thoughts on the crossover between what we're talking about in drug testing and living organ donation and a lot of respects it's very similar in that you go and provide blood or whatever provide the sample and it goes off for privacy concerns so that the donor the person providing the sample doesn't see the health information that the person is looking for the donation you don't see those results so it's something where you provide the donation or you provide the sample it goes off and it's shared between numerous parties healthcare providers usually a donation center and then doctors several doctors who do the testing and review panels and boards and whatnot it just sounds like there's a lot of overlap I don't have any experience with that aspect of donation medical sample donation or if they're sort of apples and oranges a little bit you know what I don't actually like it's the many of the same things sound familiar similar in the way you're describing but I don't know anything about donation use cases and the flows to be able to make any connection or even comment on it I appreciate that when we were talking last year about expansion use cases for Cardia beyond COVID and travel I think we were looking at how can we provide and work as a community to build the technology that could be used by the most amount of people for the most amount of use cases and I think that it just sounds to me that if we were to focus on putting together a sort of implementation of Cardia specific to drug testing that it could be used in other types of medical testing environments as well besides drug testing and the expansion use cases for Cardia this is again I think another opportunity to bring more kind of use cases into the fold that's all thanks I guess the good and the bad thing about workplace drug testing is it because it's so complicated there are so many different layers of regulation there are a bunch of different substances we're talking about some of them being elicit some of them being elicit but you know might have an impact on the way someone can perform on a job site once you are able to build a robust workplace drug testing use case on a platform and flow I can definitely see potential of getting pieces out of there and using it more simpler straightforward more flat like work flow so I think there is definitely a chance of economies of scale there too absolutely thank you anybody else have questions they want to either type in the chat box or just come off mute and speak yes I'd like to know if there's a possibility for say in this use case the employer to allow an option for the employee candidate employment candidate to when they click on the consent form on the iPad or whatever is presented to them that they could also just enter their wallet ID so that the test could be electronically sent and placed into their wallet because some employees might have the concern that the employee that they want to make sure that they are trusted by them potential or candidate employee as a user interface I think that's a rather more philosophical question because yes I think I believe as individual we should have access the results should belong to us and that we should share with those results with whomever we want and we're just talking about workplace drug testing but keep in mind there's all kinds of pearl testing there's cases where trusts require there on a regular basis to get funding from trusts or your divorce cases so the use cases of drug testing is way beyond just workplace drug testing but employers for practical purposes I don't think unless they have to would want to allow that because it just opens up a whole quite set of questions you know you get a result and it says there are different cut off levels there's screening levels there's a bunch of different drugs if you look at a drug testing result it's a complicated result and it's also not the result that the employer might get a result that is filtered through and made it more simplified after an MRO decision but I would think that employers would rather not have prospective employees get their drug result because if they are let's say you get the job you assume that result was negative then you know what did the results say and you can still request results but then that can all become a whole new legal issue and a whole other set of you know state laws or employment laws can come into play so I think it is an employee or prospective employee having access to the result because things will probably become a problem when that person in some shape or form fails the test my question was basically as a user interface designer so I would like to know if hyper ledgers should offer the option of some employer or whatever it is allowing the employee to own their own data to say when they walk in there when they sign the consent form there will be lines fields that the potential employee or whatever could fill in and those fields could be say A send it to my wallet here's my wallet address B send it to Uber here's their wallet address whatever they're called here's their address D send it to Lyft here's their wallet address so that giving them the option to make their drug test available to others would that be or do you want to restrict hyper ledgers and user interface thank you I can't say anything about the hyper ledger how that might be but it is definitely I think a good use case for people to be able to do it and plus we could very well be in a situation in the future where as potential employees we could drug test ourselves if there was an option to be able to share the result I mean the employer's request to drug test results they're not testing because that's a part of their process but if there was trust in the system and there was a way to share between an authentic result employers would love not to pay for a drug test and would do it much easier so it couldn't even be a incentive for an employer to hire an employee that might already have a drug test results that they can share and they might even have paid for just to do a quick time check we're a couple of minutes over so I want to make sure we're not messing up everybody's day hopefully that answers the question I've taken some notes here feel free to review and adjust if you think I misinterpreted that I just want to take a minute and say thank you very much for this conversation it was enlightening we're very happy to have met you heard your input thank you thank you very much at our next meeting which is on June 8th we're going to have Sarah I think it's Samus from GCOM come and talk to us a lot about sort of the vaccination space but potentially some other topics as well and so I would encourage those of you who are here today to listen at our next meeting on the 8th with a different Zoom link so make sure you've got the calendar correct from Hyperledger thank you again Sir Hott we are very grateful for your time and expertise that you're willing to share with us thank you I'm glad it was somewhat useful it was thanks everybody thank you bye