 I'm here with Greg Fenton from Zen Tech, and we just got off a very compelling discussion on why investors should be looking not only at biotech, but after more technology. Where do you want to start? Well, Tracy, let's start with the press release that we put out last week, and why that's important. In that press release, we announced that some of our latest results, and we're now demonstrating binding affinity of aptomers. So how well the aptomer actually grabs a hold of its target and holds on to it. We've improved that up to 500 times over existing aptomer technology, and that is incredibly significant, because that was some of the shortcomings of the, I would call it, first generation aptomers that have been around for a couple of decades. They showed great promise 20, 25 years ago. There was one product that actually made it to market, but most others failed once they got into human trials, and that was due to something known as bioavailability or how much of the products actually available to go and attack its target once it gets into the system. And part of the issue there was the aptomer's ability to grab on, hold on to its target, then it was very quickly cleared through the renal system in the body. With this new binding affinity that we have, we believe that we've overcome a significant portion of some of those early shortcomings with aptomers. This is technology that Dr. Lee has developed. We filed a couple of patents on it over the last six to eight weeks. We're very confident that we should be able to get a patent in those because it's very, very unique technology that he's developed. So the other thing that comes along with that increased binding affinity was the yield or the amount that we were able to produce out of a given starting amount of material, and we've got that yield up to 95%. And that has huge implications on the cost of aptomers. So this is really transformational, we believe. So those two points are really, really important when we look at it. So we believe we've developed and we've brought the technology along and that is supported by the earlier testing data that we released in July and I believe August or September of this year, where we demonstrated that our aptomers were performing as well, if not better than the best in class monoclonal antibodies in the market. And I strongly suggest that people listening to this go and look at the amount of money that's going into the antibody market. And we believe that aptomers could be an incredible replacement for antibodies. We can produce them more efficiently, much more quickly, and much more cheaply than existing antibodies. So that's the markets that we're most interested in going after. So this was a very, very, very big development for us. Well, you've just answered my first question, which was how has ZenTech improved the binding affinity of its universal COVID-19 aptomers? I think you've clearly explained that to our audience. And you've also explained the key benefits of these improvements in terms of factoring yield. However, can you just clarify a little bit more what these potential competitive advantages are now in the market? If you could just take us a few steps further, please, please, Greg, thank you. Sure. So antibodies, while some of them are demonstrating incredible efficacy, there are issues with antibodies as well. One of the main issues or benefits of aptomers over antibodies is the speed in which they can be produced. Once we have a target DNA profile, like we had right back at the beginning of COVID, they isolated the COVID spike protein, and they knew what that sequence was. Then they had to move and try to develop a vaccine or an antibody that could actually react to that spike protein. With aptomers, that can happen in probably six to eight weeks. So we could have an aptomers synthesized for a specific target within six to eight weeks, which is absolutely incredible. Most vaccines take a decade to produce. Yes, the mRNA vaccines were done much more quickly. But with aptomers, we're talking about producing this in six to eight weeks. And we know once these are made up of DNA sequences, our bodies are made up of DNA sequences. So they're safe. We know they're safe because they're made up of what we're made up of. And now we get the proper sequence. We can get it to that target very, very quickly and effectively. And that's what we've demonstrated with the COVID testing through McMaster University and Dr. Miller's team. So that's the first thing is the speed. The other thing is the cost to produce them. And again, that goes back to that yield number that we were talking about. We can produce aptomers relatively and expensively to existing antibody therapies. Now, we're not going to comment on what those specific numbers are because we're still optimizing dose ranges and a whole host of other things with respect to it. But we think we're going to be a fraction of the cost of existing antibody therapy. So there's a lot of other things about them that I can't get into right now because we haven't disclosed it publicly. But there's substantial advantages of aptomers over antibodies once you prove up their efficacy. And right at the top of the list is safety. They're incredibly safe. Okay. So basically the areas of medical research that you're collaborating with McMaster University, you just touched on that. But how does the industry perceive the potential of your aptomer platform compared to existing therapies like monoclonal antibodies? You just touched on that. But maybe you would like to take us just a step further, please. This is relatively early days, Tracy. Again, there was a lot of attention in the aptomers space two decades ago. And there has been a couple of products in the ophthalmology space for macular degeneration that have come to market. So aptomers have been proven. They do work. What? There's a healthy dose of skepticism because of the amount of failure that happened in the first generation of aptomers. However, as we continue to prove up this platform, the proof is in the pudding, as I always like to say, and we're getting the results through the work that we're doing at McMaster. We're going to continue to do that. We've got work to do on safety profile, as I said, dosing ranges, a few other things. But we believe that the market, once we put together that data package and they see how we've performed against best in class antibody therapies, it'll be a real eye-opener for most. And that education process is going to start early next year. Our team was incredibly enthusiastic with your most recent news release. But let me just jump, have you step aside here. We were talking about the estimated cost savings for the Canadian health care system from adopting Zentex Zengard enhanced air filters in office spaces. And perhaps if you can just talk to what the broader impacts on health and productivity that have come back in your recent analysis. So we continue to do work. So we've done a couple of studies, Tracy, where we've quantified the impact on absenteeism of utilizing Zengard on HVAC filters. And we announced that in a press release and it was somewhere around $15,000 for 10,000 square feet and assuming 70 individuals in an office, we're doing similar work for the health care system, what the benefit is. And it's roughly in the same quantum. And then we're doing additional work that we haven't announced yet to the market on the energy savings. Because one of the big issues with utilizing HVAC filters is one of the recommendations is to bring in fresh air from outside. The more fresh air you can bring in, obviously the more pathogens you're shooting out outside. The issue with that is in the middle of winter, you're bringing in minus 20 air that now needs to be heated up to room temperature. That has a substantial impact on energy or vice versa. In the summer, you're bringing in really hot air that needs to be cool. With the Zengard filter, you can reduce the number of air exchanges required because of the higher capture rate of Zengard on a filter. So there's a significant energy benefit as well. So when we can start bringing together those three aspects, reduce absenteeism costs, improved health care savings, and improved energy savings, it's an incredible argument from an economic perspective. So it's not just, yes, this is better and it kills these, but we can say here's what it's worth in dollar terms. That means something to building owners, to business owners, and to the public health care system, particularly in Canada where it's all funded through our tax dollars. This has a significant potential benefit in savings. So wonderful milestones recently announced. I think one of the significant items I read was the increasing value of your overall platform. Can you comment on that? Sure, Tracy. We announced that in our press release last week and it's one thing I would highly recommend investors or prospective investors to dig in on. Getting a single indication, so a single therapy to the stage, the preclinical stage to where we're at right now, there are a lot of studies in the marketplace that are available that can demonstrate what it costs a biotech company to get to the stage of development we're at. And we estimate that somewhere around 230 to 250 million US dollars. We've done that on a budget of just a little over two million dollars Canadian. And again, it speaks to our relationship with McMaster and the work that they've done there, Ying Fu Li's team, Dr. Miller's team, getting the aftermars, and the results that we're getting. I can't underestimate that enough. So that's what the cost to get a single indication in the monoclonal antibody space, that numbers into the billions. And remember what I said earlier, we believe that we could be a competitor to the monoclonal antibody space. We've got more work to do, but we believe that our technology will compete in that space. So when people want to start talking about valuation, there's enough information in the space that will lead you to what our platform should be worth at this point. And I think that's our job early in 2024 is to educate the market on the value of this platform. And of course, if you're not excited by Zentech after hearing all of this, your latest board announcement, that seemed impressive to me. Can you explain that to our audience, please? We are incredibly fortunate to be able to add John Snezarenko to our board. John is a former pharma industry executive. He's worked with some of the biggest names in pharma, Genentech, who now is part of the Roche Group. He's worked for Novartis. He's worked for a number of different companies. So he's incredibly connected through pharma industry. He still has tremendous connections there. Bringing John's perspective to the table in terms of what we had, again, I don't want to underestimate or folks should look at why did he decide to join us. He saw something he liked. He was in the market buying stock yesterday. I think that's a ringing endorsement for what we have, and we want to be able to utilize John and his connections to get our story out to the pharma industry. And we're working through putting together the appropriate data packages to start sharing that with the pharma industry. So we're very, very fortunate to have John part of our team now. Well, Greg, thank you so much for joining us today. As always, what a pleasure. And for everybody interested in finding out more about Genentech, please go to their following website listed below. Thank you, Greg. Thank you, Tracy.