 In your opinion, do young scientists understand the repercussions of misconduct, say, on their career or on science, when they indulge in such activities? I guess my impression is that, you know, as a scientist, when I was doing research, I was doing it right. And so I don't think I ever thought about misconduct. You know, I was doing my work. I was doing it the right way. I was preparing my work to be as beautiful as it could be. And I wanted to share my work in a publication. And my impression is that, you know, a lot of the figure manipulation that we see, you know, some plagiarism that we see, is partly because people are trying to submit the best work that they can submit. Somebody's already said a fact in a great way. They may reuse the fact, the sentence, because it's said perfectly. In some cases, an image may be good. But if they erased a little bit of it, a piece of dirt or something, it may be better. And I don't think there's always the repercussion of thinking about whether the work is original and whether the work is as presented as it was captured. And I think that is our standard, is if it comes from the camera at the time of the experiment, it shouldn't look like it came from the camera at the time of the experiment. It shouldn't be Photoshopped to a point where it looks like a totally different experiment. And if the experiment didn't work, then it shouldn't be modified to show what the experiment would have looked like had the experiment worked. And I don't necessarily think there, in many cases, there's that intent to perform misconduct. But especially for young investigators. But I do think there's a lot of pressure on young students and even early career professors to publish. And so if there's always that one last experiment that doesn't look quite right and everyone has to make the decision to repeat the experiment or to change the contrast of it to make the experiment a little bit better, then it really came out. So there are questions, and ideally I hope in this world that people don't take steps to actively engage in misconduct. And there's also timelines, you know, people are supposed to graduate within four to five years in many instances. There's the promotion, you want to go out to do a postdoc or to get an early career professorship. And there's a lot of pressure to get a lot done within a very limited time. And so when experiments don't work and they don't work for months, you know, there's a lot of questions to determine as to whether how much you're going to struggle and how you're going to make things work. So I feel, I mean I was there, I feel for every student who's trying to publish because it is stressful. But you also want to feel very comfortable at night that your work that you did is going to be well-received and that what you showed in your paper can be reproduced. It's not just the one experiment that worked out of ten that you tried and that it's going to be well-received by your community because it is reproducible and people can build upon it. And those are the questions that you just have to continue to answer. Is this work strong enough that it should be reported and shared with the rest of the community?