 For the rest of the council members, we're a little bit ahead of schedule, but we can't just shift our time as we've published in the federal register and the concepts in particular are a lot of try to keep to those times. We can move up the council initiated discussion and do that at this time. Maybe save us a little time at the end. So your choice is a very long lunch or move up council initiated discussion. Show of hands. What is your preference? I would move up the council initiated discussion. You would not help. No, I would. Oh, you would. All right. And I see nodding heads. So let's go ahead and do that this time. We can shift the break by a few minutes, but I don't want to radically change things. Okay, so this is council initiated discussion. I think most of you know the drill. This is your opportunity to request reports from us about a particular research program, your council meetings, or to bring to our attention concerns that you're hearing about in the scientific research community. We regard you as very of the extramural research program. So the floor is yours. Show of hands, it's your pleasure. I will throw out the question, are there particular people you would like to hear from at the September council meeting? I think there was one other, really, correct me. I think because of scheduling, yeah, we have one new institute director you haven't met yet who we want to bring here. And there was a scheduling problem for today. So that will be one that we will try to schedule for September. But is there anybody else that you can think of now that you'd want us to try to approach for September or February? You know, previously there was like a NIH-wide effort in sort of big data. And so, you know, NHGRI has its own sort of approach to big data and that's working out. We'll hear more about AMBEL later. Is there, are there other things going on with other institutes or NIH-wide that we should be, you know, hearing about and thinking about how we can leverage what we're doing with what other people are doing? You know, certainly Biodata Catalyst at NHLBI is an effort. There are other types of things going on. So I was just wondering, you know, since data are the most important products these days, what can we do to make things better for people in genomics? One obvious person who I think, I don't think we've brought to council very recently. Rudy, what was the last time, Susan Grigarek spoken to council? No, she has not. Not, so that was, she's the head of the, sort of the central data office. And so I think that would make a whole lot of sense. And there's a lot going on. I mean, I think you'd hear from her what you sort of just heard from Marie Bernard in terms of, you know, all these things coming out and then, you know, trying to link not only office of director initiatives, but then with other institutes and also being a catalyst for development of things in the data science space. So I think Susan would be a really appropriate person. And I think Lindsay Criswell was one that I had mentioned. Yeah, yeah, so Lindsay, well, yeah, I didn't name the name, but Lindsay was the one that didn't schedule today. I couldn't have had a conflict. And so, yes, especially for lots of reasons. So yeah, Lindsay's on the list. I don't know if we've locked her in for September, but I know she's on the list because she couldn't make it. She was very sad she couldn't make it, but there was a conflict. Oh, God. I have two suggestions. I don't have specific person, but I'm wondering if there's somebody that you think might be good. One is probably not next, but maybe in a couple council meetings, but somebody to come to us once our by age gets more, you know, specified and gets, you know, I think that would be really exciting because we can all easily, I think, see some potential collaborative opportunities with them, right? And then the second one is actually thinking about biomedical ethics and somebody, if there's anyone at NIH who's, especially from the, you know, sort of riffing off of the data science, right? Like from the data and genome perspective, right? So how does it fit with personalized genomics and our ability to analyze genomes and, you know, disparities, et cetera? So I think your first suggestion's a good one. I expect when an ARPA age director gets announced, they'll get 27 council limitations within an hour because everybody wants to know what it's gonna be and what it's gonna look like. So that's a great suggestion. And we'll think about the biomedical ethics one. Len. Did you call on me, Rudy? Yeah. Okay. So I just have a question. Sorry, can I just jump in for Olga and just get some clarification about the biomedical ethics? Are you more interested in just big picture thinking in the field or do you wanna hear more about what NHGRI is supporting? I'm hoping, I mean, as it relates, not necessarily, I guess in between. So I'm thinking about it basically as it relates to genome and interpreting genomes and going from medicine, but not, I guess, not as limited as what we're already supporting, but sort of what are the questions? NIH is probably thinking, but yes, within the context of the genome, right? Because I think we do have a specific. Well, of course the genome is, yes, I didn't mean all of the biomedical, but. Yeah, yeah, so kind of within the NHGRI focus, but not only what we're supporting now. All right, that's helpful. Thank you. So regarding ARPA age, I know there was a concern earlier that the ARPA age appropriation might affect the NIH budget and reduce it. And maybe I missed it, but is it now established that ARPA age funding will not affect NIH funding? Well, so that's a complicated question with a complicated answer. I mean, it gets this fiscal year, it has a billion dollars to get going. Next fiscal year, the president has asked for in his budget, quite a bit more than that to build it up. Now, those are certainly happening at the same time that, you know, I mean, this year, our institutes are important in the management department, we got a three plus percent increase. So, you know, so sure, it seems to be separate now, but of course there's a finite number of dollars to be given out. So, you know, clearly, you know, I think it's trying not to compete against the NIH, clearly nobody wants to see that happen, but the reality is everybody's working within budget limits. And so this is gonna have to come at a cost of something else not getting done. So, but what I would say is there's certainly, I think in general, the hope that it doesn't attract from NIH funding in general. Thank you. Joe, go ahead. Yeah, so probably not for the next meeting, but one in the future, because I think the landscape is changing significantly on this topic and that's data privacy, implementation of statewide things like GDPR and things like that, just a curiosity or just I think we do have to understand where the NIH is going relative to those topics. And I don't think that, I don't think it's really clear yet, especially in the U.S., but I think that would be a topic for us to review at some point in time in the future. Yeah, that's a great suggestion, Joe. And I'm sure you're partially asking it. I think we've thought about this. The problem is it's sort of hard to know when to, it's just sort of constantly an evolution. And I think it's sort of hard to predict when there's sign and substantive. I mean, there are various things, especially that bubble up from time to time from members of Congress, from language that gets floated as possibly being put into legislation or legislative language and then it sort of shifts or it doesn't get much room, but I agree with you. I mean, I think this is an area we, especially around genomic data, the sharing of genomic data, especially outside the U.S. Well, I think Eric, there's realities that exist today. I mean, California has CCPA and they've already put legislation in place that by 2023, we'll have something in California that almost 100% mimics GDPR. Michigan is on the same path. And I think the trend in the U.S. is, unfortunately somewhat disconnected because we're allowing it to be done on a state-by-state basis, which is gonna significantly complicate things. But the reality is that at least in California, we'll see something that looks almost identical to GDPR, which is what the Europeans have been dealing with and we all know as the standard that I think ultimately evolves. But again, I live and die in this space and I do think it would be good for us to know probably not the next meeting, but one in the future because it is going to change with a significant amount of legislation that's coming. And maybe Joe, you could help us identify a appropriate speaker. I mean, there may be somebody at NIH, but maybe we'd even have a broader view than just the NIH view. So we'll be in touch about that. Yeah, let me know. I know a lot of people in the space and I think some of the thought leaders both in Europe, well globally, and especially here in the U.S., I could provide you some names. Okay, thank you. Other concerns. Okay, let me make one schedule change to accommodate the schedule of one of the council members. We're gonna flip the order of the concepts. When we come back, we're gonna do the anvil concept and then the diversity genome research centers. Clear? All right, so we'll get an extra 10 minutes for lunch because we have to resume at 2.30. We'll resume at 2.30 Eastern time, right? 2.30 Eastern time. Turn off your microphones and cameras but do not disconnect from the meeting. Leave a like. We'll see you at 2.30 Eastern, bye everyone.