 So, I'd like to thank Professor Beverly Raphael for the introduction. We still have some people coming into the, into town, into the meeting. And so I'd like to welcome you to the first National Symposium on Translational Psychiatry, which is co-sponsored by the ANU, my own school, the John Curtin School of Medical Research, and the Nature Publishing Group. So, I have a lengthier talk at the end of the day today. So, this is just like a very brief summary and overview. So, as you'll see my presentation, my presentation is called the sneak peek of the future of psychiatry. So, I'm giving a sneak peek of my sneak peek here. So, this is Judith Axelrod who worked at the NIH and discovered one of the mechanisms of action of most anti-depressants that we use today. And that was in 1961. So, that's why I think the need for translation is very substantial. When we think of translating discovery from Bench or from the realm of the experimental to actual health care, I thought of a process with six steps that I'll be presenting my talk and three gaps. So, I'll talk about the gaps now because I think most of what will be presented during the day to day and tomorrow is designed to address those gaps. So, the first gap, I call it the knowledge gap, and that's the need to still do more discovery to think about potential for treatments that go beyond just improvement of symptoms and potentially leading to cures. And that in this case, when there is a knowledge gap, the practice of psychiatry of any area of medicine is not evidence-based because the evidence does not exist. So, what we have to do to close that gap is to acquire the evidence. The gap, too, I call the practice gap. And that gap is when the evidence exists, but people do not do their practice based on that evidence. So, there is a gap, like a discrepancy between what's known and what could be helping patients and what treating clinicians actually do on daily practice to actually help those patients. So, the problem there is to make the practice evidence-based. And the third gap, I call it the implementation gap, which is when the practice is evidence or common sense based and things don't really happen as prescribed. And I think actually the vast majority of kind of immediate improvement that could be achieved is in that domain. So, I'll give you an example that's outside of the field of psychiatry, but something we see every day, which is that if someone arrives in a doctor's office anywhere in the world, could be like in a village in Africa, could be in downtown London, could be here in Canberra, could be in New York City. And they are, let's say the blood pressure is 200 over 150. And they are overweight and the person's like, change smoking cigarettes. The doctor will look at the person and say, you have to stop smoking and you have to lose weight. And we have to treat the blood pressure as well. You need to do those things. And yet, very few of those patients will actually lose the weight and will actually stop smoking. So, there are things that for obesity and especially for cigarette smoking that cigarette use should be given in the ratios for American soldiers in World War II and in Vietnam. So, it went from being almost like a part of your kind of a government given diet to now there have been very strong campaigns. I can't imagine a doctor that the patient will arrive there and it's like smoking. They'll say, no, you should stop smoking. But still people smoke. So, there is a gap between what's prescribed and what's actually done. So in the field of psychiatry, I was just reviewing the evidence of all people who are started on a course of antidepressants that the prescribing doctor thinks that they need to take medication on at least medium term basis. Only about 20% actually keep taking those medications. Some studies is like 19%, some studies is 23%. The better ones is like 40% of people keep taking the medications. And that's in very good centers. And I've seen studies like from Japan that it's about 19% of people who keep taking them. So if you go all over the world, you have, let's say, assuming that the prescription was done on evidence base, the person has a diagnosis of major depression, needs to take the antidepressants. Everything happened. You start a treatment. But very often there is this implementation gap. So again, as I said, a sneak peak at my sneak peak. How do you address these translational gaps? So the first one that I said the knowledge gap is still there. So the idea or the promise for the future is that you would, you know, you have the brain, you would look at different metabolic pathways, those, these color pictures here. This is the serotonin pathway. This is the corticotropin releasing hormone pathway here. NCRH receptors are stained in different conditions here. And the idea is that you would eventually find some kind of allylic variation that would be put into a chip and could guide treatment. But as I said, we still have a knowledge gap there. So the field of translational medicine has evolved in the last 20 to 10 years and exponentially so. So in order to address this gap between knowledge and actual practice. So it's a great pleasure for me to welcome all of you here to this symposium. And to address this field, we are having, of course, not only this symposium, but I'm starting a new nature publishing group journal called Translational Psychiatry. So that's a sister journal to molecular psychiatry that I founded and I still edited. I'm still editing. So I founded it in 1995, I had the idea, and the first issue came in 96. So it's a little over 15 years now. And that journal became the number one in the field worldwide. And we can only publish now about 3% of the papers that we receive. So it kind of breaks my heart to see like work that is very meritorious that just a couple of years ago would be published and I have to reject. So I've been proposing to the nature group that we should create another journal that would not have the problem that molecular psychiatry has, which since we are still like as a base of print journal, there's a number of pages that you can print in a niche. So if we put something that's web-based, that would not be the issue of page limits. And we could publish material that's highly meritorious, but there wouldn't be this kind of artificial pressure for space since the space is not a problem on the web. So based on those conversations, we decided to create a new journal, this one dedicated to the area of translational psychiatry, and that it is an independent journal so people can submit directly to it, but it's also a sister journal to molecular psychiatry. So when people submit to molecular psychiatry, now the paper can be rejected, which I still reject a lot of them that if I think that they're not that good or the comments from the reviewers point to some very substantial flaws. But there is a group of papers that are very high quality and which are now instead of being rejected for lack of space, they're being referred to a translational psychiatry. So since the announcement was made that translational psychiatry was out there, we had 24 papers that were rejected for lack of space, but referred to a translational psychiatry after review. And of those, five were actually submitted after review. Then we had several that I thought would be like a futile exercise to send them through the peer review process because they were very interesting, but I didn't think that they would make it to the top 3%, so I didn't see the point of sending them to peer review. But they were still very meritorious. So I suggested to the authors that they should submit to translational psychiatry, but then they would go additional external peer review and the whole process would start afresh. So there were 26 in that category of which eight were transferred to us. And then there were seven new manuscripts that were already directly submitted to translational psychiatry, so that's just since February. So here is just a summary of the papers that have been accepted and are either in press or just about to go live online. So this is my initial editorial. There is also a guest editorial by Tom Insel, who's the director of the NIMAGE. And then there is a review paper by Philippe Couttet and Irving Gottesman and Todd Gould about the neuroscience of suicidal behaviors. Then these are our first papers, like original research articles submitted to the journal by Bob Nicolesco from Indiana. And this is the first paper that's coming live. It will be out live on the web for essentially published tomorrow. And in case we are lacking authors, that's no longer a problem. I mean, there will be many people who will have their in their CVs and translational psychiatry, as you can see in this next paper here. So we have vast numbers of authors now, even though they're all in one paper. So it's a great pleasure to welcome you. And I don't want to take too much time on this introduction. So I'll let Professor Rafael continue with the session. And then I'll give you some of my thoughts at the end of the day. So thank you very much.