 And Juan Claas, old friend of the urban agent, as we heard before from Wolfgang, one of the people who effectively kick-started the whole project and is now the head of UN Habitat. We'd like you to just introduce this session and then share the discussion. Thank you. Yeah, okay. Thank you very much. Thank you for the invitation again to this, to have the opportunity to talk with you of these interesting questions. Well, we are, we are focusing this discussion on understanding urban health. And I, we will have the privilege to have three very well-reputed professionals who knows quite a lot about that, Victor Rodwin, Katherine Kiyobutungi and Jason Corbun. And I think that of the three approaches, we will see also different geographical perspective of health and urbanization, especially the difference between the developed world realities and the developing world realities. We tend to, we are very, very, we should, probably we are very confident in ourselves when we try to analyze cities, which are very different, urban realities which are very different. In the presentation of the conference, we see that we are talking about cities which go from $60,000 per capita year to cities that go to less than $900 a year or $500 a year. And to try to understand everything together or to try to draw common solutions to that is quite difficult. But still, let's try what it comes out. It's interesting. Some also a medical-trained person and a mayor, and it seems that there's a kind of correlationship, perhaps, between health and urbanism as our biographies explain. And this is not, this is not suppressive in the sense that, in fact, when you look at the history of urbanism, one of the biggest steps forward in urbanism was done in the mid-18th, 19th century, with the high-energy, high-enysity movement when, when, I showed quite a lot of pictures. About that. Okay, then. I don't need to repeat that, there's a strong, one of the forces, one of the forces who draw the political interest together in order to do city changes at that moment was the perception that it was immoral to accept the health differences that they were seen at that time in the city. You remember the optimists. You talk about that also? No. Okay. That optimist was the one which, the origin of the word optimist is contrary to the nowadays meaning of optimist, in fact. The origin of optimist, like Maltus, was the one who considered that the social equilibrium at the moment was the optimal social equilibrium that society could get. It was not a better possible society other than the workers being very poor, the riches being very rich, in order to have a very competitive industry because the cost of the labor was very cheap. This was considered the optimal functioning of the economical society. It was that urbanism sublabated and said, no, there's another alternative. There's an alternative that this is not the optimal equilibrium. There's another optimum equilibrium and it's that the workers get a little bit better off and they will spend a little bit more money, they will have a little bit more knowledge and capacities, they will increase improving their conditions, the productivity of our economic society and then everything even would be a little bit better. Then it was justified to invest in cleaning the water and improving the urban characteristics of our society until that was accepted by society, it took a lot of fights and there's very interesting debates, by the way, in the British parliament saying that, no, we shouldn't improve the water distribution of the cities because this is how things have been always and there's no need and it's not good to improve the conditions of water distribution in London until of course it was not by, let's say, just cognitive awareness, it was by political fight by which the change was produced and then of course the new urban layout of the cities, mainly with water distribution and clean water distribution, clean tap water distribution to households was acquired and it was very interesting from the medical point of view that that was done before Pasteur, that means that that was done before the microbiology theory of illnesses, cholera, which was the origin of everything, the Biberian choleric it was not really fully described and understood as a cause of cholera until 30 years after it was applied, all those urban policies, urbanistic policies were applied, that means that we have here a very clear point where the politicians, fortunately, or the political system, the fight between powers in order to provide the new consensus was in front of medical knowledge, the social conditions of health were not described as that but politically understood and moved and justified the change of approach to urbanism in the mid-century. But now I think the important thing is that we go to our speakers and I would like to first to invite Victor Rodwin from New York in order to explain, okay, your ideas.