Everybody forced here up in a box at 2022 luminance football hobby for Mike W. Thanks, Mike. Good luck, man Let's find it. Let's get a picket. What better time to get a picket or I guess a Bailey zappy a Bailey zappy right now One good Jillian dollars for a Bailey zappy or one auto I bet Luminance we have it at 209 99 Yeah, you have prices free shipping worldwide though Breeze Stingly we've got Khalil Shakir rookie 27 to 35 Jalen wire to Meyer rookie 120 of 249 And there he is he's having a good go out of here Damian Pierce rookie on a 78 of 349 back-to-back really good weeks Run all over the place man It's a bright spot for the Texas nice Damian Pierce a dynamic Joe Shiesty Jackson Thornton there's a Jack Cone Tua numbered 9 of 149 a Devin Singletary Jersey card not numbered and Vastage Trey Lance Yeah, yeah, but he had to that's exactly right It came a Cuonu sky more the Kobe Dean a Aaron Rodgers 38 of 249 Points card coming just Go Mahomes sheesh there 600 points Corral Thompson Harris Darius Leonard 88 of not in or Shaquille Leonard. I should say a Breeze Hall rookie auto nice hit there 38 of 100 good rookie running back box for sure Probably the two guys you want to have right now and a Bailey zappy dynamic There he is Thanks again for the order Mike nice rookie running back on us for you We'll get the box. We'll get the cards out there. I should say


Dear students, in this topic we shall discuss the hormones produced by placenta. During pregnancy, placenta produces large quantities of hormones, which are essential for the maintenance of pregnancy. These hormones include four types of hormones. The human-choreonic-gonadotropin, astrogenspergestron and human-choreonic-someto-memotropin. We shall discuss all these in detail. The human-choreonic-gonadotropin hormone is secreted shortly after the embryo implants with the uterus. Its secretion then rises rapidly and reaches a maximum till 10 to 12 weeks of pregnancy. After this, its secretion decreases during the 16th to 20th week and then remains constant at a steady level during the remainder period of pregnancy. This hormone causes the persistence and growth of carpus luteum. It causes carpus luteum to secrete its hormones, astrogens and progestron until the placenta fully takes over the production of these hormones. This hormone also prevents the process of menstruation. It also causes the endometrium of uterus to grow and store large amounts of nutrients. Dear students, this hormone, human-choreonic-gonadotropin, also affects the testes of male-dwelling fetus. It exerts a stimulatory effect on the interstitial cells of the developing testes and causes the production of testosterone by them. This testosterone, which is produced during the gastric period, causes the fetus to grow into a male, producing primary male sexual characters. If testosterone is not produced at this stage, female primary sexual characters are produced. This hormone also causes the testes to descend into the scroterm before birth. Dear students, now we shall discuss the role of astrogen. Secreted by placenta during pregnancy. During pregnancy, placenta produces enormous amounts of astrogens. If we look at the normal production of astrogens in a female, in the end period of pregnancy, more than 30 times more astrogens are produced by this placenta. During pregnancy, placenta produces astrogens. These astrogens exert mainly proliferative functions on the reproductive and associated organs of the female. These effects include enlargement of the uterus, enlargement of breasts and growth of breast ductile structure. These also include enlargement of external genitalia. Astrogens also play a role in the relaxation of pelvic ligaments so that to make the pubic symphysis elastic for the passage of the fetus through birth canal during parturation or childbirth. Dear students, the progesterone is also secreted in tremendous amounts by placenta. Progesterone's secretion during pregnancy has more than 10 times more than normal levels. This hormone decreases the contractility of the uterus to prevent any chance of spontaneous abortion. It also causes the development of deciduous cells in the endometrium. These cells play an important role in providing nutrition during embryo's early development. Dear students, now we shall discuss the fourth placental hormone that is human-choreonic-someto-memo-tropin. This hormone starts to be secreted during the fifth week of pregnancy. This hormone is primarily involved in the metabolic processes and development of breasts and lactation. This hormone also promotes protein tissues just like the functions of growth hormone. It also causes decreased sensitivity of tissues to insulin and also decreases the utilization of glucose by the tissues of mother. It also promotes free fatty acids from the fat stores providing alternative sources of energy. This hormone acts more as a general metabolic hormone which has specific nutritional implications for both mother and the fetus.


Assalamu alaikum. Welcome to the virtual university's course on business and technical communication. In continuation with our language review that we have been doing over the past lessons, today we are going to look at the mechanics of your final report or whatever text it is that you produced within your business and technical communication. In this lecture we will look at capitalization, the use of italics, abbreviations, acronyms, numbers, enumerations, symbols, equations and spellings. Let us have a look first of all at capitalization. Although there are many specialized rules for capitalizing letters, there are four rules which are the most common. First that you should capitalize the first words of sentences including sentences cited within quotations as you can see in the example on the screen in front of you. Secondly, you will capitalize proper names including any particular person, object, place, project, institution, river, vessel, genus, culture, ethnic group or formal job title. Thirdly, unless you are following a documentation style that specifies otherwise, you will capitalize titles of books, periodicals, published and unpublished reports, articles and document sections. Have a look at an example which will clarify this. Also you will capitalize reference to specific figures, tables, chapters, sections, equations within your text. If you are referring to any of these within your paragraphs or within your text, capitalize the names of these chapters, figures, appendices, equations, etc. Now there are some rules for capitalizing multi-word titles and proper names. We all know that if we have a title then we capitalize that, but if the title consists of more than one word then what are the rules for those? Unless you are following a documentation style that specifies otherwise, you will observe the following rules for capitalizing multiple word titles and proper nouns. One rule is that you will capitalize all nouns, pronouns, verbs, adjectives, adverbs and subordinating conjunctions in a title. You will capitalize any word regardless of the part of speech it is, if it is the first word or last word of the title or subtitle, or if it is a proper name or if it follows a punctuation mark indicating a break in the title. Sometimes we have titles which have punctuation marks which show a break. For example, some titles may have a colon, so when you have any word that comes after a colon you will capitalize that even if it is not a noun, pronoun, verb, adjective, adverb or subordinating conjunction. Even if it is a preposition it will be capitalized. Also you will make sure that you should not capitalize articles, coordinating conjunctions, prepositions and the word to TO in infinitives unless they appear as the first or last word of a title or subtitle. If these words are articles, coordinating conjunctions, prepositions or TO in infinitive form, if these are the last words of the title then you will capitalize them otherwise you will not capitalize them as you are seeing in this example. Also you need to remember that each discipline has its own specific guidelines for determining which terms should be capitalized and which not. If you are looking at capitalization in scientific terms then you will have to think of specific rules, specific guidelines for that particular scientific discipline. In general, scientific writing tends to minimize capitalized nouns. In scientific writings generally the capitalized nouns are used less and less but as I said you will follow the discipline you are writing. I am going to show you a list which summarizes some widely observed practices. You will capitalize and put in italics the phylum, class, order, family and genus of plants and animals. Do not however capitalize the species. And you can see that for Homo sapiens as esox luscious, Homo, the H of Homo and the E of esox is capitalized. Also you will capitalize the names of geological eras, periods, epochs and series but do not capitalize the word indicating the amount of time. So here you will capitalize the J of Jurassic but not the P of Period and the C of Genozoic but not the E of Era. You will capitalize astronomical terms such as the names of galaxies, constellations, stars, planets and the satellites and asteroids. However the terms earth, sun and moon are often not capitalized unless they appear in a sentence that refers to other astronomical bodies. If you are referring to the earth, sun and or moon as a list of series along with other astronomical bodies then you will capitalize their first letters otherwise you will use these as common nouns and you will not capitalize them when you are writing for science. For example you will say the sun is an ordinary star with a small s and Venus and earth differs significantly in the composition of the atmosphere. In this you will have capital letters for both Venus and earth because you are talking here about the earth with the same weightage as Venus. It is part of a list along with Venus. You will not capitalize medical terms except for any part of a term which consists of a proper noun. As you can see in this example Parkinson's disease has the P of Parkinson's capitalized because Parkinson's is a name otherwise the terms are not capitalized. Similarly you will not capitalize physical laws, theorems, principles or constants except for attached proper nouns. If you are talking about the special theory of relativity there will be no capitalization but if you are talking of Boyle's law then the B of Boyle's will be capitalized. Now coming to the use of italics which is another mechanic that we have within writing. We tend to use italics depending on where we want to emphasize information or for other uses. Let's have a look at what the italics does. Unless you are following a style guide that specifies otherwise you will use the guidelines and the conventions that we are going to show you today. You will italicize titles of journals, books, newsletters and manuals, letters, words, terms and equation symbols that are being highlighted for discussion. Foreign words, words of phrases that are being emphasized and names of specific vessels will also be italicized. I am going to show you some examples where the titles of journals, books, newsletters and manuals are written in an italicized manner. The following is a list of examples where letters, words, terms and equation symbols are italicized in order to highlight them for discussion. These examples show how letters, words, terms and equation symbols can be highlighted by italicizing them and they can be highlighted for discussion. If you say if either 1 or 2 is negative, equation 8 describes a convex reflecting surface here. Equation 8 is italicized so that it can be highlighted. Similarly, in the next example you will see you see some italicized words and these have been done to emphasize them as has the term dialectic been emphasized because it is being defined. You will also italicized foreign words. For example, if you have a sentence which says against the criminally stubborn conviction of the professional officer's officer course that courage, alien and naked steel must carry the day the machine gun was the ultimate argument. In this the word alien has to be italicized because it is not an English word. Similarly, in the other two examples that you see, you see some italicized words which are foreign words. Italics I also use for emphasis as in this example, the Chernobyl reactor search from its standby level to 50% of its capacity in just 10 seconds. This last phrase in just 10 seconds has been italicized to highlight the short span of time. Names of specific vessels will be in italics but you will not put in italics the models class, manufacturer or model number. Another mechanic that is generally used in technical writing is abbreviations. Unless you are following a style guide that differs from the guidelines that we will show you today, you will try to use these conventions. Abbreviations or shortened form of words are commonly employed in scientific and technical writing but you need to avoid unnecessary abbreviations which can confuse a reader. Some abbreviations are always followed by a period or a full stop. With other abbreviations however, the use of the period of full stop varies from discipline to discipline. So, when abbreviations are always full stop, it will not take a lot of time and you will have to see that because those rules vary from discipline to discipline. Similarly, some abbreviations are capitalized and others are not. You will need to consult a style guide in your professional field for appropriate rules regarding capitalization and periods. But here we will talk generally about the use of abbreviations. We are going to have an allocated list which outlines common and appropriate uses of abbreviations. You will abbreviate terms and words in graphics and bibliographies to save space. You will always abbreviate certain words and phrases in your text and these include Mr, Ms, B, A, Ph, D, B, C, B, C, E, C, F which is from the Latin word compare et al which is from Latin and means and others. Also, you will abbreviate standard units of measure. You can find lists of common units of measures in most text books and dictionaries. However, in general, avoid inventing abbreviations. If there are such words whose abbreviations are not present, then try not to make new abbreviations because it is possible for the readers to understand. But if you do need to coin an abbreviation, if you really need to make up an abbreviation in order to make a word fit into a limited space such as a drawing or a table, then the most common approach is to cut the word off, generally use the first five letters or closest to a syllable and cut it off there. You can either cut it off after the first five letters or so or after the consonant falling the first, second or last syllable. Similarly, if you want to make an abbreviation of magnetic, then you will make it mag and put a full stop there. If you want to make an abbreviation of environmental, then you can put a full stop after two syllables of ENVIR. When the abbreviations are made by shortening the words, by breaking a word or removing some part of it, then the abbreviations are acronyms. They are when we join them with different words first or with another word. You will use acronyms to shorten phrases in order to save space or to avoid awkward repetition of phrases. If you feel that there are repeatedly repeated phrases and it feels weird, then you will make acronyms with the first letters. So, basically acronyms are abbreviations of the things they represent, but they are formed by combining the first and sometimes other letters of the principal words. So, they are very similar to abbreviations, but they are generally formed from within a phrase rather than just one word. Let us have a look at some examples of acronyms, where AIDS is the acronym for Acquired Immunodeficiency Syndrome, RAM is an acronym for Random Access Memory, ROM is the acronym for Read Only Memory, DOS is the acronym for Disk Operating System, FTP for File Transfer Protocol, HTML for Hypertext Makeup Language, HIV for Human Immunodeficiency Virus. There are some guidelines for using acronyms. In general, you will capitalize acronyms and you will not use a full stop after acronyms. In an abbreviation, you tend to use a full stop where you have cut the word off, but in acronyms you will not use periods. When an acronym becomes integrated into the language as a common noun, for example, laser, radar, scuba, then it is no longer capitalized. If an acronym is so commonly used that it becomes a part of the language, then it is not capitalized. Then it becomes a word. When you are using an acronym for the first time in your text, spell the phrase out and follow it with the acronym in parentheses. For example, as you see in the example, hypertext markup language, HTML was never intended to be a common programming language. And then when you are referring to that acronym later in the text, then you may use it by itself. In this example, the first time when an acronym was used, the entire phrase was written and in the brackets, the acronym was written in parentheses. And then the example says, the original assumption was that word processing applications would automatically generate HTML code. If your prose is laden with acronyms, if it has a lot of acronyms, then you will provide a list of terms in the front matter of your document to guide the reader. To form plurals of acronyms, you will add a lower case S without an apostrophe. For example, in the last lecture, in the discussion of apostrophes, if you want to form a plural with an acronym, then you will add an S in it, and then there is no need for apostrophe. Also, in your document, you will be using numbers in a variety of situations. Unless you are following a style guide that specifies, otherwise, you will observe the guidelines that we will see today. In general, you will use Arabic numerals instead of words in scientific and technical writing for both cardinal and ordinal numbers. For example, if you write 6 subroutines, 3 subroutines, 6 braces, 61 amino acids, for example, then you will write these cardinal numbers in Arabic numerals. Similarly, if you are using ordinal numbers, you are saying the third subroutine, the sixth brace, the 61st amino acid, then you will use Arabic numerals. In some scientific and technical styles, however, you will write out numbers between 1 and 10, and one-word fractions that do not follow an integer. If the words that are between 1 and 10, you will write them in words, or if there are any words or fractions that are not after an integer, but are written without an integer, then you will write them in words in such a way that you will say 3 subroutines as in T-H-R-W, or if you are saying half R, then you will not write half as a fraction, but you will write one half hour in words. If you need to begin a sentence with a number, then you will spell it out, or you will reword the sentence if possible. It is better to reword so that the number does not come at the beginning of a sentence. For example, if you have to say 32 workstations were provided by the university, either you will spell out 32, or you will say the university provided 32 workstations, and then you can have 32 in Arabic numerals. If one number immediately follows another in a sentence, then spell out the one that can be expressed in fewer words. Whatever number can be expressed in fewer words, you can spell it out and leave the other number in Arabic numerals. Try, however, to express units of measure in Arabic numerals. Try to use less spelling and use Arabic numerals for units of measure, where you are measuring something that you can write in numbers. Or you can reword the sentence. If you are using one in your text, but you are using it as a pronoun, then you will spell it out. You will never write one pronoun in Arabic numerals. For example, if you have a sentence which says, in protecting the privacy of individuals, one must always consider all the possible ways data can be accessed and used. Now in this example, one is used as a pronoun, so it will be written in, it will be spelled out and not written in Arabic numerals. Also for numerals for date, times of day, pages, figures and notes, you will use numbers in Arabic form. For example, you will write for 5 August 1994 1 p.m. or August or p.m. to letters, but rest of them will be numbers. You will use Arabic numerals followed by the percent sign to express percentages, except when the number begins a sentence. If in the beginning of the sentence, you want to show a percentage or a number, then you will spell out. Otherwise, if you are somewhere in the middle, then you can use the number. For example, if you say, only 3% of the system is crashed during the test period, then your sentence is starting only. But if you say, 3% of the system is crashed during the test period, then you will spell out. There is some difference between British and American formation numbers and European formation numbers. Let us see what that is. British and American are the same and European standards are different. In the British and American formation of numbers, you will form integers of 2 to 4 digits without any punctuation or spacing. As you can see, you will also use the period to indicate the decimal point and use an initial zero for numbers less than 1 or 1.0. You will also form numbers of 5 digits or more by using a comma to mark off groups of 3 digits starting at the decimal points. However, in European and international standards for formation of numbers, the first element will be the same where you will form integers of 2 to 4 digits without any punctuation or spacing, but the other two will be different. In European and international standards, you will use the comma to indicate the decimal point and use an initial zero for numbers less than 1. You will form numbers of 5 digits or more by using a period to mark off groups of 3 digits starting at the decimal point. So here, the comma and the period will change in European or international standards whereas, in British and American standards, it is different. We are going to have a look at some general guidelines for using numbers in non-technical prose. When you are using numbers in non-scientific text, spell out numbers less than 100 or numbers of any size that beginner centres. In addition, spell out round numbers of any size and use Arabic numerals followed by the terms million and billion to express numbers larger than 1 billion. If you have round numbers, you will spell out them and if you are talking about very large figures, more than million or billion, then you will write Arabic numerals and then you will write million or billion. For example, if you say it is less than 100, for example 73, then you will spell it out but if you are talking about big figures, then you will write it in numerals. Let's talk about numbers on enumeration which are numbers but when you number something as a list, you will enumerate your chapters and see what are their guidelines. Unless you are following a style guide that specifies otherwise, you will use the guidelines you will use enumeration in reports and other documents to identify sequences of chapters, sections, page numbers, figures and tables, equations, footnotes and appendices. Lengthy reports may contain and enumerate all these items. If there is a small report, then few things are enumerated but if there is a long report, then all these things will be enumerated. Any technical or scientific document of more than one page will at least enumerate its pages as well as any of the other elements that are present. There can be chapter section enumeration which is one of the most widely used enumeration systems used and the numerical system in this, for this is clearer than the alpha numerical system. Where you have used numbers, that system, chapter or section to show division and to enumerate it is more clear than the alpha numerical system where you combine letters and numbers. In the numerical system the reader can always locate his or her place in the document from this single decimal number which is 5.1, 5.2, 5.2, 0.2 and immediately the reader will know where the text is. I just said if you have a document which is more than one page long then you will have page numbers. You will enumerate the pages. Now how do you do this pagination? You will number the front matter in lower italic roman numerals whereas the rest of the text and the rest of the pages can be used in regular Arabic numerals. But the front matter in which the table of contents, list of tables etc. is abstract, you will do that in italic lower case roman numerals. All other pages will be in Arabic numerals and they will start with the number 1. You will number sequentially through till the last page including all back matter. The appendices and bibliography will also be included in the numerals. Now you have to number the tables and figures. You will number tables and figures sequentially such as table 1, table 2, table 3 and so on. If you have a long document however, you will the table and figure numbers are often prefixed with a chapter number. If there is a long document then you will number the table and figure and it will be easier for the reader to read which is exactly where and which reference table and figure they are looking at. For example, you will say table 5 dash 1 or table 5.1 This refers to the first table in chapter 5. Many times you use symbols in your documents. You will use symbols consistently and in keeping with the common practice in your discipline. Biology, chemistry, engineering mathematics, physics among many other fields have extensive and precise systems to present quantities objects and actions. You will check with a relevant style guide textbook or handbook as to what are the accepted symbols in your field. If you are not certain that your readers will recognize a symbol give a full spelling or in parentheses for the first time that you use the symbol as we gave the full description of the acronyms and then gave the acronym in parentheses Similarly, if you are using a symbol and you are not sure that your readers will understand then in parentheses write the full spelling of the symbol and then use the symbol again without spelling If your document contains a large number of symbols that may be unfamiliar to your readers then include a list of symbols in the front matter following the list of tables If you have used many such symbols which may be confusing for the reader then after a list of tables include a list of symbols in your text, in front matter Similarly, you can use equations in your documents and unless you are following a style guide that is giving you some specific guidelines different from the ones that I will be showing you today you can follow the ones that I talk about. You will integrate equations into the body of your document by including in the text one or more explicit references to each one and if appropriate a short explanation of each term In your text give it a reference so that it is clear and if possible give it some explanation However, you will include only the main equations in the body of the document Any detailed derivations and calculations should be put in appendices If they need it then try to include only the main equations in your main body If you include them then it may not be that interesting and it may be difficult to connect so keep the key elements in the main text and if you need other derivations then keep them in appendices Set of equations from the text by displaying them centered on the longest line and with equation numbers as shown on the screen on the equal sign as you can see here and break an equation longer than one line according to the following order of preference If you are breaking immediately before the equal sign align the equal sign in the second line with the first operator in the first line If it is immediately before an addition or subtraction sign that is not enclosed in parentheses brackets or braces the second line with the equal sign in the first line where the first line is equal then align your addition and subtraction sign in the second line immediately before the multiplication sign you will align the multiplication sign starting the second line with the equal sign in the first line as you did with subtraction and addition also you will If you are making a break between two sets of enclosures, for example parentheses, brackets or braces, then you will begin the second line with an explicit multiplication sign aligned with the equal sign followed by the second enclosed set. Now let's come to spelling. Until now we have talked about numbers, equations. Now one of our common problems in documents is that many times our spelling mistakes are left and this editing and proofreading phase is very important that we should also look at it carefully. The rules and conventions for the spelling of standard American English words are very complex and they are beyond the scope of one lecture or just a couple of lectures. But correct spelling however is extremely important in technical and scientific writing because it establishes a writer's credibility by displaying his or her care and precision in dealing with information. So it is important that you give a lot of emphasis to your spelling because that is what will convey to your readers how careful you have been, how precise you have been in dealing with your information as well. If you have spelling mistakes or careless mistakes in your text, your readers will get the impression that the data you have collected or the information you are giving you have dealt with it as carelessly as you have dealt with your spellings. So that is something that really gives the gist of your care and your precision towards the document. A reader may hesitate to trust your data or design recommendations of a technical document that contains careless misspellings. I am going to give you a few suggestions today to help ensure that your document is free of spelling errors and these suggestions you will be seeing on your screen. Always proofread your document for misspellings. If you are writing on a word processor, always use the spell check but do not rely on it alone. The spell check cannot catch one word substituted for another. For example, if you are trying to write it in a discreet way, D-I-S-C-R-E-E-T and you have written it in a discreet way, D-I-S-C-R-E-T-E, the spell checker will not recognize it because both of them are complete words in themselves. And also it may not recognize a typographical error that is a word in itself. For example, if you are trying to write a code and you have written it in a wrong way, or if you are trying to write a code and you have written it in a wrong way, D-I-S-C-R-E-T-E, then the spell checker will not correct it because both of them are correct English words. Also be consistent in the spelling of your words in your documents. Make sure that if you are using British English then you stick to that. If you are using American English then you stick to that. Be consistent in whatever type of spellings you are using. Generally the use of standard American English is much more common for scientific and technical writing. Also for consistency use the same dictionary when writing your first draft as when revising or editing your document. If you have consulted a dictionary while writing your document for spellings or meanings, then consult revising or editing on a proof reading stage. If you first learnt British or Commonwealth English, be careful that you don't substitute American English with it and you don't mix your forms for technical and scientific writing. As I just said, use American English, the spellings for American English. I am going to show you a list that summarizes some of the most common differences between American English and British English spelling. As you can see, the main difference is that the words E-R end in American English and they end in British English with R-E. And the second difference is that the place where American English is used and the place where Z is used and the place where British English is used. And the third difference is that the silent words are generally less in American English while the silent words are used in British English. I am now going to show you a list of some dictionaries that will be useful for you. Some of the desk dictionaries that are useful to help you with your spelling and your language are the Random House College Dictionary, the American Heritage Dictionary and the Merriam-Webster's Dictionary. I am also going to show you some names of unabridged dictionaries which give much more detailed information, more historical information as well about the language that they have. And two of these very, very good ones are the Oxford English Dictionary on Historical Principles and Webster's Third New International Dictionary of the English Language. ESL dictionaries are those which are meant specifically for users of English as a second language. Then there are also technical dictionaries. Depending on whatever discipline you want to find a dictionary in, on the screen in front of you you are seeing now a list of some of such dictionaries. In this lecture we learnt about Capitalization. We talked about where capital letters are used, how they are used, we used capital letters to begin proper nouns, names of places, people, objects, things, rivers, cities, countries, etc. We also talked about capital letters are used in the beginning of sentences. If there is a quoted material in a sentence, then it will also start with capital letters. We talked about italex, that italex is used to emphasize something, it is used to express ratios, italex is used to give explanation of something. If we want to show a list, then after the introductory element we can use italex to follow a list. Then we talked about abbreviations, abbreviations are those which we can use to express a long word, because we may have a lack of space or a lot of repetition. So how can we express that word? Generally we break the word in syllables or after the first five syllables, or after the second or third syllables, we break the word. We talked about acronyms, which we take the first letter of a phrase or any other letter and join it. We took some examples, such as Ram, random access memory. I have also shown you the list of acronyms. We talked about if we want to pluralize the acronyms, then we put S in front of it, without apostrophe. We talked about numbers, how we can incorporate them into the text. Generally we use Arabic numerals. When we talk about numbers, we will try not to spell out the first letter in the beginning of a sentence. We will spell out the first letter in Arabic numerals.  Similarly we talked about how we will call continuity chapters and we will use numerical systems or we will use alphanumerical systems in terms of enumeration. We talked about symbols. The symbols are different in every field. They have their own rules. They have their own equations. How can we incorporate them into the text? Finally we talked about spellings. We emphasized that spellings are very important for the overall image of your document and for the reliability of you as a writer and for how the reader sees you as a writer. If your spellings are careless or incorrect, then your whole document seems to be carelessly compiled. You have to be careful with your spelling. Try to use a spell check. You are typing on a computer or a word processor, but do not rely on the spell check because the spell checker can also miss out certain things. We also talked about the fact that there is a difference between standard American spelling and British spelling and you need to use the standard American English spelling for scientific and technical documents. With this we come to the end of our lesson on reviewing language with reference to mechanics until next time, Allah Hafiz.


Why you always with the drama? Why you can't be positive? Why you can't get calmer?  This is just for the trolls, you guys, cause you know I troll hunt You guys know I-


Good afternoon ladies and gentlemen, sorry for the delay and I think anyone who tried to get here today will understand that the Secretary General too has been caught up in the town traffic. First off, maybe you would like to ensure that your mobile phones are switched off or switched to silent. We are living these days in interesting times to use a t-shirt as far as security in Europe is concerned. We hear that NATO, one of the pillars of European security for what will be next month, 70 years is obsolete and we hear other people saying that NATO is brain dead. That makes the question of security in Europe very topical and indeed very crucial. So who more interesting to talk about it than the Secretary General of the organization for precisely security and cooperation in Europe. You are very welcome Mr. Griminger in this capacity. We look forward to great interest to hearing what you have to say and as you perhaps heard me asking, the formal presentation by Mr. Griminger will be on the record. The question and answer session afterwards because as Mr. Griminger says this will make it more interesting will be on the record. So Mr. Griminger will speak for about 20 minutes, his schedule is very tight. We have to finish at 2 o'clock so let's begin to have the floor. Thank you so much. Ladies and gentlemen, I'm delighted to be here in Dublin. I should actually say back to Dublin. During the Irish OEC chairmanship in 2012 I was in Dublin on several occasions. So happy to be back. Let me start by thanking the IEA and its president for inviting me to this event. Ladies and gentlemen Ireland was a founding member of the OEC and it remains one of the organization's leading champions up to the day. And support for our cooperative and comprehensive approach to security is particularly welcome now. Then the fundamentals of international security and diplomacy face unprecedented challenges. Our second channel of the world's largest regional security organization I have to admit it's not easy to be an advocate of cooperative security these days. In the OEC we have long argued that security is indivisible. Security of one country should not be enhanced at the expense of others. And the past two decades have shown us what happens when this principle is not respected. Today some of the world's most powerful leaders openly display their distrust of international institutions, oppose international governance and increasingly turn to unilateral and often confrontational approaches in foreign relations. Such behavior may offer short-term rewards for those with the greatest bargaining power. But even for them it's often detrimental and costly in the long term. And it erodes trust and confidence among states, hindering cooperation on common challenges. In a world of complex and interlinked threats and challenges, banking on national capabilities alone cannot sustain peace and security.  No state can handle these alone. These complex security challenges demand cooperative responses. In recent years we have seen how eroding trust between states has deepened East-West tensions and reshaped security priorities for many OEC participating states. Strengthening security and stability throughout the way to Europe should be a key priority for both East and West. This means upholding the fundamental principles and commitments of European security, including those enshrined in the 1975 Helsinki Fine Lact and the 1990 Paris Charter. We must protect our collective rule-based security order. We also need an inclusive security system and an inclusive security dialogue. In short, we need cooperative security. And this brings me to the security paradox that we currently face. We urgently need more dialogue. We need more cooperation to reduce tensions and to rebuild trust. Yet the space for dialogue and cooperation is shrinking just when collective action to face complex transnational threats is needed more than ever. So against this gloomy backdrop, how can the OEC help to rebuild trust? I will offer three points. First, the OEC offers a rare venue where inclusive dialogue and security is still possible. In particular, we offer a space for genuine East-West dialogue. A key platform of the OEC for this is the so-called structured dialogue, which focuses on political military matters, which are once again an urgent concern even in Europe. This flagship OEC initiative is in fact the only regular multilateral security dialogue in the wider Euro-Atlantic region today. State-owned and state-driven, this informal process has stimulated useful exchanges on threat perceptions, on forced postures and on military doctrines. It has also begun to discuss practical steps to reduce military tensions, avoiding or at least better managing military incidents could help prevent an escalation by accident. This risk is alarmingly real and needs to be better controlled. The structured dialogue can help to rebuild trust and confidence. Indeed it is a confidence-building measure in itself. But it depends on the willingness of our participating states to engage in good faith and to maintain the momentum. Second, the OEC offers a people-centered approach to security that focuses on improving the lives of those affected by conflict. This is also one of the priorities of our current OEC Chairman Chip by Slovakia. When we talk about security, the lives of people are what is really at stake. The lives of families and children, of individuals and of communities. And this is where security becomes concrete. And I know that this reality is well understood here on this island. In Europe today, we vividly see this in the conflict in eastern Ukraine. Over 13,000 Ukrainians have died in this conflict and millions more have been displaced, lost loved ones and livelihoods. The OEC has played a pivotal role since the crisis in and around Ukraine erupted in 2014. When we were the only international organization accepted by all sides. We rapidly deployed the special monitoring mission to Ukraine, the SMM, and contributed in a very significant way to prevent a further escalation of the conflict. At the political level, the OEC facilitates efforts to achieve a peaceful settlement to the conflict through the so-called trilateral contact group, where all the signatories of the Minsk agreements sit at the same table. The special monitoring mission to Ukraine works hard to alleviate human suffering in addition to monitoring the ceasefire. Last year alone, the SMM brokered over a thousand local so-called windows of silence to enable repairs to critical infrastructure, making sure that millions of people on both sides of the line of contact continue to have access to water, to gas and to electricity. These windows of silence also contribute to preventing escalation of local ceasefire violations. After more than five years of fighting, there are now signs of a new dynamic which could create new opportunities for peace. We have seen confidence-building measures like the recent exchange of detainees between Ukraine and the Russian Federation. We've seen efforts by the sides to disengage from the three identified pilot areas. And just last week, the new bridge at Staniska Luganska was open. After four years of having to crawl up the steep and dangerous steps of the heavily damaged old bridge, local residents can now at least safely cross the line of contact in the Lugansk region. And we are talking about around 10,000 crossings a day. Confidence-building measures are important, but obviously they're not enough. Ultimately, achieving sustainable peace in the Donbas depends on the political will of the sides. All sides must make concerted efforts to create an enabling environment for moving conflict resolution forward, and that is implementing the Minsk agreements. Constructive engagement by all parties is crucial, and I hope that next month's summit of the Normandy 4, that is Ukraine, Russia, Germany and France, will give a strong political signal to the sides that time has come to take some significant steps towards bringing peace to the people of Eastern Ukraine. The OEC also engages in conflict management efforts elsewhere, in Moldova, for instance, and in the South Caucasus. Conflict prevention and conflict management is the OEC's core business, and we have a long track record of successfully containing conflicts. Resolving them, however, is a far more challenging task. The OEC can facilitate conflict resolution, but ultimately it depends on the political will of the parties to engage in good-face negotiations and take decisive steps towards the lasting solution. As a third point, I wish to stress that we cannot afford to be complacent in tackling the security challenges we face today. We must be pragmatic. Without losing sight of the principles at the foundation of our shared security, we urgently need to seek engagement and cooperation in areas where interests converge. I already mentioned transnational threats, but today we are also confronting what can only be described as a technological revolution, offering possibilities and risks that we are barely beginning to understand. Unfortunately, there is not yet much policy thinking about new emerging technologies, about how emerging technologies will affect security. Indeed, the vast majority of current national strategies on artificial intelligence make no link between AI and security issues. Not even its potential use by terrorist organizations or violent extremist groups. At the OEC, we are already starting to explore how new technologies can both amplify and counter transnational threats, like terrorism, like human trafficking, as well as their implications for human rights and for media freedom. And in Ukraine, our special monitoring mission is at the forefront in using new technologies and monitoring and for enhancing security for our staff. New technology, meaning UIVs, cameras, et cetera. I'm convinced that thanks to our comprehensive approach to security and our extensive experience with security-related issues, the OEC could become a useful platform for meaningful dialogue on technology and security. And given our history, we might even develop confidence-building measures in some areas. In fact, all 57 OEC-participating states have already agreed to 16 pioneering confidence-building measures for cybersecurity. These cyber-CBMs are designed to reduce the risk of misperception and miscalculation associated with the use of ICT technologies by states. Every state has an interest to cooperate to prevent it-for-tact reactions or a dangerous escalation that risks triggering conventional military responses. Ladies and gentlemen, the complexity and diversity of the challenges that we face today call for fresh ideas, call for new approaches. Getting stuck in old patterns of thinking and interaction creates a risk in itself. Increasing dialogue among states is absolutely critical, but we also need to engage a wider range of stakeholders to find solutions to the key security challenges of our time. So I'm particularly glad to have this chance to talk with you today. Thank you for your attention, and now I'm ready to respond to your comments or questions.


Thank you. I'll hold my comments until the end so we can get right into our two name discussants and if you've got questions after Terry and Karen that would be great. So Terry why don't you start off? Okay so well thank you for letting me participate in this. I appreciate it. I'm gonna take a slightly left turn then perhaps than our current speakers because I really believe that the issues that are problematic aren't how we come up with the clinical informatics system. It's actually the underlying knowledge below that and I think that that's that's where we're having to run into some issues and I think NHGRI has done some remarkable things with multiple networks but the question arises is how are they being integrated across these different networks? So you have Ignite and you have a merge and you have ClinGen and each one has a different website and these these are not being integrated so that's one of the things that and we saw this earlier in the discussion previously with regards to the population and diversities and so for example in the ClinGen activities there's a lot of effort being put towards populations and ancestries and as representative of CPIC where we worry greatly about coming up with guidelines for pharmacogenomics I will tell you right up front the biggest problem we have is how we define those populations and how we define those guidelines and they're not great I'm the first to tell you that and that's because we don't have really strong information or data with regards to these populations and that's really where something like Ignite can really help as we move forward but I think as we move forward we do have to think ahead as to how we're going to unite all of these different initiatives so that they are sharing that information. I agree with Josh about the informatics gap I think that that's a big one. I think there are two other issues that I don't think anyone really raised is how are we going to incentivize our institutions to prioritize the work with regards to genomic medicine. I can tell you that at my own institution that's an issue. It's great in the research domain not so good in the clinical domain. Kelly sort of alluded to it earlier I mean she finally she moved back in the last year so she's familiar with it from the clinic standpoint but we don't really have genomic medicine highly integrated in at Stanford and yet we're one of the leading institutions that do research in genomic medicine. I also think that there's a question that I'm going to throw back to Eric is should we be leaving precision medicine implementation to the vendors you know ours is it really the vendors who I don't know that we have any vendor representation here I know they come in at different places I know Sandy has been involved in them and other people have as well but I think there needs to be better buy-in from them you know is it the idea that ultimately we're going to have one vendor system probably not but I think that there needs to be is it a regulatory issue that there are certain requirements that each of these vendors must have something to do with it so I think that that is also the issue and then lastly I think there's a big issue as to who is going to pay for all this long term and it's not just who's paying for the studies that we are all in this room doing either individually from the research perspective or from the network perspective but how are we going to sustain the knowledge the underlying knowledge as it changes and how are we going to keep that and I know that this is a big issue for NIH it's a big issue for those of us who generate the knowledge that then gets translated into the general practice but I think that we need to come up with mechanisms to deal with that as well. Hi so I am a bioinformatics person with leaning towards genomics and I've been a member of the ESP for Ignite for like two and a half years I think and I want to thank Ebony for bringing me in to this project I don't really see it as service I see it as education for my benefit and it's just been this wonderful opportunity and so from my perspective on this panel I don't have answers to any of the questions that come up I just have a lot more questions and I feel like as a scientist when I look at the projects that have come together through Ignite I feel like the challenges are not so much scientific we're on top of the science I feel like the challenges are actually social and political and that to me is hard I'm used to science I'm not used to dealing with all of these different kinds of people that we need to make implementation happen and so the some of the questions that that I have that I think I think Ignite is is starting to roll with is like how do we how do we engage the EHR vendors they're kind of this black box that they don't they either don't say anything or they tell us how it is but how do we actually engage with them and and make make the relationship work like I find that challenging as a clinical informaticist how how do I guide my institute in where to go with precision medicine and I think Ignite has provided these really amazing demonstration projects that show an improvement in quality that when you use precision medicine in the clinic and I think that we need we need to use these then in this experience to take that back to our managers and really prove that this is something that our hospital should be investing in and so I mean I think there's a lot of social hurdles to get over to do that as well and anyone who who actually knows me through work knows that I'm really interested in standards development and interoperability and I hate free text I'm all about being able to communicate on both verbally and computationally and using using standards to do that so how do how do we guide the standards development committees and these are very diverse groups how do how do we as as like the accumulation of these networks guide those different committees to to focus on the things that we actually need to move forward and then then how on the flip side of that is how do we encourage our systems internally and our physicians to get on board to use these terminologies and ontologies so my own personal experience is is with phenotyping and people really they just want to write free text they don't actually want want to engage in in learning about the phenotype terminologies and use that and that would make my life a lot easier so that's like another challenge I think that one of the things that I haven't heard talked about today as well is is return of results so we've talked about getting things into the EHR and that's great but then how how do we provide the infrastructure to actually take that back to to the clinic and and that costs money and it takes a lot of organization and I don't really see anybody wanting to pay for that so these are just random thoughts that good why don't I ask the speakers to respond to the two discussants but we need to be mindful of our time because I want to give the audience a chance to ask questions well I'll start by addressing there's a lot of great questions there so I I thought we could talk a little bit about engagement of the vendors which I think is very important I mean regardless of what we say here ultimately at this point in them in the commercial market the vendors are are gonna be the ones who would have to implement any kind of actual code changes and so we have engaged the vendors within the CIG group we haven't come give webinars but it's been not a deep bilateral exchange but there are a lot of us have that kind of bilateral exchange in sort of other parts of our professional lives and and so you know I know Mount Sinai and in our our place there's a lot of discussion with the vendors about how to do this and my overall comment about that is the vendors cannot do this on their own they actually come to the table somewhat ignorant of exactly how to show genetic genomic risks and or even what the appropriate standards are what what's the appropriate metadata and so there's a lot for them to learn and they recognize this to their credit and have I think accordingly sought a lot of help around the country so I think there is a lot of ongoing conversation it's not always within groups like this but it the groups like this can help facilitate a certain agree I agree that there were a lot of great questions and issues raised by the discussants to to extend on the vendor question so as somebody within an academic medical center there's some areas where I feel we have great relationships with vendors and there's some areas where they totally drive us nuts and you know and cause concerns I do find that through put in a little bit of a plug for the digitize action collaborative which is a collaborative organized under the genomics roundtable at the National Academies most of the EHR vendors participate in that and we found them to be extremely helpful and engaging in that context and willing to work with us in general relative to engaging with vendors and also this general sort of funding question I mean we are internally outside of grant funding opportunities commercial opportunities opportunities for internal investment it really there is a lot of pressure to look at economics and how you can interject and use genetic techniques in combination with clinical informatics to produce economic benefits to the institution which becomes exciting to the institution and becomes exciting to to the vendors as well lots of you know risk in in going into those areas but I think that there is increasing excitement and increasing views of opportunity there so I'll respond to a couple of the questions also so one of the comments was about using about incentivizing implementation and so what one thing that I think could happen within it within ignite is to define what are outcome measures to I mean there's there's outcome measures in terms of a physician uptake and in patient acceptance and so on but there's also opportunity for outcomes that could be collected on an ongoing basis from the EHR and so reporting measures or metrics that could be looked at and could have a financial implication and so if we're able to show that there's potentially some some cost benefit of doing these kinds of projects that might help with the with incentivizing also there is a point about capturing data as as structured data and and and I guess one of the things that I don't think we brought up NLP too much but national language processing is is potentially important to consider and when trying to find the the data that that we need from clinical records and you know I've been in the the situation where I've wanted to find you know do the phenotyping where you find patients that have complex conditions and see that the the ICD-9 codes or the billing codes aren't sufficient and they're messy and they're missing and there there's all kinds of reasons why that's happening and and so then you have to look into the notes manually and so having automated approaches to do that will be pretty important for being able to find the data that we need to trigger a decision support and so on thank you questions from the audience lawn yeah thanks that was a very informative discussion I have a question for terry so as as I can see you lobbed a few grenades out there and I think I counted three and I think each of them could and arguably should engender some discussion the first one was the communication and sharing amongst NHGRI programs that probably should be taken up at some point second one was the vendor one and the third one I just wanted to draw you out on to see where you were going with it which was who should pay for this and who should pay for what is it the data generation is it the interpretation is it storage is it update where were you heading with that actually all of the above because from my perspective I'm I'm on the data generation side and the knowledge generation and so I worry about that because I know that there's a lot of human involvement in that and as good as NLP techniques are getting I will tell you that a lot of that for example a lot of the knowledge is buried in tables and NLP for example is not good at that we can also talk about mining EMRs that's great except that anyone in this room who is a physician and or a patient knows very well that a physician oftentimes will make a decision to write down a particular code or diagnosis because they believe that their patient will do better on a particular drug but they know that to get that drug they must have a certain diagnosis even if they don't necessarily have that so you know that old phrase garbage in garbage out so there's that piece of it and then there's this there's the storage of that knowledge the upkeep of that knowledge the translation of that knowledge and then the whole idea I mean in terms of that the EMR itself in terms of the healthcare system some of that is built in for the payee system I mean that's the whole health insurance part but that doesn't cover the cost it doesn't cover the cost of building the system the testing of the system the translation of it so I was really throwing a huge bomb I wasn't just throwing one it was I was spreading it across the board about three or four years ago a number of us were on the room published a paper out of EMR it's called Barriers to Implementation and I think as we hear the talk today we could argue that there hasn't been much progress we're doing wonderfully at identifying the barriers but the the so we're we've identified our targets well the challenge that I see is that virtually everything that we identify as a barrier is outside of the control of the groups that we're doing we can't control the vendors we can't control the payers we can't control the healthcare systems we can provide input and we can you know define what we think are best practices but in terms of actually having them move forward we have no ability to really direct that policy discussion so so I have two questions related to the Ignite meeting one is what are the areas within the barriers that would be good targets for research around things that we might be able to actually do something about and then the second thing is the opportunities presented now at the policy level by the movement that seems to indicate that ONC is saying if you want to be a certified electronic health record you have to have some degree of openness for applications that sit outside the EHR so it's not the monolith that we've been dealing with for the last I can see Sandy drooling already because he and I have talked about this a lot so we make what are the opportunities that we would have going forward in Ignite or other things to study how we could get around some of these barriers through the use of applications that sit outside of but interact with electronic health records so so I think to the two different points you know one thing that I do think is important for us to keep in mind is if we build things that if we build things that generate value that demonstrate value economically clinically then that then vendors will go after you know licensing and adopting those things so so that is a mechanism for interacting with vendors and and pushing things into into care I do think that in terms of enabling those things to come into play a huge part of this is establishing as everyone said the interfaces the standardized interfaces that would enable us to get at the specific kinds of interoperability we need to gather the data and and deploy this infrastructure and that again I do think the best way to do that is to demonstrate applications that expose interfaces that provide value to clinicians that provide value to health systems that that then incentivize people to build other interfaces that enable them to operate so Howard then Chris but I have a I want to interject a question here on this thread maybe I'll put lawn on the spot you're representing the entire US Chamber of Commerce in this question why isn't the market working you know typically when these are they're outside this room by and large and there are these opportunities and obstacles we we trust that the market's going to help us fill them but at that you know going back if indeed these are these these problems or challenges or years old where is it are there not market incentives to help fill this void that we need to pay attention to it seems that the by and large that the private sector is not working with us to help fill these voids so many thanks for that small question Eric so I'm I work for GlaxoSmithKline in the drug discovery domain so which is why Eric's probably picking on me on this so that's not a vendor in this context I think but it certainly is a consumer and I guess I would I don't know the big picture answer to that I could say the market is is working in oncology where targeted therapies immuno-oncology things are driving towards a precision medicine and and we don't need to push it I think it's going that way because the treatments are improving it's not the case in my view outside of oncology and rare diseases broadly lack of incentive and I think actually one of the things I wanted to ask later maybe I'll just ask it right now is if you think of if you think of pharma drug discovery before we even start a research program we go ask the payers what they want right and here we're doing all this research and then asking what they want and the risk there is we're going to develop conduct a whole bunch of studies and generate a whole bunch of data that isn't actually relevant to implement I wonder if we should turn that question around and and drive the discussion from there and you get the incentive so that they may not know what they want but but maybe we have the discussion and maybe we have the debate on what good data would look like that would actually move the needle so Howard so I'd like to thank the panel I mean I think you've hit on some of the key issues I mean when we think of informatics we're all often thinking about from the sequence to the clinical report but I actually think what you're touching on is how do you go from the clinical report to actual care is the biggest challenge and I think ignite in round two if there is one has some huge opportunities here to be thinking about it I do not believe that the EHR structure is designed to go forward with what much much of you are talking about much of medicine is it's it's a patient comes in with a phenotype we then do a diagnostic test as we move to doing more and more sequencing and having more information available in advance as was discussed earlier how do you use the pharmacogenomics is already hard in that environment how do you use it proactively how do you have that information and I have no confidence that the EHR structure is going to deliver around that so I think this is a huge opportunity you have data now from version one and you have input from your physicians but how do you move the decision support away from having four million alerts that come up with this variant and I think that this alert fatigue is another really big issue and as we have conversations with physicians about this they don't want more alerts and so I think ignite has got some huge opportunity to really address that critical piece which is going to be the barrier for genomic medicine it's how do we enable the physician to practice medicine in a 15 minute time window and I don't see any structure in place to enable that so I don't have an answer but I think that is a huge opportunity for this group as it goes forward in my opinion go ahead so I was just going to say that I think something that's really important is to have somebody from the health IT side on research teams if at all possible because I've been on like clinical decision support committees where there are other priorities of the institution so they have an allergy alert that's that's going off way too often and so they have a priority of what's what's going to have the largest impact and so these genomic medicine projects may not bubble up to the top necessarily and so have if it's possible to include somebody on the team to actually take ownership on some of some of the the implementation piece I think that that's important and there's apis within epic that I'm learning about and within these vendors that are that make data accessible for you know developing software so I think that there's there's a it's promising Chris last question from the audience thank you uh I just want to riff off your your point Howard and I I think there's there is a widespread expectation that and Sandy you alluded to this the genomic information will be in a sort of the moral equivalent of a PACS system uh and that in silico evaluation or if a clinician would order an in silico test effectively of something that exists in that repository but my question really is if this is going to go forward and and Terry your point about how do we coordinate this across NIH and frankly with with digitize and and other efforts I accept the premise that the core requirement is really information transfer transmission and interpretation that in my little brain translates to standards and as usual the nice thing about standards is there's so many to choose from uh in the context of this problem uh to what extent can ignite again in partnership with other NHGRI and for that matter with other NIH and digitize you know National Academy uh efforts really begin the winnowing process and the refinement process and the promotion process it is a socio-political problem I accept that uh but I think there's enough mass momentum and gravitas across the groups that are that are assembled on this problem to begin saying okay folks you know here's a rational way forward and in the kind of vendors are willing to follow the lead of clear and and and rational recommendations at least in my experience this this whole notion of having proprietary divergence for the sake of proprietary divergence and if if a separate industry starts to emerge we want to get ahead of that industry making up its own darn standards as industry tends to do what can we do to promote the harmonization and consolidation of information transfer representations so in my opinion there's only one way to really make this happen which is what we need is we need a killer app that provides value to clinicians that requires genetic data to be sent into it in a structured way and if we can do that we have to I think we have to lead with providing the value to the clinicians through a piece of infrastructure if then the interface is into that piece of infrastructure that people will want to implement into their systems will what will truly drive standardization I think driving from the standards towards the infrastructure I think it's extremely hard to make that work Terry you want to add to that yeah I just want to add two points one is when we talk about standards we're assuming we can define a standard and that's part of the problem so in pharmacogenomics for example not all clinical labs will define something the same way and they will not test it the same way unlike other sort of clinical tests if someone is measuring creatinine we know sort of the values so there's an inherent problem and it's not just in pgx it's in disease risk and and other things as well but that is a huge thing and so when we talk about standards we have to be a little careful there the second thing is actually I'm just going to build on what Sandy said and it sort of builds on what everyone else has said you have 15 minutes with with a doc and I'm glad you have 15 minutes because many with my docs it might be six minutes but the idea of an app if we have if if groups can come up with a way to convey the important information or knowledge that affects that specific patient and we usually say we talk about it in 30 seconds or less then in fact you will get buy-in you'll get buy-in from the informatics community you'll get buy-in from the vendors you'll get buy-in from the physicians who right now are not being trained in genomics but ultimately will be if you make it easy for your for the participants it will happen so is it going to happen in the next year or two probably not but if we're doing if if NHGRI is funding research and networks to do things that are effective now they're way too late they are they're trying to do it for five years or ten years down the road so some of the ideas that are being talked about here in fact are even though they are still barriers we are coming up with better ways to address it so I think that that's part of the issue. So I'm going to take the moderators prerogative and have the last words that you know this session in my opinion it all boiled down to sort of working toward you know clinical decision support and I'm going to add for the long term into that that sentence and I really think I want to thank the speakers the the the discussants and the audience everyone it was a fantastic session. The two I think take-home messages that I bring out for Ignite is first the focus on interfaces at many different levels you know there was an there were that there was the technical side the interface between the physician and the screen there was the interface among data components the case he brought up there was the personal interfaces of of multidisciplinary teams I think importantly towards the end the interface between the research community and the private sector and I'm going to come back to that in a minute and then maybe building a bridge to the previous session is the interface the social interfaces I think are important. Then the final point is I think for Ignite is the importance of engaging very early non-traditional parts of this community. There was some nice banter I think Mark and Howard about the importance of you know sort of engaging the payers very early in this process and then I think towards the end of this session we can extend that to the need to engage the EHR vendors again very early in the process and we we shift our focus of success from being counting publications to making sure we have a path to implementation so the the research that we're doing really is defining a path to implementation so I think if we can keep all those things in mind not only will Ignite be successful but frankly the entire community will be more successful so I want to thank everyone for their their engagement and for the ideas that came out and I believe the next I'll turn it over to Ebony but I believe the next agenda item is lunch. Yes and I want to remind people that Colette is going to email you the poll for testing for us to use later on this afternoon she's also going to display the questions for the poll on the screen so when you have time I know we're doing a working lunch so please just grab your lunch try to eat fast especially the ones that are going to speak in the next session if you could try to be the first ones or allow them to be the first ones to grab their lunch so they can grab a quick bite to start the next session and then we can be eating while they're presenting thank you very much we'll meet back here at one o'clock


Hello and welcome to International Daily Roundup by People's Dispatch, where we bring you major news developments from around the world. Our headlines? Iran's decision to raise uranium enrichment level is expected, say Russia and China, when as well as National Assembly officially convenes following GPP electoral victory, Filipino legislators move resolution demanding enquiry into Tumandok massacre, and finally in our video section we look at the implications of the UK extradition verdict in the case against Julian Assange. In our first story, Russia and China in separate statements said that the Iranian decision to raise uranium enrichment levels to 20% was expected and cautioned the international media not to dramatize it. Iran had announced on Monday that it had started enriching uranium at 20% at its four-door facility. The Iranian government spokesperson Ali Raveh informed the media that the move is part of a process of the implementation of the strategic action plan to counter sanctions. Now, this was passed by the Iranian parliament in November, and it allows for the government to increase uranium enrichment to 20%. The law was passed after the assassination of Iran's nuclear scientist Mohsen Fakrizade in November last year. According to the Iran nuclear deal of 2015, the country had a cap of nuclear enrichment of up to 3.67%. However, Iran started enriching uranium at 4.5% in 2019, a year after the US unilaterally withdrew from the deal and imposed economic and political sanctions on Iran. Iran did so, that is increase in uranium enrichment after pointing out that other signatories of the deal did not do enough to mitigate the effect of the US sanctions. Iran has also stated that these steps are reversible, provided the US rejoins in nuclear deal, resins the sanctions and all signatories return to full compliance. US President-elect Joe Biden has stated that he will consider joining the Iranian nuclear deal if the country returns to full compliance and commits to negotiations. Members of the Iranian Revolutionary Guards also seized a South Korean chemical tanker in the Persian Gulf on January 4th. They cited an infringement of maritime environmental laws. South Korea is sending a delegation to negotiate the release of the tanker on its crew. A senior diplomat is also set to visit Tehran regarding the freezing of Iranian funds in Korean banks as a result of US sanctions. In our next story, the newly elected National Assembly of Venezuela will officially be inaugurated today, that is January 5th. The Assembly will convene following the victory of the great patriotic polar alliance in the parliamentary elections that were held on December 6th, 2020. The GPP, which is led by the ruling United Socialist Party of Venezuela, has secured 257 out of the 277 seats in the country's unicameral parliament. The main challenge confronting the Assembly is the severe economic crisis in Venezuela resulting from the US imposed sanctions. These sanctions have hindered the government's ability to provide necessary basic services to citizens including food and transport. The country was also faced with a sharp devaluation of its currency, increasing inflation and a massive decrease in oil production. The economic crisis was exacerbated following the coup attempt by US-backed far right-wing leader Juan Vido. While the December 6 elections marked a decisive defeat of the coup efforts, the government is now tasked with recovering from the economic devastation these efforts caused. President Nicolás Maduro has urged elected deputies of the GPP to emphasize reconciliation and inclusion in the country's economic matters. Elected deputy and vice president of the PSUV, Díaz Dardo Cabello, is proposed to become the leader of the PSUV block in parliament. Further nominations for the post of first and second vice presidents and first and second secretaries have also been made. All of these will be voted on once the Assembly is officially convened. We now go to the Philippines where members of the House of Representatives have called for an official inquiry into the massacre of indigenous leaders by security forces. These legislators from the left-wing Macabayan block moved a resolution in the House on January 4. Nine leaders from the Tumandoc indigenous community were killed during a joint police and military operation in the Panay Island on December 30. Around 18 people were also arrested in the raid, which swept 16 villages in the provinces of Capiz and Iloilo. Security forces stated that they had served 28 warrants pertaining to irregular firearm possession in the region. They claimed that the people from the community shot at the officers during the raid, which resulted in the killings. However, the leaders and members of the community have asserted that no one was armed during the raids. Indigenous communities in Panay have been fighting against the Panay River Basin integrated the Elephant Project for years. The project is expected to displace nearly 17,000 people and impact indigenous ancestral lands. Human rights groups, such as Panay Alliance Karapatan, have stated that indigenous leaders killed had been red-tagged by the military as supporters and members of the band Communist Party of Philippines, New People's Army. Instrumental in this process of red-tagging is a national task force to end local communist armed conflict. The task force was established under President Roderico Duterte in 2018. The massacre has been condemned as further evidence of the increasingly violent persecution of marginalized groups and dissenters in the Philippines. For a final story, we take a closer look at the UK Code decision that has blocked the extradition of Julian Assange to the United States. A full application for the bail of the WikiLeaks founders expected to be filed on Wednesday. Here is Renata Avila to discuss the major concerns surrounding the verdict and what is to be expected from the appeals process. Today, something important for the people watching to understand is not a final decision. This decision could and will be appealed by the Department of Justice of the US even if they know that they are going to lose most likely. The second important clarification that is very important for people to bear in mind, we are not disputing the facts here. We are not defending yet the right to publish here. The only question that was in the hands of the UK is whether a person charged by the crimes that he has been charged, which is basically to publish and to protect journalist sources, should be extradited to the US or should be protected because of political reasons. And all the arguments submitted by the defense explaining to the court that what he's doing to him is the best form of journalism, that what he's doing is in the public interest, that he didn't harm anybody, that it was all done legally, all of this today was dismissed. So even if I'm happy because, you know, like the answer was a no to extradition is bad news for journalism. Why is it bad news? Because the only reason that the court took and the only reason why the extradition has been denied is because he's in a really bad shape and he's at suicide risk and the conditions of prisons, as we all know, in the US do not meet the standards that will not guarantee that he will not kill himself. So it is a very sad, in a way, judgment. I mean, it was just a humanitarian reason to keep him alive and save his life, basically, but we lost somehow. We lost all the journalistic arguments and that only consolidates this muse imperialism that the US wants for all of us. Why? Because the publications were not published from the US, were not published by a US citizen. It was completely outside US publications about matters that matter to the rest of the world. And that's what is being persecuted and persecuted here. So, in a way, it is a good day for human rights, a bad day for journalism somehow, because what will happen, what will happen is that if you are under the same circumstances, you will be punished. If you are on the exact same circumstances, you will be affected. Well, Julian is in solid ground because the ruling of the Minor Court, it is consistent with recent rulings of higher courts in the Lori Love case. And that means that he's more likely to... That argument is 99% probabilities to prevail. But now we have a complication because we don't know if he will be granted bail. We think that it's the only just thing. I mean, he has been in these conditions for so long. There's a COVID pandemic. We really hope that consistent to the decision that the judge let him be under house arrest or even just the military arrest during this time, you know, like if he's able to circulate, to go to universities, give talks, like activate his life back, get his life back. Even these minimum things are going to the beach and playing with his children in the park. These minimum things that he could enjoy again. Let's see what happens. Let's see what happens. We will know a UK time in the morning on Wednesday, Wednesday the 6th. That's all your time for today. We'll be back tomorrow with more news from around the world. Until then, keep watching People's Dispatch.