So what you'll see from that is that I so far, I haven't at all mentioned what is a very common way of thinking about ethical issues in clinical care or medicine more broadly. And that is the so called four principles of Biomedical Ethics. So these are somewhat unavoidable in a in a medical school environment or a health professional education environment. They're also commonly invoked in clinical ethics practice on our healthcare practice more broadly. So I would say these, of course, are highly influential, and, you know, very highly regarded in the field. But in our day to day work as academics working in the bioethics sphere, I would say we draw on these relatively infrequently in the sense that what we do is kind of in parallel to this type of analysis. So that this is just one mechanism that we can use when coming up with arguments for positions that we wish to defend. And so We take on broader approaches or the theories, we look at different conceptualizations of the of the principles that Beecham and Childress have articulated. So just to kind of illustrate that, when you think of bioethics, it's a lot more than just the four principles, important as they are. So I'll just move on now to briefly consider what we actually do when we do bioethics research. So it's really complex to explain and very challenging, and I probably won't do a particularly great job. But I think one thing to explain is that as a field, bioethics remains relatively young, and it is also a field that has come from lots of different places, and there are bioethics groups, in lots of different faculties in universities globally, they can be in medical schools, in law faculties, in social science areas in philosophy. And there's also people doing bioethics work within non government organisations, government departments, for example. And so we are coming at this idea of what we should do, and why in health from lots of different backgrounds. We come from philosophy, social science, law, medicine, history, etc. And so when we do this, we bring with us our baggage from our training. And we bring with us our disciplinary norms and our expectations. And sometimes there's quite a bit of negotiation to be done, to work out how we all rub along together, the way that we ask questions can differ and the concepts that we tend to draw Ron can also be different for these reasons, as are the theories and approaches that we do. So there's a lot of concentric circles in bioethics research. And this can come to the surface when we are evaluating each other's research proposals for funding when we're collaborating with experts from outside our fields as well. But so what do we actually use? What methods do we use? I've touched on this a little bit already. But we use all of these things that are coming up on the slides here. Now, qualitative health research, normative bioethics reasoning, which I've picked up on and described in the most detail, so far, deliberative, public engagement, that is a form of engagement, using qualitative methodology, but in a way to have your participants as experts alongside you by the end of the process, historical reflection, survey based or quantitative research, policy analysis, and of course, philosophy. So Oh, and of course, legal reasoning as well. So you can see here that there's a lot of different methods involved in the way that we ask and answer our questions. And one valid question in our field is, well, which of these is primary? And there isn't necessarily an answer to that question. All of you attending today will probably have different views about that. But ultimately, we are an inherently disciplinary field, interdisciplinary field rather. And so actually bringing these norms and expectations and being clear about where we're coming from, is part of how we successfully collaborate with each other. So when it comes to your practice, whether you are an academic who identifies as someone in bioethics already, someone who's interested in bioethics, or someone who really hasn't had much to do with it until this point in time, your practice whatever it is, what would you defend about it on an ethical perspective? And what makes your view about this a reasonable view to hold? And on the other side? What worries you if anything about your practice and why and again, what makes your view reasonable? And most importantly, how would you seek to convince someone else that your view is the correct one. So that's just a way of trying to kind of so called wiggle your ethics and 10 a, when you're thinking about and reflecting on your own work. Thank you so much for listening.