You know, so how does this specific field grid provide the topographic information that an OCT cross-section alone might miss? And then also, do you think retina clinics are more likely to have access to FAF imaging or the 24-2C imaging or vice versa?

[chuckles] Well, you asked me several questions there at the same time.

Retina clinics, most of them have, uh, FAF or fundus autofluorescence because it comes along with the, with the cameras and the various tests that the retina specialists do.

But many clinics, uh, in, uh, general ophthalmology don't have autofluorescence, and we've actually received a certain amount of criticism for writing these recommendations and saying that autofluorescence plus OCT should be the, the test 'cause they're both objective.

What autofluorescence does is it gives you a larger field of view in which you can see both central damage or more, um, pericentral, near or beyond the arcades damage, uh, which, which separates the predominant European pattern, not total, of parafoveal retinopathy, or the Asian pattern, which is pericentral.

But we know that neither of these patterns are absolute.

A certain number of Europeans will show pericentral or mixed disease, and a fair number of Asians will show, at the start of things, a parafoveal pattern, which is why we say you really have to test both.

How does having the longitudinal data from the 24-C help us identify that inflection point, you know, where functional loss may first appear or where there's acceleration of that loss?