I have audio, I've got audio, all right, okay. And there it is on the screen there, so. So thank you everyone for coming, and it's really gratifying to see all these friendly faces, and some of them can't see them, but I know they're friendly underneath those masks, so that's good. I wanted to talk today about something that has been bothering me for decades, which is, is there scientific proof to, hey, down in front, where, and that has been, is there any proof that we have ways of communicating that are validated, reproducible, actually effective? And for a long time, that was kind of in the question, and that's what this presentation today is all about, and probably the first and foremost question is, why do we care? Why do we want to give presentations? Is it to convey knowledge, you know, well, sure, you know, hand somebody a book, read the book, I'll talk to you later. Why do we want to present to people? And the real reason, at least as far as I could think of, was that we're, the first and foremost is, bad presentations don't work. Okay, I'm going to take a poll here. Sorry, I can't see you all online, but how many have been in a presentation where they've actually fallen asleep? Let's see your hands, let's see, yeah, it's about two-thirds of you for those online, and how many have been in a bad presentation? Okay, and I hope we're not counting today. All right. They just don't work. Where they, you know, you fall asleep, you habituate to what they're saying, you get bored. And so really, so that's really the most important answer as to why we're interested, for me, but probably the deeper answer is we're really trying to change people. We really want to change what the audience knows, what they believe, what they feel, and what they do. I suspect many in this room and probably many online have had patients where you said, hey, you would be so much better off if you lost weight, right? Or stop smoking, yeah, yeah, exercise, that's a good one. But it doesn't take, and there's a reason it doesn't take, and we'll talk about that a little bit, but the brain has sort of a resistance to any kind of moving forward. I'm going to tell my personal story here. This is a true story. I was a newly minted resident. I worked for an oil company, and I was given the honor of talking to the retirees. You know, they would fly in from all over the world, and I did the health aspects of retirement. That's great. Whoa, I worked on it, and I thought, man, you know, I'm going to talk about cholesterol and exercise and diet and, you know, psychological health and everything else. It was great. And I just thought, you know, if I could just cram one more bullet point in there, I'd really have done my job. And I thought, but first I'd better practice. I had my family sitting on the couch in front of me, and I stood back and I said, you know, I'm going to videotape it. And so I had to videotape it, it was camcorders in those days, you guys remember. And behind me was the cat. He was on the cat tree, he was kind of batting at me, and he was all energetic and all that, and I was kind of playing with him. And then I began my presentation and started talking and talking and talking and talking. When I reviewed the video, the cat, you know how the cat trees have like a little depressed area and the wall comes up? His feet were sticking out, he was dead asleep. And my family pretty much had the same reaction. So I thought, you know, I'm going to have to do something about this. And so I started doing probably what all of you have done if you're presenting, you look for rules. You know, aren't there rules? You know, aren't there people that know what they're doing? And yeah, there's tons of rules. There's Ted. Probably everyone in this room has heard of Ted, Ted Talks. There's a wonderful book called Ted Talks by Chris Anderson, he's the CEO of Ted and TEDx. And he came up with some really great things. By the way, the detailed version of this is in the appendix, should you be looking at the slides. And it's wonderful. You know, you start with an idea, you don't put too much on top of people, you really try hard to communicate. And I thought, wow, those are great rules. And but then I started looking, turns out there's a lot of rules. This is from David Phillips. He listened to like 3,000 different managerial executive presentations, and came up with 110 rules. Use body language, you know, vary your tone of voice, all this kind of stuff. And they're great rules. But it's like, where do you start and what's evidence based? Not a ton of it. And so it's a lot like Chinese medicine, it's an empirical kind of endeavor that's happened over years, heavily influenced by Hollywood and stage and screen actors. And so if you're really trying to be a good presenter, you really want to prioritize on the stuff that is known to work. So we, I thought, you know, I got to move forward in this. So I started looking at the neurophysiology of presentations. And it turns out, it's a huge field. You go all the way from science of, you know, kind of, you know, animal studies, you go to pedagogy, andrology, which is, I guess, you know, the look for adult learners, you go to behavioral studies. And there's just a ton of stuff that happens all the time. And, you know, the study, the actual neurophysiologic studies are based around lesions, you know, people that have strokes, etc., people that have, excuse me, brain injuries. When you see they have electrodes stuck in the brains of cats, they've got EEGs, all kinds of studies. And some of them are really directly applicable to presentation. And if you're going to be a scientist, if you're going to be in occupational medicine, you want the data. So that's kind of what I started looking at. And the problem is, the brain is kind of fickle, and it's sort of resistant. And you need to figure out what the hell you're going to do to connect with it. And that's kind of what this is open, that's what I'm talking about today. But the neat thing is, the brain is open to influence, and there's actual scientific data to show that. The first thing is, you really have to figure out what kind of input does the brain need. And there's some really interesting studies. But before we talk about what to do, let's look at the brain's resistance. Have anybody here ever heard of the Ebbinghaus curve? Probably all of you that this is, Ebbinghaus published this in 1958, I believe, and it's been validated a thousand times since, is that when you have somebody in a classroom, or when you give them a text to read, or a story, and ask them, at various periods of time, to please give you all the information that was covered, within the first 20 minutes, you've lost about 40%. And of course, it shows here, the idealized curve starts at 100, in fact, most people don't pick up 25% of it, so you're starting at 75%. Then you go down, and within the first hour, you've lost 50% of the information. So I can count on 50% of you not remembering what I just said. So it's, and of course, it goes down asymptotically, and there is some counters to this, pretty much, I'm sure everyone here has heard this, that you can do reinforcement. The important thing here to remember is that if you reinforce, you basically change the shape of the curve, and they don't all then asymptote out as far, as quickly as the initial curve without reinforcement. So basically, if you look at the first curve, you'll notice that if you tell people to repeat, or you repeat to them, immediately after class, they're going to remember more. And since that's only 10 minutes after class, you can probably do it 10 minutes before the end of class, which we'll do later. And so basically, this improves the memory curve. So one of the key things, well-documented, well-proven to having people remember what you say, remember, you're trying to change what people know, is to repeat. You have to remember to repeat, right? So that's the first kind of revelation for me, is that if I repeat, if I repeat, it's going to stick a little better. The second thing was really interesting. There's a guy named Standing, L.G. Standing, and he studied pictures, and he looked at pictures versus words, and it was really fascinating. He showed pictures, the one study, he showed 10,000 pictures, and the same results prevailed. He would show them pictures, and two days later, he'd say, hey, do you remember this picture? And he'd have some dummies and blanks in there that people hadn't seen. And when they had normal pictures, like a plane sitting on a runway, or somebody walking down a hallway, they had a 62% retention. When they showed the same things on cards, had people read the cards, 1,000 cards, two days later, they only had 37% retention. And of course, like Ebbinghaus shows, it all kind of went down. But the amount of information from pictures was significantly greater. Then he tried vivid images. So he showed a plane crash, he showed somebody with a broken arm, I don't know how gross he got, but basically, those were 97% retained two days later. So if you're going to give a presentation, if you're going to show people something that's important, try and think of a visual image that represents your point. If you're into wellness, for example, show somebody who's benefited from wellness so people remember. If you can make it vivid, maybe they've just gone to the top of a mountain climbing or something, show it, because that's what they'll remember. It's just innate, it's how we're wired. And the other big thing that came from actual research, references are in here, by the way, should you be interested, is the fact that if you actually give context, if you tell a story that has context, they're going to remember it, than if you just tell a story. So if you say a person had a big sack and they walked into a room and they spread out all the things in the sack, turns out to be a lot of cloth and clothes of some sort, and then they left them there and they went away and they had to go find something, you don't know what it was, and they came back and they grabbed all the things up and handed them to somebody else, you won't remember that story as much as if you say, this lady more specific was going to wash her clothes and she took a bag of her clothes and put it on there and all the clothes spread out and she realized she didn't have any soap. She went back and got the soap and came back to the laundry room, but then the machine was full and she got so pissed off, she grabbed it and walked away. You will remember that much better because it's given context. One of the practical applications of this in pedagogy is pre-tests. If you give people, if you people go into a class they've never been in, complete blank on that subject and give them a pre-test, even if they get 100% of the answers wrong, they will remember the material a week later, two weeks later, and four weeks later, much better than if the same exact class, same exact teacher taught it and they didn't have a pre-test. That's one of the peculiarities of the brain. Our brain attaches to information. It needs places to store things and if you set it up just by seeing the words ahead of the class, you will get much better retention. Using the context, giving a pre-test, using visual images, all these are super, super useful if you're going to give an excellent presentation. By the way, I originally called this the exceptional presentations, but then I saw Bill and Ted's Excellent Adventure. Anybody seen that? That's a classic, a classic. It's like, wow, if you're going to keep people from forgetting, that's one of the big resistances in the brain. If you want them to remember, then it's important to use the proper tools. The other huge revelation for me is the brain is open to suggestion. We all know this. How many here have read Michael Kahneman, Kahneman thinking fast and slow and all that? What an amazing book. He's the one, he won the Nobel Prize in economics, but he's a psychologist. How did he do that? He showed that people cannot stop receiving information. It just goes into our brain. We can't not use it. Don't think of an elephant, we've all seen that. He showed that if people are exposed to large numbers and then they get asked, they did the thing at a fair where they rigged up this Ferris wheel and it would give, not Ferris wheel, one of the things you spin to win a prize, and he had it show big numbers. Then when they were leaving, he would have his interviewers ask them, what's the population of Uganda? Or something they wouldn't know. This is Nobel Prize winning research, and they would guess large numbers because they'd been exposed to large numbers. Those small numbers would guess small numbers. It's just the way our brains work. He kind of got into trouble when he showed the same thing happened with Israeli judges when they were passing sentences. He would expose them through some ruse to large numbers and they'd pass longer sentences. It's our nature. The brain is open to suggestion. Before we kind of get into that, I wanted to talk briefly about functional MRI. I'm sure everyone in this room has heard about functional MRI. We all know, just a quick reviewer, MRIs use water molecules as magnets and they spin like 10,000 times a second. You get what's called a spin-spin dipole, and any time you move a magnet, you generate a current, right? We all remember that. I didn't know it before I did this. Well, it turns out, oxyhemoglobin, and I guess it's oxy and carboxyhemoglobin, have different spin-spin dipoles and send off different signals. When a part of the brain is activated, the brain has a baseline, of course, but then it rushes oxyhemoglobin to that part of the brain that's being activated. They do all kinds of things with these studies. They'll show ... I think, well, I've told this story so many times. They showed people pictures of their ex-spouses that got divorced people, and they showed them their ex-spouse, and they said, think of the worst thing that ever happened when you were getting divorced. They'd think of it, and then they'd put it in the scanner, and then they took a hot poker and stuck it on their arm and stuck it back in the scanner. Same part of the brain lit up. It's our nature to sort of just ... It's amazing what the scanner can do. They're really good for spatial resolution. Basically, you get little cubic voxels, V-O-X-E-L-S, voxels of data that come out, and you can tell the intensity of the signal from different parts of the brain. It's down to the millimeters. It's amazingly sophisticated, and you can see patterns in the brain in different areas when you have somebody look at a picture or listen to something. You can also see network associations, so different parts of the brain light up. If you've ever been in a plane and see the clouds, the lightning and the clouds going, that's kind of what happens to the brain. Its only drawback is the resolution is ... The temporal thing is very short. You've got to kind of have them in the scanner when you do the stimulation, so it's harder when you use other forms like the PET scanner, which uses labeled oxygen and glucose. Basically, it takes about an hour to go in, so the times are different in terms of what you're picking up. The reason I go into this is there's a fascinating study. They took six right-handed married couples with no neurologic problems, and they put them in scanners. Just like the picture here, they were lying right next to each other. It's like, God, I hope they don't start an argument. They gave them ... They would start one person off talking to the other, and sometimes they'd ask them to get into areas where they're angry, and areas where things are really happy, that kind of thing. They basically ... Then they did 10 runs with different scripts, et cetera, and different kinds of suggestion that one would give to the other. They showed that the brains began to reflect each other. Once they started talking about things, the same parts of the brain would light up. First in the sender, and then in the receiver. There was a time delay. There's a temporal difference, but as they talked longer, those would get closer together. They were tuning into each other as a theory. Obviously, a lot of this is speculation on what the data actually means. There's a temporal succession that really showed activation of one person's brain from the other. That was really interesting. There's another study that was done. This wasn't done with fMRIs. This was done with this very sophisticated EEGs. You put the apparatus on, and they would have two people talk. They'd have one person ... It was really clever, though. They'd have one person talk to the other about different subjects. Sometimes they'd have active subjects. I was kicking the ball, and I was running down the field, and parts of the listener's brain would begin to light up as the person spoke about it. And there was a temporal delay. They didn't talk about whether it got closer or not, but they called it brain-to-brain coupling. So that parts of the brain, and this applies to presentations because if I'm thinking something, it's very likely, this data suggests, that you will begin thinking of it. But again, it's the capacity of the brain, like Kahneman pointed out, to absorb data without, you don't really have control over it. It just happens. And so there's a causal relationship. They imputed a causal relationship with this. They also did some interesting things. They had them use a foreign language that the receiver didn't understand, and they didn't get the same thing. So basically, it has to do with communication. When you're communicating, you're lighting up, literally, somebody else's brain. And then it began that if somebody would start talking on the subject, I guess they did talk about this temporal relationship, they would start getting anticipatory responses. Before a person got to that point in the conversation, the part of the brain that would be lighting up in the control meetings would light up in anticipation of the person going there. So if you're going to take people in a certain direction, they're kind of ahead of you, and to some degree, if they're listening, giving you permission. So if you're going to present and convince people, stay tuned in. Listen to what they're saying, and reflect back. Be there. This is a, I put this together as a little graphic, but this is actually from their paper. They don't have the yellow line. I put the yellow line in there. But as they would speak, parts of their brains would light up. So let's see. Did I get this? Yeah. So that was really interesting. That was the EEG studies. But it turns out others have done similar studies with body language, where they're actually, they're calling it inter-brain synchrony, where somebody is basically doing charades. In fact, I have a slide here. And this kind of parallels. There's a child theorist and pedagogical eminence named Piaget back in the 40s and 50s. And he had this notion that children learned, they're in a crowd, and they learn from what's called human contagion. Bad phrase this day and age. But what happens is they begin to learn responses just because they're in a group, and the group is thinking about things and doing things, and everybody notices the same things. And we've heard of the madness of a crowd or whatever, or the wisdom of a crowd, or both. And so that's part of, that's sort of a general view, not related to the neuroscience I'm talking about. There's also experimental demonstrations of emotional contagion. They get actors to talk to somebody, and the actor will be acting sad or whatever, and the person begins. And then they have people rate, they have actual raters rate the person right after the conversation. How do you feel? I'm feeling sad. And they actually score it. This is actual research. And we all know that, particularly if we have patients, what do they say? If the patient seems depressed, and if you feel depressed, maybe the patient's depressed. And so this is called emotional contagion, and it's kind of demonstrated to exist. And the interesting thing is, and this is the body language, where actually they did do scanning here. This is a fMRI study where they scanned the brains, and the same areas of the brain lit up as they were getting the charades. The same areas of the brain began to light up in the same places where the gestures were made. So if my motor cortex is showing that I'm moving my arms like that, in the receiver, their motor cortex, even if their arms are still, would start lighting up like that. So you can communicate, and this kind of brings up another principle of presentations. Body language, right? I once caught a fish this big, right? OK. So you want to convince people that you're with them as you talk about what's going on. And there is now evidence that that has an impact on people. So really, if you're trying to look at what the audience needs, if you're trying to get them to change what they know, remember what you said, if you're trying to get them to believe something, they have to trust you. There's a whole range of other neurophysiologic stuff we haven't talked about. If you want them to feel, you actually have the power to make all those things happen. And if you do the first three, and you want them to take action, you can. And just to repeat, does anybody remember repeating? Repeating, right? OK. You want to show vivid images as much as you can. If you're trying to demonstrate a success or a win, show this as much as you can. Because now my slides, because we're dealing with a scientific issue, had probably way too many words. And if I could have gotten a picture for everything I showed, I would have basically done that, because it's worth the time. If you have to really try and reinforce a message, there's something you want to do. Of all the things we talked about, I'd say the emotional contagion, the idea that you can influence your audience, that is key. And your gestures, your body language, you're being there with them, you're looking at them, that all has huge impact on what they do, and what they say, and really what they're going to believe. If anybody has vaccine deniers, just sitting there and listening to what they say can also be very, very helpful. It doesn't mean they're going to take the vaccine, but at least you'll be connecting. And the other part of it that kind of comes from the world of stage acting and all that is you want to feel what you say. If you have a story you're telling and it really embarrassed you, let that come out. Like when I talked about the cat, that was, I'll tell you, when I saw that cat asleep, it was the, not the worst thing, but it was definitely an indication I needed to do something else. Some of the audience here, they've known me for a while, they're nodding their heads, yes, I definitely need to improve. So really, that is the main body of the talk. I did want to talk, oh, I must say that nothing I say is of interest or comes from Liberty Mutual, is all I can say. And let's see, this is the TED Talk, just for those of you looking on at home. This is the detail. Again, this is to be read, not to be used as a presentation slide. I did put some of these skills that David Phillips had on that giant chart of 110 things on here for those of you who want to try and improve your speaking skills. Let's see if I can go through it here. You want to change the pace of your speaking. You want to get into a lower position if you want to relate to the audience. Usually, you sit in a chair. You want to avoid ah and er. It shows uncertainty, et cetera, right? Where was I? Looking up increases presence, so they say. And slight self-laughter shows deprecation. You're not putting yourself above the audience. And really, those are the things that have come from the world of acting and the world of Hollywood that have been applied to presentations. You'll see these all over the internet. There's tons of teachers. It really helps to get a coach, if only to basically learn what you're doing, because you don't see yourself a lot. And I was advised to videotape myself when cell phone cameras came out. I never did it. It's great advice, but I never did it. So these are some of the rules. Let's see. Duchenne smile. Anybody ever heard of Duchenne smile? This is one person. That's where, instead of, you know, I'm really happy today, your eyes and your mouth should match. So if I'm going to give a Duchenne smile, I'm really happy. And you show it. You try and generate that feeling when you're talking, because you're telling the truth. Doctors are so guarded all the time. And it's like, oh, if I say the wrong thing, they'll think this or that. You've got to get out of that if you're going to convince people that you're talking about something important to them. That's, what's that old joke? Everybody's turned into W-I-I-F-M. What's in it for me? If you're going to talk to people, start where they are. And this gets at context, by the way, just now that I think of it, that if you're going to set a context and give a context for what you're saying, you want to basically move people in the direction from where they are. So I don't know, somehow I'm talking about vaccine deniers. And I respect the fact that they've made a decision. It's not a decision I would agree with. But the fact that they're there is kind of where you have to begin if you're going to talk to somebody about that. And if you start, and which most doctors are guilty of with the jargon and whatnot, you separate yourself from the audience and you lose them. Let's see, I think. There we go. Here's some references. These are some great, this is the David Phillips TED Talk, really good. The other one here by Phil Wachnell is really good, too. He's the one that came up with the notion of what the audience needs to know, what they need to believe, what they feel, and what they have to do. And it's a great exposition. And he tells you kind of how to get there. I think, I don't know why that says attention. That's it. Any questions? Yes. So I'm always struck when I go to a meeting and someone says not to talk to you. Maybe it's gaining my attention because it's so unusual. But it is interesting that lawyers, every lawyer I've had in my current seat, rarely use telephones. And they definitely want the jury or the judge to do what they want them to do. I speak to the power of not using telephones. Can you repeat that question? Sure, sure. Sorry, for the people online. Thank you, Joe. The question was, can I describe the power of not using PowerPoint? And if you're good at it, it is extremely powerful. You basically are in complete touch with the audience. You're listening to them. You're not thinking about your slides. They are listening to you. But it takes a skill. You can develop that skill. But boy, it takes a real skill. Lawyers are trained in discourse. I don't know how probably not a lot of people here probably remember Howard Cosell. But what an amazingly articulate, he was a lawyer turned sportscaster back in the day. And he could go on forever extemporaneously. He was really good at it. Obviously, there's other eminences in our world. John Howard once gave a keynote address at AOHC. Not a single slide. It was riveting. So the other part of that, though, is even if you're good, unless you get them crying, again, these are exceptional skills, you're going to really want to have something for them to take home, something to hand them or that they look at online. Because as the Ebbinghaus curve shows, they're going to forget that. Even if it's great, unless it almost causes an emotional turmoil in them at the time, they won't remember the details. And that's kind of interesting, too. That's the way memory works. We put things from short-term to long-term memory. But as the hippocampus takes it and distributes it to the cortex, oh my god, my watch is talking to me. How about that? All right. To retrieve the memory, we pull it back in. And we put it in working memory. And then we then go store it again. But it's integrated with whatever we're looking at. And so as you think about things that you're supposed to know that are distant things, the furniture kind of moves around in the room. And so to make a long story short, great presenters can do that. And great actors, think of some of the great soliloquies on TV or on movies can do it. But it's a refined skill. So that's my answer. I don't know if that answers any other question. I have a question. Yes. Now, of course, I've forgotten the name of the curve. This is horrible. Ebbinghaus. Ebbinghaus. But how does it relate when you decrease the time of the presentation or the content of the information? I know you've talked about microlearning before. Or the TED Talks are very short. So how does that impact the curve? I know that's been studied. I don't know how it impacts the curve. My presumption would be there's less to remember. And if you really hit the mark, it's probably got a higher chance of being remembered. Because remember that there's another kind of rule in presentation, which is you present for 10 minutes, and then you have what the neurophysiologists call an emotionally competent stimulus. A joke, a little story, a funny tale, something like that. And that allows the conversion from short-term memory into long-term memory. Well, people aren't, if you just keep talking and talking and talking, which I guess that's what I'm doing here, it's like a glass that overfills and flows over. And that's one of the reasons people forget. So I think shorter presentations would probably be less prone to that. But I suspect there's data on that. I just don't know it. Yes. Really interesting presentation, Dean. I've got a question really about knowing your audience. And something I remember from history was Abraham Lincoln's Gettysburg Address was revolutionary at the time because it was only 20-something minutes long. And normally, at that point in history, political speeches were expected to be probably three hours long, something maybe like Chinese opera. And I guess my question is, are there sort of secular trends in communication and cultural trends in communication that we need to be thinking about when we're considering our audience? Absolutely. There's one study, really fascinating study. It looked at the average length of a scene in old movies versus current movies. And they used Mission Impossible 3 and not the most recent James Bond movie, but the one right before that. And the average length of a scene has gone from something in the neighborhood of 15 to 17 seconds down to like 3 and 1 half. It's amazing. And if you look at any YouTube video or any of the TikTok videos, same thing. It's bam, bam, bam, bam, bam. And that is changing. I suspect, again, don't know that people have done formal studies on the retention, the depth of knowledge, et cetera, from that kind of learning. There are studies on microlearning. And if you kind of chain them together properly, they're looked at as sort of the coming thing in education. What the data is behind that, I don't know. But I would say we all need to be aware that an hour-long talk, and this, I work with an insurance company. And when I began 10 years ago, hour-long talk was de rigueur. You do it, and sometimes you give a two-hour talk. I give 15-minute talks. And even though, you can kind of see them fidgeting when you're done. So I think the secular trend is definitely shorter. And what this means for us as health professionals is decisions. You have to decide. Doctors believe, and health professionals believe, if they just explained everything, they'll understand. And it's not true. You really have to prioritize. And so if I'm going to give a talk, even if it's something like how to run a Swann Ganz catheter, yeah, there's 30 steps. Or I don't even know if they use Swann Ganz catheters anymore. I've been out of it for a while. But anyway, even if there are 30 steps, you've got to go through it. But you've got to prioritize. You've got to make decisions. Have anybody ever read The Checklist Manifesto by Atul Gawande? Fantastic book. It's all about, you make a checklist. But if you put 500 things on it, nobody's going to read it. You have to make decisions. What's important? What's subsidiary? And so now, as we give presentations, as we talk to patients, I don't know. My wife just saw an orthopedist. And I mean, if he spent like four minutes in there, it was like a long time. And so if you're going to talk to patients, if you're going to be rushed, you really have to define what's your parameters. So that's a long-winded answer to your question. And I hope it kind of gives you some perspective. Yes? Hello. Thank you very much for your dissertation. I enjoyed it very much. I don't know, but I think, first a comment and then two questions. I think that these kind of topics, they should be mandatory. Like, you have to attend these. You have to make it a course out of it. You cannot go to med school or any other science career without something like this. Let me answer that first, then we'll get to your second question. Absolutely. In fact, I think the ACGME has communication as one of their criteria for competencies. Marianne, you know that, right? It's a competency, right? Yeah. Yeah. But. Yeah. But particularly in occupational medicine. I mean, you know, there was a time when I had patients, but I don't have a lot of individual patients. I'm talking to engineers and nurses and industrial hygienists and, and I'm leading by, you know, I can't tell that single person do this. I have to lead by persuasion and without knowing how to present, I think you are at a grave disadvantage anywhere, but in occupational medicine in particular. So yes, I agree. Fantastic. And my question is, everything that you said is like perfect when we are like this, something that we can't, that we haven't been doing this. Oh, okay. You can stand by here. Let's do it together. So. Oh, excellent. So imagine that in this setting, we get to talk, we get to see you, we get to see your hands, your voice, but what happens when you're not in person and when you're presenting virtually any special tips or tricks that you have picked up, especially in these last two or three years. Sorry for the ones online. You are, you know, join him as we are, but I, my wife just gave me permission to write another book and it's going to be on virtual presentation, but it'll probably be five years before it comes out. If it's like the last one. Yes. A lot of the things we talked about varying the pace, certainly putting things in context, what happens when you're looking at that little screen, you should, if you can try and get your face on that screen, you know, they have now, Zoom has it and others have it where you're basically have the presentation and the face, try and get your face bigger than just that tiny little thing, because we are hardwired to look at expressions, to hear like, ah, wow, that's great. You know, and you're looking at my face, you know, that's, that's how, you know, when you're in person, you're the press, you are the presentation, not the slides. When you're virtual, the other, there's other tricks. If your face is on the screen, like, you know, leaning into the screen and, you know, I mean, that's one of the big things in Hollywood is that the, the, the closeup, you know, from going from stage acting where you're, you know, to be or not to be, to, to where they're like looking at your face and then you see, you know, see Jack Nicholson going, here's Johnny. It's like, wow. You know, that's, it's changed the dynamic of communication. And so when you're online, you have to do that. Using your voice, going faster, going slower, pausing. And moving on is all, all those are the things you kind of have to really practice. And if you're, if you're giving a presentation, you should actually write, you know, you, you write your material and you put pause because if you want something to sink in, you have to let it sink in. And so those are some of the tips. There are, there is a book called The Virtual Presenter by one of Nancy Duarte's people. And there's, there's one other I just saw online, but I haven't gotten it yet. So that's kind of my, I would say it's a, it's an evolving area. The technology is evolving. If you can get, there are certain devices like the YoloBox, which a YoloBox is basically, you know how I'm like on TV news, it has, it has a picture here and I have to go to the commentator there and it'll be a banner on the bottom and there might be a green screen somewhere. A YoloBox allows you to switch between different things. And again, varying the input. Our brains habituate very quickly. So varying the input is really very helpful. So if you have that kind of technology or access to it, use it because it'll help you communicate. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes.

effective communication

presentation skills

scientific proof

audience engagement

repetition

vivid imagery

context in presentations

brain-to-brain coupling

emotional contagion

body language