Many questions were raised for the panelists, but one of note was whether there is enough evidence or scientific knowledge to move violence prevention forward. While all of the presentations focused on prevention as the necessary approach, they also acknowledged gaps in data and knowledge as they relate to cost and programmatic effectiveness, multiple risk factors or determinants of violence, the context of violence, and the environments in which interventions would be implemented. The panelists acknowledged that there are many examples of best practices and lessons learned that have already been scaled up to national levels in LMICs, as well as knowing what interventions they felt should be avoided (i.e., those that involve increased detention and incarceration, which only increase the economic costs of violence). They identified other foci including efforts to facilitate national planning, implementation, and evaluation that would call for and allow country governments to increase their investments in violence prevention. The countries would also need technical assistance from U.S. agencies such as the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the National Institutes of Health, the U.S. Agency for International Development, and the Department of Justice, as well as other agencies and organizations from the philanthropic and corporate sectors, to support funding for these prevention efforts. It was also pointed out that the United States has invested billions of dollars to globally support HIV/AIDS prevention, treatment, and care on a much leaner evidence base than what is currently known for violence prevention. There was also lengthy discussion about the positive and negative effects and use of television programming either to incite aggressive behavior or to educate and provide population-level messages about violence prevention.