“The Q3 guide assumes slight improvement off of Q2, call it 5%.”

In context

“g purposes. The puts and takes here are that we're assuming a little bit better Life Sciences given the performance we saw in the first half, and that offsets are a little bit more conservative bioprocessing outlook that we talked about. Respiratory, we're thinking given where infection rates have trended, about $1.6 billion or a touch below that for the full year. As we're talking and you're thinking about the second half, it's important to look at the underlying trends in the business as well as the impact of respiratory from quarter to quarter. We actually included a table in our earnings presentation that illustrates this. We thought it'd be helpful to lay it out. Excluding the impact of respiratory revenue, core growth was 4.5% in Q2. That's an acceleration versus what we saw in Q1. The Q3 guide assumes slight improvement off of Q2, call it 5%. The biggest swing factor is the impact of respiratory revenue. Respiratory was about 150 basis point headwind in Q2. We think it's about 250 basis point headwind in Q3, and those headwinds essentially go away year-on-year in Q4. That's why we're feeling comfortable with that Q4 mid-single digit core growth rate. Vijay Kumar Understood, Matt. Maybe one more on this EPS raise, Matt. I think Masimo financing came in better. Maybe it's looking at close to $0.10 contribution. I think 2Q, the beat ex Masimo was probably $0.07, $0.08. When you look at second quarter performance with Masimo coming in, it's probably $0.17, $0.18 in incremental versus prior expectations. Guide raise was, I think, around $0.08. Is this some conservatism, or is this a reflection on Masimo, maybe some investments nee”