If I may, I think it has to do with the relationship that's generated. If you make the analogy to work product, it's not the general work product, in the federal Privacy Commissioner's decision, of how much tarragon a chef uses or how many shingles a roofer uses. It's actually, instead, what kind of medication am I receiving? If the patient perceives that third parties are commercially benefiting from that exchange, is that patient going to be more reluctant or more inhibited to share that information?
There actually have been data studies—CMA itself has done polling, which we'd be happy to share with you--showing that patients have indicated that they will be less likely to confide in their physicians as they perceive more third parties intruding into that encounter. Because that's the lynchpin of the whole thing: the secondary users of it.
If I might, CMA—